This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Hello Rlevse (and happy new year) - I wasn't around to comment on this sockpuppet case when you handled it and it's now a bit stale, but I'd appreciate it if you had a look at my comments at WT:SSP#How to deal with reports violating AGF and User talk:Alex Makedon#My comments. Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:07, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Randy,
Many thanks for the Barnstar, for which I am deeply appreciative. It is truly a privilege to participate on the Scouting WikiProject and I am glad to be a small part of it. Best wishes to you in the New Year, Jim. JGHowes talk - 18:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I can help on that. Can you tell me how do you pronounce "vero" ? -- Manop - TH ( talk) 19:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
แวโรพีเดียคืออะไร ?
แวโรพีเดียคืออะไร? แวโรพีเดียคือสารานุกรมที่กลุ่มชาววิกิพีเดียร่วมกันสร้าง ซึ่งได้ทำการเลือกเนื้อหาที่ดีที่สุดจากวิกิพีเดียมาปัดฝุ่น ปรับแก้รูปแบบ และทำการเซฟเก็บไว้ไม่มีการแก้ไขเพิ่มเติม เพื่อทำให้เนื้อหามีความนิ่ง สมบูรณ์และน่าเชื่อถือจากทุกคนโดย คณาจารย์ และนักเรียน นำข้อมูลที่สมบูรณ์และเชื่อถือได้ไปใช้ได้ทันที
แวโรพีเดียเป็นโครงการที่แยกออกมาจากวิกิพีเดียหรือไม่? ไม่ถูกต้องซะทีเดียว เนื้อหาแวโรพีเดียตั้งอยู่บนฐานของเนื้อหาวิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งการปรับปรุงแวโรพีเดียนั้นคุณจำเป็นต้องร่วมแก้ไขวิกิพีเดียก่อน ซึ่งจะเห็นได้ว่าทางเราไม่ได้แข่งขันกับวิกิพีเดีย ความสำเร็จของเราจะขึ้นอยู่กับความสำเร็จของวิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งทางเราคิดว่าตัวเราเองเปรีบเสมือนเป็นชั้นแรกของความรู้เสรีที่ดึงข้อโดดเด่นของวิกิพีเดียออกมา
แล้วเว็บนี้เป็นเพียงแค่เว็บมิรเรอร์เว็บกระจกเงาของวิกิพีเดีย? แน่นอนว่าไม่ใช่! เนื้อหาทั้งหมดในแวโรพีเดียนั้นจำเป็นต้องผ่านเกณฑ์ที่เข้มงวด ซึ่งบทความทั้งหมดจะไม่มีป้ายเก็บกวาด ป้ายต้องการอ้างอิง การลิงก์ไปที่ลิงก์ไม่มีเนื้อหา หรือแม้แต่ภาพที่ใช้งานอย่างชอบธรรม โดยมากไปกว่านั้น ในแต่ละบทความจะมีการตรวจสอบโดยผู้เชี่ยวชาญและนักวิชาการในแต่ละสาขา และจะประทับตราบอกไว้ว่าผ่านการตรวจแล้ว พร้อมทั้งคำแนะนำในการปรับปรุงบทความ ซึ่งวิธีการนี้จะทำให้บทความน่าเชื่อถือยิ่งขึ้น
แล้วอย่างนี้จะเป็นโครงการสำหรับนักวิชาการและผู้เชี่ยวชาญเหมือนกับ ซิติเซนเดียม? ไม่ใช่แน่นอน เนื้อหาของแวโรพีเดียจะถูกเขียนขึ้นโดยผู้สนับสนุนจากวิกิพีเดีย โดยนักวิชาการและผู้เชี่ยวชาญจะมีหน้าที่ในการตรวจสอบและยืนยันว่าถูกต้อง โดยผู้เชี่ยวชาญจะให้คำแนะนำเพื่อปรับปรุงในวิกิพีเดียต่อไป ถ้ามองในทางกลับกันแล้ว จะเหมือนเป็นการร่วมมือระหว่างแวโรพีเดียและวิกิพีเดีย
บทความในแวโรพีเดียสามารถปรับปรุงได้หรือไม่? แน่นอน ซึ่งการปรับปรุงในแวโรพีเดียนี้จะเริ่มต้นที่วิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งการปรับปรุงใหม่ในวิกิพีเดียจะถูกนำเข้ามามาในแวโรพีเดียอีกต่อหนึ่ง ซึ่งจะทำให้ทั้งสองโครงการได้รับเนื้อหาที่มีคุณภาพสูงขึ้นพร้อมกัน
แวโรพีเดียมีเนื้อหาทั้งหมดของวิกิพีเดียหรือไม่? ไม่ใช่ ในความเป็นจริงในระยะแรกของแวโรพีเดียจะมีเพียงส่วนน้อยเท่านั้น ซึ่งแวโรพีเดียเติบโตทุกวันโดยจะเริ่มมีเนื้อหาหลักที่จำเป็นในส่วนของสารานุกรมที่จะมีประโยชน์ต่อคณาจารย์และนักเรียน จุดมุ่งหมายของเราคือปรับปรุงคุณภาพของบทความมาก่อนปริมาณบทความ
ลิงก์สีเขียวและลิงก์สีน้ำเงินคืออะไร? ลิงก์สีเขียวในบทความแสดงถึงบทความที่มีในแวโรพีเดียและได้จัดการ "แวโรไฟ" เรียบร้อยแล้ว ซึ่งข้อความเหล่านั้นได้ถูกเก็บไว้ในฐานข้อมูลเรียบร้อย สำหรับลิงก์ที่ยังไม่มีในแวโรพีเดียจะแสดงเป็นลิงก์สีน้ำเงินซึ่งจะโยงไปเนื้อหาในวิกิพีเดียแทนที่ ซึ่งคุณสามารถกดแบ็กสเปซเพื่อจะกลับมาแวโรพีเดียได้
ใครเป็นผู้ร่วมจัดทำ? ผู้ร่วมจัดทำแวโรพีเดียเราได้เลือกจากชาววิกิพีเดียที่มีประสบการณ์การเขียนการแก้ไขในวิกิพีเดียจำนวนมาก ซึ่งเป็นที่รู้จักกันดีและมีชื่อเสียงในวิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งทางเราหวังว่าจะชักชวนชาววิกิพีเดียที่สนใจเพิ่มเติมเข้ามาช่วยพัฒนาโครงการ
ทำไมถึงไม่ให้มีภาพที่ใช้งานอย่างชอบธรรม? ประเด็นการใช้งานอย่างชอบธรรมในวิกิพีเดียมักจะเป็นปัญหาร้อนที่เกิดขึ้นบ่อย ซึ่งทางเราตัดสินใจที่จะเลี่ยงปัญหานั้น และมุ่งประเด็นไปที่เนื้อหาเสรีมาเป็นอย่างแรก โดยสนับสนุนให้ทุกคนเปลี่ยนกระแสนิยมการสงวนลิขสิทธิ์มาเป็นการเผยแพร่เสรีสู่สาธารณะ
ถ้าพบข้อผิดพลาดในแวโรพีเดียละ? กรุณาแจ้งให้เรารู้โดยการส่งอีเมลมาและทางเราจะแก้ไขให้เร็วที่สุด ซึ่งรวมถึงเนื้อหารวมถึงภาพและสื่อที่ไม่อนุญาตให้ใช้งานอย่างเสรี
ทำไมแวโรพีเดียถึงมีโฆษณา? จุดมุ่งหมายของเราคือการรวบรวมเนื้อหาเสรีที่ดีที่สุดและเปิดให้ทุกคนสามารถใช้งานได้อย่างเสรีซึ่งวิธีนี้จำเป็นต้องใช้เงินจำนวนหนึ่ง ทางเราไม่มีเจตนาที่จะขอเงินบริจาคจากกลุ่มเป้าหมายเราซึ่งก็คือ อาจารย์และนักเรียน และเราเชื่อว่าการโฆษณาที่ไม่รบกวนผู้ใช้เป็นทางออกที่ดีที่สุด เงินทั้งหมดที่ได้จะใช้สำหรับปรับปรุงบทความและเก็บเนื้อหารวมถึงค่าดูแลที่จะทำให้มีการปรับปรุงโครงการให้เกิดประโยชน์สูงสุด
แวโรพีเดียมีเฉพาะในภาษาอังกฤษหรือไม่? แวโรพีเดียเริ่มต้นจากภาษาอังกฤษโดยกลุ่มคนจากวิกิพีเดียภาษาอังกฤษ ซึ่งเนื้อหาในภาษาอื่นจะมีเพิ่มเติมเข้ามาในภายหลัง
จะมีส่วนร่วมกับแวโรพีเดียได้อย่างไร? กรุณาส่งอีเมลมาหาเราและแนะนำตัวเอง เล่าเรื่องราวเกี่ยวกับตัวคุณและผลงานที่ได้ทำในด้านของความรู้เสรี อย่างไรก็ตามทางเราวางแผนขยายชุมชนอย่างช้า ๆ ซึ่งอาจจะมีสมาชิกใหม่เพียงหนึ่งหรือสองคนต่อวัน หวังว่าคุณอดทนรอการตอบรับจากทางเรา ในขณะเดียวกันคุณยังคงสามารถปรับปรุงวิกิพีเดียและแจ้งทางเราว่าคุณต้องการบทความไหนที่คุณคิดว่าควรจะรวมเข้าสู่แวโรพีเดีย
ร่วมแปลคำถามและข้อสงสัยในหน้านี้ในภาษาอื่น กรุณาติดต่อเราได้
แวโรพีเดียพัฒนาบนพื้นฐานของวิกิพีเดียสารานุกรมเสรี เนื้อหาทั้งหมดสามารถนำไปใช้ได้ภายใต้ สัญญาอนุญาตเอกสารเสรีของกนู
<- the translation ends here. -- Manop - TH ( talk) 03:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification, which was much appreciated. Since I have never dealt with an arbitration, I am unsure as to what I'm meant to do. Do I have to re-submit my statement? It may sound like a silly question, but thanks for your time. Also, am I classed as "an involved party"? I'm merely curious. Thanks once again. LuciferMorgan ( talk) 21:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for bothering you (again! :)), but can I ask whether you'll be doing the initial nomination when the RFA comes? It's just, if you're not, I'll know who to pick to do the co-nominations then. Best regards, Rt . 21:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Rlevse! This week, I'm writing the Signpost WikiProject Report on WikiProject Scouting, which I noticed you coordinate. So, I am going to ask you a few questions concerning the project :)
Lead coordinator: Rlevse Article improvement: Wimvandorst Project mediation: Bduke Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting Task Force: Kingbird Philmont Scout Ranch Task Force: Johntex Image tagging: B
Thanks! Happy editing, ( ar ky ) 22:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Why was the case name changed? I think this is quite unfortunate. No one suggested it. Marskell ( talk) 00:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
This is where Pgagnon999 started with a threat to report someone to their system admisinstrator.
With regard to Middletown, Connecticut, your removal of the Neutrality tag constitutes conflict of interest as your IP address is a state website. If you would like to dispute the tag, please open a discussion on the talk page for the article. Otehrwise, you'll end up on the Wiki list of organizations/ agencies that self edit--a pretty embarassing place to be. -- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 20:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
This is where he was engaged in further activity to intimidate a poster: Also interesting is a history of edits from user at the Connecticut gov. (Middletown gov?) state IP address and a seemingly related Wesleyan Univeristy IP. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
This vicious and underhanded behavior is threatening and abusive.
He does not engage in civil behavior, he deletes QUOTED material and then posts garbage from lame sites that support his narrow and partisan beliefs. ---That's nasty behavior. And astonishing to me that you support him in it.
He's pushing point of view, he's violated neutrality, he's deleted referenced material, he's certainly does not assume good faith. I mean, he's out there attacking people and all but terrorizing them. And that's the guy you've put your support behind. Great.
See my diffs, there were a couple of minor errors in your case open. You didn;t include the arbs votes to accept in the preliminary decision section, and evidence of prior dispute resolution is used by the arbs to decide whether to hear a case but it does not become part of the case once opened. (Unless someone wants to put it on the evidence page--but it does not go on the main page). Otherwise a successful start. Thatcher 04:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:DogCare E back.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:DogCare E front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:ForageCrops G back.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:ForageCrops G front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for thinking of moving the Lead(II) nitrate picture to Commons: good idea. I saw that it has a different name there. Is that temporary, part of the moval procedure, or should we re-link to the new picturename in the article? Wim van Dorst (talk) 13:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC).
I want to thank you for the Scouting barnstar. I also say thanks that you informed me about the article in The Wikipedia Signpost.Yours in Scouting- Phips ( talk) 14:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
From the to-do list: I created the article (mostly translation of the German article): User:Phips/workshop/Sturmtrupp-Pfadfinder, take I look. Should I move it? Yours in Scouting- Phips ( talk) 19:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Normally when I see edits like this I would report them to WP:WQA, but in this case, the user is already under an active block for uncivil behavior. What is the correct course of action in this case? Dlabtot ( talk) 21:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse, I was wondering if I could become your "clerk apprentice" for the Arbitration Committee. If you have too many clerks or whatever, please decline, but I'd like to learn more about and help with the Arbitration Committee, and you're an excellent clerk. Thanks. Regards, Keilana talk (recall) 01:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash ( talk) 04:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
For this USN CNO/DESA recipient: I see you have already edited this one. However, it might need a Scouting portal link. It does need some expansion/cleanup. I've added a few references, but it could use some more attention. — ERcheck ( talk) 17:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
HollywoodFan1 responded to your request for explanation of their actions, by stating “I don't need to explain anything, because I am not MetaphorEnt.“ [1]. I think this reinforces the need for block of MetaphorEnt and HollywoodFan1. No further action occurred in regards to the report and it was archived. As you are an administrator, could you block the accounts or do I need to file another incident report? BlueAzure ( talk) 03:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse, I noticed that you actively involved in WP:SSP and you have a lot of experience there. I had filled a case, however there are no further developments. Could you please suggest that I should do next, fill a WP:RCU? Your advise would be much appreciated. M.K. ( talk) 09:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey there.
Not sure I quite understand your message about archiving rejected cases: was this general guidance or did I mess something up when I archived BlueAzure? Because I had archived it [2]. — Coren (talk) 13:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hmm...this newness, source and interpretation for this criteria does seem a bit mysterious, and the thirteen new tags look a tad bit pointy eared to me. Dreadstar † 16:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Per this post I have decided to notify about the case as you were an administrators active on Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement. -- Cat chi? 20:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you recently assisted in a sock puppet and COI case: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/PJHaseldine (sock puppets blocked indef and user blocked 1 week for COI). This user has now posted extracts and linked to an external discussion on wikipedia review.com on an article talk page: diff. He assumes bad faith by accussing myself and other editors of "concerted attacks" and "attempts to censor wikipedia" (also the heading of this new talk page section) and even labled us "pro-apartheid". I didn't respond to it, save for posting a warning to his talk page, but this copied external discussion and link is worrying (searching internet for my name and suggesting I'm an apartheid era military officer etc.). I don't know if this can be removed or how to proceed... it's an article's talk discussion page afterall. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated. — Deon Steyn ( talk) 21:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
(repeat of my
post on article talk page...)
Instead of following your advice, PJHaseldine has now pasted the same passage and external link on the talk pages of his three banned sock puppet accounts.
[3],
[4],
[5]. —
Deon Steyn (
talk) 20:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
She has asked not to have her name posted on wiki so I won't do it ... but she didn't even use RTV. She just had a regular rename just like I did. She has one account, not two accounts. There are a few (under 10) admins that have abandoned their old account and come back under a new name and had that new name sysopped, but that's not what happened here. If you look at her earliest contributions, you see her old signature. This RFA process is so silly it's beyond words - there are plenty of admins who have been renamed and to suggest that we should go through RFA again is just an open invitation for trolling. -- B ( talk) 05:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I wish... :) Rudget . 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Username_policy#Company/group_names has said this for a while: "Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited, but it is not recommended, and depending on circumstances may be seen as a problem."
You seem to be back to username blocking, and blocking users simply for having a company or group name. What are the circumstances, in your opinion, that make them blockable? (I would only block if they are using that name to make promotional edits.) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm so jealous of your Aug 07 BSA beer award! Forget all the stars, that award is a real award for good work. When your buddy hands you that cold one, you know what I mean.-- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 20:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Yep, that's one up again. Congrats. I think you can easily throw in those remaining 8k edits needed to come in the top 100, right? ;-) Gladly I'm just over 11k edits (not yet Kate's count), so I'm out of the danger zone to fall 'higher' than #2000. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC).
i had a chance to rename my username thanks to BLACKKITE but before i could change it User:Rlevse blocked me, saying all i did was put 187 in it, it was already in it thats my original name User:Lil' kim187, i hadn't changed my username at all, thats what i needed to change was the Lil' kim187, so i want to know why User:Rlevse blocked before i could change it. User_talk:Lil' kim187
Thanks for the mutual warning. Its fair, and I didn't plan to revert, in any case; was waiting for another editor to help make consensus on the dispute clear. Giovanni33 ( talk) 02:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a response to your comment on the Nrswanson sockpuppetry case my talk page. Best wishes, Voceditenore ( talk) 06:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Just came across a request for unblock here. In the past (as I understand), ArbCom's topic-specific restrictions have been on article pages only, and editors so restricted were allowed to edit talk pages (unless this privelege was explicitly denied). Am I missing in either the ArbCom ruling here? Or am I misunderstanding the situation? (Either of which is more than possible). Because it does not look to me like TDC violated the ArbCom ruling. Pastordavid ( talk) 17:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, If you are seeing this, somebody unblocked me or just my school IPs are blocked. Tell me which one please -- ジェイ ✉/ ✍ 17:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for closing the SSP case on him. There's another IP, look at 209.247.5.60's contributions. Might need a block for a month or so. It also might be worth extended the other IP blocks to do with this case to a month. Cheers, D.M.N. ( talk) 19:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this, is he not still under his restrictions of only being allowed to edit at the related Arbcom case? He was told his original block was lifted so that he could participate in his related Arbcom case but not to edit anywhere else and doing so would result in him being blocked again. You blocked him again. Does your block now dissolve his original unblock stipulations? -- ALLSTAR echo 17:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I wasn't intending to revert Giovanni next time in any case and would have reported him. I appreciate it that you were clear in your warning, though I fear Giovanni didn't take it fully to heart given his recent 24 hour block. John Smith's ( talk) 18:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanky for taking the time to deal with the situation below - FYI -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#To_ban_or_not_to_ban
Cheers,
-- Skyelarke ( talk) 16:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The category includes people who attended and never graduated. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 23:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad to see you back! -- Oxymoron 83 19:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back! Dlabtot ( talk) 19:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks to all of you for your support. It means a lot. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yay! Man, did I need a spirit-lifter right now :) Glad to see you're back. Wizardman 19:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yea that's right. I've replied here. <--- READ IT! Lara ❤ Love 19:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks to all again, I can't keep up with all these accolades (blushing). — Rlevse • Talk • 20:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, next time you quit....can I have your beer award? I always loved that one. ;)-- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 22:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back, yeah! You're greatly needed here and were sorely missed. Sumoeagle179 ( talk) 23:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back. Jauerback dude?/ dude. 23:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad you're back (-: —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 01:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back. ThuranX ( talk) 01:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Randy, you'd better update your user page: your 123rd now on WP:WBE. Just 24 to go, and merely 4400 edits will take care of that. ;-) Wim van Dorst (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC).
Nice to see you back. I protected it mainly because, basically, if you said "I quit", then nobody else should change that until you came back. (For example, when RickK left, his userpage received basically no constructive edits but vandalism before he came back to protect it.) You can (obviously) go ahead and unprotect it if you want. jj137 ♠ 22:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It appears the ANI case has been closed. What happens next with that case? Anthon01 ( talk) 23:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
If I may give some advice: drop ArbCom/ArbEnforcement, at least for a while. Go edit some articles. It helps :D
Great to see you again, my friend. Dihydrogen Monoxide ( party) 23:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
You sure? I'd hand the reins fully to you if that's what you want. Keilana| Parlez ici 00:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Whoa, what did I miss? I came over to tell you I'm back in the saddle, and to ask you to unprotect my userpage now, and I see you took a break and have returned. I'm sorry I wasn't around to support and welcome you back ... some times on Wiki are real killers, huh? :/ Welcome back, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You may wish to weigh in on this discussion, as the photographer whose work is being manipulated. - John Russ Finley ( talk) 04:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
My concern is if they alter the images in a bad way. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Sent email, posted this "The potential for abuse of images, making wiki look bad, condoning child porn here is huge. Please act, Jimbo. If such use is condoned, I will no longer submit images of children to wiki." — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I know, sent me for a spin there, but I'm very glad you decided to stay. I figured it would only add to your stress to bug you about the coaching, and I really don't get the various off-wiki communications systems. Being co-coached by you and Keilana would be an honor and a real plus for me, since you both have varied interests and experiences. MBisanz talk 04:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Too bad such a drastic move made us show our support, but at least you know our opinion now. Squash Racket ( talk) 06:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if you noticed this editor: [6]. Very few edits, and I think it's likely it's the same person that opened the sock case. The only edits by this user are to ask for help with a sock case, and he posted the case on my talk page. RobJ1981 ( talk) 14:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Would you please paste copies of two deleted pages to my user space. I would like to address the concerns mentioned in the AfDs. They are KRC (Scientology) and ARC (Scientology). Thanks. -- JustaHulk ( talk) 14:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm facing another sockpuppet 124.87.134.96 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) of the banned ip user 219.66.40.104 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki), 219.66.45.131 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) (in this time, different network host) now. Per the ip user's same writing style and interest (ex. Yujacha ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views){ Manhwa ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)_, I believe the user evades his sanction again (many 5~6 times?) Can you look into his contributions and block him? Thanks.. -- Appletrees ( talk) 14:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Please can you give me some much needed admin coaching!! Ningnangnong ( talk) 16:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
is a pain in my talk page's ass... and probably a lot of other people's talk pages too. But don't feel too bad, we only like you slightly less because of it. So here's the thing; I'm totally awesome, k? And I have a better code. Not only will it keep your sig from effing up the coding of any more pages, BUT it also is like a whole line shorter. The servers will love you... much more than they love me even, because a sig as beautiful as mine takes space, ya know? So here you go, you can thank me monetarily at a later time:
<font family=verdana> — [[User:Rlevse|<font color=#060>'''''R''levse'''</font>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<font color=#990>Talk</font>]] • </font>
Best regards,
Lara
❤
Love 18:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
test here, just pasted here: — Rlevse • Talk •
test here with "raw" checked (with check it errors): <font family=verdana> — [[User:Rlevse|<font color=#060>'''''R''levse'''</font>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<font color=#990>Talk</font>]] ( talk) 21:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Images are not showing up on any Wiki pages I open. Are you having this problem? Thoughts? Some toolbar button images are missing too. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 19:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, one of your images is being discussed at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Boy_Scouts_are_for_spanking.3F. -- B ( talk) 21:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Sent email, posted this "The potential for abuse of images, making wiki look bad, condoning child porn here is huge. Please act, Jimbo. If such use is condoned, I will no longer submit images of children to wiki." — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Best I can figure is to discuss this on the project, let folks know the issues and let them decide for themselves. Welcome back, eh? --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 22:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Please summarize and put on talk WP:SCOUT. One this is that commons photos of live or recently deceases should have "personality rights" tag like all mine now do: Image:World_Jamboree_2007_009.jpg. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I will take a stab at a guideline- should it be separate or part of WP:S-IMG? I'm afraid this is a gray area as the Youth Protection rules do not cover photos. [8] Each council is supposed to develop their own rules for website operations based on state and local laws and the standards and guidelines set by National. [9] I have no clue on the policies of other countries or national Scout organizations. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 00:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
This user already had a last warning and when he continued to attack the user user:nku_pyrodragon you gave him another warning instead of a block —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rws killer6 ( talk • contribs) 05:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
See outcome of the SSP case you submitted here. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
If you oppose child pornography, you support slavery. [11] I'm glad we've created this encyclopedia with such wonderful information. -- B ( talk) 22:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Freedom is not an absolute right, it has limits. Check any number of US Supreme Court rulings. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rlevse. Did you see Hrafn's Hrafn's comment at Talk:Politicization of science? -- Iamunknown 23:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
User:No, Gwen! looks awfully SOCKy with only 4 edits, 1 to vote against deletion and 1 to question the closing admin. Probably impossible to tell whose though with all the comments to the AFD page. MBisanz talk 01:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 4 | 21 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 00:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
This user is making the same reverts that User:Atari400 (the sockpuppet of User:KirbyTime) made to Template: Countries of the Indosphere. He is making the same omissions and is not justifying anything in the talk pages after having been asked multiple time to join the debate, but has done nothing and in fact claims that i have not joined the discussion [15], though I am all over the talk page. He has been told by a user with rollback powers (Alexfusco5) that he has been making unconstructive edits that need to be justified. After Alexfusco5 made the comment and reverted his edit, he has been silent on the template and the template talk. He did has not edited the template again at this time in order to not break the 3RR. Based of his talk page, it appears that he has violated the WP:CIV, but I am unsure; if he has can you please give him a warning or some form of disciplinary action. Also, I would like to know, where or to whom should I report his behaviour? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 02:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I have also posted the above on Jehochman's user talk Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 02:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Heyo, Where should I place this question? - [16] Thanks in advance. Jaakobou Chalk Talk 14:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
You edit conflicted out my decline :( - Revolving Bugbear 22:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your
constructive criticism and input in making
Alpha Kappa Alpha a
featured article.
Best,
miranda 08:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
While observing the everlasting editwar over genre on the Underoath page, I noticed that many of the edits that change the genre to Screamo are done by annon IPs. I would like to point out one IP in particular, not because of edit warring on the Underoath page, but because of it's history of vandalism in general. This IP is 63.3.16.2 [18]. In one of the edit summaries, this particular IP says "sorry i'm not on my profile". I think whoever is using this IP, probably has a real accout, and does their vandalism via this annon IP. In addition to this, there is a suspicion that this IP is used by the same user as the IP 63.3.16.1 [19]. This second IP has a similar history of vandalism. whether these IPs are connected I am unsure. but I'm pretty sure 63.3.16.2 is a Sock IP of someone. I would like to do something about it, but because I have been unable to find any user accounts that seem to be associated with this IP. Is this an appropriate situation for a use of CheckUser? If so, where do I go to request it? If not, what should I do as my next step? I've seen you have a history of dealing with sockpuppets, What do you think of this situation? Axcess ( talk) 18:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I know. I realized after the last revert. Rracecarr ( talk) 22:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rlevse. I saw that you archived AN3RR lately. Are you aware that it's set up to be archived by bot [20]? If you had a reason for archiving it, I understand, but thought I should let you know at least. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Rlevse. I noticed that some banned users are able to get back online even with the same IP, such as User:Nku pyrodragon, who had already banned 3 times before on being a sockpuppet. But he still is able to make a new membership, even after blocking. He can also log in and edit his talk page and others' also. Can you give me an answer on my talk page? Styrofoam☭1994 talk 02:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the recent Israel-Palestine Arbcom. I've been feeling that a number of wiki-editors have been in breach of the Decorum principle. I've raised the issue here, but believe that it won't be seen there - where do I raise this issue so we can get a clearer explanation of how this is intended to be implemented? Jaakobou Chalk Talk 17:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:RFAR#Appeals_and_requests_for_clarification — Rlevse • Talk • 17:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. User:Bluegoblin7 is looking for an admin coach but I am a relatively new admin so I would prefer to co coach the user. Can we coach him together? Thanks. Tbo 157 (talk) 19:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
for dealing with that problem on ANI. Cheers. miranda 22:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
While surfing wikipedia, I notcied that this user received a final warning to stop harassing the user:Nku_pyrodragon. However, he continued to harass users and he did not receive a block for his actions. Instead you gave him another last warning. He seems to be also harassing the user:rws_killer6-- Wikieditor1989 ( talk) 15:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason: "reason —unconvinced, make a pseudo article on your talk page does not convince me. this is also your third decline and you're only allowed two. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)"
I don't want to play the you said, they said game but...
you said then he said and then he said and then he said. I really don't care, he just popped up on my watchlist. Best regards! -- omtay 38 19:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse I removed th Merger tags on Blue Heron Lodge and Tidewater Council because the votes were saying to Keep them seperate and i got a comment on Blue Heron Lodge that said the merger was declined and the Merge strip needed to be taken off of this page and Tidewater Council. I was told to remove the tags by Wikipedia. I did not remove them because i wanted too. Thank you. Kenny ( talk) 03:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Before I got rid of the Merger button the bottom of the disscution said the merge was discontinued so when i saw that that means the merger dissuction needed to be taken off.Thank you. Kenny ( talk) 04:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
You mean "The merge request has been removed in that it was erroneously placed in the first place. Sorry for the confusion. KC9CQJ 00:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)" ? Thata's from almost 2 years ago. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I believed it to be an honest mistake, caught in a block web. Thanks for freeing me. Have a good evening Travellingcari ( talk) 04:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I notice you were the closing admin in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Sports Nuggets so I thought I'd come to you. It looks like the same editor is now editing through public library computers: [21] and [22]
It also appears Sports Nuggets is the same editor as another puppet master account: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ron liebman. How does one go about reporting weird cases like this? -- Mosmof ( talk) 05:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, did you get my e-mail? John Smith's ( talk) 07:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
?. Post here. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Sure. I recently remembered your warning to Giovanni and myself not to revert each other, or you would issue a block. After you made the warning, Giovanni reverted a change I had made earlier on the Republic of China Navy article at 23:53, 17th January 2008. I also think this is a case of wikistalking, as he has never shown a real interest on that page or any other modern military pages. He reverted me for a rather dubious reason and then never commented again on the talk page/edited again on the page.
Just thought you should know, as I guess you missed it. John Smith's ( talk) 17:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
It seems that as Wikipedia's grown, we've relaxed our restrictions on what goes on in the userspace to allow more userboxes, mini-projects, etc. Would something like this User:TlatoSMD#Great_Wikipedians which probably wouldn't have survived 2 or 3 years ago, survive today? MBisanz talk 08:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Bdasgupta@gmail.com said he realised the problems that could happen by having that username. I suggested he either rename the account or create a new one. He did the latter, so it should be ok now. Spellcast ( talk) 12:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see proposal here: Talk:George_Thomas_Coker#Proposal. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Oldnoach should be Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Oldnoah. Thanks. -- Closedmouth ( talk) 12:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I still hope that you will respond to my three emails. Thanks in advance. Racepacket ( talk) 16:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, is there any reason my statement wasn't copied over? The arbitrators haven't yet rejected or accepted my proposal so I believe it should be copied over, if anything just for the record. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 02:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:8th Georgetown South, Page was speedily deleted. -- Egel Reaction? 10:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm the guy who's been working on Kardashev scale, well me, User:Ben_Standeven, User:Beland... anyway I did something today I'm not sure I was supposed to do, I restored a page back to it's previous version after several edits had been made, I'm not sure, but I know there's a privilege called rollback, that I don't have. But I'm not sure this counts... but I'd like for you to look into it.
My problem is with User:Michaelbusch he has a tendancy to remove large sections of the article without talking about why on the talk page... Today he made 7 removals, without talking about any one of them... once... starting with this one:
he removed 6 large sections on Dec 27 starting with this one:
I've already talked to you about this once before, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rlevse/RlevseTalkArchive8#Kardashev_Scale.2C_and_concern_from_a_new_user but his abbreviated reasons of removal and limited discussion on the Talk:Kardashev_scale page erks me. I don't really know what to do about it. Can you help?-- Sparkygravity ( talk) 22:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention to the matter. Regarding your continued concern over connection to the anonymous IP 4.153.59.194, it should be noted that the same IP registered at AtariAge the same day to do the usual harassment and trolling. The user (Stonic) has a history of going from various IP's to register there, on ebay, and through various email accounts to harass that group of individuals (atariage, Curt Vendel of Atarimuseum, and Matt Reichart of atariprotos.com), and nfortunately he spilled it over to Wikipedia. The owner of AtariAge was going to share the logs for that IP, if that would have helped things, but it appears unnecessary now. However, I just wanted to make you aware of that because you mentioned not being totally convinced. -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 01:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 5 | 28 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 04:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you were his coach, this might interest you Wikipedia:BN#Readdition_of_administrator_flag. MBisanz talk 04:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I've identified a few more accounts per your request on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#Blacklist.3F. Reviewing the remaining links, there appears to be many good faith additions, but the statement posted on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Tube bar ("If links to DP on other pages are ok, then we'll just do that ;)" [23]) raises a corncern. There is a discussion on MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#www.digitpress.com_repeated_spam_on_Wikipedia, hopefully we can get more input. Thanks-- Hu12 ( talk) 13:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear Rlevse, Giovanni continues to wikistalk me. I left a message on a user's page about something he wrote, and Giovanni decided to reply in his name. I asked Giovanni nicely on his talk page not to follow me around if I was asking one person a question. He then removed it without comment and left yet another comment on the other user's talk page.
Can you please ask him to stop doing this? If I leave a message on an article talk page he is working on, he can comment. But if I ask a question that only one person can answer he shouldn't be following me around. He has complained that I followed him on to an article recently at the Admin's incident board and that I was seeking conflict. Yet he is doing exactly what he accuses me of. The one piece of advice he was given on the Admin board was to leave me alone - he appears to have ignored that and wants to provoke a situation. As he has ignored my polite requests, can you please deal with the situation? John Smith's ( talk) 21:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Both of you carry out your fingerpointing and debates somewhere else. I only want hard facts here on my talk page. I'm also posting on both talk pages strongly advising you both to leave each other alone. If I come across more issues with either of you, I won't hesitate to block. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, a couple of months ago you told me to let you know when I was ready for a nomination on RFA. I am ready for a nomination now Alex fusco 5 22:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I just deleted Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Durzatwink after an entry on WP:AN. Styrofoam1994 now is adamant that it was a real SSP case and not him playing around, like previously with said user. You have been involved in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nku pyrodragon and might know more about the matter. Could you please comment or recreate. Thanks Agathoclea ( talk) 00:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
How does this look for a recall process User:MBisanz/Recall?, since it will be an RfA question. MBisanz talk 03:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 05:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Mickylynch101
I believe you completely abused your powers in this case. I have been forced to create a new account to defend myself from these bogus charges. I have provided evidence on Markanthony101s page that disproves your accusations.
The way you held the discussion was an absolute joke. No-one commented on the evidence (They weren't given a chance to) and I wasn't given a chance to defend myself. Its a pity that admin powers cannot be overturned because you have simply gone power mad. And yes, of course this account is a sockpuppet account but I have absolutely no connection to Mickylynch. Please consider the evidence and allow me a chance to defend myself. Markanthony102 ( talk) 14:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I've learnt a lot about the admin hierarchy in my time here. Markanthony102 ( talk) 13:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Did you see the changes I made? Thoughts? -- evrik ( talk) 15:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
See WP:VPM#Wrongly accused of sockpuppetry; consequent case was illegally handled and wrongfully executed. I think this may be a valid complaint, given the poor quality of, in particular, the timeline evidence that was provided at the SSP page. — Random832 16:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Randy,
Thanks for the great news about my first FA. I heard it first from you, when checking my "new messages" — as it should be! Appreciate all the help, Jim. JGHowes talk - 06:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
LOL, in 2006 the person was you, as in Wikipedia editor, YouTube video maker, Flickr photographer, blogger, and all kinds of other Webers 2.0. So you too are Person of the Year. Pretty cool, isn't it? :) Renata ( talk) 18:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm still working on the case, and I believe the editors are long time sock of banned user(s). I can't narrow down the case, because the editors seem to have been wikipedians since 2005 and with various socks. I request you to not close the case. Among the suspected socks on the list, 5 accounts are busy making disruptive edits and the rest are either blocked infinitely or abandoned the accounts.
However, I need the blocked user to be listed for proof. Thatcher said technical measure is not helping to confirm their possiblity of the sock. I'm collecting their behavioral patterns from old and recent activities. Among them, User:KoreanShoriSenyou should've banned early for the account name policy, which means Exclusive use for disposal of Chosenjin. Chosenjin itself is racial slur to South Korean the account name is like Nazi's conduct. If you think it is confusing, I wil clean up much. But f I make another file on them, mostly the case is just copy and paste.Please restore the case. Thanks-- Appletrees ( talk) 19:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Yo, I all ready admitted to having more then one account look at the talk page. But I don't see the problem with having more then one account. Also if you look at my user:page I said I was done with wikipedia, but if I ever want to come back on I would just make a new account. Wikipedia = to many rules!
Hiya, I was wondering if you would be willing to consider lifting page protection? I think that it was definitely useful in breaking a nasty revert cycle, but I think we've got a handle on things now. If you check our recent poll, I think it's pretty clear that we have a consensus for the condensed version of the article, as a basis from which to move forward with further article improvement. There have been no new comments in a few days, so if you have time, could you please review the section, and let me know if you agree? Thanks, El on ka 03:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it looks like the one editor with WP:OWN issues, PHG ( talk · contribs), is still determined to defy consensus and revert the article. [28] We've reverted him back, but it's looking like he's going to continue fighting this. He's also continuing to disrupt in other areas, such as an Original Research problem today at Talk:Viam agnoscere veritatis (which we have since cleaned up). Though I see also now he's been blocked at Commons for copyright violations (sigh).
It is my opinion that we've given him enough good-faith cautions (his talkpage is full of them), and that since he's continuing to edit-war in defiance of consensus, that he just needs to be blocked for disruption. He was already blocked once for 24 hours, but he never admitted fault. If it were up to me, I'd say that he just needs to be blocked and then kept blocked until he can at least acknowledge that he understands the problems that his behavior has been causing, and until he can promise to do better in the future. Of course, I'm an involved editor, and it's not my decision, but I can still make a recommendation. Or if you disagree, I think at least a longer block (48 hours), so that we can continue working on cleanup without disruption. Do you agree with my assessment? Or would you rather that I took this to ANI? -- El on ka 01:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I'm a bit confused by your re-protecting the article. Could you please let me know what you would like to see as conditions, to unprotecting it? Based on my view (and multiple other editors on the talkpage), the situation is pretty simple: We have a consensus to condense the article and then continue working on it from a condensed version. Then we have one editor, PHG, who has been in violation of WP:OWN for months, who refuses to acknowledge consensus, and who keeps reverting the article to his own preferred 200K version (which he continues to even further expand in his userspace). [29] PHG is also continuing to create POV forks and WP:COATRACK articles, into which he is continuing to put biased and highly questionable information. See Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance#List of articles for review. All of our attempts to get him to stop this voluntarily have been unsuccessful; he has continued to defy consensus for months now, whether it be an article RfC or wording of the intro sentence, or condensing the article, he refuses to concede any point, and instead, continues escalating. Several of his POV forks have been put through AfD, [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] but it is exhausting to keep chasing after him like this.
I saw that you asked at talk for diffs of two other editors participating in the poll, but I assure you that neither of those editors participated in the poll, and this should be easy enough to check by looking at the talkpage history since the poll was started on January 29, [35] and neither of them (Justin nor Matt57) has participated at all on the talkpage since well before that.
I am trying very hard to avoid an ArbCom case here, since I don't think a case would really do any purpose except to waste months of time, to confirm what is already pretty obvious: PHG is not working in a cooperative manner, PHG is defying talkpage consensus, PHG is ignoring all good-faith requests to modify his behavior, PHG is refusing to compromise on any point. If this were complex enough that it needed a judgment call, I could see taking it to ArbCom, but it's not complex: We have long lists of complaints at PHG's talkpage from a variety of editors, (Elonka) (Geogre) (Adam Bishop) [36] (WJBscribe) (Ioeth) [37] (Aramgar) (Kafka Liz) [38] (Srnec) (Eupator) (Shell Kinney) [39] (Luna Santin) (Jehochman) (Orderinchaos) (Durova) (Dihydrogen Monoxide)
He was blocked for 24 hours on EN, [40] but it did no good. We now have dozens of articles which need cleanup, and he is continuing to cause more problems on a near daily basis. He has ignored warnings from multiple admins. I was hoping that with the poll at the talkpage at least, we would have a clear way to move forward, but if the action each time that PHG reverts is simply to protect the article, without taking action on the cause of the disruption (PHG), we are never going to be able to break out of this cycle. :/ So, could you please tell me what you'd like to see, what proof that you would need to settle things in your own mind, that all other good faith efforts to deal with PHG have been exhausted, and that the solution is not protecting the article from everyone, but simply protecting Wikipedia from PHG? -- El on ka 06:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Case just accepted by arbcom, it's rather moot now so I unprotected the pages and made a stmt on talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I blocked him 31 hours. See talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I respectfully submit Rlevse that this situation is a bit more complex imho. The two comments PHG had added to the poll, were from an earlier poll cycle, and if you check those editors talk pages, for example here, you can see they were intimidated into leaving the article. That's not a typical way to go about consensus-building, threatening everyone who disagrees until they leave, and then saying Hey we have consensus now!. So I would ask that you consider that qualification in any sanctions against PHG until ArbCom has a chance to speak. We don't want a situation where there's any perception that the bullies run the playground. I'm not saying they do, I'm saying it could be perceived as going that way. Wjhonson ( talk) 06:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
You said . . . not convinced they're socks . . .. Not trying to dispute your decision or anything, just very puzzled why you said that. The diffs I provided showed both IPs inserting the same bad poem (which has zero google hits) into the same article. How could that, in all liklihood, be anything but the same person? As I say, not trying to get anything changed, I just want to try to understand this so I can make a better report next time. SpinningSpark 15:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I reopened this case, as I am pretty sure Durzatwink is a sockpuppet. I noticed that you banned his previous incarnation in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nku pyrodragon. Can you help me out here too? contribs STYROFOAM☭1994 TALK 15:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
A little late perhaps, but congradulations on getting Truman featured. Great work. Basketball one 10 02:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Is it possible to gain support on my request for 2 articles ? See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting#Creation_of_2_documents_on_Wikipedia_Commons Thanks.
KVDP ( talk) 12:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Check out the screenshot for Veropedia. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 14:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Distinguished Eagle Scouts, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Distinguished Eagle Scouts is a redirect to a non-existent page (
CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Distinguished Eagle Scouts, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk) 17:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for helping us out. KC109 ( talk) 01:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 6 | 4 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Here you go: Alvin Townley --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 15:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Pearson was a close friend of the pioneer of the Scouting movement Baden-Powell, and supportive of his efforts in setting up the movement and publishing its magazine The Scout. When Pearson's scheme for publishing in Braille was faltering due to lack of funds, on 2 May 1914 Baden-Powell publicly requested that "all Scouts perform a 'good turn' for The Scout magazine publisher Mr C Arthur Pearson, in order to raise money for his scheme of publishing literature in Braille for the blind." Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 15:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
So its obvious the SPA at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Jossi_COI_diffs is a sock puppet of someone whose likely to have contributed to either this or another discussion involving Jossi. But since there are several people who have questioned/been critical of him, there is no direct connection. Obviously RFCU doesn't permit fishing, so how should it be investigated? MBisanz talk 03:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I've made a reply here [45]. If you believe there are errors within it I would appreciate being noted about them privately (via email). Jaakobou Chalk Talk 14:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I think I'm ready to go up, I've worked through everything at User:MBisanz/AC and can't thnk of any new areas I want to learn. And I've finished my most back-logged article work. Do you plan on writing a co-nom? Since I have 3 coaches who might write co-noms, should I accept as soon as 1 noms or wait for any others who plan on? MBisanz talk 18:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping my count up-to-date :) I'm trying to pretend its not going on and just doing my regular tasks, but it someone keeps finding its way into my recently visited pages list. MBisanz talk 03:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC) No problem, and I understand. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse,
I have a question that perhaps you can answer, is there an upper limit on how many images should be put in an article's gallery section? I know that WP:NOT says that Wikipedia is not an "image repository", etc., but are there any specific guidelines? For example, one of the articles I maintain, Bermuda was today loaded up with two dozen images! JGHowes talk - 00:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
FYI - I posted a request for a review of your ban of TlatoSMD at AN/I. I personally agree with it, but I think it should get wider endorsement because of his fairly long history here and at de.wiki. (Is he banned there I wonder?) Avruch talk 02:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Could you check this for me? I think you tagged as sockpuppets on the basis of the editing patterns, but if you could confirm that for the checkuser, that would be great. You could also check out the ANI thread if you wanted. Carcharoth ( talk) 08:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
This user User:Are0z0ne seems to know more than most new users, but they've only made 1 good contribution so far. Is this just a watch and hope for the best situation? MBisanz talk 06:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
We've both been waiting a long time. In fairness, I have been extremely low key about the whole affair when I have had a right to be much angrier. I would appreciate (But don't expect) an apology from you and the other offending administrator. Markanthony102 ( talk) 14:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:TimeDec10 1984.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 02:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
If Markanthony101 and Mickylynch101 were, in fact, both nominating articles created by SchuminWeb for deletion, why did no-one ever say this out loud? I feel like my time may have been wasted because no-one bothered to articulate the one allegation that this was all really based on. — Random832 20:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Caught my first sock today at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jay Turner. To bad its unwiki to award pelts to users who catch socks. MBisanz talk 08:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
As you may know that I've been dealing with a lot of Japanese socks. Some of them began using open proxy and impersonating me.-_-;; [47] [48] [49] [50]
61.19.242.44 ( talk · contribs) is blocked after I reported at RFCO, and 202.177.195.115 ( talk · contribs) is also confirmed as an open proxy, but not blocked yet. This Applletree ( talk · contribs) is obviously a sock of somebody trying to smack on me as using the similar name to mine. Please block these disruptive socks. Thanks.-- Appletrees ( talk) 12:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Markanthony101 See my latest post. It is probably the same UNI IP adress, that is the only logical reason I can think of. I was banned so wasn't allowed to respond in my old account. MA103 ( talk) 14:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Tks, someone blocked him. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
R,
I've rescanned the original source photo and uploaded it as Image:White House radio broadcast 1937 (v2).jpg. Let me know what you think — your monitor is probably a higher solution than my 800x600! Is this better than Image:White House radio broadcast 1937.jpg now at Commons? If you think so, I'll go ahead and replace that one at Commons with this v2 JGHowes talk - 14:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:MOVIES-HighAndMighty.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 00:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 09:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Remember this: User_talk:Jaakobou#Warning ?
I request your opinion/guidance on how I am supposed to continue content based discussions following this diff, which violates Arbcom Final decisions.
With respect, Jaakobou Chalk Talk 16:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I have a prior agrement with SA that I am permitted to edit his comments. PouponOnToast ( talk) 22:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I recently took part in the Giano arbcom. It was very messy. I suggest that you agree with the arbs that you will deal severely with any untoward behaviour (with due allowance, but not too much), make sure everyone is notified, and stamp on the first example of bad behaviour. This one may need a firm hand! LessHeard vanU ( talk) 23:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC) ps. It is tally - no "e".
Same subject...based on his comments here [52] I believe Morven should be recused from this case. What's the procedure for formally requesting it? Cla68 ( talk) 23:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Since when do we split up proposals by user? — Random832 04:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Did my email make sense? Ronnotel ( talk) 19:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Since I believe that the edits I have made (with the exception of a few which I have adjusted for as people have notified me about) are making wikipedia better, if the worst crime I have committed is doing so many edits that I fill up watchlists I can live with that. I don't mean to sound like a jerk and I am not upset about your comments, I appreciate the positive tone in which your comments where presented, however many of the comments that I have received where in regards to "better uses of my time" so, since its my time to waste I have chosen to ignore them. I will admit that I have made some mistakes in using AWB by incorrectly changing some things, and I have corrected them. If there is a specific complaint you are referring to I would apreciate enlightenment.-- Kumioko ( talk) 02:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
KL has returned though seemingly only for a hit and run attack as the IP address used has been blocked for 24 hours and so far hasn't reappeared in his usual haunts using another account. I was considering a RFCU for the address but it's obviously him so passed on it but do keep your eyes open as I think he's just prepping before returning and running at full-bore again. Just as an aside, why isn't there a subpage for KL at WP:LTA yet? There's the list that's maintained in User:DietLimeCola's userspace and it's puzzled me since I first knew of KL as to why there isn't one given the high frequency of vandalism over time. Don't need to answer, just interested. -- treelo talk 03:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 58 supporting, 0 opposing, and 2 neutral. I hope to demonstrate that your trust in me is rightly placed and am always open to critiques and suggestions. Cheers. MBisanz talk 04:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC) |
I want to thank you personally for being my coach and helping me to develop the skills necessary to serve the community. Feel free to ever ask for my help. MBisanz talk 04:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
no problem. I don't expect to have anything more to add (good, bad, appropriate, or not) -- Rocksanddirt ( talk) 19:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I translated the material I found about Slovenian Scouts and Guides in Carinthia. Can you please take a look at User:Phips/workshop/ Should it become part of Scouting in Slovenia or an own article?- Phips ( talk) 22:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparently there is some controversy about the first aircraft to complete 25 missions. Some say that another B-17 called "Hell's Angels" (yes, the MC gang was named for it) was the first, but they did not have a documentary (some say because of the name) and did not return to the states for a bond tour. The National Museum of the United States Air Force says about the Memphis Belle: "In May 1943 it became the first U.S. Army Air Forces heavy bomber to complete 25 missions over Europe and return to the United States" [53] (my bolding). This does not clear up the issue completely. If you look at the edit history of the article in question you will see that there was a small edit war about it recently, and I put "one of the..." to defuse the situation. -- rogerd ( talk) 23:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Re this thread: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Sauce_for_goose.2C_sauce_for_gander:_where.27s_Weiss.27s_wife_on_WP.3F
I believe that it would be best to delete this picture as soon as possible, because it does not actually depict Truman, and can only cause further confusion. I discuss this more thoroughly on the Commons talk page, with links to other pictures of Truman and the unknown subject of this picture, from the same event. -- Dominus ( talk) 05:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Please check out http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=101635 . A photograph exists of Baldur von Schirach together with Futara Yoshinori as spectators at fight games of the Hitlerjugend in Bremen, taken August 15, 1937. It says something really small at the side. You're really good at this stuff-can you help get an image that is _not_ marked on? Thanks Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 09:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
That silver star edit as made before you told me about the error. I have gone back and started going through all of the recipients of the Silver and Bronze star but it takes a while to go through 1800 articles.-- Kumioko ( talk) 16:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a bot, yet you still manually archive. Please refrain from doing this. Thank you. — E talk 06:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse. Re Hillcourt, I can only offer a few suggestions/questions.
– Outriggr § 06:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I believe as clerk for the current arbcom. case, i can ask your assistance. I wish to present evidence to the arbcom., to be uploaded to the page Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence. I have prepared my best draft at [54]. Would you advise me if it is order to upload this as my evidence, or if there are any adjustments that are necessary, before it is suitable for uploading. I am unsure as to any deadline for submissions. I believe I have the right to provide evidence, a course which is not necessarily to my liking, and bearing in mind that I am a relatively inexperienced User, I ask for some forbearance if my application veers to the unlearned. Newbyguesses - Talk 12:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I got to know that why I have been chased by so many Japanese people since December. They made two treads at 2channel, Japanese bulletin board famous for anti-Korean sentiment.
It is filled with personal attacks and racial slurs against only me such as Chosenjin, hwabyeong patient, psycho, institutionalized mentally deranged person, irrational person, stupid, .etc. I translated some of the Japanese thread at Talk:Sea of Japan. I'm so exhausted of all these dramas, so didn't consider to report it at ANI or Arbicom, but the meatpuppet and sockpuppet of Azukimonaka/KoreanShoriSenyou/Orchis29 are haunting around me and pushing POV much. I talked to admin, LordAmeth who can read Japanese, and advised me to post it at ANI. see this User_talk:LordAmeth#Need_a_guideline
Before reporting the incident at ANI, I want you to look at this people.
2008FromKawasaki ( talk · contribs) are emerging again and look like obvious sock of Azukimonaka per the same interest and writing style, especially "erroneous". I believe these editors are also socks of him, and are proved as sock to each other at RFCU but they were not infinitely blocked. They abusively used the accounts though. You can also check it again from the collapsed boxes of my past SSP on Azukimonaka.
andThey write poor wording in English and the literary word, erroneous is not commonly used and is likely for non-English speakers to see it in advanced test preparation books like GRE, GMAT.
I can't file another RFCU files right now because my two files are not finished and you advised me not to use it much. But I couldn't help plead this again to you. Thanks.-- Appletrees ( talk) 12:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, being written in is one of cliche that Azukimonaka used a lot, so you can confirm it from the collapsed boxes of Azukimonaka SSP file Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Azukimonaka.
And see the Koreans in Japan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The personal attacks are written in the Japanese thread, and some of them said they intentionally made edit warring with me to tease me. -- Appletrees ( talk) 13:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I also think the new user, Coraroidman ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) seems like a sock of Azukimonaka per their same interest and writings. Azukimonaka loved to edit cuisine related article or insert images. He claims he or her is a Vietnamese in Vietnam and made some edit on Vietnamese articles and then directly went to vote for his /her support for Sea of Japan. After that he keep inserting POV article regardless of my suggestion to use Talk page.
South Korea ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
At RFCU case, Zainichi Koreans is unrelated to 2008FromKawasaki, but given the fact that I had been stalked by User:Amazonfire for quite some time, I think Zainichi Koreans is amazonfire. And some of their contributions were erased because of several violation of rules. -- Appletrees ( talk) 13:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
was being writtten |
---|
Kamosuke = Azukimonaka = KorenaShoriSenyou = Orchis29 = ShinjukuXYZ = NekoNekoTeacher = Necmate = 43.244.133.167
I believe these people are the same editor per the following reasons. If you see it, you will notice the users' interests are all similar and same pattern of writing such as using passive sentences rather than active sentences such as concealed or denied. They like using "insistence" and "ground" or "groundless" rather claim, assertion or than citation, source, or evidence, etc. I'm not good at writing in English but they all make the same errors in tense such as "was being hated by" etc. The below are distinctive examples for the claim that they're all the same person.
As for Kamosuke, he and HaradaSanosuke are the banned socks on August 2006 and are Softbank odn ISP users = 211.131.78.52 [59]. Their (actually one person) writing style remarkably resemble that of Azukimonaka, KoreanShoriSenyou, Orchis29. I haven't looked through Kamasuke's contribution history, but he also made the same errors in writing past tense. ("was being written by someone") Kamosuke created his account at 2005-11-19T08:01:02. [60] According to the remain block log, He had been a long-time abusive troll and I strongly believe he has transformed as new edior with countless sock puppetry.
This apparent sock ip doesn't seem to be a dynamic address. I think this should be blocked infinitely as well.
Although ShinjukuXYZ was proven as a sock of NekoNekoTeacher, they were not infinitely blocked. They seem abusively used the accounts though. I think this account should be infinitely blocked along with another sock accounts.
|
-- Appletrees ( talk) 13:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
What are you removing someone else's evidence for? — Rlevse • Talk • 01:10, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Do User:152.91.9.144 and User:CygnetSaIad's edit histories look similar enough to warrant an RFCU? I'm seeing that the IP was hit with an "accidental" autoblock applied to Cygnet. And for an IP, he has a tendancy to turn up right in the middle of heated debates. MBisanz talk 03:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
What is the procedure for submitting further evidence, if available? Just add to my section, don't think I am over the ord or DIFF!! limit yet.
Is there a deadline for submission? Newbyguesses - Talk 21:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt action in the sockpuppetry case. You will be interested to know that shortly after Downtrip’s block several IP addresses and one account identifying themselves as Wikizilla’s appeared and attempted to deface my talckpage.
[62] thereby confirming the suspicions of Downtrip’s association with Wikizilla. The edits themselves were reverted by other editors however, if you see nothing against it would it be possible to semiprotect my user page for a while to save others trouble.
Freepsbane (
talk) 03:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
At Yes, I do apologize for mis-identifying the clerk in this very thread, and can only blame it on my dyslexia computersaurus!. [63]. Newbyguesses - Talk 17:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
The 14th was Morven who is listed as away but he started voting. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 23:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
That questionable IP and the almost stale-user were confirmed at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/CygnetSaIad that he are User:CygnetSaIad operating from an anon. IP. What is the proper response here? Warning, block, AN, etc? MBisanz talk 03:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm no proxy expert, but I think the open proxies and anonymizers are to be blocked. If you user IRC, you could ask in the admin channel (which you're now eligible for). I think User:Ryan Postlethwaite knows about them too. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi. could you please keep an eye on Talk:Israeli settlement? The article is currently edit-protected. This is part of the topical area of Israeli-Palestinian articles, covered by a previous ArbCom case. thanks. -- Steve, Sm8900 ( talk) 14:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Note to clerk: re Mantanmoreland arbcom case, I am experiencing continuing computer difficultes, and now that in particular the /Workshop page has got so long, it may become impossible for me to post further evidence, or reply to queries.
If that is so, and you wish to contact me, please do so at Newbyguesses. I should also mention, that this proceeding is taking a gruelling toll on me, and does not even seem to have completed the preliminary phases.
It may become necessary for me to take a break from these proceedings. I hope it is obvious that my comments are all sincerely meant. It may be that i would benefit from a Wikibreak— Newbyguesses - Talk 12:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I strongly object to User:Crum375 editing other people's evidence section under the guise of "Removing BLP violations", on the evidence page, unilaterally, without asking the other side to refactor first, and in full knowledge of how controversial his action would be. [64] and [65] could you please review the information provided, and then if found to be a BLP violation, go through everyone else's submissions on the ArbCom case (such as a banned user being called a blackmailer, without evidential backup), and remove them as well. Thanks. SirFozzie ( talk) 17:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
No big deal, comes with the clerking job. See ev talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Currently we have the issue with KL but also with another vandal called Greg Jungwirth aka Claymort who DLC has figured might be Komodo Lover seeing as both talk to their previous identities as other people and pretend to be several people at once. I've asked him to file a RFCU on their most recently active accounts even though one comes from Rhode Island and the other from Atlanta so probably won't reveal anything. Besides that, there's a pending SSP case for Greg's sockpuppets and as they've became increasingly aggressive towards me since I filed the case so if you can could you go check it over? Thanks. treelo talk 14:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I want to delete User:Sparkygravity/Socks because just in case I make more userboxes I created User:Sparkygravity/userboxes/socks. So now I have an extraneous page.-- Sparkygravity ( talk) 17:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Because you seemed to be picking on gothangel when she had a valid point here, you seem to want to remove the word Boys and men and male from every artcile and every passage on that article which I presonally don't agree with with. I cant understand how you can have so much mention of women and girls in a male-dominant article. It does not make logical sense. You have now threeatened me, which I find appalling. -- Steven Hipkins ( talk) 23:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
There is quite a schemozzle, it seems, about whether these BLP? or external links are allowed in evidence, or even if RL names in evidence, are allowed. Whatever is the ruling, I am content, but I wish to draw to your attention to a number of similar entries to these possibleBLP? that occur in the Evidence presented by Georgewilliamherbert.
If all are these links and mentions are allowed, fine, then they should all be restored in every instance where they were wrongly removed by Crum375, but if no links or names are allowed, then i think they must be removed from ALL sections of evidence, and that would include mine, and GWH's. thankyou, Newbyguesses - Talk 00:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC) (note to self - Post to /evidence#newbygwhen next online)
I didn't do that. Melbrooksfan101 talk 04:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status and move your entry to the Active list. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
...but given that you up and left Wikipedia in a huff the last time you got into a dispute with me, I would appreciate it if you did not continue down this road of hounding me. Your last comment on WP:AE was particularly unbecoming. ScienceApologist ( talk) 20:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
My recusal in the paranormal arbcom decision had absolutely nothing to do with SA. I recused because less than a month before that arbcom case, Martinphi was disrupting the FA process (over the parapsychology FAC nom) and I nearly blocked him (Martinphi) for it. Raul654 ( talk) 21:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
This is exceedingly rude to me and Raul. ScienceApologist ( talk) 20:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
I have commented here
FT2 ( Talk | email) 21:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
I think the reason the Completed Requests section keeps disappearing is that the bot is archiving it. See my edits to /archive14 fixing it. You might look at diffs just before the bot to see if there is a simple reason, otherwise maybe contact the bot owner. Maybe it doesn't like = Sections = . Thatcher 23:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Me and several other editors have been drafting an RfC on JzG here. We listed an effort by you to influence his behavior in the past but don't necessarily expect you to be one of the certifiers for the RfC. But, if you'd to look it over and tell us if you think anything that we listed is unfair or inaccurate before we post it, that would be very helpful. Thank you. Cla68 ( talk) 01:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
This Wilt Chamberlain looks like the kind of article I could take to an FA-status? its got a large number of cites, but could use some content reoganziation and wiki-formatting. And its already a GA. MBisanz talk 05:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, yesterday Didodo (a sock of AA banned user Fadix) added some evidence to the Ehud proposed decision talk page, I blocked and reverted. Now VartanM (good standing user, no issue there) has restored Fadix comments, endorsing them himself. As a result, I think it should probably stay even though it was a banned user. I've quickly scanned it, and it is relevant to Adil, so I've kicked off a formal CU here. -- John Vandenberg ( talk) 06:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse, I have been matched with you for Admin Coaching. I would like to introduce you, so we can get started with what you would like to teach me. My name is Dusti, I am 18, and I live at ISSCH. I have been editing on Wikipedia since April 4th, 2007, according to the account creation log. I would like to become an Admin to better Wikipedia. Granted, an editor can better Wiki by simply adding to articles, however, with the tools Admin's have, you can do a whole lot more to better the encyclopedia. I feel that after becoming an admin, I can do a lot more than what I have been doing, which is RC patrol, NP patrol, and some AFD stuff. I look forward to working with you. Unfortunatley, because I am living here at ISSCH, I do not yet have access to an email account. I will be graduating soon in May, and will have an email account when I attend College soon thereafter. I look forward to hearing from you! Happy Editing, Dusti talk to me 18:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
It's fine. If MBisanz recommends you to me, that's all I need to know. We'll start later today. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Can you tend to Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop#Possibly urgent -- need Arbcom/Clerk clarification on BLP? GRBerry 20:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I undid my own protection, as I noted that the Clerks were taking action and I didn't want my act (as an interested party) to remain once the "emergancy" had been dealt with. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 21:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your input. I have followed up on my user talk page. Thanks. -- AeronM ( talk) 00:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 8 | 18 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 9 | 25 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
A friend sent this under the heading "Clean can be Funny." Truth to tell it had me in stitches, but then I needed it. Now you be the judge: Fifty-one years ago, Herman James, a North Carolina mountain man, was drafted by the Army. On his first day in basic training, the Army issued him a comb. That afternoon the Army barber sheared off all his hair. On his second day, the Army issued Herman a toothbrush. That afternoon the Army dentist yanked seven of his teeth. On the third day, the Army issued him a jock strap. The Army has been looking for Herman for 51 years. Thank you Rlevse, Shir-El too 00:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Tom.mevlie is almost certainly a sock of a banned user after seeing this comment [70]. Does the MO of seeking adoption, Wikiproject International Relations, and very odd phrasing of this apology [71] for this [72] ring any bells? MBisanz talk 16:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I've just noticed this comment on my (WordBomb's) talk page, but I'm not clear what it means.
Sorry I'm just getting back to you. I pretty much never go to that page. But I'll make a point of doing so moving forward.-- WordMail ( talk) 17:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | ||
For your excellent clerking on a RFAR case that turned out to be a real Fozzie of a Bear of a problem. Dr. Extreme ( talk) 21:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC) |
I didn't know about that RfA log - many thanks for adding the info there :) -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 22:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
As the clerk, should you be commenting at all? I realise that you may have opinions and work with the Arbs in formulating a lot of what appears on the pages but aren't you supposed to be the only party that stays dumb? It will be too late to remove or strike now, but perhaps one of the arbs will proxy your opinions if you really feel the need to comment. Cheers. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 23:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Oops, I misread. Thanks for telling me. Keilana| Parlez ici 03:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Could you please un-archive my request for clarification of the Ferrylodge case? It has not been clarified, since the two admins who commented leaned towards applying the decision to talkspace, while the admin who closed the AE thread apparently took home a different message. Ferrylodge is disruptive in talkspace and articlespace. I'd like concrete clarification or amendment to indicate that the decision either applies to all namespaces or is restricted to articlespace. Thanks. MastCell Talk 04:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The arbs have a lot to do and I'm sure are giving the case its fair share of attention. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. That user requests to be unblocked. Judging by the tone of his unusually articulate unblock request, I'd say we can risk giving him another chanca. What do you think? Sandstein ( talk) 09:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
A user conduct RfC involving the actions of JzG ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) in which you have been mentioned is about to go live and will be found at WP:RFC/U shortly. Viridae Talk 11:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind that I protected your userpage for a short while. IPs aren't on the constructive side today for some reason. :) Regards, Rudget . 14:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I've created the RFCU here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Vr. BTW, the banner on that page says "to the checkuser page here" which seems to be an out-of-date way of creating a new request. Someone should fix that but I've no idea who handles this part of WP. I've never raised an RFCU before, so if I've done something wrong, feel free to tweak it. Colin° Talk 19:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 06:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Checking in. What's new? Dusti talk to me 16:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 10 | 3 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The memory of water page seems to be under attack by a series of different IP editors. Now I have certainly used up my reverts but cannot deal with this editing. They are anonymous casual visitors and refuse to discuss the changes. What can I do? Am I allowed to simply revert them? Being new to this I am unsure what channel to follow as if I assume good faith, they are not real vandals. The Tutor ( talk) 11:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm filing and RFCU on this myself. There's obviously something fishy here. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, as a newcomer editor I'd like to know what was wrong with my edit on the Medal of Honor page.
1 cool guy ( talk) 02:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Can you take a look at Kurt Turkulney ( talk · contribs) and decide if this is another User:Arthur Ellis sock? I blocked an IP this morning following this edit that included signing as Ellis. This user came to the RM page this evening, and his contribs are 90% Kinsella and RM related, which were two Ellis focuses. But, given the situation, any Wikipedian with interests in Canadian politics might well come to this article now. And I don't know Ellis well enough to judge for sure - but my intuition is saying the user probably is. GRBerry 04:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I have an edit war going on my own talk page. I've replied, it's not enough, they have to get the last word in. It's the cyber equivalent of junk mail. One has even gone so far to comb my edit history for missteps. What can I do to stop the Wikistalking? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 02:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:OurCabañaLogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Your previous remark on me is right. I'm apt to make very lengthy files or too vague files for sysops to have a difficulty to figure out what is a problem with my report. However, this long-time (over 4 years) disruptions by Japanese editors from the off-wiki bulletin board, 2channel is way too big for me alone to deal with.
I don't know how to proceed the case because the related people are over 30 and I'm the one against their disruption so far. I recently notified of this incident(s) to several Korean editors but I don't know they would participate in the process if I file it to arbicom. You've seen my filing RFCU, SSP, and AIV a lot, so can you take a look at the link and give me an advice? thanks. -- Appletrees ( talk) 21:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I think you have confused me with somebody else. [77] I have no conflicts or involvement with Igor, other than having had a few friendly chats with him past, and today having counseled him a few times to lay off the drama. As VirtualSteve noted, I have been generally supportive towards Igor. However, I could not ignore Igor's use of my talk page to make attacks on third parties. Would you be willing to strike out your comment? Jehochman Talk 03:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse,
Guy thinks it is Tom Butler [78] [79]
It is not Tom, and I know who it is- a WP user in good standing. The WP user has nothing on its block log. —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 07:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I come here to you for a help. I want to use this image in the article Animal rights in Nazi Germany. But I am still not well-versed in uploading image manually outside of Flickr through flickr upload bot. I am a bit confused about the license and the process of manual upload. Can you please help here or upload it in wikipedia. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 12:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
This is the problem I am also facing here what is the license. It is the only image I found in the internet. I found you through recent change patrolling. The image will be deleted if it is copyrighted, but it is hard to know its copyright status. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 12:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Done, see the article. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, there is a backlog at the SSP page and i was just hoping you can take a look at this case i made, [81]. Seems no one has yet looked into it, no one i have contacted has been of help, and the user has used yet another I.P. as a vandalism-only account. One of the users IPs has just vandalized multiple page again and i am seriously getting tired of having to revert all of his mess everyday. Please look into it. -- LaNicoya •Talk• 19:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
What you need here is a WP:RFCU for IP check. Two separate IP ranges, with several IPs. 22:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments on User talk:130.101.152.83. This is the same user; I didn't want to use an account after seeing the mess on paranormal articles in general. 130.101.152.24 ( talk) 19:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Jehochman is right, you just shot yourself in the foot. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:AnimalRightsNaziGermany.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 21:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Look, I have a very short fuse and my patience is being severely tested by some terminally stupid people. Give me a break. Who are you anyway???? The Rationalist ( talk) 21:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Why? Why don't these people take a wiki break? Why should I take a Wiki break? The Rationalist ( talk) 21:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion that I file an RFCU for the spamming IP addresses. I would like to do that, but I am unsure how to use the RFCU template when the sock master is not a registered account, and all I have is a large bunch of IP addresses, none of which is really the sock master — a situation that the template and the RFCU instructions do not seem to have been designed to handle. I posted a question about RFCU for IPs on WT:SSP. The replies so far have not really addressed the issue I raised. I'd appreciate any advice you could offer over there. - Neparis ( talk) 21:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Just as a reminder, if you delete a page, you should close out the AFD. I did these for you ( Noveninsk and Andrzej Koswakij). SynergeticMaggot ( talk) 21:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I have been perplexed to his behavior. What contribution can I do? (I do not want to be hated by him. And, I want to avoid the edit battle. )
I introduce my denied contribution.
Chosun Ilbo introduced Namdaemun. "Namdaemun was specified for the national treasure No.1 by a Japanese empire. The South Korean thinks the succession of the specification of a Japanese empire to be disgrace. " [84]"
Appletrees was not able to deny the fact written in this source. Therefore, he tried to conceal this fact shouting, "You are a puppet".
Case2 Japan-Korea relations [85]
Chosun Ilbo analyzed "Japanese boom in South Korea". [86] The South Korean was worshiping the electronic gadget made in Japan when South Korea was poor. However, the South Korean enjoys Japanese food and clothes today.
Appletrees shouted "Vandallism". And, the source was deleted. He doesn't verify the source.
JoongAng Ilbo explained the movie Hanbando. "The end for which Japan apologizes to Korea will satisfy South Korean's anti- Japanese sentiment." [88]
The signature of Ser Myo-ja shouted and he shouted though it was.
He shouted though this was an article with the signature of Ser Myo-ja. "That is not a real "article" written by a reporter. Don' try to fool me again" And, the source was concealed.
I advised. "Do not delete the source without the reason. " He answered. [89] "If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Japan-Korea relations, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Again, read the citation, possibly a 2channel meat/sock"
I am a beginner. Please guide me. -- Opoona ( talk) 10:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Could you look at Image:Philadelphia CSP.png? -- evrik ( talk) 14:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, you had recently closed Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Eliko with a "let's watch and see" conclusion. About a week after I had started this SSP case, I had also started Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eliko, which concluded with a verdict of "somewhere between possible and confirmed". I'm not sure if you had seen that case when you made your SSP conclusion. Also, per the discussion at User talk:Thatcher#Checkuser follow-up, I'm concerned that Eliko views these case closures as clear proof that he is not the puppetmaster of Manstorius et. al., and no sanctions are necessary. I had also promised to block him or another editor for 7 days if they made any edits to a specific article during a "cool-down" period, (discussion at User talk:Andrwsc/Archive 6#Protection at List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita), which he appears to have done with one of the sockpuppets. Therefore, I don't think a "no action" outcome is entirely appropriate. Thanks — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 19:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
{{
unblock}}
can always be used if he disputes it. I'm still concerned that Eliko is getting away with breaking an agreement (also made with
User:CieloEstrellado) not to edit their disputed article for a week or get blocked for 7 days, but I guess Eliko is on an extremely short leash as a result of this casework. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 20:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse,
As a matter of Wikipedia policies and procedures, if an anon IP has a 30-day block imposed for violation of 3RR, is he then allowed to evade the block by registering? I am referring to blocked IP61.127.11.135, now registered since yesterday's block as Ahoalton JGHowes talk - 23:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
We got off on a bad foot and I'm sorry for snapping at you. I saw a real named person being accused of being a sock puppet account, and I don't need to rehash the details, but I wanted to protect a new contributor even if he might be the same person trying to be pseudonymous, since he had done nothing wrong and neither had the real named person. It was clear to me that there was no possibility he could be the same as Unprovoked, and the basis of the RFCU was therefore missing a foundation as I viewed it. Had I not felt an urgency to stop the situation before it got out of control, I would hopefully have been more polite to you. The reputation of the named person seemed paramount to me in that moment, especially if he might wish to return as a pseudonymous editor. — Whig ( talk) 05:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
User:Allstarecho/scouts has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Allstarecho/scouts and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Allstarecho/scouts during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Justinm1978 ( talk) 17:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your review and support of this FAC. As suggested, I've moved the following free images to Commons and they can now be deleted at en-Wikipedia:
The following images, although now at Commons, presented a problem for me, in that I could not get the HABS url's to display properly inside the template as they do an en-Wikipedia, so I guess I'm making a syntax error somewhere. As a workaround, I've listed the url data separately as "HABS source information" underneath at each image's Commons page:
Thanks, JGHowes talk - 18:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
How hard did you look at the case? Every admin can over-judge - and you yourself have just done it now. If you honestly want some solid advice - I would think harder before over-ruling an admins decision like that. You need to gravitate towards standing by each other if you want to be taken seriously. 72 hours may have been harsh (though I personally just felt relief) - but reducing it as you did (combined with lifting the talk ban too) was far far less wise. WNDL42 accused Kafziel of bias in his original decision - and WNDL42 never stops going, believe me - he's a real wind-up artist. He's also obsessive about controlling articles (he'd been in war on this one not long ago). Kafziel did what he thought was right given WNDL42's behaviour (and WNDLs definitely the type that would benefit from longer to think too).
It seems pretty clear to me that over-ruling Kafziel was quite an easy decision for you, and I am always paranoid on Wikipedia that emails change hands which honest parties like myself cannot see to put right. I know WNDL42 sends them to admins - can you see why I'm paranoid here? And I have to deal with an empowered nuisance-editor now, with a free supply of sweeties RE admin-power he'll happily suck on as long as he can! I just want to take this opportunity to tell you that YOU DON'T!!!! Not a great moment for Wikipedia in my eyes - and I feel I've really struggled for the cause the past day. And don't think mileage won't be made - not every editor acts as rationally as you want them too. WNDL42 had scant regard for policy and authority anyway (though he can be very very polite - especially in his emails I'm sure).-- Matt Lewis ( talk) 03:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, would you or one of the other clerks assist me in obtaining a deleted page? [90] Two sources have informed me that Samiharris has a conversation with a known WordBomb sock on that page. I'd like to examine it. Durova Charge! 07:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I believe you were involved in this investigation.
Using Suspected_sock_puppets/Matthew as a precedent, I've courtesy blanked this page Suspected_sock_puppets/Dbromageas it obvious that these claims have been discreditied by the Arbitration Committee.
If anyone wants to examine these discredited allegations then they are welcome to examine the history of that page.
User:Dbromage seems to have made a worthwile contribution here Special:Contributions/Dbromage. Sadly,this editor has departed Wikipedia since these claims were made. I hope by blanking the page the community sends a signal that he is welcome to return.
I'm like to disclose, I might have a conflict of interest here, being a Railpage forum user, although I have no connection with its operation. My concern is that this sockpuppet investigation has filtered into Google. Using a keyword search "Dbromage" reveals the discredited allegations.
I attemped to do some research in the matter and I must admit I'm no expert, but it seems CSD#G7 does not apply.
Do you have any opinions how this sockpuppet investigation and User_talk:Tezza1can be permanently removed? Logic Fuzzy ( talk) 08:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be an issue with me closing AFD's. I've been told that I closed them when there was no clear cut issue. I will give on one of them, as you can see on my talk page. However, the rest that I closed were reclosed or open then closed with the same outcome. I forgot, actually I was wrong, in the fact that I forgot the last step by adding the template to the talk page, again, see my page. I was told not to close any more AFD's. Can you provide your insight on this? Thanks, and sorry if I disappointed you. That is/was not my intention. Dusti talk to me 16:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Dusti is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon. Short intermediate edits may happen, but I just need to destress and clear my head. I'll be back soon though -- don't worry!!!! |
Dusti--while you're still learning AFDs, only close the obvious ones. Study the closing of the close ones, and steadily work toward them. See you when you get back. I'll be gone 21-29 Mar too. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Since you were the admin involved in the SSP above, I figured I'd drop a line here. I've filed a new case at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Colective follower, which (to me) looks pretty similar. Since the old case was archived and closed, I didn't know what else to do. Yngvarr (c) 23:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
You referred to a "link above", but there was none. I fixed it. :) Corvus cornix talk 23:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
You blocked Colective follower as a sock of Greg Jungwirth. The odd thing is, he added nonsense to the talk page of The Legend of G. The Legend of G hadn't edited in two days. Colective follower made one more edit and then stopped. Eight minutes later The Legend of G arrives and claims Colective was a sock of Greg. Colective gets blocked....and then Legend gets caught in the autoblock. Odd, no? IrishGuy talk 00:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I woke up this morning feeling great, and I had to come back. I'm just going to slow down for now. Anything in particular you want me to do, or not do :) Dusti talk to me 18:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
As per the archived WP:AN/I discussion here, I have initiated WP:DR in the respective talk pages as follows:
If it's not too much trouble, please continue to monitor discussions there. Thank you.-- Endroit ( talk) 18:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
|== Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance == This Arbitration case is closed and the final decision has been published at the link above. PHG ( talk · contribs) is prohibited from editing articles relating to medieval or ancient history for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion. PHG is reminded that in contributing to Wikipedia (including his talkpage contributions, contributions in other subject-matter areas, and contributions after the one-year editing restriction has expired), it is important that all sourced edits must fairly and accurately reflect the content of the cited work taken as a whole. PHG is also reminded that Wikipedia is a collaborative project and it is essential that all editors work towards compromise and a neutral point of view in a good-faith fashion. When one editor finds themselves at odds with most other editors on a topic, it can be disruptive to continue repeating the same argument. After suggestions have been properly considered and debated, and possible options considered, if a consensus is clear, the collegial and cooperative thing to do is to acknowledge the consensus, and move on to other debates.
PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects in other ways, including by suggesting topics for articles, making well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, and continuing to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons.
For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 01:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I haven't a clue as to who that guy was, but I saw him go past as a person who's been indef-blocked, a process I'm interested in. Maybe he was a troll. At worst he should have been told his name would create too much controversy. But nobody knew why he chose it, and nobody gave him a chance to explain himself. The other part of the interest for me, is that (as a matter of fact) I run a cat/kitten rescue operation and we've castrated many a kitten, and thus saved a lot of lives (I can explain if you're really interested). If you think this is advocation of violence, it only shows you need education in vetrinary medicine. That said, I don't have all the info here, either, but at least I understand that I don't. Please take this as a mild suggestion to follow these things up better until you're sure you haven't biten yet another newbie. S B H arris 20:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know that despite a few months away, Cowboycaleb's vendetta against me still hasn't stopped, and has thus today left a post on my talkpage, basically saying no one can stop him. Can you put my talkpage on your watchlist in case he strikes again when I'm offline? Cheers, D.M.N. ( talk) 20:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse! Thank-you for your support in my RfA (91/1/1). |
I have raised an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Collaborations#RfC: Should the collaboration template appear on the article page -- Matilda talk 00:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
You were recently involved in discussions on the article Order of the Arrow. Some of the issues brought up then were not resolved. If you are interested, please participate in the continued discussion at Talk:Order of the Arrow#Safeguarded material. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 13:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
You asked for me to check in, and well, here I am. I feel that I have made some progress (see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Autocracy for an example}}. Hit me with the good/bad/ugly. Dusti talk to me 16:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I know this is weird to ask but, I'd like your opinion on my comments on this talk page. You need not weigh-in on the subject but I would like another editors view of my comments and their appropriateness. I think I may have offended another editor and that was never my intention, however I saw the situation in a certain light and that's what I spoke about. Please let me know what you think (either here, or my talk page, or the article talk page... I'm not trying to hide anything). Padillah ( talk) 13:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 11 | 13 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 12 | 17 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 23:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Added as a contact. Rudget . 13:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
It was just a polite request and I just got tired of waiting. Wikipedia encourages you to be bold and fix whatever you think should be fixed. If you can fix it further just go ahead. Any page open for edit does not require any green light. ~ RayLast « Talk!» 01:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Your username sounds familiar but I do not recall us ever working together. -- Cat chi? 14:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey there. You dealt with the tom.mevlie sockpuppetry case, as I understand. He came back recently as DangerTM, and was blocked. Now, in the WikiProject Novels, someone new has shown up with an account less than a day old, and I have a feeling it may just be that guy AGAIN. WilliamMThompson is the fellow I suspect, and is painting himself as a total newbie to Wikipedia. He's also put in an appearance on the General Forum for that project, agreeing with DangerTM and kinda calling someone a homophobe. I'm sure you can see it for yourself. It's a little suspicious that some new guy would appear on the Novels project almost immediately after Danger got blocked, agreeing with him, and saying inflammatory things. Howa0082 ( talk) 16:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey ... I was looking on flickr for a photo of Percy Harvin and I saw this one. Do you have anything zoomed in on him that shows his face? -- B ( talk) 18:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
You may be interested in Igor. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 23:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 13 | 24 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Anyways Are you sure, how you found out this was Artisol2345's sockpuppet. Did you check his e-mail address, what about if that account could be his brother or sister, or his father haveyou thought about that? Anony IPs 75 xxxabc keep driving me around bugging everyone about people accusing him about sockpuppet. Most people have roommates, and same computer can be share with more than one person. Like mom and dads can also be contrib on Wiki, and their 3 sons might have their own account while parents has their own account. That way is not a sockpuppet. A sockpuppet is one person with like 4 or 5 or more account. Lets pretend one person has account of Route 5, then Orange-County 5, or 405 guy, or LAX 505. Thats sockpuppet, they are not real users just examples.-- Freewayguy ( Webmail) 18:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I added a section to Dawn Wells that reads as follows:
The section is properly referenced and relevant. Several people including War, FCYTravis, and Cleo123, do not want this included because it is not seen as "positive". This is a POV view.
I request that you ask these people to cease reverting this section which is relevant and factual. It is based on news accounts and court records. Proxy User ( talk) 02:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Hello Rlevse (and happy new year) - I wasn't around to comment on this sockpuppet case when you handled it and it's now a bit stale, but I'd appreciate it if you had a look at my comments at WT:SSP#How to deal with reports violating AGF and User talk:Alex Makedon#My comments. Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:07, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Randy,
Many thanks for the Barnstar, for which I am deeply appreciative. It is truly a privilege to participate on the Scouting WikiProject and I am glad to be a small part of it. Best wishes to you in the New Year, Jim. JGHowes talk - 18:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I can help on that. Can you tell me how do you pronounce "vero" ? -- Manop - TH ( talk) 19:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
แวโรพีเดียคืออะไร ?
แวโรพีเดียคืออะไร? แวโรพีเดียคือสารานุกรมที่กลุ่มชาววิกิพีเดียร่วมกันสร้าง ซึ่งได้ทำการเลือกเนื้อหาที่ดีที่สุดจากวิกิพีเดียมาปัดฝุ่น ปรับแก้รูปแบบ และทำการเซฟเก็บไว้ไม่มีการแก้ไขเพิ่มเติม เพื่อทำให้เนื้อหามีความนิ่ง สมบูรณ์และน่าเชื่อถือจากทุกคนโดย คณาจารย์ และนักเรียน นำข้อมูลที่สมบูรณ์และเชื่อถือได้ไปใช้ได้ทันที
แวโรพีเดียเป็นโครงการที่แยกออกมาจากวิกิพีเดียหรือไม่? ไม่ถูกต้องซะทีเดียว เนื้อหาแวโรพีเดียตั้งอยู่บนฐานของเนื้อหาวิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งการปรับปรุงแวโรพีเดียนั้นคุณจำเป็นต้องร่วมแก้ไขวิกิพีเดียก่อน ซึ่งจะเห็นได้ว่าทางเราไม่ได้แข่งขันกับวิกิพีเดีย ความสำเร็จของเราจะขึ้นอยู่กับความสำเร็จของวิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งทางเราคิดว่าตัวเราเองเปรีบเสมือนเป็นชั้นแรกของความรู้เสรีที่ดึงข้อโดดเด่นของวิกิพีเดียออกมา
แล้วเว็บนี้เป็นเพียงแค่เว็บมิรเรอร์เว็บกระจกเงาของวิกิพีเดีย? แน่นอนว่าไม่ใช่! เนื้อหาทั้งหมดในแวโรพีเดียนั้นจำเป็นต้องผ่านเกณฑ์ที่เข้มงวด ซึ่งบทความทั้งหมดจะไม่มีป้ายเก็บกวาด ป้ายต้องการอ้างอิง การลิงก์ไปที่ลิงก์ไม่มีเนื้อหา หรือแม้แต่ภาพที่ใช้งานอย่างชอบธรรม โดยมากไปกว่านั้น ในแต่ละบทความจะมีการตรวจสอบโดยผู้เชี่ยวชาญและนักวิชาการในแต่ละสาขา และจะประทับตราบอกไว้ว่าผ่านการตรวจแล้ว พร้อมทั้งคำแนะนำในการปรับปรุงบทความ ซึ่งวิธีการนี้จะทำให้บทความน่าเชื่อถือยิ่งขึ้น
แล้วอย่างนี้จะเป็นโครงการสำหรับนักวิชาการและผู้เชี่ยวชาญเหมือนกับ ซิติเซนเดียม? ไม่ใช่แน่นอน เนื้อหาของแวโรพีเดียจะถูกเขียนขึ้นโดยผู้สนับสนุนจากวิกิพีเดีย โดยนักวิชาการและผู้เชี่ยวชาญจะมีหน้าที่ในการตรวจสอบและยืนยันว่าถูกต้อง โดยผู้เชี่ยวชาญจะให้คำแนะนำเพื่อปรับปรุงในวิกิพีเดียต่อไป ถ้ามองในทางกลับกันแล้ว จะเหมือนเป็นการร่วมมือระหว่างแวโรพีเดียและวิกิพีเดีย
บทความในแวโรพีเดียสามารถปรับปรุงได้หรือไม่? แน่นอน ซึ่งการปรับปรุงในแวโรพีเดียนี้จะเริ่มต้นที่วิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งการปรับปรุงใหม่ในวิกิพีเดียจะถูกนำเข้ามามาในแวโรพีเดียอีกต่อหนึ่ง ซึ่งจะทำให้ทั้งสองโครงการได้รับเนื้อหาที่มีคุณภาพสูงขึ้นพร้อมกัน
แวโรพีเดียมีเนื้อหาทั้งหมดของวิกิพีเดียหรือไม่? ไม่ใช่ ในความเป็นจริงในระยะแรกของแวโรพีเดียจะมีเพียงส่วนน้อยเท่านั้น ซึ่งแวโรพีเดียเติบโตทุกวันโดยจะเริ่มมีเนื้อหาหลักที่จำเป็นในส่วนของสารานุกรมที่จะมีประโยชน์ต่อคณาจารย์และนักเรียน จุดมุ่งหมายของเราคือปรับปรุงคุณภาพของบทความมาก่อนปริมาณบทความ
ลิงก์สีเขียวและลิงก์สีน้ำเงินคืออะไร? ลิงก์สีเขียวในบทความแสดงถึงบทความที่มีในแวโรพีเดียและได้จัดการ "แวโรไฟ" เรียบร้อยแล้ว ซึ่งข้อความเหล่านั้นได้ถูกเก็บไว้ในฐานข้อมูลเรียบร้อย สำหรับลิงก์ที่ยังไม่มีในแวโรพีเดียจะแสดงเป็นลิงก์สีน้ำเงินซึ่งจะโยงไปเนื้อหาในวิกิพีเดียแทนที่ ซึ่งคุณสามารถกดแบ็กสเปซเพื่อจะกลับมาแวโรพีเดียได้
ใครเป็นผู้ร่วมจัดทำ? ผู้ร่วมจัดทำแวโรพีเดียเราได้เลือกจากชาววิกิพีเดียที่มีประสบการณ์การเขียนการแก้ไขในวิกิพีเดียจำนวนมาก ซึ่งเป็นที่รู้จักกันดีและมีชื่อเสียงในวิกิพีเดีย ซึ่งทางเราหวังว่าจะชักชวนชาววิกิพีเดียที่สนใจเพิ่มเติมเข้ามาช่วยพัฒนาโครงการ
ทำไมถึงไม่ให้มีภาพที่ใช้งานอย่างชอบธรรม? ประเด็นการใช้งานอย่างชอบธรรมในวิกิพีเดียมักจะเป็นปัญหาร้อนที่เกิดขึ้นบ่อย ซึ่งทางเราตัดสินใจที่จะเลี่ยงปัญหานั้น และมุ่งประเด็นไปที่เนื้อหาเสรีมาเป็นอย่างแรก โดยสนับสนุนให้ทุกคนเปลี่ยนกระแสนิยมการสงวนลิขสิทธิ์มาเป็นการเผยแพร่เสรีสู่สาธารณะ
ถ้าพบข้อผิดพลาดในแวโรพีเดียละ? กรุณาแจ้งให้เรารู้โดยการส่งอีเมลมาและทางเราจะแก้ไขให้เร็วที่สุด ซึ่งรวมถึงเนื้อหารวมถึงภาพและสื่อที่ไม่อนุญาตให้ใช้งานอย่างเสรี
ทำไมแวโรพีเดียถึงมีโฆษณา? จุดมุ่งหมายของเราคือการรวบรวมเนื้อหาเสรีที่ดีที่สุดและเปิดให้ทุกคนสามารถใช้งานได้อย่างเสรีซึ่งวิธีนี้จำเป็นต้องใช้เงินจำนวนหนึ่ง ทางเราไม่มีเจตนาที่จะขอเงินบริจาคจากกลุ่มเป้าหมายเราซึ่งก็คือ อาจารย์และนักเรียน และเราเชื่อว่าการโฆษณาที่ไม่รบกวนผู้ใช้เป็นทางออกที่ดีที่สุด เงินทั้งหมดที่ได้จะใช้สำหรับปรับปรุงบทความและเก็บเนื้อหารวมถึงค่าดูแลที่จะทำให้มีการปรับปรุงโครงการให้เกิดประโยชน์สูงสุด
แวโรพีเดียมีเฉพาะในภาษาอังกฤษหรือไม่? แวโรพีเดียเริ่มต้นจากภาษาอังกฤษโดยกลุ่มคนจากวิกิพีเดียภาษาอังกฤษ ซึ่งเนื้อหาในภาษาอื่นจะมีเพิ่มเติมเข้ามาในภายหลัง
จะมีส่วนร่วมกับแวโรพีเดียได้อย่างไร? กรุณาส่งอีเมลมาหาเราและแนะนำตัวเอง เล่าเรื่องราวเกี่ยวกับตัวคุณและผลงานที่ได้ทำในด้านของความรู้เสรี อย่างไรก็ตามทางเราวางแผนขยายชุมชนอย่างช้า ๆ ซึ่งอาจจะมีสมาชิกใหม่เพียงหนึ่งหรือสองคนต่อวัน หวังว่าคุณอดทนรอการตอบรับจากทางเรา ในขณะเดียวกันคุณยังคงสามารถปรับปรุงวิกิพีเดียและแจ้งทางเราว่าคุณต้องการบทความไหนที่คุณคิดว่าควรจะรวมเข้าสู่แวโรพีเดีย
ร่วมแปลคำถามและข้อสงสัยในหน้านี้ในภาษาอื่น กรุณาติดต่อเราได้
แวโรพีเดียพัฒนาบนพื้นฐานของวิกิพีเดียสารานุกรมเสรี เนื้อหาทั้งหมดสามารถนำไปใช้ได้ภายใต้ สัญญาอนุญาตเอกสารเสรีของกนู
<- the translation ends here. -- Manop - TH ( talk) 03:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification, which was much appreciated. Since I have never dealt with an arbitration, I am unsure as to what I'm meant to do. Do I have to re-submit my statement? It may sound like a silly question, but thanks for your time. Also, am I classed as "an involved party"? I'm merely curious. Thanks once again. LuciferMorgan ( talk) 21:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for bothering you (again! :)), but can I ask whether you'll be doing the initial nomination when the RFA comes? It's just, if you're not, I'll know who to pick to do the co-nominations then. Best regards, Rt . 21:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Rlevse! This week, I'm writing the Signpost WikiProject Report on WikiProject Scouting, which I noticed you coordinate. So, I am going to ask you a few questions concerning the project :)
Lead coordinator: Rlevse Article improvement: Wimvandorst Project mediation: Bduke Girl Guiding and Girl Scouting Task Force: Kingbird Philmont Scout Ranch Task Force: Johntex Image tagging: B
Thanks! Happy editing, ( ar ky ) 22:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Why was the case name changed? I think this is quite unfortunate. No one suggested it. Marskell ( talk) 00:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
This is where Pgagnon999 started with a threat to report someone to their system admisinstrator.
With regard to Middletown, Connecticut, your removal of the Neutrality tag constitutes conflict of interest as your IP address is a state website. If you would like to dispute the tag, please open a discussion on the talk page for the article. Otehrwise, you'll end up on the Wiki list of organizations/ agencies that self edit--a pretty embarassing place to be. -- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 20:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
This is where he was engaged in further activity to intimidate a poster: Also interesting is a history of edits from user at the Connecticut gov. (Middletown gov?) state IP address and a seemingly related Wesleyan Univeristy IP. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
This vicious and underhanded behavior is threatening and abusive.
He does not engage in civil behavior, he deletes QUOTED material and then posts garbage from lame sites that support his narrow and partisan beliefs. ---That's nasty behavior. And astonishing to me that you support him in it.
He's pushing point of view, he's violated neutrality, he's deleted referenced material, he's certainly does not assume good faith. I mean, he's out there attacking people and all but terrorizing them. And that's the guy you've put your support behind. Great.
See my diffs, there were a couple of minor errors in your case open. You didn;t include the arbs votes to accept in the preliminary decision section, and evidence of prior dispute resolution is used by the arbs to decide whether to hear a case but it does not become part of the case once opened. (Unless someone wants to put it on the evidence page--but it does not go on the main page). Otherwise a successful start. Thatcher 04:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:DogCare E back.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:DogCare E front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:ForageCrops G back.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:ForageCrops G front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for thinking of moving the Lead(II) nitrate picture to Commons: good idea. I saw that it has a different name there. Is that temporary, part of the moval procedure, or should we re-link to the new picturename in the article? Wim van Dorst (talk) 13:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC).
I want to thank you for the Scouting barnstar. I also say thanks that you informed me about the article in The Wikipedia Signpost.Yours in Scouting- Phips ( talk) 14:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
From the to-do list: I created the article (mostly translation of the German article): User:Phips/workshop/Sturmtrupp-Pfadfinder, take I look. Should I move it? Yours in Scouting- Phips ( talk) 19:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Normally when I see edits like this I would report them to WP:WQA, but in this case, the user is already under an active block for uncivil behavior. What is the correct course of action in this case? Dlabtot ( talk) 21:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse, I was wondering if I could become your "clerk apprentice" for the Arbitration Committee. If you have too many clerks or whatever, please decline, but I'd like to learn more about and help with the Arbitration Committee, and you're an excellent clerk. Thanks. Regards, Keilana talk (recall) 01:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash ( talk) 04:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
For this USN CNO/DESA recipient: I see you have already edited this one. However, it might need a Scouting portal link. It does need some expansion/cleanup. I've added a few references, but it could use some more attention. — ERcheck ( talk) 17:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
HollywoodFan1 responded to your request for explanation of their actions, by stating “I don't need to explain anything, because I am not MetaphorEnt.“ [1]. I think this reinforces the need for block of MetaphorEnt and HollywoodFan1. No further action occurred in regards to the report and it was archived. As you are an administrator, could you block the accounts or do I need to file another incident report? BlueAzure ( talk) 03:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse, I noticed that you actively involved in WP:SSP and you have a lot of experience there. I had filled a case, however there are no further developments. Could you please suggest that I should do next, fill a WP:RCU? Your advise would be much appreciated. M.K. ( talk) 09:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey there.
Not sure I quite understand your message about archiving rejected cases: was this general guidance or did I mess something up when I archived BlueAzure? Because I had archived it [2]. — Coren (talk) 13:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hmm...this newness, source and interpretation for this criteria does seem a bit mysterious, and the thirteen new tags look a tad bit pointy eared to me. Dreadstar † 16:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Per this post I have decided to notify about the case as you were an administrators active on Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement. -- Cat chi? 20:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you recently assisted in a sock puppet and COI case: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/PJHaseldine (sock puppets blocked indef and user blocked 1 week for COI). This user has now posted extracts and linked to an external discussion on wikipedia review.com on an article talk page: diff. He assumes bad faith by accussing myself and other editors of "concerted attacks" and "attempts to censor wikipedia" (also the heading of this new talk page section) and even labled us "pro-apartheid". I didn't respond to it, save for posting a warning to his talk page, but this copied external discussion and link is worrying (searching internet for my name and suggesting I'm an apartheid era military officer etc.). I don't know if this can be removed or how to proceed... it's an article's talk discussion page afterall. Any help or suggestions would be appreciated. — Deon Steyn ( talk) 21:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
(repeat of my
post on article talk page...)
Instead of following your advice, PJHaseldine has now pasted the same passage and external link on the talk pages of his three banned sock puppet accounts.
[3],
[4],
[5]. —
Deon Steyn (
talk) 20:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
She has asked not to have her name posted on wiki so I won't do it ... but she didn't even use RTV. She just had a regular rename just like I did. She has one account, not two accounts. There are a few (under 10) admins that have abandoned their old account and come back under a new name and had that new name sysopped, but that's not what happened here. If you look at her earliest contributions, you see her old signature. This RFA process is so silly it's beyond words - there are plenty of admins who have been renamed and to suggest that we should go through RFA again is just an open invitation for trolling. -- B ( talk) 05:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I wish... :) Rudget . 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Username_policy#Company/group_names has said this for a while: "Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited, but it is not recommended, and depending on circumstances may be seen as a problem."
You seem to be back to username blocking, and blocking users simply for having a company or group name. What are the circumstances, in your opinion, that make them blockable? (I would only block if they are using that name to make promotional edits.) rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm so jealous of your Aug 07 BSA beer award! Forget all the stars, that award is a real award for good work. When your buddy hands you that cold one, you know what I mean.-- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 20:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Yep, that's one up again. Congrats. I think you can easily throw in those remaining 8k edits needed to come in the top 100, right? ;-) Gladly I'm just over 11k edits (not yet Kate's count), so I'm out of the danger zone to fall 'higher' than #2000. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC).
i had a chance to rename my username thanks to BLACKKITE but before i could change it User:Rlevse blocked me, saying all i did was put 187 in it, it was already in it thats my original name User:Lil' kim187, i hadn't changed my username at all, thats what i needed to change was the Lil' kim187, so i want to know why User:Rlevse blocked before i could change it. User_talk:Lil' kim187
Thanks for the mutual warning. Its fair, and I didn't plan to revert, in any case; was waiting for another editor to help make consensus on the dispute clear. Giovanni33 ( talk) 02:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a response to your comment on the Nrswanson sockpuppetry case my talk page. Best wishes, Voceditenore ( talk) 06:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Just came across a request for unblock here. In the past (as I understand), ArbCom's topic-specific restrictions have been on article pages only, and editors so restricted were allowed to edit talk pages (unless this privelege was explicitly denied). Am I missing in either the ArbCom ruling here? Or am I misunderstanding the situation? (Either of which is more than possible). Because it does not look to me like TDC violated the ArbCom ruling. Pastordavid ( talk) 17:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, If you are seeing this, somebody unblocked me or just my school IPs are blocked. Tell me which one please -- ジェイ ✉/ ✍ 17:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for closing the SSP case on him. There's another IP, look at 209.247.5.60's contributions. Might need a block for a month or so. It also might be worth extended the other IP blocks to do with this case to a month. Cheers, D.M.N. ( talk) 19:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this, is he not still under his restrictions of only being allowed to edit at the related Arbcom case? He was told his original block was lifted so that he could participate in his related Arbcom case but not to edit anywhere else and doing so would result in him being blocked again. You blocked him again. Does your block now dissolve his original unblock stipulations? -- ALLSTAR echo 17:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
No problem. I wasn't intending to revert Giovanni next time in any case and would have reported him. I appreciate it that you were clear in your warning, though I fear Giovanni didn't take it fully to heart given his recent 24 hour block. John Smith's ( talk) 18:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanky for taking the time to deal with the situation below - FYI -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#To_ban_or_not_to_ban
Cheers,
-- Skyelarke ( talk) 16:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The category includes people who attended and never graduated. -- Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk) 23:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad to see you back! -- Oxymoron 83 19:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back! Dlabtot ( talk) 19:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks to all of you for your support. It means a lot. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yay! Man, did I need a spirit-lifter right now :) Glad to see you're back. Wizardman 19:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yea that's right. I've replied here. <--- READ IT! Lara ❤ Love 19:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks to all again, I can't keep up with all these accolades (blushing). — Rlevse • Talk • 20:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, next time you quit....can I have your beer award? I always loved that one. ;)-- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 22:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back, yeah! You're greatly needed here and were sorely missed. Sumoeagle179 ( talk) 23:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back. Jauerback dude?/ dude. 23:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad you're back (-: —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 01:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back. ThuranX ( talk) 01:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Randy, you'd better update your user page: your 123rd now on WP:WBE. Just 24 to go, and merely 4400 edits will take care of that. ;-) Wim van Dorst (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC).
Nice to see you back. I protected it mainly because, basically, if you said "I quit", then nobody else should change that until you came back. (For example, when RickK left, his userpage received basically no constructive edits but vandalism before he came back to protect it.) You can (obviously) go ahead and unprotect it if you want. jj137 ♠ 22:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It appears the ANI case has been closed. What happens next with that case? Anthon01 ( talk) 23:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
If I may give some advice: drop ArbCom/ArbEnforcement, at least for a while. Go edit some articles. It helps :D
Great to see you again, my friend. Dihydrogen Monoxide ( party) 23:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
You sure? I'd hand the reins fully to you if that's what you want. Keilana| Parlez ici 00:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Whoa, what did I miss? I came over to tell you I'm back in the saddle, and to ask you to unprotect my userpage now, and I see you took a break and have returned. I'm sorry I wasn't around to support and welcome you back ... some times on Wiki are real killers, huh? :/ Welcome back, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You may wish to weigh in on this discussion, as the photographer whose work is being manipulated. - John Russ Finley ( talk) 04:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
My concern is if they alter the images in a bad way. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Sent email, posted this "The potential for abuse of images, making wiki look bad, condoning child porn here is huge. Please act, Jimbo. If such use is condoned, I will no longer submit images of children to wiki." — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I know, sent me for a spin there, but I'm very glad you decided to stay. I figured it would only add to your stress to bug you about the coaching, and I really don't get the various off-wiki communications systems. Being co-coached by you and Keilana would be an honor and a real plus for me, since you both have varied interests and experiences. MBisanz talk 04:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Too bad such a drastic move made us show our support, but at least you know our opinion now. Squash Racket ( talk) 06:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if you noticed this editor: [6]. Very few edits, and I think it's likely it's the same person that opened the sock case. The only edits by this user are to ask for help with a sock case, and he posted the case on my talk page. RobJ1981 ( talk) 14:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Would you please paste copies of two deleted pages to my user space. I would like to address the concerns mentioned in the AfDs. They are KRC (Scientology) and ARC (Scientology). Thanks. -- JustaHulk ( talk) 14:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm facing another sockpuppet 124.87.134.96 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) of the banned ip user 219.66.40.104 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki), 219.66.45.131 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) (in this time, different network host) now. Per the ip user's same writing style and interest (ex. Yujacha ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views){ Manhwa ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)_, I believe the user evades his sanction again (many 5~6 times?) Can you look into his contributions and block him? Thanks.. -- Appletrees ( talk) 14:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Please can you give me some much needed admin coaching!! Ningnangnong ( talk) 16:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
is a pain in my talk page's ass... and probably a lot of other people's talk pages too. But don't feel too bad, we only like you slightly less because of it. So here's the thing; I'm totally awesome, k? And I have a better code. Not only will it keep your sig from effing up the coding of any more pages, BUT it also is like a whole line shorter. The servers will love you... much more than they love me even, because a sig as beautiful as mine takes space, ya know? So here you go, you can thank me monetarily at a later time:
<font family=verdana> — [[User:Rlevse|<font color=#060>'''''R''levse'''</font>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<font color=#990>Talk</font>]] • </font>
Best regards,
Lara
❤
Love 18:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
test here, just pasted here: — Rlevse • Talk •
test here with "raw" checked (with check it errors): <font family=verdana> — [[User:Rlevse|<font color=#060>'''''R''levse'''</font>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<font color=#990>Talk</font>]] ( talk) 21:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Images are not showing up on any Wiki pages I open. Are you having this problem? Thoughts? Some toolbar button images are missing too. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 19:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, one of your images is being discussed at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Boy_Scouts_are_for_spanking.3F. -- B ( talk) 21:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Sent email, posted this "The potential for abuse of images, making wiki look bad, condoning child porn here is huge. Please act, Jimbo. If such use is condoned, I will no longer submit images of children to wiki." — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Best I can figure is to discuss this on the project, let folks know the issues and let them decide for themselves. Welcome back, eh? --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 22:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Please summarize and put on talk WP:SCOUT. One this is that commons photos of live or recently deceases should have "personality rights" tag like all mine now do: Image:World_Jamboree_2007_009.jpg. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I will take a stab at a guideline- should it be separate or part of WP:S-IMG? I'm afraid this is a gray area as the Youth Protection rules do not cover photos. [8] Each council is supposed to develop their own rules for website operations based on state and local laws and the standards and guidelines set by National. [9] I have no clue on the policies of other countries or national Scout organizations. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 00:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
This user already had a last warning and when he continued to attack the user user:nku_pyrodragon you gave him another warning instead of a block —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rws killer6 ( talk • contribs) 05:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
See outcome of the SSP case you submitted here. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
If you oppose child pornography, you support slavery. [11] I'm glad we've created this encyclopedia with such wonderful information. -- B ( talk) 22:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Freedom is not an absolute right, it has limits. Check any number of US Supreme Court rulings. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rlevse. Did you see Hrafn's Hrafn's comment at Talk:Politicization of science? -- Iamunknown 23:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
User:No, Gwen! looks awfully SOCKy with only 4 edits, 1 to vote against deletion and 1 to question the closing admin. Probably impossible to tell whose though with all the comments to the AFD page. MBisanz talk 01:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 4 | 21 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 00:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
This user is making the same reverts that User:Atari400 (the sockpuppet of User:KirbyTime) made to Template: Countries of the Indosphere. He is making the same omissions and is not justifying anything in the talk pages after having been asked multiple time to join the debate, but has done nothing and in fact claims that i have not joined the discussion [15], though I am all over the talk page. He has been told by a user with rollback powers (Alexfusco5) that he has been making unconstructive edits that need to be justified. After Alexfusco5 made the comment and reverted his edit, he has been silent on the template and the template talk. He did has not edited the template again at this time in order to not break the 3RR. Based of his talk page, it appears that he has violated the WP:CIV, but I am unsure; if he has can you please give him a warning or some form of disciplinary action. Also, I would like to know, where or to whom should I report his behaviour? Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 02:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I have also posted the above on Jehochman's user talk Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 02:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Heyo, Where should I place this question? - [16] Thanks in advance. Jaakobou Chalk Talk 14:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
You edit conflicted out my decline :( - Revolving Bugbear 22:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your
constructive criticism and input in making
Alpha Kappa Alpha a
featured article.
Best,
miranda 08:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
While observing the everlasting editwar over genre on the Underoath page, I noticed that many of the edits that change the genre to Screamo are done by annon IPs. I would like to point out one IP in particular, not because of edit warring on the Underoath page, but because of it's history of vandalism in general. This IP is 63.3.16.2 [18]. In one of the edit summaries, this particular IP says "sorry i'm not on my profile". I think whoever is using this IP, probably has a real accout, and does their vandalism via this annon IP. In addition to this, there is a suspicion that this IP is used by the same user as the IP 63.3.16.1 [19]. This second IP has a similar history of vandalism. whether these IPs are connected I am unsure. but I'm pretty sure 63.3.16.2 is a Sock IP of someone. I would like to do something about it, but because I have been unable to find any user accounts that seem to be associated with this IP. Is this an appropriate situation for a use of CheckUser? If so, where do I go to request it? If not, what should I do as my next step? I've seen you have a history of dealing with sockpuppets, What do you think of this situation? Axcess ( talk) 18:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I know. I realized after the last revert. Rracecarr ( talk) 22:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Rlevse. I saw that you archived AN3RR lately. Are you aware that it's set up to be archived by bot [20]? If you had a reason for archiving it, I understand, but thought I should let you know at least. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Rlevse. I noticed that some banned users are able to get back online even with the same IP, such as User:Nku pyrodragon, who had already banned 3 times before on being a sockpuppet. But he still is able to make a new membership, even after blocking. He can also log in and edit his talk page and others' also. Can you give me an answer on my talk page? Styrofoam☭1994 talk 02:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the recent Israel-Palestine Arbcom. I've been feeling that a number of wiki-editors have been in breach of the Decorum principle. I've raised the issue here, but believe that it won't be seen there - where do I raise this issue so we can get a clearer explanation of how this is intended to be implemented? Jaakobou Chalk Talk 17:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:RFAR#Appeals_and_requests_for_clarification — Rlevse • Talk • 17:49, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. User:Bluegoblin7 is looking for an admin coach but I am a relatively new admin so I would prefer to co coach the user. Can we coach him together? Thanks. Tbo 157 (talk) 19:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
for dealing with that problem on ANI. Cheers. miranda 22:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
While surfing wikipedia, I notcied that this user received a final warning to stop harassing the user:Nku_pyrodragon. However, he continued to harass users and he did not receive a block for his actions. Instead you gave him another last warning. He seems to be also harassing the user:rws_killer6-- Wikieditor1989 ( talk) 15:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason: "reason —unconvinced, make a pseudo article on your talk page does not convince me. this is also your third decline and you're only allowed two. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)"
I don't want to play the you said, they said game but...
you said then he said and then he said and then he said. I really don't care, he just popped up on my watchlist. Best regards! -- omtay 38 19:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse I removed th Merger tags on Blue Heron Lodge and Tidewater Council because the votes were saying to Keep them seperate and i got a comment on Blue Heron Lodge that said the merger was declined and the Merge strip needed to be taken off of this page and Tidewater Council. I was told to remove the tags by Wikipedia. I did not remove them because i wanted too. Thank you. Kenny ( talk) 03:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Before I got rid of the Merger button the bottom of the disscution said the merge was discontinued so when i saw that that means the merger dissuction needed to be taken off.Thank you. Kenny ( talk) 04:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
You mean "The merge request has been removed in that it was erroneously placed in the first place. Sorry for the confusion. KC9CQJ 00:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)" ? Thata's from almost 2 years ago. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I believed it to be an honest mistake, caught in a block web. Thanks for freeing me. Have a good evening Travellingcari ( talk) 04:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I notice you were the closing admin in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Sports Nuggets so I thought I'd come to you. It looks like the same editor is now editing through public library computers: [21] and [22]
It also appears Sports Nuggets is the same editor as another puppet master account: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ron liebman. How does one go about reporting weird cases like this? -- Mosmof ( talk) 05:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, did you get my e-mail? John Smith's ( talk) 07:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
?. Post here. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Sure. I recently remembered your warning to Giovanni and myself not to revert each other, or you would issue a block. After you made the warning, Giovanni reverted a change I had made earlier on the Republic of China Navy article at 23:53, 17th January 2008. I also think this is a case of wikistalking, as he has never shown a real interest on that page or any other modern military pages. He reverted me for a rather dubious reason and then never commented again on the talk page/edited again on the page.
Just thought you should know, as I guess you missed it. John Smith's ( talk) 17:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
It seems that as Wikipedia's grown, we've relaxed our restrictions on what goes on in the userspace to allow more userboxes, mini-projects, etc. Would something like this User:TlatoSMD#Great_Wikipedians which probably wouldn't have survived 2 or 3 years ago, survive today? MBisanz talk 08:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Bdasgupta@gmail.com said he realised the problems that could happen by having that username. I suggested he either rename the account or create a new one. He did the latter, so it should be ok now. Spellcast ( talk) 12:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see proposal here: Talk:George_Thomas_Coker#Proposal. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Oldnoach should be Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Oldnoah. Thanks. -- Closedmouth ( talk) 12:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I still hope that you will respond to my three emails. Thanks in advance. Racepacket ( talk) 16:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, is there any reason my statement wasn't copied over? The arbitrators haven't yet rejected or accepted my proposal so I believe it should be copied over, if anything just for the record. Pocopocopocopoco ( talk) 02:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Talk:8th Georgetown South, Page was speedily deleted. -- Egel Reaction? 10:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm the guy who's been working on Kardashev scale, well me, User:Ben_Standeven, User:Beland... anyway I did something today I'm not sure I was supposed to do, I restored a page back to it's previous version after several edits had been made, I'm not sure, but I know there's a privilege called rollback, that I don't have. But I'm not sure this counts... but I'd like for you to look into it.
My problem is with User:Michaelbusch he has a tendancy to remove large sections of the article without talking about why on the talk page... Today he made 7 removals, without talking about any one of them... once... starting with this one:
he removed 6 large sections on Dec 27 starting with this one:
I've already talked to you about this once before, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rlevse/RlevseTalkArchive8#Kardashev_Scale.2C_and_concern_from_a_new_user but his abbreviated reasons of removal and limited discussion on the Talk:Kardashev_scale page erks me. I don't really know what to do about it. Can you help?-- Sparkygravity ( talk) 22:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention to the matter. Regarding your continued concern over connection to the anonymous IP 4.153.59.194, it should be noted that the same IP registered at AtariAge the same day to do the usual harassment and trolling. The user (Stonic) has a history of going from various IP's to register there, on ebay, and through various email accounts to harass that group of individuals (atariage, Curt Vendel of Atarimuseum, and Matt Reichart of atariprotos.com), and nfortunately he spilled it over to Wikipedia. The owner of AtariAge was going to share the logs for that IP, if that would have helped things, but it appears unnecessary now. However, I just wanted to make you aware of that because you mentioned not being totally convinced. -- Marty Goldberg ( talk) 01:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 5 | 28 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 04:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Since you were his coach, this might interest you Wikipedia:BN#Readdition_of_administrator_flag. MBisanz talk 04:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I've identified a few more accounts per your request on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#Blacklist.3F. Reviewing the remaining links, there appears to be many good faith additions, but the statement posted on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Tube bar ("If links to DP on other pages are ok, then we'll just do that ;)" [23]) raises a corncern. There is a discussion on MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#www.digitpress.com_repeated_spam_on_Wikipedia, hopefully we can get more input. Thanks-- Hu12 ( talk) 13:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear Rlevse, Giovanni continues to wikistalk me. I left a message on a user's page about something he wrote, and Giovanni decided to reply in his name. I asked Giovanni nicely on his talk page not to follow me around if I was asking one person a question. He then removed it without comment and left yet another comment on the other user's talk page.
Can you please ask him to stop doing this? If I leave a message on an article talk page he is working on, he can comment. But if I ask a question that only one person can answer he shouldn't be following me around. He has complained that I followed him on to an article recently at the Admin's incident board and that I was seeking conflict. Yet he is doing exactly what he accuses me of. The one piece of advice he was given on the Admin board was to leave me alone - he appears to have ignored that and wants to provoke a situation. As he has ignored my polite requests, can you please deal with the situation? John Smith's ( talk) 21:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Both of you carry out your fingerpointing and debates somewhere else. I only want hard facts here on my talk page. I'm also posting on both talk pages strongly advising you both to leave each other alone. If I come across more issues with either of you, I won't hesitate to block. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, a couple of months ago you told me to let you know when I was ready for a nomination on RFA. I am ready for a nomination now Alex fusco 5 22:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I just deleted Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Durzatwink after an entry on WP:AN. Styrofoam1994 now is adamant that it was a real SSP case and not him playing around, like previously with said user. You have been involved in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nku pyrodragon and might know more about the matter. Could you please comment or recreate. Thanks Agathoclea ( talk) 00:54, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
How does this look for a recall process User:MBisanz/Recall?, since it will be an RfA question. MBisanz talk 03:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 05:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Mickylynch101
I believe you completely abused your powers in this case. I have been forced to create a new account to defend myself from these bogus charges. I have provided evidence on Markanthony101s page that disproves your accusations.
The way you held the discussion was an absolute joke. No-one commented on the evidence (They weren't given a chance to) and I wasn't given a chance to defend myself. Its a pity that admin powers cannot be overturned because you have simply gone power mad. And yes, of course this account is a sockpuppet account but I have absolutely no connection to Mickylynch. Please consider the evidence and allow me a chance to defend myself. Markanthony102 ( talk) 14:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. I've learnt a lot about the admin hierarchy in my time here. Markanthony102 ( talk) 13:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Did you see the changes I made? Thoughts? -- evrik ( talk) 15:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
See WP:VPM#Wrongly accused of sockpuppetry; consequent case was illegally handled and wrongfully executed. I think this may be a valid complaint, given the poor quality of, in particular, the timeline evidence that was provided at the SSP page. — Random832 16:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Randy,
Thanks for the great news about my first FA. I heard it first from you, when checking my "new messages" — as it should be! Appreciate all the help, Jim. JGHowes talk - 06:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
LOL, in 2006 the person was you, as in Wikipedia editor, YouTube video maker, Flickr photographer, blogger, and all kinds of other Webers 2.0. So you too are Person of the Year. Pretty cool, isn't it? :) Renata ( talk) 18:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm still working on the case, and I believe the editors are long time sock of banned user(s). I can't narrow down the case, because the editors seem to have been wikipedians since 2005 and with various socks. I request you to not close the case. Among the suspected socks on the list, 5 accounts are busy making disruptive edits and the rest are either blocked infinitely or abandoned the accounts.
However, I need the blocked user to be listed for proof. Thatcher said technical measure is not helping to confirm their possiblity of the sock. I'm collecting their behavioral patterns from old and recent activities. Among them, User:KoreanShoriSenyou should've banned early for the account name policy, which means Exclusive use for disposal of Chosenjin. Chosenjin itself is racial slur to South Korean the account name is like Nazi's conduct. If you think it is confusing, I wil clean up much. But f I make another file on them, mostly the case is just copy and paste.Please restore the case. Thanks-- Appletrees ( talk) 19:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Yo, I all ready admitted to having more then one account look at the talk page. But I don't see the problem with having more then one account. Also if you look at my user:page I said I was done with wikipedia, but if I ever want to come back on I would just make a new account. Wikipedia = to many rules!
Hiya, I was wondering if you would be willing to consider lifting page protection? I think that it was definitely useful in breaking a nasty revert cycle, but I think we've got a handle on things now. If you check our recent poll, I think it's pretty clear that we have a consensus for the condensed version of the article, as a basis from which to move forward with further article improvement. There have been no new comments in a few days, so if you have time, could you please review the section, and let me know if you agree? Thanks, El on ka 03:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it looks like the one editor with WP:OWN issues, PHG ( talk · contribs), is still determined to defy consensus and revert the article. [28] We've reverted him back, but it's looking like he's going to continue fighting this. He's also continuing to disrupt in other areas, such as an Original Research problem today at Talk:Viam agnoscere veritatis (which we have since cleaned up). Though I see also now he's been blocked at Commons for copyright violations (sigh).
It is my opinion that we've given him enough good-faith cautions (his talkpage is full of them), and that since he's continuing to edit-war in defiance of consensus, that he just needs to be blocked for disruption. He was already blocked once for 24 hours, but he never admitted fault. If it were up to me, I'd say that he just needs to be blocked and then kept blocked until he can at least acknowledge that he understands the problems that his behavior has been causing, and until he can promise to do better in the future. Of course, I'm an involved editor, and it's not my decision, but I can still make a recommendation. Or if you disagree, I think at least a longer block (48 hours), so that we can continue working on cleanup without disruption. Do you agree with my assessment? Or would you rather that I took this to ANI? -- El on ka 01:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I'm a bit confused by your re-protecting the article. Could you please let me know what you would like to see as conditions, to unprotecting it? Based on my view (and multiple other editors on the talkpage), the situation is pretty simple: We have a consensus to condense the article and then continue working on it from a condensed version. Then we have one editor, PHG, who has been in violation of WP:OWN for months, who refuses to acknowledge consensus, and who keeps reverting the article to his own preferred 200K version (which he continues to even further expand in his userspace). [29] PHG is also continuing to create POV forks and WP:COATRACK articles, into which he is continuing to put biased and highly questionable information. See Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance#List of articles for review. All of our attempts to get him to stop this voluntarily have been unsuccessful; he has continued to defy consensus for months now, whether it be an article RfC or wording of the intro sentence, or condensing the article, he refuses to concede any point, and instead, continues escalating. Several of his POV forks have been put through AfD, [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] but it is exhausting to keep chasing after him like this.
I saw that you asked at talk for diffs of two other editors participating in the poll, but I assure you that neither of those editors participated in the poll, and this should be easy enough to check by looking at the talkpage history since the poll was started on January 29, [35] and neither of them (Justin nor Matt57) has participated at all on the talkpage since well before that.
I am trying very hard to avoid an ArbCom case here, since I don't think a case would really do any purpose except to waste months of time, to confirm what is already pretty obvious: PHG is not working in a cooperative manner, PHG is defying talkpage consensus, PHG is ignoring all good-faith requests to modify his behavior, PHG is refusing to compromise on any point. If this were complex enough that it needed a judgment call, I could see taking it to ArbCom, but it's not complex: We have long lists of complaints at PHG's talkpage from a variety of editors, (Elonka) (Geogre) (Adam Bishop) [36] (WJBscribe) (Ioeth) [37] (Aramgar) (Kafka Liz) [38] (Srnec) (Eupator) (Shell Kinney) [39] (Luna Santin) (Jehochman) (Orderinchaos) (Durova) (Dihydrogen Monoxide)
He was blocked for 24 hours on EN, [40] but it did no good. We now have dozens of articles which need cleanup, and he is continuing to cause more problems on a near daily basis. He has ignored warnings from multiple admins. I was hoping that with the poll at the talkpage at least, we would have a clear way to move forward, but if the action each time that PHG reverts is simply to protect the article, without taking action on the cause of the disruption (PHG), we are never going to be able to break out of this cycle. :/ So, could you please tell me what you'd like to see, what proof that you would need to settle things in your own mind, that all other good faith efforts to deal with PHG have been exhausted, and that the solution is not protecting the article from everyone, but simply protecting Wikipedia from PHG? -- El on ka 06:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Case just accepted by arbcom, it's rather moot now so I unprotected the pages and made a stmt on talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I blocked him 31 hours. See talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I respectfully submit Rlevse that this situation is a bit more complex imho. The two comments PHG had added to the poll, were from an earlier poll cycle, and if you check those editors talk pages, for example here, you can see they were intimidated into leaving the article. That's not a typical way to go about consensus-building, threatening everyone who disagrees until they leave, and then saying Hey we have consensus now!. So I would ask that you consider that qualification in any sanctions against PHG until ArbCom has a chance to speak. We don't want a situation where there's any perception that the bullies run the playground. I'm not saying they do, I'm saying it could be perceived as going that way. Wjhonson ( talk) 06:53, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
You said . . . not convinced they're socks . . .. Not trying to dispute your decision or anything, just very puzzled why you said that. The diffs I provided showed both IPs inserting the same bad poem (which has zero google hits) into the same article. How could that, in all liklihood, be anything but the same person? As I say, not trying to get anything changed, I just want to try to understand this so I can make a better report next time. SpinningSpark 15:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I reopened this case, as I am pretty sure Durzatwink is a sockpuppet. I noticed that you banned his previous incarnation in Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nku pyrodragon. Can you help me out here too? contribs STYROFOAM☭1994 TALK 15:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
A little late perhaps, but congradulations on getting Truman featured. Great work. Basketball one 10 02:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Is it possible to gain support on my request for 2 articles ? See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Scouting#Creation_of_2_documents_on_Wikipedia_Commons Thanks.
KVDP ( talk) 12:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Check out the screenshot for Veropedia. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 14:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Distinguished Eagle Scouts, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Distinguished Eagle Scouts is a redirect to a non-existent page (
CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Distinguished Eagle Scouts, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk) 17:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for helping us out. KC109 ( talk) 01:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 6 | 4 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Here you go: Alvin Townley --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 15:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Pearson was a close friend of the pioneer of the Scouting movement Baden-Powell, and supportive of his efforts in setting up the movement and publishing its magazine The Scout. When Pearson's scheme for publishing in Braille was faltering due to lack of funds, on 2 May 1914 Baden-Powell publicly requested that "all Scouts perform a 'good turn' for The Scout magazine publisher Mr C Arthur Pearson, in order to raise money for his scheme of publishing literature in Braille for the blind." Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 15:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
So its obvious the SPA at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Jossi_COI_diffs is a sock puppet of someone whose likely to have contributed to either this or another discussion involving Jossi. But since there are several people who have questioned/been critical of him, there is no direct connection. Obviously RFCU doesn't permit fishing, so how should it be investigated? MBisanz talk 03:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I've made a reply here [45]. If you believe there are errors within it I would appreciate being noted about them privately (via email). Jaakobou Chalk Talk 14:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I think I'm ready to go up, I've worked through everything at User:MBisanz/AC and can't thnk of any new areas I want to learn. And I've finished my most back-logged article work. Do you plan on writing a co-nom? Since I have 3 coaches who might write co-noms, should I accept as soon as 1 noms or wait for any others who plan on? MBisanz talk 18:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping my count up-to-date :) I'm trying to pretend its not going on and just doing my regular tasks, but it someone keeps finding its way into my recently visited pages list. MBisanz talk 03:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC) No problem, and I understand. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse,
I have a question that perhaps you can answer, is there an upper limit on how many images should be put in an article's gallery section? I know that WP:NOT says that Wikipedia is not an "image repository", etc., but are there any specific guidelines? For example, one of the articles I maintain, Bermuda was today loaded up with two dozen images! JGHowes talk - 00:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
FYI - I posted a request for a review of your ban of TlatoSMD at AN/I. I personally agree with it, but I think it should get wider endorsement because of his fairly long history here and at de.wiki. (Is he banned there I wonder?) Avruch talk 02:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Could you check this for me? I think you tagged as sockpuppets on the basis of the editing patterns, but if you could confirm that for the checkuser, that would be great. You could also check out the ANI thread if you wanted. Carcharoth ( talk) 08:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
This user User:Are0z0ne seems to know more than most new users, but they've only made 1 good contribution so far. Is this just a watch and hope for the best situation? MBisanz talk 06:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
We've both been waiting a long time. In fairness, I have been extremely low key about the whole affair when I have had a right to be much angrier. I would appreciate (But don't expect) an apology from you and the other offending administrator. Markanthony102 ( talk) 14:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:TimeDec10 1984.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 02:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
If Markanthony101 and Mickylynch101 were, in fact, both nominating articles created by SchuminWeb for deletion, why did no-one ever say this out loud? I feel like my time may have been wasted because no-one bothered to articulate the one allegation that this was all really based on. — Random832 20:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Caught my first sock today at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jay Turner. To bad its unwiki to award pelts to users who catch socks. MBisanz talk 08:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
As you may know that I've been dealing with a lot of Japanese socks. Some of them began using open proxy and impersonating me.-_-;; [47] [48] [49] [50]
61.19.242.44 ( talk · contribs) is blocked after I reported at RFCO, and 202.177.195.115 ( talk · contribs) is also confirmed as an open proxy, but not blocked yet. This Applletree ( talk · contribs) is obviously a sock of somebody trying to smack on me as using the similar name to mine. Please block these disruptive socks. Thanks.-- Appletrees ( talk) 12:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Markanthony101 See my latest post. It is probably the same UNI IP adress, that is the only logical reason I can think of. I was banned so wasn't allowed to respond in my old account. MA103 ( talk) 14:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Tks, someone blocked him. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
R,
I've rescanned the original source photo and uploaded it as Image:White House radio broadcast 1937 (v2).jpg. Let me know what you think — your monitor is probably a higher solution than my 800x600! Is this better than Image:White House radio broadcast 1937.jpg now at Commons? If you think so, I'll go ahead and replace that one at Commons with this v2 JGHowes talk - 14:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:MOVIES-HighAndMighty.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 00:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 7 | 11 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 09:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Remember this: User_talk:Jaakobou#Warning ?
I request your opinion/guidance on how I am supposed to continue content based discussions following this diff, which violates Arbcom Final decisions.
With respect, Jaakobou Chalk Talk 16:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I have a prior agrement with SA that I am permitted to edit his comments. PouponOnToast ( talk) 22:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I recently took part in the Giano arbcom. It was very messy. I suggest that you agree with the arbs that you will deal severely with any untoward behaviour (with due allowance, but not too much), make sure everyone is notified, and stamp on the first example of bad behaviour. This one may need a firm hand! LessHeard vanU ( talk) 23:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC) ps. It is tally - no "e".
Same subject...based on his comments here [52] I believe Morven should be recused from this case. What's the procedure for formally requesting it? Cla68 ( talk) 23:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Since when do we split up proposals by user? — Random832 04:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Did my email make sense? Ronnotel ( talk) 19:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Since I believe that the edits I have made (with the exception of a few which I have adjusted for as people have notified me about) are making wikipedia better, if the worst crime I have committed is doing so many edits that I fill up watchlists I can live with that. I don't mean to sound like a jerk and I am not upset about your comments, I appreciate the positive tone in which your comments where presented, however many of the comments that I have received where in regards to "better uses of my time" so, since its my time to waste I have chosen to ignore them. I will admit that I have made some mistakes in using AWB by incorrectly changing some things, and I have corrected them. If there is a specific complaint you are referring to I would apreciate enlightenment.-- Kumioko ( talk) 02:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
KL has returned though seemingly only for a hit and run attack as the IP address used has been blocked for 24 hours and so far hasn't reappeared in his usual haunts using another account. I was considering a RFCU for the address but it's obviously him so passed on it but do keep your eyes open as I think he's just prepping before returning and running at full-bore again. Just as an aside, why isn't there a subpage for KL at WP:LTA yet? There's the list that's maintained in User:DietLimeCola's userspace and it's puzzled me since I first knew of KL as to why there isn't one given the high frequency of vandalism over time. Don't need to answer, just interested. -- treelo talk 03:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 58 supporting, 0 opposing, and 2 neutral. I hope to demonstrate that your trust in me is rightly placed and am always open to critiques and suggestions. Cheers. MBisanz talk 04:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC) |
I want to thank you personally for being my coach and helping me to develop the skills necessary to serve the community. Feel free to ever ask for my help. MBisanz talk 04:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
no problem. I don't expect to have anything more to add (good, bad, appropriate, or not) -- Rocksanddirt ( talk) 19:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I translated the material I found about Slovenian Scouts and Guides in Carinthia. Can you please take a look at User:Phips/workshop/ Should it become part of Scouting in Slovenia or an own article?- Phips ( talk) 22:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Apparently there is some controversy about the first aircraft to complete 25 missions. Some say that another B-17 called "Hell's Angels" (yes, the MC gang was named for it) was the first, but they did not have a documentary (some say because of the name) and did not return to the states for a bond tour. The National Museum of the United States Air Force says about the Memphis Belle: "In May 1943 it became the first U.S. Army Air Forces heavy bomber to complete 25 missions over Europe and return to the United States" [53] (my bolding). This does not clear up the issue completely. If you look at the edit history of the article in question you will see that there was a small edit war about it recently, and I put "one of the..." to defuse the situation. -- rogerd ( talk) 23:00, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Re this thread: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Sauce_for_goose.2C_sauce_for_gander:_where.27s_Weiss.27s_wife_on_WP.3F
I believe that it would be best to delete this picture as soon as possible, because it does not actually depict Truman, and can only cause further confusion. I discuss this more thoroughly on the Commons talk page, with links to other pictures of Truman and the unknown subject of this picture, from the same event. -- Dominus ( talk) 05:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Please check out http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=101635 . A photograph exists of Baldur von Schirach together with Futara Yoshinori as spectators at fight games of the Hitlerjugend in Bremen, taken August 15, 1937. It says something really small at the side. You're really good at this stuff-can you help get an image that is _not_ marked on? Thanks Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 09:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
That silver star edit as made before you told me about the error. I have gone back and started going through all of the recipients of the Silver and Bronze star but it takes a while to go through 1800 articles.-- Kumioko ( talk) 16:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a bot, yet you still manually archive. Please refrain from doing this. Thank you. — E talk 06:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse. Re Hillcourt, I can only offer a few suggestions/questions.
– Outriggr § 06:51, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I believe as clerk for the current arbcom. case, i can ask your assistance. I wish to present evidence to the arbcom., to be uploaded to the page Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence. I have prepared my best draft at [54]. Would you advise me if it is order to upload this as my evidence, or if there are any adjustments that are necessary, before it is suitable for uploading. I am unsure as to any deadline for submissions. I believe I have the right to provide evidence, a course which is not necessarily to my liking, and bearing in mind that I am a relatively inexperienced User, I ask for some forbearance if my application veers to the unlearned. Newbyguesses - Talk 12:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I got to know that why I have been chased by so many Japanese people since December. They made two treads at 2channel, Japanese bulletin board famous for anti-Korean sentiment.
It is filled with personal attacks and racial slurs against only me such as Chosenjin, hwabyeong patient, psycho, institutionalized mentally deranged person, irrational person, stupid, .etc. I translated some of the Japanese thread at Talk:Sea of Japan. I'm so exhausted of all these dramas, so didn't consider to report it at ANI or Arbicom, but the meatpuppet and sockpuppet of Azukimonaka/KoreanShoriSenyou/Orchis29 are haunting around me and pushing POV much. I talked to admin, LordAmeth who can read Japanese, and advised me to post it at ANI. see this User_talk:LordAmeth#Need_a_guideline
Before reporting the incident at ANI, I want you to look at this people.
2008FromKawasaki ( talk · contribs) are emerging again and look like obvious sock of Azukimonaka per the same interest and writing style, especially "erroneous". I believe these editors are also socks of him, and are proved as sock to each other at RFCU but they were not infinitely blocked. They abusively used the accounts though. You can also check it again from the collapsed boxes of my past SSP on Azukimonaka.
andThey write poor wording in English and the literary word, erroneous is not commonly used and is likely for non-English speakers to see it in advanced test preparation books like GRE, GMAT.
I can't file another RFCU files right now because my two files are not finished and you advised me not to use it much. But I couldn't help plead this again to you. Thanks.-- Appletrees ( talk) 12:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, being written in is one of cliche that Azukimonaka used a lot, so you can confirm it from the collapsed boxes of Azukimonaka SSP file Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Azukimonaka.
And see the Koreans in Japan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The personal attacks are written in the Japanese thread, and some of them said they intentionally made edit warring with me to tease me. -- Appletrees ( talk) 13:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I also think the new user, Coraroidman ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) seems like a sock of Azukimonaka per their same interest and writings. Azukimonaka loved to edit cuisine related article or insert images. He claims he or her is a Vietnamese in Vietnam and made some edit on Vietnamese articles and then directly went to vote for his /her support for Sea of Japan. After that he keep inserting POV article regardless of my suggestion to use Talk page.
South Korea ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
At RFCU case, Zainichi Koreans is unrelated to 2008FromKawasaki, but given the fact that I had been stalked by User:Amazonfire for quite some time, I think Zainichi Koreans is amazonfire. And some of their contributions were erased because of several violation of rules. -- Appletrees ( talk) 13:21, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
was being writtten |
---|
Kamosuke = Azukimonaka = KorenaShoriSenyou = Orchis29 = ShinjukuXYZ = NekoNekoTeacher = Necmate = 43.244.133.167
I believe these people are the same editor per the following reasons. If you see it, you will notice the users' interests are all similar and same pattern of writing such as using passive sentences rather than active sentences such as concealed or denied. They like using "insistence" and "ground" or "groundless" rather claim, assertion or than citation, source, or evidence, etc. I'm not good at writing in English but they all make the same errors in tense such as "was being hated by" etc. The below are distinctive examples for the claim that they're all the same person.
As for Kamosuke, he and HaradaSanosuke are the banned socks on August 2006 and are Softbank odn ISP users = 211.131.78.52 [59]. Their (actually one person) writing style remarkably resemble that of Azukimonaka, KoreanShoriSenyou, Orchis29. I haven't looked through Kamasuke's contribution history, but he also made the same errors in writing past tense. ("was being written by someone") Kamosuke created his account at 2005-11-19T08:01:02. [60] According to the remain block log, He had been a long-time abusive troll and I strongly believe he has transformed as new edior with countless sock puppetry.
This apparent sock ip doesn't seem to be a dynamic address. I think this should be blocked infinitely as well.
Although ShinjukuXYZ was proven as a sock of NekoNekoTeacher, they were not infinitely blocked. They seem abusively used the accounts though. I think this account should be infinitely blocked along with another sock accounts.
|
-- Appletrees ( talk) 13:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
What are you removing someone else's evidence for? — Rlevse • Talk • 01:10, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Do User:152.91.9.144 and User:CygnetSaIad's edit histories look similar enough to warrant an RFCU? I'm seeing that the IP was hit with an "accidental" autoblock applied to Cygnet. And for an IP, he has a tendancy to turn up right in the middle of heated debates. MBisanz talk 03:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
What is the procedure for submitting further evidence, if available? Just add to my section, don't think I am over the ord or DIFF!! limit yet.
Is there a deadline for submission? Newbyguesses - Talk 21:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt action in the sockpuppetry case. You will be interested to know that shortly after Downtrip’s block several IP addresses and one account identifying themselves as Wikizilla’s appeared and attempted to deface my talckpage.
[62] thereby confirming the suspicions of Downtrip’s association with Wikizilla. The edits themselves were reverted by other editors however, if you see nothing against it would it be possible to semiprotect my user page for a while to save others trouble.
Freepsbane (
talk) 03:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
At Yes, I do apologize for mis-identifying the clerk in this very thread, and can only blame it on my dyslexia computersaurus!. [63]. Newbyguesses - Talk 17:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
The 14th was Morven who is listed as away but he started voting. Blnguyen ( bananabucket) 23:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
That questionable IP and the almost stale-user were confirmed at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/CygnetSaIad that he are User:CygnetSaIad operating from an anon. IP. What is the proper response here? Warning, block, AN, etc? MBisanz talk 03:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm no proxy expert, but I think the open proxies and anonymizers are to be blocked. If you user IRC, you could ask in the admin channel (which you're now eligible for). I think User:Ryan Postlethwaite knows about them too. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi. could you please keep an eye on Talk:Israeli settlement? The article is currently edit-protected. This is part of the topical area of Israeli-Palestinian articles, covered by a previous ArbCom case. thanks. -- Steve, Sm8900 ( talk) 14:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Note to clerk: re Mantanmoreland arbcom case, I am experiencing continuing computer difficultes, and now that in particular the /Workshop page has got so long, it may become impossible for me to post further evidence, or reply to queries.
If that is so, and you wish to contact me, please do so at Newbyguesses. I should also mention, that this proceeding is taking a gruelling toll on me, and does not even seem to have completed the preliminary phases.
It may become necessary for me to take a break from these proceedings. I hope it is obvious that my comments are all sincerely meant. It may be that i would benefit from a Wikibreak— Newbyguesses - Talk 12:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
I strongly object to User:Crum375 editing other people's evidence section under the guise of "Removing BLP violations", on the evidence page, unilaterally, without asking the other side to refactor first, and in full knowledge of how controversial his action would be. [64] and [65] could you please review the information provided, and then if found to be a BLP violation, go through everyone else's submissions on the ArbCom case (such as a banned user being called a blackmailer, without evidential backup), and remove them as well. Thanks. SirFozzie ( talk) 17:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
No big deal, comes with the clerking job. See ev talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Currently we have the issue with KL but also with another vandal called Greg Jungwirth aka Claymort who DLC has figured might be Komodo Lover seeing as both talk to their previous identities as other people and pretend to be several people at once. I've asked him to file a RFCU on their most recently active accounts even though one comes from Rhode Island and the other from Atlanta so probably won't reveal anything. Besides that, there's a pending SSP case for Greg's sockpuppets and as they've became increasingly aggressive towards me since I filed the case so if you can could you go check it over? Thanks. treelo talk 14:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I want to delete User:Sparkygravity/Socks because just in case I make more userboxes I created User:Sparkygravity/userboxes/socks. So now I have an extraneous page.-- Sparkygravity ( talk) 17:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Because you seemed to be picking on gothangel when she had a valid point here, you seem to want to remove the word Boys and men and male from every artcile and every passage on that article which I presonally don't agree with with. I cant understand how you can have so much mention of women and girls in a male-dominant article. It does not make logical sense. You have now threeatened me, which I find appalling. -- Steven Hipkins ( talk) 23:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
There is quite a schemozzle, it seems, about whether these BLP? or external links are allowed in evidence, or even if RL names in evidence, are allowed. Whatever is the ruling, I am content, but I wish to draw to your attention to a number of similar entries to these possibleBLP? that occur in the Evidence presented by Georgewilliamherbert.
If all are these links and mentions are allowed, fine, then they should all be restored in every instance where they were wrongly removed by Crum375, but if no links or names are allowed, then i think they must be removed from ALL sections of evidence, and that would include mine, and GWH's. thankyou, Newbyguesses - Talk 00:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC) (note to self - Post to /evidence#newbygwhen next online)
I didn't do that. Melbrooksfan101 talk 04:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status and move your entry to the Active list. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
...but given that you up and left Wikipedia in a huff the last time you got into a dispute with me, I would appreciate it if you did not continue down this road of hounding me. Your last comment on WP:AE was particularly unbecoming. ScienceApologist ( talk) 20:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
My recusal in the paranormal arbcom decision had absolutely nothing to do with SA. I recused because less than a month before that arbcom case, Martinphi was disrupting the FA process (over the parapsychology FAC nom) and I nearly blocked him (Martinphi) for it. Raul654 ( talk) 21:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
This is exceedingly rude to me and Raul. ScienceApologist ( talk) 20:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
I have commented here
FT2 ( Talk | email) 21:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
I think the reason the Completed Requests section keeps disappearing is that the bot is archiving it. See my edits to /archive14 fixing it. You might look at diffs just before the bot to see if there is a simple reason, otherwise maybe contact the bot owner. Maybe it doesn't like = Sections = . Thatcher 23:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Me and several other editors have been drafting an RfC on JzG here. We listed an effort by you to influence his behavior in the past but don't necessarily expect you to be one of the certifiers for the RfC. But, if you'd to look it over and tell us if you think anything that we listed is unfair or inaccurate before we post it, that would be very helpful. Thank you. Cla68 ( talk) 01:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
This Wilt Chamberlain looks like the kind of article I could take to an FA-status? its got a large number of cites, but could use some content reoganziation and wiki-formatting. And its already a GA. MBisanz talk 05:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, yesterday Didodo (a sock of AA banned user Fadix) added some evidence to the Ehud proposed decision talk page, I blocked and reverted. Now VartanM (good standing user, no issue there) has restored Fadix comments, endorsing them himself. As a result, I think it should probably stay even though it was a banned user. I've quickly scanned it, and it is relevant to Adil, so I've kicked off a formal CU here. -- John Vandenberg ( talk) 06:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello Rlevse, I have been matched with you for Admin Coaching. I would like to introduce you, so we can get started with what you would like to teach me. My name is Dusti, I am 18, and I live at ISSCH. I have been editing on Wikipedia since April 4th, 2007, according to the account creation log. I would like to become an Admin to better Wikipedia. Granted, an editor can better Wiki by simply adding to articles, however, with the tools Admin's have, you can do a whole lot more to better the encyclopedia. I feel that after becoming an admin, I can do a lot more than what I have been doing, which is RC patrol, NP patrol, and some AFD stuff. I look forward to working with you. Unfortunatley, because I am living here at ISSCH, I do not yet have access to an email account. I will be graduating soon in May, and will have an email account when I attend College soon thereafter. I look forward to hearing from you! Happy Editing, Dusti talk to me 18:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
It's fine. If MBisanz recommends you to me, that's all I need to know. We'll start later today. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Can you tend to Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop#Possibly urgent -- need Arbcom/Clerk clarification on BLP? GRBerry 20:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I undid my own protection, as I noted that the Clerks were taking action and I didn't want my act (as an interested party) to remain once the "emergancy" had been dealt with. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 21:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your input. I have followed up on my user talk page. Thanks. -- AeronM ( talk) 00:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 8 | 18 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 9 | 25 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
A friend sent this under the heading "Clean can be Funny." Truth to tell it had me in stitches, but then I needed it. Now you be the judge: Fifty-one years ago, Herman James, a North Carolina mountain man, was drafted by the Army. On his first day in basic training, the Army issued him a comb. That afternoon the Army barber sheared off all his hair. On his second day, the Army issued Herman a toothbrush. That afternoon the Army dentist yanked seven of his teeth. On the third day, the Army issued him a jock strap. The Army has been looking for Herman for 51 years. Thank you Rlevse, Shir-El too 00:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Tom.mevlie is almost certainly a sock of a banned user after seeing this comment [70]. Does the MO of seeking adoption, Wikiproject International Relations, and very odd phrasing of this apology [71] for this [72] ring any bells? MBisanz talk 16:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I've just noticed this comment on my (WordBomb's) talk page, but I'm not clear what it means.
Sorry I'm just getting back to you. I pretty much never go to that page. But I'll make a point of doing so moving forward.-- WordMail ( talk) 17:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | ||
For your excellent clerking on a RFAR case that turned out to be a real Fozzie of a Bear of a problem. Dr. Extreme ( talk) 21:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC) |
I didn't know about that RfA log - many thanks for adding the info there :) -- SatyrTN ( talk / contribs) 22:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
As the clerk, should you be commenting at all? I realise that you may have opinions and work with the Arbs in formulating a lot of what appears on the pages but aren't you supposed to be the only party that stays dumb? It will be too late to remove or strike now, but perhaps one of the arbs will proxy your opinions if you really feel the need to comment. Cheers. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 23:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Oops, I misread. Thanks for telling me. Keilana| Parlez ici 03:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Could you please un-archive my request for clarification of the Ferrylodge case? It has not been clarified, since the two admins who commented leaned towards applying the decision to talkspace, while the admin who closed the AE thread apparently took home a different message. Ferrylodge is disruptive in talkspace and articlespace. I'd like concrete clarification or amendment to indicate that the decision either applies to all namespaces or is restricted to articlespace. Thanks. MastCell Talk 04:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The arbs have a lot to do and I'm sure are giving the case its fair share of attention. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. That user requests to be unblocked. Judging by the tone of his unusually articulate unblock request, I'd say we can risk giving him another chanca. What do you think? Sandstein ( talk) 09:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
A user conduct RfC involving the actions of JzG ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) in which you have been mentioned is about to go live and will be found at WP:RFC/U shortly. Viridae Talk 11:19, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hope you don't mind that I protected your userpage for a short while. IPs aren't on the constructive side today for some reason. :) Regards, Rudget . 14:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I've created the RFCU here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Vr. BTW, the banner on that page says "to the checkuser page here" which seems to be an out-of-date way of creating a new request. Someone should fix that but I've no idea who handles this part of WP. I've never raised an RFCU before, so if I've done something wrong, feel free to tweak it. Colin° Talk 19:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash ( talk) 06:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Checking in. What's new? Dusti talk to me 16:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 10 | 3 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The memory of water page seems to be under attack by a series of different IP editors. Now I have certainly used up my reverts but cannot deal with this editing. They are anonymous casual visitors and refuse to discuss the changes. What can I do? Am I allowed to simply revert them? Being new to this I am unsure what channel to follow as if I assume good faith, they are not real vandals. The Tutor ( talk) 11:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm filing and RFCU on this myself. There's obviously something fishy here. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, as a newcomer editor I'd like to know what was wrong with my edit on the Medal of Honor page.
1 cool guy ( talk) 02:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Can you take a look at Kurt Turkulney ( talk · contribs) and decide if this is another User:Arthur Ellis sock? I blocked an IP this morning following this edit that included signing as Ellis. This user came to the RM page this evening, and his contribs are 90% Kinsella and RM related, which were two Ellis focuses. But, given the situation, any Wikipedian with interests in Canadian politics might well come to this article now. And I don't know Ellis well enough to judge for sure - but my intuition is saying the user probably is. GRBerry 04:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I have an edit war going on my own talk page. I've replied, it's not enough, they have to get the last word in. It's the cyber equivalent of junk mail. One has even gone so far to comb my edit history for missteps. What can I do to stop the Wikistalking? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) ( talk) 02:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:OurCabañaLogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Your previous remark on me is right. I'm apt to make very lengthy files or too vague files for sysops to have a difficulty to figure out what is a problem with my report. However, this long-time (over 4 years) disruptions by Japanese editors from the off-wiki bulletin board, 2channel is way too big for me alone to deal with.
I don't know how to proceed the case because the related people are over 30 and I'm the one against their disruption so far. I recently notified of this incident(s) to several Korean editors but I don't know they would participate in the process if I file it to arbicom. You've seen my filing RFCU, SSP, and AIV a lot, so can you take a look at the link and give me an advice? thanks. -- Appletrees ( talk) 21:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I think you have confused me with somebody else. [77] I have no conflicts or involvement with Igor, other than having had a few friendly chats with him past, and today having counseled him a few times to lay off the drama. As VirtualSteve noted, I have been generally supportive towards Igor. However, I could not ignore Igor's use of my talk page to make attacks on third parties. Would you be willing to strike out your comment? Jehochman Talk 03:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse,
Guy thinks it is Tom Butler [78] [79]
It is not Tom, and I know who it is- a WP user in good standing. The WP user has nothing on its block log. —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 07:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I come here to you for a help. I want to use this image in the article Animal rights in Nazi Germany. But I am still not well-versed in uploading image manually outside of Flickr through flickr upload bot. I am a bit confused about the license and the process of manual upload. Can you please help here or upload it in wikipedia. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 12:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
This is the problem I am also facing here what is the license. It is the only image I found in the internet. I found you through recent change patrolling. The image will be deleted if it is copyrighted, but it is hard to know its copyright status. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 12:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Done, see the article. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, there is a backlog at the SSP page and i was just hoping you can take a look at this case i made, [81]. Seems no one has yet looked into it, no one i have contacted has been of help, and the user has used yet another I.P. as a vandalism-only account. One of the users IPs has just vandalized multiple page again and i am seriously getting tired of having to revert all of his mess everyday. Please look into it. -- LaNicoya •Talk• 19:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
What you need here is a WP:RFCU for IP check. Two separate IP ranges, with several IPs. 22:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments on User talk:130.101.152.83. This is the same user; I didn't want to use an account after seeing the mess on paranormal articles in general. 130.101.152.24 ( talk) 19:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Jehochman is right, you just shot yourself in the foot. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:AnimalRightsNaziGermany.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 21:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Look, I have a very short fuse and my patience is being severely tested by some terminally stupid people. Give me a break. Who are you anyway???? The Rationalist ( talk) 21:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Why? Why don't these people take a wiki break? Why should I take a Wiki break? The Rationalist ( talk) 21:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion that I file an RFCU for the spamming IP addresses. I would like to do that, but I am unsure how to use the RFCU template when the sock master is not a registered account, and all I have is a large bunch of IP addresses, none of which is really the sock master — a situation that the template and the RFCU instructions do not seem to have been designed to handle. I posted a question about RFCU for IPs on WT:SSP. The replies so far have not really addressed the issue I raised. I'd appreciate any advice you could offer over there. - Neparis ( talk) 21:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Just as a reminder, if you delete a page, you should close out the AFD. I did these for you ( Noveninsk and Andrzej Koswakij). SynergeticMaggot ( talk) 21:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I have been perplexed to his behavior. What contribution can I do? (I do not want to be hated by him. And, I want to avoid the edit battle. )
I introduce my denied contribution.
Chosun Ilbo introduced Namdaemun. "Namdaemun was specified for the national treasure No.1 by a Japanese empire. The South Korean thinks the succession of the specification of a Japanese empire to be disgrace. " [84]"
Appletrees was not able to deny the fact written in this source. Therefore, he tried to conceal this fact shouting, "You are a puppet".
Case2 Japan-Korea relations [85]
Chosun Ilbo analyzed "Japanese boom in South Korea". [86] The South Korean was worshiping the electronic gadget made in Japan when South Korea was poor. However, the South Korean enjoys Japanese food and clothes today.
Appletrees shouted "Vandallism". And, the source was deleted. He doesn't verify the source.
JoongAng Ilbo explained the movie Hanbando. "The end for which Japan apologizes to Korea will satisfy South Korean's anti- Japanese sentiment." [88]
The signature of Ser Myo-ja shouted and he shouted though it was.
He shouted though this was an article with the signature of Ser Myo-ja. "That is not a real "article" written by a reporter. Don' try to fool me again" And, the source was concealed.
I advised. "Do not delete the source without the reason. " He answered. [89] "If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, as you did to Japan-Korea relations, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Again, read the citation, possibly a 2channel meat/sock"
I am a beginner. Please guide me. -- Opoona ( talk) 10:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Could you look at Image:Philadelphia CSP.png? -- evrik ( talk) 14:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse, you had recently closed Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Eliko with a "let's watch and see" conclusion. About a week after I had started this SSP case, I had also started Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eliko, which concluded with a verdict of "somewhere between possible and confirmed". I'm not sure if you had seen that case when you made your SSP conclusion. Also, per the discussion at User talk:Thatcher#Checkuser follow-up, I'm concerned that Eliko views these case closures as clear proof that he is not the puppetmaster of Manstorius et. al., and no sanctions are necessary. I had also promised to block him or another editor for 7 days if they made any edits to a specific article during a "cool-down" period, (discussion at User talk:Andrwsc/Archive 6#Protection at List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita), which he appears to have done with one of the sockpuppets. Therefore, I don't think a "no action" outcome is entirely appropriate. Thanks — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 19:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
{{
unblock}}
can always be used if he disputes it. I'm still concerned that Eliko is getting away with breaking an agreement (also made with
User:CieloEstrellado) not to edit their disputed article for a week or get blocked for 7 days, but I guess Eliko is on an extremely short leash as a result of this casework. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 20:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse,
As a matter of Wikipedia policies and procedures, if an anon IP has a 30-day block imposed for violation of 3RR, is he then allowed to evade the block by registering? I am referring to blocked IP61.127.11.135, now registered since yesterday's block as Ahoalton JGHowes talk - 23:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
We got off on a bad foot and I'm sorry for snapping at you. I saw a real named person being accused of being a sock puppet account, and I don't need to rehash the details, but I wanted to protect a new contributor even if he might be the same person trying to be pseudonymous, since he had done nothing wrong and neither had the real named person. It was clear to me that there was no possibility he could be the same as Unprovoked, and the basis of the RFCU was therefore missing a foundation as I viewed it. Had I not felt an urgency to stop the situation before it got out of control, I would hopefully have been more polite to you. The reputation of the named person seemed paramount to me in that moment, especially if he might wish to return as a pseudonymous editor. — Whig ( talk) 05:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
User:Allstarecho/scouts has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Allstarecho/scouts and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Allstarecho/scouts during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Justinm1978 ( talk) 17:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your review and support of this FAC. As suggested, I've moved the following free images to Commons and they can now be deleted at en-Wikipedia:
The following images, although now at Commons, presented a problem for me, in that I could not get the HABS url's to display properly inside the template as they do an en-Wikipedia, so I guess I'm making a syntax error somewhere. As a workaround, I've listed the url data separately as "HABS source information" underneath at each image's Commons page:
Thanks, JGHowes talk - 18:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
How hard did you look at the case? Every admin can over-judge - and you yourself have just done it now. If you honestly want some solid advice - I would think harder before over-ruling an admins decision like that. You need to gravitate towards standing by each other if you want to be taken seriously. 72 hours may have been harsh (though I personally just felt relief) - but reducing it as you did (combined with lifting the talk ban too) was far far less wise. WNDL42 accused Kafziel of bias in his original decision - and WNDL42 never stops going, believe me - he's a real wind-up artist. He's also obsessive about controlling articles (he'd been in war on this one not long ago). Kafziel did what he thought was right given WNDL42's behaviour (and WNDLs definitely the type that would benefit from longer to think too).
It seems pretty clear to me that over-ruling Kafziel was quite an easy decision for you, and I am always paranoid on Wikipedia that emails change hands which honest parties like myself cannot see to put right. I know WNDL42 sends them to admins - can you see why I'm paranoid here? And I have to deal with an empowered nuisance-editor now, with a free supply of sweeties RE admin-power he'll happily suck on as long as he can! I just want to take this opportunity to tell you that YOU DON'T!!!! Not a great moment for Wikipedia in my eyes - and I feel I've really struggled for the cause the past day. And don't think mileage won't be made - not every editor acts as rationally as you want them too. WNDL42 had scant regard for policy and authority anyway (though he can be very very polite - especially in his emails I'm sure).-- Matt Lewis ( talk) 03:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, would you or one of the other clerks assist me in obtaining a deleted page? [90] Two sources have informed me that Samiharris has a conversation with a known WordBomb sock on that page. I'd like to examine it. Durova Charge! 07:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Rlevse, I believe you were involved in this investigation.
Using Suspected_sock_puppets/Matthew as a precedent, I've courtesy blanked this page Suspected_sock_puppets/Dbromageas it obvious that these claims have been discreditied by the Arbitration Committee.
If anyone wants to examine these discredited allegations then they are welcome to examine the history of that page.
User:Dbromage seems to have made a worthwile contribution here Special:Contributions/Dbromage. Sadly,this editor has departed Wikipedia since these claims were made. I hope by blanking the page the community sends a signal that he is welcome to return.
I'm like to disclose, I might have a conflict of interest here, being a Railpage forum user, although I have no connection with its operation. My concern is that this sockpuppet investigation has filtered into Google. Using a keyword search "Dbromage" reveals the discredited allegations.
I attemped to do some research in the matter and I must admit I'm no expert, but it seems CSD#G7 does not apply.
Do you have any opinions how this sockpuppet investigation and User_talk:Tezza1can be permanently removed? Logic Fuzzy ( talk) 08:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be an issue with me closing AFD's. I've been told that I closed them when there was no clear cut issue. I will give on one of them, as you can see on my talk page. However, the rest that I closed were reclosed or open then closed with the same outcome. I forgot, actually I was wrong, in the fact that I forgot the last step by adding the template to the talk page, again, see my page. I was told not to close any more AFD's. Can you provide your insight on this? Thanks, and sorry if I disappointed you. That is/was not my intention. Dusti talk to me 16:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Dusti is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon. Short intermediate edits may happen, but I just need to destress and clear my head. I'll be back soon though -- don't worry!!!! |
Dusti--while you're still learning AFDs, only close the obvious ones. Study the closing of the close ones, and steadily work toward them. See you when you get back. I'll be gone 21-29 Mar too. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Since you were the admin involved in the SSP above, I figured I'd drop a line here. I've filed a new case at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Colective follower, which (to me) looks pretty similar. Since the old case was archived and closed, I didn't know what else to do. Yngvarr (c) 23:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
You referred to a "link above", but there was none. I fixed it. :) Corvus cornix talk 23:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
You blocked Colective follower as a sock of Greg Jungwirth. The odd thing is, he added nonsense to the talk page of The Legend of G. The Legend of G hadn't edited in two days. Colective follower made one more edit and then stopped. Eight minutes later The Legend of G arrives and claims Colective was a sock of Greg. Colective gets blocked....and then Legend gets caught in the autoblock. Odd, no? IrishGuy talk 00:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I woke up this morning feeling great, and I had to come back. I'm just going to slow down for now. Anything in particular you want me to do, or not do :) Dusti talk to me 18:15, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
As per the archived WP:AN/I discussion here, I have initiated WP:DR in the respective talk pages as follows:
If it's not too much trouble, please continue to monitor discussions there. Thank you.-- Endroit ( talk) 18:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
|== Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance == This Arbitration case is closed and the final decision has been published at the link above. PHG ( talk · contribs) is prohibited from editing articles relating to medieval or ancient history for a period of one year. He is permitted to make suggestions on talk pages, provided that he interacts with other editors in a civil fashion. PHG is reminded that in contributing to Wikipedia (including his talkpage contributions, contributions in other subject-matter areas, and contributions after the one-year editing restriction has expired), it is important that all sourced edits must fairly and accurately reflect the content of the cited work taken as a whole. PHG is also reminded that Wikipedia is a collaborative project and it is essential that all editors work towards compromise and a neutral point of view in a good-faith fashion. When one editor finds themselves at odds with most other editors on a topic, it can be disruptive to continue repeating the same argument. After suggestions have been properly considered and debated, and possible options considered, if a consensus is clear, the collegial and cooperative thing to do is to acknowledge the consensus, and move on to other debates.
PHG is encouraged to continue contributing to Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects in other ways, including by suggesting topics for articles, making well-sourced suggestions on talkpages, and continuing to contribute free-content images to Wikimedia Commons.
For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 01:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
I haven't a clue as to who that guy was, but I saw him go past as a person who's been indef-blocked, a process I'm interested in. Maybe he was a troll. At worst he should have been told his name would create too much controversy. But nobody knew why he chose it, and nobody gave him a chance to explain himself. The other part of the interest for me, is that (as a matter of fact) I run a cat/kitten rescue operation and we've castrated many a kitten, and thus saved a lot of lives (I can explain if you're really interested). If you think this is advocation of violence, it only shows you need education in vetrinary medicine. That said, I don't have all the info here, either, but at least I understand that I don't. Please take this as a mild suggestion to follow these things up better until you're sure you haven't biten yet another newbie. S B H arris 20:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Just to let you know that despite a few months away, Cowboycaleb's vendetta against me still hasn't stopped, and has thus today left a post on my talkpage, basically saying no one can stop him. Can you put my talkpage on your watchlist in case he strikes again when I'm offline? Cheers, D.M.N. ( talk) 20:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Rlevse! Thank-you for your support in my RfA (91/1/1). |
I have raised an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Collaborations#RfC: Should the collaboration template appear on the article page -- Matilda talk 00:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
You were recently involved in discussions on the article Order of the Arrow. Some of the issues brought up then were not resolved. If you are interested, please participate in the continued discussion at Talk:Order of the Arrow#Safeguarded material. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 13:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
You asked for me to check in, and well, here I am. I feel that I have made some progress (see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Autocracy for an example}}. Hit me with the good/bad/ugly. Dusti talk to me 16:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I know this is weird to ask but, I'd like your opinion on my comments on this talk page. You need not weigh-in on the subject but I would like another editors view of my comments and their appropriateness. I think I may have offended another editor and that was never my intention, however I saw the situation in a certain light and that's what I spoke about. Please let me know what you think (either here, or my talk page, or the article talk page... I'm not trying to hide anything). Padillah ( talk) 13:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 11 | 13 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 12 | 17 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 23:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Added as a contact. Rudget . 13:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
It was just a polite request and I just got tired of waiting. Wikipedia encourages you to be bold and fix whatever you think should be fixed. If you can fix it further just go ahead. Any page open for edit does not require any green light. ~ RayLast « Talk!» 01:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Your username sounds familiar but I do not recall us ever working together. -- Cat chi? 14:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey there. You dealt with the tom.mevlie sockpuppetry case, as I understand. He came back recently as DangerTM, and was blocked. Now, in the WikiProject Novels, someone new has shown up with an account less than a day old, and I have a feeling it may just be that guy AGAIN. WilliamMThompson is the fellow I suspect, and is painting himself as a total newbie to Wikipedia. He's also put in an appearance on the General Forum for that project, agreeing with DangerTM and kinda calling someone a homophobe. I'm sure you can see it for yourself. It's a little suspicious that some new guy would appear on the Novels project almost immediately after Danger got blocked, agreeing with him, and saying inflammatory things. Howa0082 ( talk) 16:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey ... I was looking on flickr for a photo of Percy Harvin and I saw this one. Do you have anything zoomed in on him that shows his face? -- B ( talk) 18:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
You may be interested in Igor. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 23:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 13 | 24 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 08:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Anyways Are you sure, how you found out this was Artisol2345's sockpuppet. Did you check his e-mail address, what about if that account could be his brother or sister, or his father haveyou thought about that? Anony IPs 75 xxxabc keep driving me around bugging everyone about people accusing him about sockpuppet. Most people have roommates, and same computer can be share with more than one person. Like mom and dads can also be contrib on Wiki, and their 3 sons might have their own account while parents has their own account. That way is not a sockpuppet. A sockpuppet is one person with like 4 or 5 or more account. Lets pretend one person has account of Route 5, then Orange-County 5, or 405 guy, or LAX 505. Thats sockpuppet, they are not real users just examples.-- Freewayguy ( Webmail) 18:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I added a section to Dawn Wells that reads as follows:
The section is properly referenced and relevant. Several people including War, FCYTravis, and Cleo123, do not want this included because it is not seen as "positive". This is a POV view.
I request that you ask these people to cease reverting this section which is relevant and factual. It is based on news accounts and court records. Proxy User ( talk) 02:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)