I don't think the block worked, he's still doing the same thing without any edit summary or explanation on the talk page. Khoi khoi 00:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Durova, awhile back you kindly offered to nominate me for RfA, and I declined, primarily because I was too busy. Things are a bit slower right now, so this seems like as good a time as any to give it a shot, if you're still willing. I can see you've got a lot going on right now, so I feel sort of bad about asking... --Akhilleus ( talk) 03:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, it's up. Thanks for nominating me, we'll see what happens now... --Akhilleus ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if we could add a protection template on the Victory Christian Fellowship page too, since it has similar issues with the Every Nation page and is currently undergoing mediation. Thanks! Varsha Daswani 08:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Was it really necessary to semiprotect The SCO Group? The attempted gutting of the article by suspected SCO staffers pretty much stopped a couple of days prior to your protection, the edits were fairly easily dealt with by reverting at the time, and the attention from the likes of digg and various SCO-watchers around the net should have a salutary deterrent effect. Being caught out has backfired somewhat on the POV-pushers, so the adminning is perhaps unnecessary... -- Aim Here 09:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
The above-entitled arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published at the above link. Ilena ( talk · contribs) is banned from editing Wikipedia for one year and is banned from editing articles and talk pages related to alternative medicine, except talk pages related to breat implants. Fyslee ( talk · contribs) is cautioned to use reliable sources and to edit from a neutral point of view. He is reminded that editors with a known partisan point of view should be careful to seek consensus on the talk page of articles to avoid the appearance of a COI if other editors question their edits. For the arbitration committee, Thatcher131 12:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I do not believe that discussion belongs there, I think it is more of an incident as there does not appear to be a proposed action. The banning action has already occurred. very respectfully, Navou banter / contribs 16:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
What is the best way to deal with this situation with User:Soxrock? [1] [2] (His accounts all tag back to User:Soxrock.)
Investigating all four accounts (edits and contributed images) has shown no evidence that there is any attempt to violate policies like WP:3RR or WP:Sock. In addition, he does seem to be working to resolve the Fair Use Rationale issues with his images.
Thanks for your advice.
Take care,
Larry -- Lmcelhiney 16:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Your urgent help would be most appreciated here. -- Jreferee 21:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, considering that you have nominated User:Akhilleus for admin, would you care to state your approval under the "Support" column? I know that you've already said "Strong support" in your nomination, but I don't believe the bots count that in their half-hourly updates. Thanks. -- Kyok o 22:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
You are quite mistaken in your statement that my concerns "are welcome via the proper channels."
Letter and fax to Jimmy Wales, October 16, 2005: IGNORED
Fax to Brad Patrick, April 23, 2006: IGNORED
Fax to Danny Wool, September 9, 2006: IGNORED
Please unprotect the talk page on my bio. It's the only place where I can address concerns about my bio on Wikipedia. —Daniel Brandt 69.148.173.125 00:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
A notice was posted to Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest about this situation: [3]. I really dislike when people gather and start talking about an editor without inviting that person to the discussion. I've gone to the editor's talk page and tried to soothe things. [4] What do you think about this? Jehochman ( Talk/ Contrib) 03:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, Durova.. I have refactored my comments, but as I said in my reply on the Talk: Daniel Brandt page, I stand by my basic belief that he is trying to annoy folks in to getting rid of the article just to be rid of him. SirFozzie 03:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I didn't care for it. It is not a "good call" to block editors you are in a content dispute with, and User:Avraham was wrong to do so. User:Asucena doubtless deserved a block, but Avi needs to take care not to allow himself to be painted as abusive. He should have posted to WP:AN and let someone else do it for him.
Characterising me as "persistently" and "aggressively" refusing to assume good faith is out of order. I'd like you to retract that. I think it is tantamount to a personal attack. We might disagree on the issue at hand but I posted only briefly on it, and you spoke to me just the once. I did not agree with you. To then defame me shows a lack of good faith on your part, not mine. Please don't continue with it. Grace Note 05:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Durova,
I deleted that text as the particluar person has edited my post on your talk page. Check this: [5] and then look where this person has added his/her post [6]I'm not that dumb to delete someone else's post from your talk page and think that you'd not find out. I removed the post as that person has not signed and it looks as though I posted it. Why did this person edi9t my post. He should have posted above me or below me but not in the middle of my post. He just added his post after my greeting. Please unlock the Mudaliar article. Mudaliar 14:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I am really impressed with your time and atttention to WP:CEM and I believe the program will be helpful to the project. I don't see any objections to the trial so a little later today I'll write it into DR and associated pages. Additionally...
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
For outstanding devotion to the community in the area of content, and content dispute resolution, diligence in assisting other editors to understand DR process, sacrifice of time to form and refine the proposal; you have shown great credit upon yourself, the community, and en-Wikipedia. I Navou award you this, Barnstar of Diligence. Navou banter / contribs 16:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
Keep up the outstanding contributions! Best, Navou banter / contribs 16:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I've added it to the template, and WP:DR. Navou banter / contribs 17:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 00:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 18:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Durova,
203.101.45.171 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is abusing profusely and swearing constantly to intimidate all the editors and push his point. I suggest a block. Check this: [9], [10] Thanks, Mudaliar 20:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding article Mudaliar this vandal User:Mudaliar who insists of adding sections without proofs and ignores proofs from Government gazettes. He is unable to substantiate his claims with references. See his statement [11] on the Talk:Mudaliar where he refuses to give proof and substantiate his claims. At the same time adds the sections with false references and persists in edit warring for over 4 months with over 10 other editors including myself. I have tried RFC, Mediation and I am finally at the arbitration stage. I have tried CheckUser on him and found out that he was already using multiple sock puppets and current coming on a well known proxy as User:Kariakala_Cholan [12]. Please advice on how to handle this issue.
Venki 20:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Please see my references I have provided on your talk page which are all academic or research articles. As for K. Cholan, its not my socket puppet. Mudaliar 21:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
Here is the link to the checkuser on User:mudaliar [13]
Venki 16:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Greetings. On Wikipedia_talk:Abuse_reports you made a post regarding:
"an approach that garnered some interest from other editors at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#I_just_don.27t_get_it. For problem school IP vandalism I've started contacting the school. Early response has been excellent. Durova 22:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I can't find the thread. Is it still available or can you repeat the information? We have been struggling with a prolific sock puppet problem and are now raising the question of doing a range block on a University. Defense against this sockmeister is coordinated at User:Abecedare/Maleabroad and the range block idea is at User_talk:Abecedare#Why_not_ask_for_a_range_block.3F. Any suggestions on what to do, and how to approach the University of Calgary about this problem? Buddhipriya 21:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
User:Mudaliar is deleting heavily referenced sections about the Yellamma Devadasi cult in Karnataka in the article Devadasi. This is a clear example of vandalism. Please see difference [14].
Venki 22:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Durova, my mistake. I apologize. But why is the section being moved to the top again and again and with the wrong title? Venki 16:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova. I just noticed your comment at Dereks1x's SSP here. Perhaps I'm misreading it, but it appears that you're saying that you blocked Dereks1x but not the puppets. However, it doesn't appear that Dereks1x has been blocked. Did you block one of the socks instead? Just curious. · j e r s y k o talk · 03:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
And now this. Tvoz | talk 08:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
It continues, and note blatant sockpuppetry. Tvoz | talk 22:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I apologize if it didn't come out the way I meant, but my reference to the other discussion was not intended with reference to any particular comment and any particular person. --I was making a general comparison of some of the discussions on the two topics. I remember your comments re Essjay, with which I totally agreed. DGG 05:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar
Hey Durova, it's my privilege to award you this barnstar for all your hard work and perseverance in developing community enforceable mediation, and for your contributions in general and your dedication to the project. SlimVirgin (talk) 06:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC) |
Hi! Just catching up on the RobertG resignation... on this discussion you dropped a diff (ca. 14:21 hrs, the 26th) that, seems non-sensical at this juncture. I suspect it was formatted current to past, and needs to have two specific page idents. Can you take a look and fix up the link you intended? Hmmmm Drat-it's not that simple apparently, OK, How about a paragraph reference or some clarification. Thanks. // Fra nkB 17:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I wish you and your family a Happy and enjoyable Easter/Holidays and although its a little early I'm sure you will enjoy it!! Dont forget that its April Fools Day soon and I also hope you enjoy that as well.
|
How sweet! Thank you very much. :) A warm and happy spring season to you too. Durova Charge! 00:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello again, Durova. Sorry to bother you with this, but I wasn't sure who else to ask. I just created an article, Water for elephants, but I didn't name it properly. I believe, since it's the title of a novel, the 'e' in 'elephants' should be capitalized. Can you please fix that for me, or point me in the right direction to get it corrected? Thanks! - Skinny McGee 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I recently ran accross User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. after he warned an IP I had just blocked and added a curious disclaimer [20]. Now this was a bit out of the ordinary, but certainly nothing harmful, since the user was obviously trying to help. However I then noticed several other curiosities:
Looking over USA's contributions and (now blanked) talk page, there is a particular focus on adminship. However, aside from that, the contribs appear generally helpful and productive. I don't know what course of action, if any, should be taken, but I thought that you might like to be appraised of the situation. Regards, ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 20:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Just a quick note to thank you on behalf of myself and Mal Case for blocking Wackadoo. The woman was careless and was actually creating more trouble - certainly for me (which is why I came back from exile albiet temporarily to help Mal out). I've emailed Kzrulzuall with all the details of ths issues between RCW and HRPW, and I've taken both of them off the Professional wrestling in Australia page to prevent any further trouble. I also asked Kz to lock the page for a few weeks to head off any trouble that Wackadoo's carelessness may attract - such as the most recent anon edits. Maybe you could back that up? Hopefully I won't be needed anymore and Mal can look after things. Curse of Fenric 00:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
PS - I also removed the legal threat from both the pro wrestling talk page and also Mal's - and I added a "miniblocked" template to Wackadoo's user page (couldn't find the proper one for legal threats) Curse of Fenric 00:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the block worked, he's still doing the same thing without any edit summary or explanation on the talk page. Khoi khoi 00:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Durova, awhile back you kindly offered to nominate me for RfA, and I declined, primarily because I was too busy. Things are a bit slower right now, so this seems like as good a time as any to give it a shot, if you're still willing. I can see you've got a lot going on right now, so I feel sort of bad about asking... --Akhilleus ( talk) 03:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok, it's up. Thanks for nominating me, we'll see what happens now... --Akhilleus ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if we could add a protection template on the Victory Christian Fellowship page too, since it has similar issues with the Every Nation page and is currently undergoing mediation. Thanks! Varsha Daswani 08:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Was it really necessary to semiprotect The SCO Group? The attempted gutting of the article by suspected SCO staffers pretty much stopped a couple of days prior to your protection, the edits were fairly easily dealt with by reverting at the time, and the attention from the likes of digg and various SCO-watchers around the net should have a salutary deterrent effect. Being caught out has backfired somewhat on the POV-pushers, so the adminning is perhaps unnecessary... -- Aim Here 09:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
The above-entitled arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published at the above link. Ilena ( talk · contribs) is banned from editing Wikipedia for one year and is banned from editing articles and talk pages related to alternative medicine, except talk pages related to breat implants. Fyslee ( talk · contribs) is cautioned to use reliable sources and to edit from a neutral point of view. He is reminded that editors with a known partisan point of view should be careful to seek consensus on the talk page of articles to avoid the appearance of a COI if other editors question their edits. For the arbitration committee, Thatcher131 12:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I do not believe that discussion belongs there, I think it is more of an incident as there does not appear to be a proposed action. The banning action has already occurred. very respectfully, Navou banter / contribs 16:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
What is the best way to deal with this situation with User:Soxrock? [1] [2] (His accounts all tag back to User:Soxrock.)
Investigating all four accounts (edits and contributed images) has shown no evidence that there is any attempt to violate policies like WP:3RR or WP:Sock. In addition, he does seem to be working to resolve the Fair Use Rationale issues with his images.
Thanks for your advice.
Take care,
Larry -- Lmcelhiney 16:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Your urgent help would be most appreciated here. -- Jreferee 21:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello, considering that you have nominated User:Akhilleus for admin, would you care to state your approval under the "Support" column? I know that you've already said "Strong support" in your nomination, but I don't believe the bots count that in their half-hourly updates. Thanks. -- Kyok o 22:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
You are quite mistaken in your statement that my concerns "are welcome via the proper channels."
Letter and fax to Jimmy Wales, October 16, 2005: IGNORED
Fax to Brad Patrick, April 23, 2006: IGNORED
Fax to Danny Wool, September 9, 2006: IGNORED
Please unprotect the talk page on my bio. It's the only place where I can address concerns about my bio on Wikipedia. —Daniel Brandt 69.148.173.125 00:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
A notice was posted to Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest about this situation: [3]. I really dislike when people gather and start talking about an editor without inviting that person to the discussion. I've gone to the editor's talk page and tried to soothe things. [4] What do you think about this? Jehochman ( Talk/ Contrib) 03:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, Durova.. I have refactored my comments, but as I said in my reply on the Talk: Daniel Brandt page, I stand by my basic belief that he is trying to annoy folks in to getting rid of the article just to be rid of him. SirFozzie 03:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I didn't care for it. It is not a "good call" to block editors you are in a content dispute with, and User:Avraham was wrong to do so. User:Asucena doubtless deserved a block, but Avi needs to take care not to allow himself to be painted as abusive. He should have posted to WP:AN and let someone else do it for him.
Characterising me as "persistently" and "aggressively" refusing to assume good faith is out of order. I'd like you to retract that. I think it is tantamount to a personal attack. We might disagree on the issue at hand but I posted only briefly on it, and you spoke to me just the once. I did not agree with you. To then defame me shows a lack of good faith on your part, not mine. Please don't continue with it. Grace Note 05:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Durova,
I deleted that text as the particluar person has edited my post on your talk page. Check this: [5] and then look where this person has added his/her post [6]I'm not that dumb to delete someone else's post from your talk page and think that you'd not find out. I removed the post as that person has not signed and it looks as though I posted it. Why did this person edi9t my post. He should have posted above me or below me but not in the middle of my post. He just added his post after my greeting. Please unlock the Mudaliar article. Mudaliar 14:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I am really impressed with your time and atttention to WP:CEM and I believe the program will be helpful to the project. I don't see any objections to the trial so a little later today I'll write it into DR and associated pages. Additionally...
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
For outstanding devotion to the community in the area of content, and content dispute resolution, diligence in assisting other editors to understand DR process, sacrifice of time to form and refine the proposal; you have shown great credit upon yourself, the community, and en-Wikipedia. I Navou award you this, Barnstar of Diligence. Navou banter / contribs 16:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
Keep up the outstanding contributions! Best, Navou banter / contribs 16:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I've added it to the template, and WP:DR. Navou banter / contribs 17:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 00:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 18:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Durova,
203.101.45.171 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is abusing profusely and swearing constantly to intimidate all the editors and push his point. I suggest a block. Check this: [9], [10] Thanks, Mudaliar 20:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Regarding article Mudaliar this vandal User:Mudaliar who insists of adding sections without proofs and ignores proofs from Government gazettes. He is unable to substantiate his claims with references. See his statement [11] on the Talk:Mudaliar where he refuses to give proof and substantiate his claims. At the same time adds the sections with false references and persists in edit warring for over 4 months with over 10 other editors including myself. I have tried RFC, Mediation and I am finally at the arbitration stage. I have tried CheckUser on him and found out that he was already using multiple sock puppets and current coming on a well known proxy as User:Kariakala_Cholan [12]. Please advice on how to handle this issue.
Venki 20:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Please see my references I have provided on your talk page which are all academic or research articles. As for K. Cholan, its not my socket puppet. Mudaliar 21:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
Here is the link to the checkuser on User:mudaliar [13]
Venki 16:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Greetings. On Wikipedia_talk:Abuse_reports you made a post regarding:
"an approach that garnered some interest from other editors at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#I_just_don.27t_get_it. For problem school IP vandalism I've started contacting the school. Early response has been excellent. Durova 22:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I can't find the thread. Is it still available or can you repeat the information? We have been struggling with a prolific sock puppet problem and are now raising the question of doing a range block on a University. Defense against this sockmeister is coordinated at User:Abecedare/Maleabroad and the range block idea is at User_talk:Abecedare#Why_not_ask_for_a_range_block.3F. Any suggestions on what to do, and how to approach the University of Calgary about this problem? Buddhipriya 21:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
User:Mudaliar is deleting heavily referenced sections about the Yellamma Devadasi cult in Karnataka in the article Devadasi. This is a clear example of vandalism. Please see difference [14].
Venki 22:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Durova, my mistake. I apologize. But why is the section being moved to the top again and again and with the wrong title? Venki 16:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova. I just noticed your comment at Dereks1x's SSP here. Perhaps I'm misreading it, but it appears that you're saying that you blocked Dereks1x but not the puppets. However, it doesn't appear that Dereks1x has been blocked. Did you block one of the socks instead? Just curious. · j e r s y k o talk · 03:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
And now this. Tvoz | talk 08:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
It continues, and note blatant sockpuppetry. Tvoz | talk 22:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I apologize if it didn't come out the way I meant, but my reference to the other discussion was not intended with reference to any particular comment and any particular person. --I was making a general comparison of some of the discussions on the two topics. I remember your comments re Essjay, with which I totally agreed. DGG 05:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar
Hey Durova, it's my privilege to award you this barnstar for all your hard work and perseverance in developing community enforceable mediation, and for your contributions in general and your dedication to the project. SlimVirgin (talk) 06:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC) |
Hi! Just catching up on the RobertG resignation... on this discussion you dropped a diff (ca. 14:21 hrs, the 26th) that, seems non-sensical at this juncture. I suspect it was formatted current to past, and needs to have two specific page idents. Can you take a look and fix up the link you intended? Hmmmm Drat-it's not that simple apparently, OK, How about a paragraph reference or some clarification. Thanks. // Fra nkB 17:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I wish you and your family a Happy and enjoyable Easter/Holidays and although its a little early I'm sure you will enjoy it!! Dont forget that its April Fools Day soon and I also hope you enjoy that as well.
|
How sweet! Thank you very much. :) A warm and happy spring season to you too. Durova Charge! 00:43, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Hello again, Durova. Sorry to bother you with this, but I wasn't sure who else to ask. I just created an article, Water for elephants, but I didn't name it properly. I believe, since it's the title of a novel, the 'e' in 'elephants' should be capitalized. Can you please fix that for me, or point me in the right direction to get it corrected? Thanks! - Skinny McGee 19:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I recently ran accross User:U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. after he warned an IP I had just blocked and added a curious disclaimer [20]. Now this was a bit out of the ordinary, but certainly nothing harmful, since the user was obviously trying to help. However I then noticed several other curiosities:
Looking over USA's contributions and (now blanked) talk page, there is a particular focus on adminship. However, aside from that, the contribs appear generally helpful and productive. I don't know what course of action, if any, should be taken, but I thought that you might like to be appraised of the situation. Regards, ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 20:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Just a quick note to thank you on behalf of myself and Mal Case for blocking Wackadoo. The woman was careless and was actually creating more trouble - certainly for me (which is why I came back from exile albiet temporarily to help Mal out). I've emailed Kzrulzuall with all the details of ths issues between RCW and HRPW, and I've taken both of them off the Professional wrestling in Australia page to prevent any further trouble. I also asked Kz to lock the page for a few weeks to head off any trouble that Wackadoo's carelessness may attract - such as the most recent anon edits. Maybe you could back that up? Hopefully I won't be needed anymore and Mal can look after things. Curse of Fenric 00:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
PS - I also removed the legal threat from both the pro wrestling talk page and also Mal's - and I added a "miniblocked" template to Wackadoo's user page (couldn't find the proper one for legal threats) Curse of Fenric 00:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)