I hope I'm following wikipedia policy on this. You are a checkuser right? My account is currently subject of a sockpuppet investigation. I was an immature idiot and my actions were stupid and rash. I apologise wholeheartedly for it. I'm setting up a new account mainly because I just want to put this all behind me. The other reason is Im personally fed up with the conduct of a number of editors including the editor who initiated the investigation, User:One Night In Hackney. He was right to initiate the investigation, I'm not criticising him/her for that. It's the editor's general manner on this site which I have a problem with. I'm making a clean start. I was a total idiot and I just want to move on from this. Exiledone ( talk) 21:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
"Technically Glic16 displays no similarities other than editing from the Irish Republic as the other socks do, but the quacking is loud and the technical evidence does not prevent him being a duck" - say what? I thought that addition to the case was pretty baseless but never got round to saying anything. All I saw was an editor with a very sparse contribution history editing mostly Ireland related topics, but nothing that screamed sock. As for the edit to Exildeone's userpage it was awarding a barnstar as they did to numerous other Irish editors around the same time. I'll admit I didn't look too carefully at their entire history since there was nothing obvious, so if I've missed something say so. But the OP didn't present much compelling evidence and you didn't mention any you'd uncovered, so I'm a bit baffled. 2 lines of K 303 23:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I'm not sure where the appropriate venue is to propose this, but I'd like to suggest that we consider imposing a temporary injunction on the Falun Gong namespace pending the outcome of the current ArbCom case. Perhaps something to the effect that editors should exercise caution with major or potentially contentious changes, and seek to discuss them on talk pages first? This seems consistent with the editing policy. Any advice on how to proceed? Homunculus ( duihua) 03:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. User:Turmerick, who you blocked in November, is asking for unblock. The first request, which I declined, was a bit of a rant against you, but the second one seems a bit calmer. Don't know if you might like to take a look and maybe comment? -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
You are one of the bosses, so all I can do is ask what was "pointy, off-topic and/or non-evidenced" about my response to Prioryman's comments on Fae's real name that it was hatted. The first paragraph was dealing with Prioryman's speculating about another editor's motive, absent any evidence whatsoever, and the second was a summary of my view of what had happened, in contrast, I thought, to the much heavier weight to the events given by Prioryman, also absent evidence, though further commentary (but not evidence) is promised. As for Bali Ultimate's remarks, may I suggest that in such a setting as this case, points do need to be made, and sometimes underscored and that that is the point of much of the exercise? Bielle ( talk) 01:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, I emailed you with questions about OS policy. I would have preferred to post them in public so that others could benefit from the answers, but the questions use specific and recent examples that I think are best not shared in public. If you can think of a way to answer the questions publicly while obscuring enough of the details to keep the specific incidents from being traceable, please do so. Thanks, Pine ✉ 22:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
I'd like your opinion if you wouldn't mind.
I read through the AfD and the deleted history and so on. And on the surface this just looks like someone trying to reduce their web presence (or at least being written about by others). But I dunno. And I don't know what else, if anything, we at Wikipedia can do for the person at this point (regardless of whether we wish to or not). And I'm also scratching my head wondering "why me"? I was contacted out of the blue and don't recall ever being part of any related discussions. Is there something I'm missing here? - jc37 00:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
As the subject seems to be of your interest, you are an experienced editor, and know very well how to deal with uncivil summaries/comments in talks, your opinion and presence would be very appreciated in this, as yet, non-consensual and critical talk. Thanks, Excalibursword ( talk) 17:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
LouisPhilippeCharles ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
In the past you have been involved in a block/unblock procedure either on the sockmaster account of LouisPhilippeCharles or an account of one of the sockpuppets. Please see WP:ANI#LouisPhilippeCharles -- PBS ( talk) 20:30, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
I have read your comment at the bottom of the (opened?) (closed?) ANI. I have never seen this before. I have not seen where other editors have expressed a desire to re-open this particular ANI which, as you said, was the criteria for re-opening it. As I am sure you know, all of these editors know each other and are just seemingly making the rules up as they go along. I see the same editors as yesterday with one exception. One editor has just been given a new chance by the Arbitration Committee. You think they would feel lucky.
Of course I will abide, because I always abide by administrators instructions but I would like to continue with my comments there if other editors are also doing so. Is this allowed? Seems like Wiki is changing alot these days Elen. I do not know how you do it without going crazy but you do and I commend you for it. Mugginsx ( talk) 17:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen. I'm wondering if I might request some clarification on the operations of the workshop page for the FLG 2 ArbCom case. It seems to be growing rather unwieldy, and may benefit from some greater involvement by members of the arbitration committee to help keep things on track. Is that generally how these things work? Homunculus ( duihua) 22:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ellen. Are you sure about this? cairogang.com is used regularly on Wikipedia as a reliable source. RashersTierney ( talk) 14:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
We seem to have an issue with circular referencing at this article. I wonder would you mind re-visiting? RashersTierney ( talk) 18:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Please make AC aware of proposed urgent motion I have made on workshop page. SarekOfVulcan has moved the Perth article despite participating in the move review. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 16:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi - as the previous blocking user - please comment thanks-
Youreally
can 3:00 pm, Today (UTC−7
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Nangaphobia your comments as a CU familiar with the topic will be welcome.-- DBig Xray 07:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
What personal attacks are you talking about? What allegations are you talking about? I don't see any! I have requested declaration of COIs in accordance with WP:COI. -- Nenpog ( talk) 14:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
This is now at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Nenpog. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 01:33, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
It would have been a perfunctory deed for you to have told me if my answer to your question was right or wrong. I'll simply add it to the heap of wasted prose I have appended into this god forsaken hell hole of a place My76Strat ( talk) 22:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
( edit conflict)::In many ways you are right. The only thing I can say is I posted a comment to Edison under his. If something above was see addressed to him let alone two, this is the first I have heard of it. I know the names who spawned my desire to comment, and for sure it wasn't Edison. That's what took me out. I meant everything to Edison as a compliment and every-time I refreshed the page someone else was pissed about what I said to Edison. I suppose I'll have a look to see if I can see what you and the others saw, that wasn't there. My76Strat ( talk) 23:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Would you be willing to comment on this thread as a knowledgeable, neutral third party? The question is whether asking people commenting on an RFC explicitly to consider NPOV is appropriate or not. Thanks. -- Rick Block ( talk) 19:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I suspect you're not watching this page closely enough to have seen this, but here's an analogy that might be helpful in understanding why I think it's a POV issue. Imagine being asked what is NN for N=2 and being given the answer "2+2=4, so the answer is 4".
2+2=4 is a correct statement. It is actually related to what anyone would consider the correct answer in an intrinsic sort of way (it uses the unmentioned but "obvious" simplification that for N=2, N+N and N*N and NN are all identical). And, yes indeed, 4 is the correct (numeric) answer. But yet, as a matter of TRUTH or Truth, there's something not quite right about this answer.
Relating this to the MHP, the "simple" solutions presented by popular sources are saying (what at least some sources say is) the equivalent of 2+2=4. The "conditional" solutions presented by the vast majority of sources in the field of probability are saying the equivalent of (with no comment about "simple" solutions) NN is N*N*N... (N times), which for N=2 is N*N, so the answer is 2*2=4. The (smaller) number of sources criticizing the "simple" solutions are saying "simple" solutions are "correct, but ... shaky", or "misleading", or "incomplete", or "[don't] address the problem posed" or are [bluntly] "false" - and these sources demonstrate the issue by showing "simple" solutions fail if you use them to solve (the equivalent of) NN for some other value of N.
Martin is saying he wants the main "solution" section of the article to present "simple" solutions (those saying the equivalent of "2+2=4 is the answer") "with no disclaimers that they do not solve the right problem or are incomplete", and to include both the (conditional) solution typically presented in the field (showing the equivalent of NN for N=2 is N*N = 2*2 = 4) AND the criticism of the "simple" solutions (which show the equivalent of 2+2=4) in a later section "for experts only".
I'm saying this creates a structural POV.
The only TRUTH I'm interested in here is the Truth about what the sources say. Martin continues to argue that the sources critical of "simple" solutions aren't saying what they clearly say (IMO, from a standpoint of TRUTH, explicitly denying Truth). -- Rick Block ( talk) 06:08, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Up to now, obviously misinterpreting some source, sometimes just "the only one aspect" has been "read into" the statements of sources, although the source actually and effectively just confirms "the other aspect" as well. We need to deal very carefully with the sources, to avoid that the sense of source statements is not reproduced unilaterally, obviously misinterpreting the source.« – Please read again what the sources really say. Regards, Gerhardvalentin ( talk) 17:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I got my answer [3]. In Wikipedia terms, having your thesis marked does not constitute peer review, and having it placed in a database like this does not constitute publication in a peer reviewed journal. So until your material is published in a peer reviewed journal, I would not think it was appropriate to use in the article. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 01:09, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
I see you previously found that this account belonged to Factseducado. Well, the account has since become active including here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/F%C3%A6/Workshop&diff=500047338&oldid=499976559.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 21:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi, would be you interested in delivering your impressions in DRV – E. being? They would be appreciated. Excalibursword ( talk) 03:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
the anti-indian comments/edits show (IV) is indeed Nangparbat, can u have a look ? DBig Xray 13:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I've started a project. Actually, I made the first edit is all and everyone else is doing all the real work so I can't take any credit, but I think you might find it interesting. It is barely two days old yet the enthusiasm is strong. There are a great number of reasons people leave Wikipedia, and I think that there is a broad consensus among us that this needs addressing on many fronts. If you get a chance, take a look. It is a motley crew of editors (my favorite kind of crew) with a lot of good ideas and a common goal of keeping good editors here. One of the things that was brought up was that only 9% of the editors here are women, which I find to be almost criminal. It is still very raw and new, but if you (or any of your wonderful talk page stalkers) were so inclined to join us, or just stop by from time to time and share your wisdom and ideas, it would be welcomed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Pine ✉ 09:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I get the feeling you need a treat right now, and nothing beats baklava and a good cup of tea. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks Dennis. I'm just about coming round, but definitely not firing on all cylinders yet.
Your name has come up here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Possible_interaction_ban_violation Nobody Ent 14:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
CU please:
Thank you. Bred Ivy ( talk) 23:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Dear Elen, may I ask for your opinion? Do the following sentences from Peter Tomsen, The Wars of Afghanistan, p. 565 (which can be checked here):
"Increasing numbers of Pashtun Taliban were secretly contacting him [anti-Taliban leader Abdul Haq] as Taliban popularity trended downward. In the late 1990s and 2000, Haq's home in Peshawar and the Karzai residence in Quetta became the main gathering sides for tribal elders, commanders ... dissatisfied with the Taliban."
verify the following line:
"Abdul Haq received increasing numbers of defecting Pashtun Taliban ..."
JCAla ( talk) 07:26, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
NewtonGeek ( talk) 01:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you with this question. I have the feeling that you may have pointed me in the right direction before but I failed to follow up on it. You evidently recall the case of the Hockey editor with an aversion to Czech surnames. There was something about a larger number of moves to "accent-less" titles, and creating and editing a large amount of redirects from diacritics, thereby preventing moves being reverted. Can you point me to the specific guideline about when it is not correct to edit a redirect from diacritics? Thanks. In ictu oculi ( talk) 10:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
NewtonGeek ( talk) 22:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I wonder if this is a technical computer glitch. I e-mailed you. NewtonGeek ( talk) 22:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Not having jumped in on Noetica's desysopping straw poll one way or the other doesn't necessarily mean the "community" agrees with him.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello Elen of the Roads.
I am submitting a request to the ArbCom.
I request you to refrain from intervening in this matter.
I think that the formal language for that is that I ask your recusal from this case.
I ask that because you have previously intervened in several stages which led to that request, and seemed to have already made up your mind about it, and you seem to have taken a side.
The knowledge you had while intervening was partial, because only now I present my view on the matter without reservations.
I think that your recusal would benefit the case, even if only to preserve the appearance of lack of prejudice, wherein by appearance of lack prejudice I mean the appearance that the case wasn't decided in advance with partial evidence, before all facts were presented. -- Nenpog ( talk) 15:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
There is a vote to close the Falung Gong 2 case which is not yet passing. Your votes could be decisive as there are one proposed finding of fact and three proposed remedies which do not currently pass due to missing arbitrator votes. Regards -- Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 18:28, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I am bringing this to your attention since you recently blocked User:DriveByWire. I believe the User:Ochson is a sockpuppet of the same editor. User:Ochson recently created a thread at the ref desk forging my signature: [7] and erasing his own autosignature: [8]. This was after I reported him here [9] for editing another user's comments to change their meaning entirely. I have filed an ANI here: [10] but am hoping for your immediate help. Thanks. μηδείς ( talk) 23:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
You are listed as active at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Proposed decision. Is that accurate? The case is about to close, and your vote is the deciding vote on a number of proposals, but you have not voted on anything yet. Hipocrite ( talk) 17:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Just an FYI, dont hesitate about rangblocking Vodafone mobile IP's if the need should arise. I used to work on their (line) service management dept. They have total internal logging of when, where, who (if contract) is assigned an IP and at what time. So any interruption in their service to their customers they are more than willing and able to cut off the offenders if they should cause any problems for their other customers. They (in the UK and AUS) used to have constant issues with getting their ranges banned from various high-traffic sites due to the throwaway nature of their PAYG dongles, so they take any interruptions quite seriously. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 10:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :)! Callanecc ( talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:35, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I hope I'm not the only one who got the reference to Alice's Restaurant (i.e. circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back). And since I'm here, I'd like to take a moment to thank you for serving as an Arbitrator. I expect it's not a fun job and it's probably even worse than I can imagine. I'm thankful that you, and others, are willing to take on this task and serve the community in this way. It's much appreciated. Best regards. 64.40.57.60 ( talk) 08:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Dear elen of the Roads,
My name is Rajesh Mehta and I am the producer of a film titled DRAPCHI which you will find here.
The poster of this film needs to change immediately and replaced by another one.
I have no idea about how one does this..A friend had uploaded the new version a few weeks ago but again an old one has cropped up.I need to get rid of this and replace it with another file.can you help me please?
My email ID is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.251.89 ( talk) 18:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you please tell me why the Wikipedia page Sand is locked? I cannot imagine sand being a hot button issue and causing problems. I would like to correct something in the article because it is locked. When will it be unlocked? Thank you.-- 74.240.238.238 ( talk) 18:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
He's still got an IP free. I'm at 3 reverts on the page, if you would kindly help. Thank you. Ian.thomson ( talk) 16:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you are set to be mentioned in this week's Arbitration Report ( link). The report aims to inform readers of The Signpost about the proceedings of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the draft article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them on the talkpage (transcluded in the Comments section directly below the main body of text), where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievous factual errors (making sure to note such changes in the comments section). Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot ( talk) 00:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello! I would like to kindly ask You for help and to use the oversight feature... One of the contributors keeps posting my personal information and legal threats in [ [11]] (Life on earth External link section). The reason of this behavior is quite simple - I have deleted (in good faith) link to his page from External links in the article (to prevent people suffering from cancer from purchasing a device that is sold as "curing cancer and normalizing ones body aura"). More contributors agree with me and the user in question starts to use personal attacks and revert their edits too. Thanks for any help/response. Panszpik ( talk) 14:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Panszpik, if there are edits that need suppressing, can you either Use this form if you have a Wikipedia account with Wikipedia email enabled ( click here to enable account email); or use your normal email and write to oversight-en-wpwikipedia.org. Please supply diffs - I can't see where he is posting information about you. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 15:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I just mentioned you in a proposal I made regarding an editor blocked for sockpuppetry. After I did so, I realized I probably shouldn't go throwing your name around, even in a complimentary fashion, without alerting you. The discussion is here (collapsed in the drawer). It refers to this now-archived SPI. Cynwolfe ( talk) 16:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
egits? What's an egit? Nobody Ent 23:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, sorry for coming directly but I have a concern about TDA's sudden involvement inthe Men's Rights issue, expressed here. I'll note that TDA has also started commenting on Talk:Feminism an article I have significantly contributed too. Given that it was clearly expressed that a) KC did nothing wrong and b) that any further moves should go to Move Review and c) this looks a bit like hounding (especially in light of this [12]). If this is an AE or ANi matter I'll go there but would like some input. I'm going to contact PhilKnight and SirFozzie directly to. If I'm overreacting I'm more than happy to redact and AGF-- Cailil talk 12:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Not sure how you meant to change Penyulap's block settings, as your comment ("reinstating talk page access") is in, err, dynamic tension with your action ("cannot edit own talk page"). Bishonen | talk 20:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC).
@Nobody Ent. That's not the flaw. The flaw is that if we were under attack from an interstellar ant colony, I do not believe that the "Government of Earth" would need to employ the bizarre strategy of training children in secret to carry out the attack on the ants' homeworld, not knowing what they were doing, because no adult could be persuaded to carry out genocide. I think they would find plenty of willing and able adult volunteers who would have no problem with bombing the shit out of the Buggers, and I have no doubt they could spin it to the general public. In this respect, Starship Troopers is way more accurate than Ender's Game. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 15:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Elen I prefer no dialogue with you. I've found your comments unhelpful, grating, unfair, condescending. Can you possibly go back to leaving me be? I certainly haven't initiated anything with you. Thank you. Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 04:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, since all we have is words typed into an edit box, all we have to go on is the words. It may seem nitpicky to you, but man, you're reaction here really illustrates what Dennis and I are saying. " nit-pick with over-generalized criticisms" doesn't even make sense. Nit-picking is very specific. If either Dennis or I have made an observation about your editing - and it is only about your editing, neither of us know you in real life - it is specifically based on things we have seen in your editing. It's not generalised at all. This conversation is an exact example of what you do - any attempt to make any comment about your edits is met with these increasing walls of text insisting that you are being wronged and attacked. That's why I keep telling you to just read your own edits, and try to imagine they are made by a third party you are in dialogue with. How would you react to them? How would you prefer the other party to react if you had pointed out that (for instance) their source didn't meet the reliable source requirements. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 20:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure I understand why Penyulap's talk page required full protection. I was inclined to leave a comment but feel the matter has now spilled over to require user's like myself to bear the brunt of an unsupportable action. What have you prevented by disallowing my access and that of others? 76Strat String da Broke da ( talk) 14:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Savant syndrome is good background reading, in this case. Savants are never easy to handle or deal with, but very well worth the effort. Pesky ( talk) 04:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Adding: I've been trying to come up with a kind of real-world parallel to get an idea across. Imagine a string of mountain peaks, with a person standing on each peak. You may not be able to get to where I am, but you can see me from where you are. I can't get to where Pen is, but I can see him from here, and you can't actually see him, but you know that I can. I can't see what he sees from where I am, but I trust that he can see more than I do, from where he is. Does that help? Or, if you have pets, maybe this one might be better: if I watch my dog air-scenting, I can't analyse or identify the scent she's caught on to, because I don't have her sense of smell. But I can see that she's picked up on something which I can't detect. Pesky ( talk) 05:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I have no doubt that eventually Wikipedia will die as a project in the future, but I also think that in the 25th Century (or whenever it becomes an issue) what everybody is working on today will very likely seed such future compendiums of human knowledge just like Wikipedia has been gifted from a great many other sources to make what we have today. That many people are using Wikipedia to spread human knowledge should be viewed as a good thing. Failure to attribute and plagiarism in violation of the terms of the Wikipedia licenses is bad form, but conforming to Wikipedia licenses are pretty easy to do (since you don't need formal written permission to copy). --Robert Horning (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to butt in here but I warned Dennis about Pen months ago - his acting out at one of the ppl who were helping him and bending over backwards for him is precisely the kind of behaviour that this project does not need. *If* this is a guy who has RL problems I have every sympathy for him but we and WP can't help him. If he can't play by the rules here we have no reason to spend further time on him. He lied about having more sockpuppets, and while there are multiple lines between legitimate sock accounts and illegitimates ones, lying is one of the brightlines.
Furthermore he was going on about
breaching experiments before being indef'd - that's what he's doing now (and had previously been doing). Wikipedia (what ever Pen's view of it) is an encylcopedia not a space for performance art, or a social network. IMHO his actions amount to
griefing and at this point it is time to treat the issue "with
extinction" until he gets the message, then the
standard offer applies. His talk page *not* being a forum/social network/blog etc is one of those things Pen needs to adjust to, and frankly the simplest one--
Cailil
talk 09:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
@Pesky, if you're blocked, you're blocked. It is you the person who is not to edit, not the particular account. So a blocked editor creating socks while still discussing their block is always going to get the hammer dropped on them. Particularly as - as Cailil says - these socks appear to be breaching experiments, which will get you blocked anyway. I'm sorry but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a social networking project. If you guys want to chat to Penyulap, you'll need to find another venue. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 11:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humour | ||
For exposing the truth about local governments here. De728631 ( talk) 22:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC) |
LOL! Thanks :) -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 23:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Damn, someone beat me to it. @Elen, please elaborate on your methods.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 02:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Some things are best ignored. (Yes I do have better things to do than WP, but I'm taking a break from them cause they're kinda boring, actually). Nobody Ent 14:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, User talk:SinghIsKing123 has ignored your final warning, given yesterday. Please block this disruptive user. Thanks
Thanks so much - so very helpful. I realise I don't know much about how sock tracking works. Is it possible to geolocate registered accounts? I am sure this user has many socks but works through registered accounts so I can't tell without submitting info to the sock board. Can I prove that PrabhChatha is a sock of SinghIsKing123? He seems very active all over and very determined. Any advice would be welcome. All best wishes Span ( talk) 21:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
... could you take a look at this: [15]. I'm not sure what User:Zgoutreach is up to here, but if it is intended as an article, I think he/she is likely to be sorely disappointed per multiple policies, and if it isn't intended as an article, it doesn't belong there. I've had a bit of interaction with Zgoutreach at The Zeitgeist Movement (the name seems coincidence, rather than COI - see User talk:Zgoutreach), so perhaps it might be better for me not to get involved and someone with a little more tact (i.e. almost anyone, but you seem a prime example) may be more effective. Thanks. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 03:38, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
"If either of you can persuade Penyulap to stop creating sock accounts while blocked, they can have their talkpage access back to expound further on these fascinating topics."
“ | I would be happy to comply with any reasonable request. Am I being
asked not to create alternative accounts on commons and other wikipedias, and would you prefer I shut down the alternative accounts that I am now using on Japanese, Russian and German wikipedias as well ? |
” |
Hi Elen, I am sure you recall User:Godmadeit whom you blocked 21:48, 20 February 2012 for continuously replacing "same-sex" with "homosexual" in Census data of small Northern California towns. Well... Son of Godmadeit has arrived... User:Godmadeit101 just made the same type of dogmatic changes to Colusa, California and I reverted their changes. Thanking you again for all your help! Ellin Beltz ( talk) 00:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Ezzayakoo ( talk) 00:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 19:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, Somerled the Viking Slayer is not a POV fork. It relates to a different person. 'Somerled' apparently refers to a Viking ancestor and does not refer to Somerled the Viking Slayer. Somerled the Viking Slayer is a historical Pictic leader with an extensive recorded lineage. Thank you for your contribution.
Moidart ( talk) 06:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Just in case you took her page off your watchlist, about 1 month after her 1 year block expired, User:Neptunekh2 is back to editing (if you've forgotten, see [18] and [19]). And already making very specific, and some might argue overly specific, categories. Right now it's just barely w/in reason, but I see that some of her edits have already been reverted. Sigh--she so clearly wants to be here, and clearly wants to help in her own way. I wish there was some way to channel that energy and desire productively. Qwyrxian ( talk) 09:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I seem to think that there was a policy or guideline on privacy of non-notable individuals on Wikipedia articles, but I can't seem to locate it. Do you happen to know where it is, or if ti's just my imagination? MSJapan ( talk) 00:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Minor correction: the MHP was originally presented in a pair of letters to the American Statistician. It didn't turn up in Parade magazine until 15 years later, by which time it was already a fairly standard example used in intro probability courses of counterintuitive conditional probability. The notion that it was "originally" a parlor teaser and later hijacked by math types is completely inverted. It was originated by math types and later hijacked as a parlor teaser by vos Savant. -- Rick Block ( talk) 04:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't know the admin involved, nor do I frequent the articles, but your comment below, struck a chord with me: "Its the sort of problem that you'd deal with in the workplace by pulling the guy out for some retraining". I agree that it wouldn't end in sacking or demoting. But more accurately, I'd characterise it as follows: "Its the sort of problem that you'd deal with in the workplace by getting the manager to tick him off". The best parallel we have is Arbcom admonishing/warning the user. What's to be lost in trying that? If he truly doesn't get it, you can desysop in a couple of weeks when he steps over the line again. If he does get it, you retain a motivated, productive admin, who's had a wake-up call. -- Dweller ( talk) 14:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
He can't help what other people post on his talk page. If he showed himself willing to listen now, do you think it'd make a difference? I hate losing good people. -- Dweller ( talk) 15:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
I sure don't see any arb brutality , and apologize if I gave that impression. I guess I don't see that there is only one solution, and that, the most severe when we have an editor with this kind of contribution record and who's admin mis actions are a handful. I wonder about AGF and a probation period with even one strike after that and he's out (desysop), no questions asked. If he can't or won't comment I'd also assume good faith and say fine with a comment and explanation maybe this could pass, but with out, a probation period and a falling ax for the same mistake. I'm no arb of course who has to actually deal with the problem rather than talk about it so its easy for me to sit here and cough up solutions. Thanks for your response and hearing me out.( olive ( talk) 19:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC))
I've been offwiki (usually am, Sat-Mon) but if you think there's a point in doing so, I'd be happy to try having a chat with him. Lmk. -- Dweller ( talk) 20:32, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
"you were crying over desysoping Kwami, and the time before that you were crying over desysoping Rich Farmbrough, " Elen - that is an incredibly childish way to describe Kumioko's legitimate concerns. In fact I have told children off for using that sort of language.
Rich
Farmbrough, 16:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC).
Thank you for taking the hit to your wiki-productivity in terms of the "Dammed if you do, Dammed if you don't" drama cycle Hasteur ( talk) 19:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jean-no and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Art4em. They are connected to a recent ANI thread. I see that this year ArbCom is more often stepping into such cases where parties involved in external conflicts carry it on Wikipedia, even without a formal request for a case. Maybe the participants who refused to confirm or deny their connections to the matter on-wiki will do so by email with you guys. Also, I think that some statements on ANI deserve some scrutiny vis-a-vis of WP:BLP as well, as they go beyond even what was published in the blogosphere. Finally, perhaps you could point me to ArbCom's current most recent ruling on how accounts hard to distinguish one from another should be evaluated in disputes; wikieons ago, ArbCom issued this. (I didn't know that "account" was an uncountable noun, although perhaps in that case it was so.) Tijfo098 ( talk) 08:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Does Special:Contributions/79.249.117.2 ring a bell? It doesn't like LG Williams so it might be a Qiwi sock. Tijfo098 ( talk) 18:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm curious. Are you suggesting that there is a 'cosmetics cabal' amongst our Lords (and Ladies) Protectors? Or do they convene for weekly cabal conferences in Rõuge, Estonia? [20] AndyTheGrump ( talk) 18:30, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Sigh. I was hoping that Glkanter had decided to move on with his life, but here he is again: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Monty_Hall_problem&diff=prev&oldid=511947018 -- Guy Macon ( talk) 02:20, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Hey Elen of the Roads, just wanted to let you know I've replied over at Silverseren's Talk page. Would love to get your feedback on updated LMC and Gurwitch drafts. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 16:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Hasteur ( talk) 23:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
You obviously have never heard of AGF. Perhaps you would like to read it before commenting on my motives and saying that I "deliberately" did something! That was not the case and that was not an edit war! Camelbinky ( talk) 00:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
(Note to self. Pertains to [21] - responses there -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 22:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC))
Elen, I was struck by something you said at ANI.
Some editors I respect (SandyGeorgia) are decidedly not fans of infoboxes. I don't go that far, as I find them useful, but I agree they can be abused. For example, a nuanced discussion of some issue might be perfectly appropriate in the main text, yet cannot be adequately summarized into a single word.
I have an item on my To-do list to see if the community would be willing to debate the use of infoboxes, and consider whether non-objective entries should be allowed. The addition to the list was prompted by some heated discussions involving names of influences of economists.
Religion presents a different challenge, as it is inarguable in many cases. However, the case of Galloway aptly identifies a situation where the proper treatment is a NPOV paragraph, but such a paragraph is unlikely to result in a single word, so best to leave it blank in the infobox.
IOW, I agree with you, and if I ever find the time to bring it up, I'm warning you that I may quote you :).-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 17:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Banned editor commenting here and is mentioning you, you probably have it on your watch list but just thought I'd let you know. Mo ainm ~Talk 22:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Br'er Rabbi has taught your kitten to bite you shrewdly on the ass. Hopefully that has made your day better. Kittens are cute and have very sharp teeth! Spread the goodness of kittens by giving someone else a bitey kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
I was just thinking of you because I saw an appeal that may get sent up to BASC. I'm preparing a cup of tea with some headache medicine in case you need it. I don't know how you keep your sanity with all the stuff that appears on your talk page. Pine ✉ 05:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC) |
Just checking to see if you have any other feedback on the drafts. 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 21:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Over at Talk:Monty Hall problem#Conditional or Simple solutions for the Monty Hall problem? I assigned Neither to your comments. If this is incorrect, please indicate "Proposal #1", "Proposal #2", or "Abstain". Thanks! -- Guy Macon ( talk) 20:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
The Gurwitch Products and Laura Mercier drafts look ready to go, in my opinion. Can you perform the histmerges? Silver seren C 00:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, This comment is a gross exaggeration and nearly ad hominem attack. I have never argued for a 4 paragraph exposition of the problem or that a "correct" solution needs three screens of math to set out the answer. If it was up to me, the "Solution" section would look pretty much like User:Rick Block/MH solution. The entire text fits on one screen. The figures make it slop over to two screens, but I think the "extra" space is worthwhile. -- Rick Block ( talk) 16:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
My recent change on the "straight inc. article was removed by you. It was removed on grounds of lack of source material, I specifically choose not to include a source because the majority of sources for information on that article involve horrific recounts of mental, physical, and emotional abuse of minors by the rehabilitation facility in question, as such I did not feel it appropriate to subject others to such articles through Wikipedia. However if it is necessary to provide examples I will, please see for examples of my edit and why it is justified, should you see fit please restore the edit: http://www.survivingstraightincthemovie.com/ http://survivingstraightinc.com/cincinnatioh_survivor_stories With respect -Me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xDpvsLIKF0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.90.183 ( talk) 23:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
If accounts from hundreds of children and teens isn't enough I honestly do not know what would be, but you are the editor and You have the decision so I will not argue, I wish you a good rest of the morning, noon, or night depending on your time zone. - Me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.90.183 ( talk) 00:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I responded to your comment on Hasteur's talk page on DID and Tylas, but I don't think you saw it. You said you were going to read up on DID. Tylas withdrew from the DR on DID, saying that she wasn't going to edit the article any more and so the DR was closed with the finding that WP:MEDRS will henceforth be followed. Now that Tylas has announced that she is planning to return to editing DID. I'd like to present to you what I see as the problem.
I believe the lack of research into DID is due to the lack of any testable models (the inability to operationalize DID), the lack of reliable and valid assessment measures of DID, the lack of any agreement over the definition of crucial concepts like personality etc. How can even epidemiology be addressed if there is no reliability or validity in diagnosing?
I think there's not enough mainstream clinical interest to encourage research because most clinicians find other diagnoses that fit the symptoms presented by the patient. Clinicians become disinterested when there are no agreed upon definitions, as evidenced by the terminology in DSM-IVTR.
Although much of the ISSTD traumagenic model rests on Attachment theory where there's been quite a bit of research (e.g. Attachment theory in adult psychiatry. Part 1: Conceptualisations, measurement and clinical research findings), none of it appears to address DID for the reasons I give above I believe.
Please do read the DID article with MEDRS criteria in mind to come to your own determination.
Thanks for hearing me out. Best wishes, MathewTownsend ( talk) 21:18, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Cookies! | ||
16912 Rhiannon has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks so much for your help with the Laura Mercier and Gurwitch articles! 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 00:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC) To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
This new user [23] is an apparent sock of the account you blocked here [24], and is making similar edits. Something must be done. Qworty ( talk) 04:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I was going to ask your permission about mass deletion requests on channel lineups, like List of channels on Sky and List of Dish Network channels (United States). However, I realize the heavy amount of channel lineups. Therefore, I've discussed this in WP:village pump (policy). I need strategies and plans first. -- George Ho ( talk) 09:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Life is too short for me to spend the remainder of my afternoon dealing with the arcana of a "Categories for discussion" nomination, but I had to share this with someone, and I imagine that your page is well-watched by those who will appreciate it. I just saw this: Category:Fictional characters with superhuman strength.
This should, of course, be distinguished carefully from Category:Non-fictional characters with superhuman strength or Category:Real people with superhuman strength … Cynwolfe ( talk) 17:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up User talk:NinaGreen. I just noticed that a barnstar was added to the user page, but it looks a bit odd with the ugly tag on User:NinaGreen. I would remove it myself but I don't know the protocol and don't want to stir up any issues when what's required is a drama-free return. Assuming it's appropriate, would you mind removing the tag? Thanks. Johnuniq ( talk) 11:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up the threat on my userpage.
SassyLilNugget (
talk) 14:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Awww, cute! -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 15:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
As you are the blocking admin concerning User:Penyulap, I think it it appropriate to inform you concerning a current situation, and that I have asked arbcom to review/act concerning this situation. - jc37 03:23, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
You need to let this drop I think. I didn't protect that talkpage when I removed Penyulap's access because there didn't seem to be any need to, and if I'd seen Bishonen's email (which I didn't due to technical problems) I would probably have unprotected. And if I may say, your response to her email was simply appalling. Not only was it perfectly reasonable to email (given that it was in response to correspondence with Penyulap, and the fact of the correspondence as well as the content might reasonably be considered private), but your reasons for refusing to respond to the enquiry are frankly wretched, and do nothing to enhance a collegial atmosphere on the project. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 14:57, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
What reverts are you talking about?
I haven't done anything in some time. If you're going to get on a horse and drag me somewhere, at least be clear in what you're referencing, and look at the rest of my Talk page, because I'm almost 100% certain other people beat you to it in notifying me of whatever you were talking about. -- Avanu ( talk) 20:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I hate bigots. I hate the people which think mainly about their position, but pretend to defend the Community and the Great Justice. Now, you know who am I and why I participate in flamewars. Only a user who is not worse than me, himself, has the right to say me that I'm bad. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 21:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Elen, a few days ago you archived this thread. You stated: "I'd have started with him, and I still will if he returns in the same style." Today Bali Ultimate returned in the same style. this edit: "I'm saying that a large part of your mission on Wikipedia is to spread hate. I'm saying the same thing about No More Mr. Nice Guy." Thanks. 71.198.248.236 ( talk) 02:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
You seem to have become less engaged at the talk page. Any particular reason for this? Just curious. -- Rick Block ( talk) 03:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
1 week block hasn't changed a thing. See here, where he removes a comment with an edit summary calling the editor "run along you anonymous, no-ethics, propagandizing, game-playing jerk -- go tell teacher" and reiterates here his claim about "propagandists without ethics" controlling the article. That's besides the personal attacks he gave towards you, the blocking admin. -- Jethro B 20:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
In the NH mess yesterday, this was an interesting point. I'm always up for being picked up on things I've got wrong as a Wikipedian. I'd be pleased if you'd take a look at the diff I OSd and lmk if you'd have handled it differently? -- Dweller ( talk) 09:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Cheers, -- Dweller ( talk) 13:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
I will also point out you have your username and your ip address up on your page, you IP page shows that this is registered to The Answer Group, and you want to cry Outing ? Dude, it's just not happening. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 17:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC) PS: You have a real name now, why are you still using your IP ? KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 17:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
3 edit conflicts in three different places about the same subject... we should have just done rock scissors paper. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 16:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Elen, did you study the edit history of that article before making that block? If you had, I think it would have been obvious to you that certain editors are using the article to make Israel-related Arab culture look as stupid as possible. It's the most blatently racist editing that I've seen in awhile. Dan has been calling them out on it, and instead of supporting him, you block him! Wikipedia has a problem with overly-POV editors in the Israel-Palestine topic area. I know WP administrators don't like making block decisions on NPOV grounds, but the administrators who do so, and do so correctly, are the ones who are really helping Wikipedia. Cla68 ( talk) 16:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Cla68, how does posting hate speech rants help the situation that you describe. Bali isn't actually achieving anything by his carry on, you do realise that. If what you describe is going on, you need to be a little bit cleverer. I am not sympathetic to misuse of sources to further a POV for instance - providing evidence that this is going on is likely to have considerably more impact that futile railing on talkpages. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 17:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Any chance of closing the SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dualus. I notice that Cupco was blocked but no notice of that there or at User talk:Cupco. Or was that going to be your next step? Apteva ( talk) 02:00, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Maractus is an ED admin (as is Michaeldsuarez who's running a sockpuppet investigation about Dualus on meta) ioand a GNAA associate Meepsheep. He's usually globally blocked on WMF projects on sight. He also owns the domain maract.us under a pseudonym. Cupco has had dozens of previous accounts blocked, including Selery and Nrcprm2026. He doesn't like the GNAA. Meepsheep is happy he's won this battle. Notice his edits 15 minutes apart on enwiki and ED.
References:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Michaeldsuarez/Sockpuppetry#.40Elen_of_the_Roads
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FDualus&diff=515989268&oldid=515921033
encyclopediadramatica.se/index.php?title=Gay_Nigger_Association_of_America&diff=prev&oldid=430950
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global/2011-06#Global_lock_for_Meepsheep
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=meepsheep+%22maract.us%22&hl=en&prmd=ivns&filter=0
http://bgp.he.net/dns/maract.us#_whois
2605:6F00:877:0:0:0:B505:DCE6 (
talk) 04:40, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
You said elsewhere, "my talkpage is infested with socks at the moment". It's not just your talk page, All Wikimedia Foundation projects are infested with "socks". Until there is a fundamental change in how the projects are governed, it will likely stay that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6F00:877:0:0:0:B505:DCE6 ( talk) 02:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Is Special:Contributions/199.101.61.190 really an innocent editor from Manitoba not connected with any of the profi trolls? Tijfo098 ( talk) 01:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Maractus talk 00:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, this [38] is from a user name page that was moved as part of a user name change. I think the page should exist as a redirect or maybe it should be deleted under housekeeping? -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
~ Adjwilley ( talk) 17:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
You've got mail, already. To the other address. Bishonen | talk 12:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC).
Special:Contributions/146.90.43.8. It should probably be blocked per WP:SCRUTINY. Tijfo098 ( talk) 18:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Please let us know how to proceed. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 00:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
As he obviously wishs his real name no longer used should [39] this also be removed? Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This person threatened to have me blocked for removing channel lineups in Royal Cable and Cignal Digital TV. However, look at Cablelink ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Cable Star Iloilo ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and Global Destiny Cable ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). They are fully protected because probably the same IP user makes reverts and then another user begins to agree with me. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
...for talking sense at the loopy business about Malleus. Dunno whether it'll do much good. My workplace is political...in the formal sense of that word, and really, Malleus just doesn't rate as uncivil on real-world scales. Anyway, just thought I'd say. Don't want to see good people like yourself spinning out of here like User:Black Kite, presumably because the turkeys finally get 'em down. :-) hamiltonstone ( talk) 11:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
The situation with Malleus isn't just about bad words where he may say something like that's bullshit or what a bunch of crap...he's calling people twats, cunts and assholes...that is simply unacceptable. I would expect to be blocked from editing if I were to do that and no amount of GA's, FA's and other positive contributions gives him the right to not follow our NPA and Civility policies and guidelines. I don't think he has never been a Wikipedian, but I do think that if he has decided the rules don't apply to him, then he no longer wishes to be part of the community....the community where some semblence of common decency and mutual respect is mandatory for its continued well being.-- MONGO 16:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Examples outside Rfa's...how many examples of threats, intimidation and personal attacks do you want....a small sample from the past 30 days in areas outside Rfa. Multiply this by 6 at least if we examined the last 6 months...
-- MONGO 17:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen - could you please link me to, or tell me, exactly which accounts Arbcom status are expiring this year, thanks - Youreally can 17:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Elen, I do not work with spi, but I have noticed a similarity between the style, nature, and marginal notability of articles worked on by this user and those of this blocked user banned after a rather complicated spi you handled. Perhaps you can follow up for me. DGG ( talk ) 09:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
And if you want a case of socks trolling each other, try this. Tijfo098 ( talk) 15:00, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
I don't for one minute think that you were accusing me of bullying, [40] but others might. My view on bullying is very simple, and one that has caused me some problems here on Wikipedia: don't turn the other cheek, don't go pleading to "authority" in the expectation of "justice", just get stuck in and sort it out. Bullies are only allowed to be bullies because nobody has the courage to confront them. At junior school I was the anti-bully if you will. I'd batter anyone I saw picking on some kid, and nobody ever tried to bully me.
Now I come to think of it they did try. I remember one day that Tommy Findlay was pushed by his gang to challenge me to a fight after school (does that kind of thing still happen?). He was a little scrap of a thing, any boxing board of control would have ruled the fight illegal, and luckily he had the good sense to scarper before I arrived, But that's a story best kept for my memoirs. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 18:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi there.
How can I get an SPI I opened closed? I'm now of the opinion that it was a misunderstanding - over-enthusiasm on my part, and lack of experience on the other two editors parts.
Don't want to waste anybody elses time with it when there's no need.
Thanks. Chaheel Riens ( talk) 10:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
In the hall of fame: [41]. :-) Tijfo098 ( talk) 09:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
I have placed the unblock request of DownRightMighty ( talk · contribs) on hold because:
Please review the unblock request and respond. Thanks! ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:18, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Oh by the way, we generally allow logged in editors to edit from proxies (or we should do).
Rich
Farmbrough, 02:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC).
The Distinguished Podstar | ||
For what is possibly the finest sentence composed on wiki this year: "What he reacts badly to is being 'handled' by 'the management' (as he perceives it) - this is much, much less of a problem for the encyclopaedia than civil POV pushers skewing articles by eliminating their more forthright correctors, spammers, advertisers, political censors, sly vandals, Randy in Boise and anything that affects the continued creation and maintenance of accurate content." -- RexxS ( talk) 13:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC) |
Elen of the Roads, you've confirmed the IP range and this editor has three times trolled on arbcom pages, now in this farce of Cla68 If you can give some explanation of why he came to edit Grunsky matrix as Ansatz ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) did, that would be a start. 99% of the edits are by me: the article is a specialist article created by on geometric function theory. Please explain. He has trolled in the past about five times in Ferhago's 2012 request for amendment, with as far as I remeber four different accounts. Why exactly do you think it might not be him? Mathsci ( talk) 20:56, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for keeping an open mind on this issue. Spar-stangled ( talk) 21:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Elen, please see my comment about this on RFAR. If you feel there is any impropriety in me commenting in this section, feel free to take the discussion with me to my talk page or to the arbitration request.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 00:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
you've got what you want, sod off
|
---|
We still haven't got to the bottom of why you blocked Pen.
Rich
Farmbrough, 23:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC).
In A Child of the Jago the typical response to an unwanted request to borrow a pan was along the lines of "I haven't go one, I'm using it, I already leant it out and what's more it's at the menders." To a large extent your prevarication here is beginning to create the same impression. You said
These all look now like red-herrings. Meanwhile 2 months have elapsed. Having a good turn of phrase, and using humour makes you a very personable editor and admin, however at some point you have to actually engage your brain and moral compass. I believe it is quite likely that Pen will not request an unblock, and may never even use his talk page - and even that that might not be a bad thing. Nor do I delude myself that were Pen to request an unblock, and be unblocked there is not a significant chance that he would be reblocked at soem later date. Nonetheless there is a moral and pragmatic imperative to stick to one's word, regardless of the other good reasons. This is not just about Pen. For example I trusted you to stick to your word and you have let me down - and wasted a lot of my time. Possibly Bish and others were expecting you to keep to what you said too. This sort of thing is not conducive to a good working environment. Please now, without any further delay, do what you said you would, and restore Pen's talk page access. All the best,
Rich
Farmbrough, 02:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC).
Elen, I apologize for stirring the pot. What I observed is two editors I respect (RF and yourself) apparently stuck in an interaction that neither of you seemed to be enjoying and appared to have a straightforward solution. I used the existing rope essay as shorthand for the concept that unblocks are cheap and no lasting harm to Wikipedia would occur if it turned out not to work. I believe Bish does have a valid point about the etymology of the phrase being sketchy; unfortunately WP:UNBLOCKS ARE CHEAP is redlinked and I don't have wikitime to write it today. Nobody Ent 16:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
--- |
You marked this SPI as checked: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Logical_1 but no check was done. IRWolfie- ( talk) 01:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Obvious puns given the last two edits of Special:Contributions/63.3.19.129. Tijfo098 ( talk) 00:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Since Special:Contributions/Miufus turned out to be a sock of a more established editor ( User: LlamaAl); perhaps Special:Contributions/I_remember_halloween should be investigated as well. Tijfo098 ( talk) 00:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
By the way, LlamaAl put a WP:LITTLEBROTHER defense here. Tijfo098 ( talk) 01:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
[51] Bali/Dan is back at calling people "anonymous propagandists," despite having been blocked before by you for continued personal attacks. Are you allowed to handle it, or should I take it to ANI (some threads on your talk page discuss Bali if you want to refresh on it)? -- Jethro B 04:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
For spotting the latest Sock of User:A Nobody. Mt king (edits) 08:01, 1 November 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Elen, you placed this SPI on hold. I haven't found any documentation on exactly what that signifies and I was just checking up because I didn't know if on hold meant a couple hours and you forgot or a couple days and it's still on hold. There's obviously no rush. Ryan Vesey 17:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Elen. I'm alarmed by the proliferation of GA reviews that don't result in good articles. It makes us look stupid. So I'm asking a couple of admins where I should go to open a discussion of this. It seems to be a largely rogue process. Cynwolfe ( talk) 11:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Bish, Elen, Rich: I've been trying to work out in my head how to say this, hoping to formulate something especially enlightened, pithy, succinct or compelling. Having crossed paths with all of you all overs the years, I've developed appreciation and respect for your efforts here. Seeing this develop has been like watching the beginning of a car crash: you see it develop, you know it's going to be bad, and there doesn't seem like there's a damn thing you can do to stop it. The best I've come up with is:
You're all acting like idiots, please stop.
I don't see specific enumeration, or relative ranking of your recent missteps, as a useful exercise. Penyulap was blocked by Coren back in July, followin an ANI discussion, so the good or bad of the block is on him. Whether or not Penyulap's talk page access is enabled isn't really significant to Wikpedia - the Encyclopedia. It's not that important, and certainly not important enough for ya'll to be at each other's throats. You all are hereby banned by the Ent from interacting with each other for a week or so, or until your brains return to their usually rational state. This ban will not be enforced by blocks, threats or noticeboard dramas, but rather (hopefully) by their being enough sanity in your respective brains to see the wisdom in what a very old Ent is sayin. Nobody Ent 15:16, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Mt king (edits) 00:20, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Mt king (edits) 00:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
I hope I'm following wikipedia policy on this. You are a checkuser right? My account is currently subject of a sockpuppet investigation. I was an immature idiot and my actions were stupid and rash. I apologise wholeheartedly for it. I'm setting up a new account mainly because I just want to put this all behind me. The other reason is Im personally fed up with the conduct of a number of editors including the editor who initiated the investigation, User:One Night In Hackney. He was right to initiate the investigation, I'm not criticising him/her for that. It's the editor's general manner on this site which I have a problem with. I'm making a clean start. I was a total idiot and I just want to move on from this. Exiledone ( talk) 21:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
"Technically Glic16 displays no similarities other than editing from the Irish Republic as the other socks do, but the quacking is loud and the technical evidence does not prevent him being a duck" - say what? I thought that addition to the case was pretty baseless but never got round to saying anything. All I saw was an editor with a very sparse contribution history editing mostly Ireland related topics, but nothing that screamed sock. As for the edit to Exildeone's userpage it was awarding a barnstar as they did to numerous other Irish editors around the same time. I'll admit I didn't look too carefully at their entire history since there was nothing obvious, so if I've missed something say so. But the OP didn't present much compelling evidence and you didn't mention any you'd uncovered, so I'm a bit baffled. 2 lines of K 303 23:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I'm not sure where the appropriate venue is to propose this, but I'd like to suggest that we consider imposing a temporary injunction on the Falun Gong namespace pending the outcome of the current ArbCom case. Perhaps something to the effect that editors should exercise caution with major or potentially contentious changes, and seek to discuss them on talk pages first? This seems consistent with the editing policy. Any advice on how to proceed? Homunculus ( duihua) 03:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. User:Turmerick, who you blocked in November, is asking for unblock. The first request, which I declined, was a bit of a rant against you, but the second one seems a bit calmer. Don't know if you might like to take a look and maybe comment? -- Boing! said Zebedee ( talk) 11:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
You are one of the bosses, so all I can do is ask what was "pointy, off-topic and/or non-evidenced" about my response to Prioryman's comments on Fae's real name that it was hatted. The first paragraph was dealing with Prioryman's speculating about another editor's motive, absent any evidence whatsoever, and the second was a summary of my view of what had happened, in contrast, I thought, to the much heavier weight to the events given by Prioryman, also absent evidence, though further commentary (but not evidence) is promised. As for Bali Ultimate's remarks, may I suggest that in such a setting as this case, points do need to be made, and sometimes underscored and that that is the point of much of the exercise? Bielle ( talk) 01:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, I emailed you with questions about OS policy. I would have preferred to post them in public so that others could benefit from the answers, but the questions use specific and recent examples that I think are best not shared in public. If you can think of a way to answer the questions publicly while obscuring enough of the details to keep the specific incidents from being traceable, please do so. Thanks, Pine ✉ 22:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
I'd like your opinion if you wouldn't mind.
I read through the AfD and the deleted history and so on. And on the surface this just looks like someone trying to reduce their web presence (or at least being written about by others). But I dunno. And I don't know what else, if anything, we at Wikipedia can do for the person at this point (regardless of whether we wish to or not). And I'm also scratching my head wondering "why me"? I was contacted out of the blue and don't recall ever being part of any related discussions. Is there something I'm missing here? - jc37 00:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
As the subject seems to be of your interest, you are an experienced editor, and know very well how to deal with uncivil summaries/comments in talks, your opinion and presence would be very appreciated in this, as yet, non-consensual and critical talk. Thanks, Excalibursword ( talk) 17:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
LouisPhilippeCharles ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
In the past you have been involved in a block/unblock procedure either on the sockmaster account of LouisPhilippeCharles or an account of one of the sockpuppets. Please see WP:ANI#LouisPhilippeCharles -- PBS ( talk) 20:30, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
I have read your comment at the bottom of the (opened?) (closed?) ANI. I have never seen this before. I have not seen where other editors have expressed a desire to re-open this particular ANI which, as you said, was the criteria for re-opening it. As I am sure you know, all of these editors know each other and are just seemingly making the rules up as they go along. I see the same editors as yesterday with one exception. One editor has just been given a new chance by the Arbitration Committee. You think they would feel lucky.
Of course I will abide, because I always abide by administrators instructions but I would like to continue with my comments there if other editors are also doing so. Is this allowed? Seems like Wiki is changing alot these days Elen. I do not know how you do it without going crazy but you do and I commend you for it. Mugginsx ( talk) 17:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen. I'm wondering if I might request some clarification on the operations of the workshop page for the FLG 2 ArbCom case. It seems to be growing rather unwieldy, and may benefit from some greater involvement by members of the arbitration committee to help keep things on track. Is that generally how these things work? Homunculus ( duihua) 22:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ellen. Are you sure about this? cairogang.com is used regularly on Wikipedia as a reliable source. RashersTierney ( talk) 14:49, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
We seem to have an issue with circular referencing at this article. I wonder would you mind re-visiting? RashersTierney ( talk) 18:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Please make AC aware of proposed urgent motion I have made on workshop page. SarekOfVulcan has moved the Perth article despite participating in the move review. Ncmvocalist ( talk) 16:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi - as the previous blocking user - please comment thanks-
Youreally
can 3:00 pm, Today (UTC−7
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Nangaphobia your comments as a CU familiar with the topic will be welcome.-- DBig Xray 07:15, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
What personal attacks are you talking about? What allegations are you talking about? I don't see any! I have requested declaration of COIs in accordance with WP:COI. -- Nenpog ( talk) 14:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
This is now at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Nenpog. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 01:33, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
It would have been a perfunctory deed for you to have told me if my answer to your question was right or wrong. I'll simply add it to the heap of wasted prose I have appended into this god forsaken hell hole of a place My76Strat ( talk) 22:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
( edit conflict)::In many ways you are right. The only thing I can say is I posted a comment to Edison under his. If something above was see addressed to him let alone two, this is the first I have heard of it. I know the names who spawned my desire to comment, and for sure it wasn't Edison. That's what took me out. I meant everything to Edison as a compliment and every-time I refreshed the page someone else was pissed about what I said to Edison. I suppose I'll have a look to see if I can see what you and the others saw, that wasn't there. My76Strat ( talk) 23:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Would you be willing to comment on this thread as a knowledgeable, neutral third party? The question is whether asking people commenting on an RFC explicitly to consider NPOV is appropriate or not. Thanks. -- Rick Block ( talk) 19:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I suspect you're not watching this page closely enough to have seen this, but here's an analogy that might be helpful in understanding why I think it's a POV issue. Imagine being asked what is NN for N=2 and being given the answer "2+2=4, so the answer is 4".
2+2=4 is a correct statement. It is actually related to what anyone would consider the correct answer in an intrinsic sort of way (it uses the unmentioned but "obvious" simplification that for N=2, N+N and N*N and NN are all identical). And, yes indeed, 4 is the correct (numeric) answer. But yet, as a matter of TRUTH or Truth, there's something not quite right about this answer.
Relating this to the MHP, the "simple" solutions presented by popular sources are saying (what at least some sources say is) the equivalent of 2+2=4. The "conditional" solutions presented by the vast majority of sources in the field of probability are saying the equivalent of (with no comment about "simple" solutions) NN is N*N*N... (N times), which for N=2 is N*N, so the answer is 2*2=4. The (smaller) number of sources criticizing the "simple" solutions are saying "simple" solutions are "correct, but ... shaky", or "misleading", or "incomplete", or "[don't] address the problem posed" or are [bluntly] "false" - and these sources demonstrate the issue by showing "simple" solutions fail if you use them to solve (the equivalent of) NN for some other value of N.
Martin is saying he wants the main "solution" section of the article to present "simple" solutions (those saying the equivalent of "2+2=4 is the answer") "with no disclaimers that they do not solve the right problem or are incomplete", and to include both the (conditional) solution typically presented in the field (showing the equivalent of NN for N=2 is N*N = 2*2 = 4) AND the criticism of the "simple" solutions (which show the equivalent of 2+2=4) in a later section "for experts only".
I'm saying this creates a structural POV.
The only TRUTH I'm interested in here is the Truth about what the sources say. Martin continues to argue that the sources critical of "simple" solutions aren't saying what they clearly say (IMO, from a standpoint of TRUTH, explicitly denying Truth). -- Rick Block ( talk) 06:08, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Up to now, obviously misinterpreting some source, sometimes just "the only one aspect" has been "read into" the statements of sources, although the source actually and effectively just confirms "the other aspect" as well. We need to deal very carefully with the sources, to avoid that the sense of source statements is not reproduced unilaterally, obviously misinterpreting the source.« – Please read again what the sources really say. Regards, Gerhardvalentin ( talk) 17:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I got my answer [3]. In Wikipedia terms, having your thesis marked does not constitute peer review, and having it placed in a database like this does not constitute publication in a peer reviewed journal. So until your material is published in a peer reviewed journal, I would not think it was appropriate to use in the article. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 01:09, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
I see you previously found that this account belonged to Factseducado. Well, the account has since become active including here: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/F%C3%A6/Workshop&diff=500047338&oldid=499976559.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 21:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi, would be you interested in delivering your impressions in DRV – E. being? They would be appreciated. Excalibursword ( talk) 03:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
the anti-indian comments/edits show (IV) is indeed Nangparbat, can u have a look ? DBig Xray 13:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I've started a project. Actually, I made the first edit is all and everyone else is doing all the real work so I can't take any credit, but I think you might find it interesting. It is barely two days old yet the enthusiasm is strong. There are a great number of reasons people leave Wikipedia, and I think that there is a broad consensus among us that this needs addressing on many fronts. If you get a chance, take a look. It is a motley crew of editors (my favorite kind of crew) with a lot of good ideas and a common goal of keeping good editors here. One of the things that was brought up was that only 9% of the editors here are women, which I find to be almost criminal. It is still very raw and new, but if you (or any of your wonderful talk page stalkers) were so inclined to join us, or just stop by from time to time and share your wisdom and ideas, it would be welcomed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Pine ✉ 09:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I get the feeling you need a treat right now, and nothing beats baklava and a good cup of tea. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks Dennis. I'm just about coming round, but definitely not firing on all cylinders yet.
Your name has come up here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Possible_interaction_ban_violation Nobody Ent 14:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
CU please:
Thank you. Bred Ivy ( talk) 23:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Dear Elen, may I ask for your opinion? Do the following sentences from Peter Tomsen, The Wars of Afghanistan, p. 565 (which can be checked here):
"Increasing numbers of Pashtun Taliban were secretly contacting him [anti-Taliban leader Abdul Haq] as Taliban popularity trended downward. In the late 1990s and 2000, Haq's home in Peshawar and the Karzai residence in Quetta became the main gathering sides for tribal elders, commanders ... dissatisfied with the Taliban."
verify the following line:
"Abdul Haq received increasing numbers of defecting Pashtun Taliban ..."
JCAla ( talk) 07:26, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
NewtonGeek ( talk) 01:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry to bother you with this question. I have the feeling that you may have pointed me in the right direction before but I failed to follow up on it. You evidently recall the case of the Hockey editor with an aversion to Czech surnames. There was something about a larger number of moves to "accent-less" titles, and creating and editing a large amount of redirects from diacritics, thereby preventing moves being reverted. Can you point me to the specific guideline about when it is not correct to edit a redirect from diacritics? Thanks. In ictu oculi ( talk) 10:09, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
NewtonGeek ( talk) 22:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I wonder if this is a technical computer glitch. I e-mailed you. NewtonGeek ( talk) 22:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Not having jumped in on Noetica's desysopping straw poll one way or the other doesn't necessarily mean the "community" agrees with him.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello Elen of the Roads.
I am submitting a request to the ArbCom.
I request you to refrain from intervening in this matter.
I think that the formal language for that is that I ask your recusal from this case.
I ask that because you have previously intervened in several stages which led to that request, and seemed to have already made up your mind about it, and you seem to have taken a side.
The knowledge you had while intervening was partial, because only now I present my view on the matter without reservations.
I think that your recusal would benefit the case, even if only to preserve the appearance of lack of prejudice, wherein by appearance of lack prejudice I mean the appearance that the case wasn't decided in advance with partial evidence, before all facts were presented. -- Nenpog ( talk) 15:30, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
There is a vote to close the Falung Gong 2 case which is not yet passing. Your votes could be decisive as there are one proposed finding of fact and three proposed remedies which do not currently pass due to missing arbitrator votes. Regards -- Alexandr Dmitri ( talk) 18:28, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I am bringing this to your attention since you recently blocked User:DriveByWire. I believe the User:Ochson is a sockpuppet of the same editor. User:Ochson recently created a thread at the ref desk forging my signature: [7] and erasing his own autosignature: [8]. This was after I reported him here [9] for editing another user's comments to change their meaning entirely. I have filed an ANI here: [10] but am hoping for your immediate help. Thanks. μηδείς ( talk) 23:24, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
You are listed as active at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Proposed decision. Is that accurate? The case is about to close, and your vote is the deciding vote on a number of proposals, but you have not voted on anything yet. Hipocrite ( talk) 17:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Just an FYI, dont hesitate about rangblocking Vodafone mobile IP's if the need should arise. I used to work on their (line) service management dept. They have total internal logging of when, where, who (if contract) is assigned an IP and at what time. So any interruption in their service to their customers they are more than willing and able to cut off the offenders if they should cause any problems for their other customers. They (in the UK and AUS) used to have constant issues with getting their ranges banned from various high-traffic sites due to the throwaway nature of their PAYG dongles, so they take any interruptions quite seriously. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 10:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :)! Callanecc ( talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 14:35, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I hope I'm not the only one who got the reference to Alice's Restaurant (i.e. circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back). And since I'm here, I'd like to take a moment to thank you for serving as an Arbitrator. I expect it's not a fun job and it's probably even worse than I can imagine. I'm thankful that you, and others, are willing to take on this task and serve the community in this way. It's much appreciated. Best regards. 64.40.57.60 ( talk) 08:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Dear elen of the Roads,
My name is Rajesh Mehta and I am the producer of a film titled DRAPCHI which you will find here.
The poster of this film needs to change immediately and replaced by another one.
I have no idea about how one does this..A friend had uploaded the new version a few weeks ago but again an old one has cropped up.I need to get rid of this and replace it with another file.can you help me please?
My email ID is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.251.89 ( talk) 18:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you please tell me why the Wikipedia page Sand is locked? I cannot imagine sand being a hot button issue and causing problems. I would like to correct something in the article because it is locked. When will it be unlocked? Thank you.-- 74.240.238.238 ( talk) 18:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
He's still got an IP free. I'm at 3 reverts on the page, if you would kindly help. Thank you. Ian.thomson ( talk) 16:29, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you are set to be mentioned in this week's Arbitration Report ( link). The report aims to inform readers of The Signpost about the proceedings of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the draft article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them on the talkpage (transcluded in the Comments section directly below the main body of text), where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievous factual errors (making sure to note such changes in the comments section). Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot ( talk) 00:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello! I would like to kindly ask You for help and to use the oversight feature... One of the contributors keeps posting my personal information and legal threats in [ [11]] (Life on earth External link section). The reason of this behavior is quite simple - I have deleted (in good faith) link to his page from External links in the article (to prevent people suffering from cancer from purchasing a device that is sold as "curing cancer and normalizing ones body aura"). More contributors agree with me and the user in question starts to use personal attacks and revert their edits too. Thanks for any help/response. Panszpik ( talk) 14:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Panszpik, if there are edits that need suppressing, can you either Use this form if you have a Wikipedia account with Wikipedia email enabled ( click here to enable account email); or use your normal email and write to oversight-en-wpwikipedia.org. Please supply diffs - I can't see where he is posting information about you. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 15:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I just mentioned you in a proposal I made regarding an editor blocked for sockpuppetry. After I did so, I realized I probably shouldn't go throwing your name around, even in a complimentary fashion, without alerting you. The discussion is here (collapsed in the drawer). It refers to this now-archived SPI. Cynwolfe ( talk) 16:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
egits? What's an egit? Nobody Ent 23:13, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, sorry for coming directly but I have a concern about TDA's sudden involvement inthe Men's Rights issue, expressed here. I'll note that TDA has also started commenting on Talk:Feminism an article I have significantly contributed too. Given that it was clearly expressed that a) KC did nothing wrong and b) that any further moves should go to Move Review and c) this looks a bit like hounding (especially in light of this [12]). If this is an AE or ANi matter I'll go there but would like some input. I'm going to contact PhilKnight and SirFozzie directly to. If I'm overreacting I'm more than happy to redact and AGF-- Cailil talk 12:18, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Not sure how you meant to change Penyulap's block settings, as your comment ("reinstating talk page access") is in, err, dynamic tension with your action ("cannot edit own talk page"). Bishonen | talk 20:36, 24 August 2012 (UTC).
@Nobody Ent. That's not the flaw. The flaw is that if we were under attack from an interstellar ant colony, I do not believe that the "Government of Earth" would need to employ the bizarre strategy of training children in secret to carry out the attack on the ants' homeworld, not knowing what they were doing, because no adult could be persuaded to carry out genocide. I think they would find plenty of willing and able adult volunteers who would have no problem with bombing the shit out of the Buggers, and I have no doubt they could spin it to the general public. In this respect, Starship Troopers is way more accurate than Ender's Game. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 15:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Elen I prefer no dialogue with you. I've found your comments unhelpful, grating, unfair, condescending. Can you possibly go back to leaving me be? I certainly haven't initiated anything with you. Thank you. Ihardlythinkso ( talk) 04:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately, since all we have is words typed into an edit box, all we have to go on is the words. It may seem nitpicky to you, but man, you're reaction here really illustrates what Dennis and I are saying. " nit-pick with over-generalized criticisms" doesn't even make sense. Nit-picking is very specific. If either Dennis or I have made an observation about your editing - and it is only about your editing, neither of us know you in real life - it is specifically based on things we have seen in your editing. It's not generalised at all. This conversation is an exact example of what you do - any attempt to make any comment about your edits is met with these increasing walls of text insisting that you are being wronged and attacked. That's why I keep telling you to just read your own edits, and try to imagine they are made by a third party you are in dialogue with. How would you react to them? How would you prefer the other party to react if you had pointed out that (for instance) their source didn't meet the reliable source requirements. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 20:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure I understand why Penyulap's talk page required full protection. I was inclined to leave a comment but feel the matter has now spilled over to require user's like myself to bear the brunt of an unsupportable action. What have you prevented by disallowing my access and that of others? 76Strat String da Broke da ( talk) 14:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Savant syndrome is good background reading, in this case. Savants are never easy to handle or deal with, but very well worth the effort. Pesky ( talk) 04:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Adding: I've been trying to come up with a kind of real-world parallel to get an idea across. Imagine a string of mountain peaks, with a person standing on each peak. You may not be able to get to where I am, but you can see me from where you are. I can't get to where Pen is, but I can see him from here, and you can't actually see him, but you know that I can. I can't see what he sees from where I am, but I trust that he can see more than I do, from where he is. Does that help? Or, if you have pets, maybe this one might be better: if I watch my dog air-scenting, I can't analyse or identify the scent she's caught on to, because I don't have her sense of smell. But I can see that she's picked up on something which I can't detect. Pesky ( talk) 05:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I have no doubt that eventually Wikipedia will die as a project in the future, but I also think that in the 25th Century (or whenever it becomes an issue) what everybody is working on today will very likely seed such future compendiums of human knowledge just like Wikipedia has been gifted from a great many other sources to make what we have today. That many people are using Wikipedia to spread human knowledge should be viewed as a good thing. Failure to attribute and plagiarism in violation of the terms of the Wikipedia licenses is bad form, but conforming to Wikipedia licenses are pretty easy to do (since you don't need formal written permission to copy). --Robert Horning (talk) 21:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to butt in here but I warned Dennis about Pen months ago - his acting out at one of the ppl who were helping him and bending over backwards for him is precisely the kind of behaviour that this project does not need. *If* this is a guy who has RL problems I have every sympathy for him but we and WP can't help him. If he can't play by the rules here we have no reason to spend further time on him. He lied about having more sockpuppets, and while there are multiple lines between legitimate sock accounts and illegitimates ones, lying is one of the brightlines.
Furthermore he was going on about
breaching experiments before being indef'd - that's what he's doing now (and had previously been doing). Wikipedia (what ever Pen's view of it) is an encylcopedia not a space for performance art, or a social network. IMHO his actions amount to
griefing and at this point it is time to treat the issue "with
extinction" until he gets the message, then the
standard offer applies. His talk page *not* being a forum/social network/blog etc is one of those things Pen needs to adjust to, and frankly the simplest one--
Cailil
talk 09:18, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
@Pesky, if you're blocked, you're blocked. It is you the person who is not to edit, not the particular account. So a blocked editor creating socks while still discussing their block is always going to get the hammer dropped on them. Particularly as - as Cailil says - these socks appear to be breaching experiments, which will get you blocked anyway. I'm sorry but Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a social networking project. If you guys want to chat to Penyulap, you'll need to find another venue. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 11:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humour | ||
For exposing the truth about local governments here. De728631 ( talk) 22:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC) |
LOL! Thanks :) -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 23:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Damn, someone beat me to it. @Elen, please elaborate on your methods.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 02:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Some things are best ignored. (Yes I do have better things to do than WP, but I'm taking a break from them cause they're kinda boring, actually). Nobody Ent 14:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, User talk:SinghIsKing123 has ignored your final warning, given yesterday. Please block this disruptive user. Thanks
Thanks so much - so very helpful. I realise I don't know much about how sock tracking works. Is it possible to geolocate registered accounts? I am sure this user has many socks but works through registered accounts so I can't tell without submitting info to the sock board. Can I prove that PrabhChatha is a sock of SinghIsKing123? He seems very active all over and very determined. Any advice would be welcome. All best wishes Span ( talk) 21:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
... could you take a look at this: [15]. I'm not sure what User:Zgoutreach is up to here, but if it is intended as an article, I think he/she is likely to be sorely disappointed per multiple policies, and if it isn't intended as an article, it doesn't belong there. I've had a bit of interaction with Zgoutreach at The Zeitgeist Movement (the name seems coincidence, rather than COI - see User talk:Zgoutreach), so perhaps it might be better for me not to get involved and someone with a little more tact (i.e. almost anyone, but you seem a prime example) may be more effective. Thanks. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 03:38, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
"If either of you can persuade Penyulap to stop creating sock accounts while blocked, they can have their talkpage access back to expound further on these fascinating topics."
“ | I would be happy to comply with any reasonable request. Am I being
asked not to create alternative accounts on commons and other wikipedias, and would you prefer I shut down the alternative accounts that I am now using on Japanese, Russian and German wikipedias as well ? |
” |
Hi Elen, I am sure you recall User:Godmadeit whom you blocked 21:48, 20 February 2012 for continuously replacing "same-sex" with "homosexual" in Census data of small Northern California towns. Well... Son of Godmadeit has arrived... User:Godmadeit101 just made the same type of dogmatic changes to Colusa, California and I reverted their changes. Thanking you again for all your help! Ellin Beltz ( talk) 00:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Ezzayakoo ( talk) 00:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.
In this issue:
--The Olive Branch 19:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen, Somerled the Viking Slayer is not a POV fork. It relates to a different person. 'Somerled' apparently refers to a Viking ancestor and does not refer to Somerled the Viking Slayer. Somerled the Viking Slayer is a historical Pictic leader with an extensive recorded lineage. Thank you for your contribution.
Moidart ( talk) 06:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Just in case you took her page off your watchlist, about 1 month after her 1 year block expired, User:Neptunekh2 is back to editing (if you've forgotten, see [18] and [19]). And already making very specific, and some might argue overly specific, categories. Right now it's just barely w/in reason, but I see that some of her edits have already been reverted. Sigh--she so clearly wants to be here, and clearly wants to help in her own way. I wish there was some way to channel that energy and desire productively. Qwyrxian ( talk) 09:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I seem to think that there was a policy or guideline on privacy of non-notable individuals on Wikipedia articles, but I can't seem to locate it. Do you happen to know where it is, or if ti's just my imagination? MSJapan ( talk) 00:39, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Minor correction: the MHP was originally presented in a pair of letters to the American Statistician. It didn't turn up in Parade magazine until 15 years later, by which time it was already a fairly standard example used in intro probability courses of counterintuitive conditional probability. The notion that it was "originally" a parlor teaser and later hijacked by math types is completely inverted. It was originated by math types and later hijacked as a parlor teaser by vos Savant. -- Rick Block ( talk) 04:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't know the admin involved, nor do I frequent the articles, but your comment below, struck a chord with me: "Its the sort of problem that you'd deal with in the workplace by pulling the guy out for some retraining". I agree that it wouldn't end in sacking or demoting. But more accurately, I'd characterise it as follows: "Its the sort of problem that you'd deal with in the workplace by getting the manager to tick him off". The best parallel we have is Arbcom admonishing/warning the user. What's to be lost in trying that? If he truly doesn't get it, you can desysop in a couple of weeks when he steps over the line again. If he does get it, you retain a motivated, productive admin, who's had a wake-up call. -- Dweller ( talk) 14:00, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
He can't help what other people post on his talk page. If he showed himself willing to listen now, do you think it'd make a difference? I hate losing good people. -- Dweller ( talk) 15:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
I sure don't see any arb brutality , and apologize if I gave that impression. I guess I don't see that there is only one solution, and that, the most severe when we have an editor with this kind of contribution record and who's admin mis actions are a handful. I wonder about AGF and a probation period with even one strike after that and he's out (desysop), no questions asked. If he can't or won't comment I'd also assume good faith and say fine with a comment and explanation maybe this could pass, but with out, a probation period and a falling ax for the same mistake. I'm no arb of course who has to actually deal with the problem rather than talk about it so its easy for me to sit here and cough up solutions. Thanks for your response and hearing me out.( olive ( talk) 19:30, 7 September 2012 (UTC))
I've been offwiki (usually am, Sat-Mon) but if you think there's a point in doing so, I'd be happy to try having a chat with him. Lmk. -- Dweller ( talk) 20:32, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
"you were crying over desysoping Kwami, and the time before that you were crying over desysoping Rich Farmbrough, " Elen - that is an incredibly childish way to describe Kumioko's legitimate concerns. In fact I have told children off for using that sort of language.
Rich
Farmbrough, 16:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC).
Thank you for taking the hit to your wiki-productivity in terms of the "Dammed if you do, Dammed if you don't" drama cycle Hasteur ( talk) 19:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jean-no and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Art4em. They are connected to a recent ANI thread. I see that this year ArbCom is more often stepping into such cases where parties involved in external conflicts carry it on Wikipedia, even without a formal request for a case. Maybe the participants who refused to confirm or deny their connections to the matter on-wiki will do so by email with you guys. Also, I think that some statements on ANI deserve some scrutiny vis-a-vis of WP:BLP as well, as they go beyond even what was published in the blogosphere. Finally, perhaps you could point me to ArbCom's current most recent ruling on how accounts hard to distinguish one from another should be evaluated in disputes; wikieons ago, ArbCom issued this. (I didn't know that "account" was an uncountable noun, although perhaps in that case it was so.) Tijfo098 ( talk) 08:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Does Special:Contributions/79.249.117.2 ring a bell? It doesn't like LG Williams so it might be a Qiwi sock. Tijfo098 ( talk) 18:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm curious. Are you suggesting that there is a 'cosmetics cabal' amongst our Lords (and Ladies) Protectors? Or do they convene for weekly cabal conferences in Rõuge, Estonia? [20] AndyTheGrump ( talk) 18:30, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Sigh. I was hoping that Glkanter had decided to move on with his life, but here he is again: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Monty_Hall_problem&diff=prev&oldid=511947018 -- Guy Macon ( talk) 02:20, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Hey Elen of the Roads, just wanted to let you know I've replied over at Silverseren's Talk page. Would love to get your feedback on updated LMC and Gurwitch drafts. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 16:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Hasteur ( talk) 23:26, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
You obviously have never heard of AGF. Perhaps you would like to read it before commenting on my motives and saying that I "deliberately" did something! That was not the case and that was not an edit war! Camelbinky ( talk) 00:19, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
(Note to self. Pertains to [21] - responses there -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 22:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC))
Elen, I was struck by something you said at ANI.
Some editors I respect (SandyGeorgia) are decidedly not fans of infoboxes. I don't go that far, as I find them useful, but I agree they can be abused. For example, a nuanced discussion of some issue might be perfectly appropriate in the main text, yet cannot be adequately summarized into a single word.
I have an item on my To-do list to see if the community would be willing to debate the use of infoboxes, and consider whether non-objective entries should be allowed. The addition to the list was prompted by some heated discussions involving names of influences of economists.
Religion presents a different challenge, as it is inarguable in many cases. However, the case of Galloway aptly identifies a situation where the proper treatment is a NPOV paragraph, but such a paragraph is unlikely to result in a single word, so best to leave it blank in the infobox.
IOW, I agree with you, and if I ever find the time to bring it up, I'm warning you that I may quote you :).-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 17:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Banned editor commenting here and is mentioning you, you probably have it on your watch list but just thought I'd let you know. Mo ainm ~Talk 22:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Br'er Rabbi has taught your kitten to bite you shrewdly on the ass. Hopefully that has made your day better. Kittens are cute and have very sharp teeth! Spread the goodness of kittens by giving someone else a bitey kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
I was just thinking of you because I saw an appeal that may get sent up to BASC. I'm preparing a cup of tea with some headache medicine in case you need it. I don't know how you keep your sanity with all the stuff that appears on your talk page. Pine ✉ 05:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC) |
Just checking to see if you have any other feedback on the drafts. 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 21:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Over at Talk:Monty Hall problem#Conditional or Simple solutions for the Monty Hall problem? I assigned Neither to your comments. If this is incorrect, please indicate "Proposal #1", "Proposal #2", or "Abstain". Thanks! -- Guy Macon ( talk) 20:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
The Gurwitch Products and Laura Mercier drafts look ready to go, in my opinion. Can you perform the histmerges? Silver seren C 00:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi, This comment is a gross exaggeration and nearly ad hominem attack. I have never argued for a 4 paragraph exposition of the problem or that a "correct" solution needs three screens of math to set out the answer. If it was up to me, the "Solution" section would look pretty much like User:Rick Block/MH solution. The entire text fits on one screen. The figures make it slop over to two screens, but I think the "extra" space is worthwhile. -- Rick Block ( talk) 16:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
My recent change on the "straight inc. article was removed by you. It was removed on grounds of lack of source material, I specifically choose not to include a source because the majority of sources for information on that article involve horrific recounts of mental, physical, and emotional abuse of minors by the rehabilitation facility in question, as such I did not feel it appropriate to subject others to such articles through Wikipedia. However if it is necessary to provide examples I will, please see for examples of my edit and why it is justified, should you see fit please restore the edit: http://www.survivingstraightincthemovie.com/ http://survivingstraightinc.com/cincinnatioh_survivor_stories With respect -Me http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xDpvsLIKF0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.90.183 ( talk) 23:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
If accounts from hundreds of children and teens isn't enough I honestly do not know what would be, but you are the editor and You have the decision so I will not argue, I wish you a good rest of the morning, noon, or night depending on your time zone. - Me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.90.183 ( talk) 00:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I responded to your comment on Hasteur's talk page on DID and Tylas, but I don't think you saw it. You said you were going to read up on DID. Tylas withdrew from the DR on DID, saying that she wasn't going to edit the article any more and so the DR was closed with the finding that WP:MEDRS will henceforth be followed. Now that Tylas has announced that she is planning to return to editing DID. I'd like to present to you what I see as the problem.
I believe the lack of research into DID is due to the lack of any testable models (the inability to operationalize DID), the lack of reliable and valid assessment measures of DID, the lack of any agreement over the definition of crucial concepts like personality etc. How can even epidemiology be addressed if there is no reliability or validity in diagnosing?
I think there's not enough mainstream clinical interest to encourage research because most clinicians find other diagnoses that fit the symptoms presented by the patient. Clinicians become disinterested when there are no agreed upon definitions, as evidenced by the terminology in DSM-IVTR.
Although much of the ISSTD traumagenic model rests on Attachment theory where there's been quite a bit of research (e.g. Attachment theory in adult psychiatry. Part 1: Conceptualisations, measurement and clinical research findings), none of it appears to address DID for the reasons I give above I believe.
Please do read the DID article with MEDRS criteria in mind to come to your own determination.
Thanks for hearing me out. Best wishes, MathewTownsend ( talk) 21:18, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Cookies! | ||
16912 Rhiannon has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks so much for your help with the Laura Mercier and Gurwitch articles! 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 00:16, 24 September 2012 (UTC) To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
This new user [23] is an apparent sock of the account you blocked here [24], and is making similar edits. Something must be done. Qworty ( talk) 04:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I was going to ask your permission about mass deletion requests on channel lineups, like List of channels on Sky and List of Dish Network channels (United States). However, I realize the heavy amount of channel lineups. Therefore, I've discussed this in WP:village pump (policy). I need strategies and plans first. -- George Ho ( talk) 09:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Life is too short for me to spend the remainder of my afternoon dealing with the arcana of a "Categories for discussion" nomination, but I had to share this with someone, and I imagine that your page is well-watched by those who will appreciate it. I just saw this: Category:Fictional characters with superhuman strength.
This should, of course, be distinguished carefully from Category:Non-fictional characters with superhuman strength or Category:Real people with superhuman strength … Cynwolfe ( talk) 17:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up User talk:NinaGreen. I just noticed that a barnstar was added to the user page, but it looks a bit odd with the ugly tag on User:NinaGreen. I would remove it myself but I don't know the protocol and don't want to stir up any issues when what's required is a drama-free return. Assuming it's appropriate, would you mind removing the tag? Thanks. Johnuniq ( talk) 11:42, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up the threat on my userpage.
SassyLilNugget (
talk) 14:47, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Awww, cute! -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 15:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
As you are the blocking admin concerning User:Penyulap, I think it it appropriate to inform you concerning a current situation, and that I have asked arbcom to review/act concerning this situation. - jc37 03:23, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
You need to let this drop I think. I didn't protect that talkpage when I removed Penyulap's access because there didn't seem to be any need to, and if I'd seen Bishonen's email (which I didn't due to technical problems) I would probably have unprotected. And if I may say, your response to her email was simply appalling. Not only was it perfectly reasonable to email (given that it was in response to correspondence with Penyulap, and the fact of the correspondence as well as the content might reasonably be considered private), but your reasons for refusing to respond to the enquiry are frankly wretched, and do nothing to enhance a collegial atmosphere on the project. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 14:57, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
What reverts are you talking about?
I haven't done anything in some time. If you're going to get on a horse and drag me somewhere, at least be clear in what you're referencing, and look at the rest of my Talk page, because I'm almost 100% certain other people beat you to it in notifying me of whatever you were talking about. -- Avanu ( talk) 20:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I hate bigots. I hate the people which think mainly about their position, but pretend to defend the Community and the Great Justice. Now, you know who am I and why I participate in flamewars. Only a user who is not worse than me, himself, has the right to say me that I'm bad. Incnis Mrsi ( talk) 21:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Elen, a few days ago you archived this thread. You stated: "I'd have started with him, and I still will if he returns in the same style." Today Bali Ultimate returned in the same style. this edit: "I'm saying that a large part of your mission on Wikipedia is to spread hate. I'm saying the same thing about No More Mr. Nice Guy." Thanks. 71.198.248.236 ( talk) 02:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
You seem to have become less engaged at the talk page. Any particular reason for this? Just curious. -- Rick Block ( talk) 03:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
1 week block hasn't changed a thing. See here, where he removes a comment with an edit summary calling the editor "run along you anonymous, no-ethics, propagandizing, game-playing jerk -- go tell teacher" and reiterates here his claim about "propagandists without ethics" controlling the article. That's besides the personal attacks he gave towards you, the blocking admin. -- Jethro B 20:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
In the NH mess yesterday, this was an interesting point. I'm always up for being picked up on things I've got wrong as a Wikipedian. I'd be pleased if you'd take a look at the diff I OSd and lmk if you'd have handled it differently? -- Dweller ( talk) 09:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Cheers, -- Dweller ( talk) 13:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
I will also point out you have your username and your ip address up on your page, you IP page shows that this is registered to The Answer Group, and you want to cry Outing ? Dude, it's just not happening. KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 17:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC) PS: You have a real name now, why are you still using your IP ? KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh ... 17:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
3 edit conflicts in three different places about the same subject... we should have just done rock scissors paper. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 16:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Elen, did you study the edit history of that article before making that block? If you had, I think it would have been obvious to you that certain editors are using the article to make Israel-related Arab culture look as stupid as possible. It's the most blatently racist editing that I've seen in awhile. Dan has been calling them out on it, and instead of supporting him, you block him! Wikipedia has a problem with overly-POV editors in the Israel-Palestine topic area. I know WP administrators don't like making block decisions on NPOV grounds, but the administrators who do so, and do so correctly, are the ones who are really helping Wikipedia. Cla68 ( talk) 16:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Cla68, how does posting hate speech rants help the situation that you describe. Bali isn't actually achieving anything by his carry on, you do realise that. If what you describe is going on, you need to be a little bit cleverer. I am not sympathetic to misuse of sources to further a POV for instance - providing evidence that this is going on is likely to have considerably more impact that futile railing on talkpages. Elen of the Roads ( talk) 17:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Any chance of closing the SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dualus. I notice that Cupco was blocked but no notice of that there or at User talk:Cupco. Or was that going to be your next step? Apteva ( talk) 02:00, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Maractus is an ED admin (as is Michaeldsuarez who's running a sockpuppet investigation about Dualus on meta) ioand a GNAA associate Meepsheep. He's usually globally blocked on WMF projects on sight. He also owns the domain maract.us under a pseudonym. Cupco has had dozens of previous accounts blocked, including Selery and Nrcprm2026. He doesn't like the GNAA. Meepsheep is happy he's won this battle. Notice his edits 15 minutes apart on enwiki and ED.
References:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Michaeldsuarez/Sockpuppetry#.40Elen_of_the_Roads
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia%3ASockpuppet_investigations%2FDualus&diff=515989268&oldid=515921033
encyclopediadramatica.se/index.php?title=Gay_Nigger_Association_of_America&diff=prev&oldid=430950
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global/2011-06#Global_lock_for_Meepsheep
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=meepsheep+%22maract.us%22&hl=en&prmd=ivns&filter=0
http://bgp.he.net/dns/maract.us#_whois
2605:6F00:877:0:0:0:B505:DCE6 (
talk) 04:40, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
You said elsewhere, "my talkpage is infested with socks at the moment". It's not just your talk page, All Wikimedia Foundation projects are infested with "socks". Until there is a fundamental change in how the projects are governed, it will likely stay that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6F00:877:0:0:0:B505:DCE6 ( talk) 02:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Is Special:Contributions/199.101.61.190 really an innocent editor from Manitoba not connected with any of the profi trolls? Tijfo098 ( talk) 01:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Maractus talk 00:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, this [38] is from a user name page that was moved as part of a user name change. I think the page should exist as a redirect or maybe it should be deleted under housekeeping? -- The Red Pen of Doom 21:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
~ Adjwilley ( talk) 17:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
You've got mail, already. To the other address. Bishonen | talk 12:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC).
Special:Contributions/146.90.43.8. It should probably be blocked per WP:SCRUTINY. Tijfo098 ( talk) 18:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Please let us know how to proceed. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 00:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
As he obviously wishs his real name no longer used should [39] this also be removed? Darkness Shines ( talk) 20:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This person threatened to have me blocked for removing channel lineups in Royal Cable and Cignal Digital TV. However, look at Cablelink ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Cable Star Iloilo ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and Global Destiny Cable ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). They are fully protected because probably the same IP user makes reverts and then another user begins to agree with me. -- George Ho ( talk) 05:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
...for talking sense at the loopy business about Malleus. Dunno whether it'll do much good. My workplace is political...in the formal sense of that word, and really, Malleus just doesn't rate as uncivil on real-world scales. Anyway, just thought I'd say. Don't want to see good people like yourself spinning out of here like User:Black Kite, presumably because the turkeys finally get 'em down. :-) hamiltonstone ( talk) 11:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
The situation with Malleus isn't just about bad words where he may say something like that's bullshit or what a bunch of crap...he's calling people twats, cunts and assholes...that is simply unacceptable. I would expect to be blocked from editing if I were to do that and no amount of GA's, FA's and other positive contributions gives him the right to not follow our NPA and Civility policies and guidelines. I don't think he has never been a Wikipedian, but I do think that if he has decided the rules don't apply to him, then he no longer wishes to be part of the community....the community where some semblence of common decency and mutual respect is mandatory for its continued well being.-- MONGO 16:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Examples outside Rfa's...how many examples of threats, intimidation and personal attacks do you want....a small sample from the past 30 days in areas outside Rfa. Multiply this by 6 at least if we examined the last 6 months...
-- MONGO 17:48, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elen - could you please link me to, or tell me, exactly which accounts Arbcom status are expiring this year, thanks - Youreally can 17:08, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Elen, I do not work with spi, but I have noticed a similarity between the style, nature, and marginal notability of articles worked on by this user and those of this blocked user banned after a rather complicated spi you handled. Perhaps you can follow up for me. DGG ( talk ) 09:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
And if you want a case of socks trolling each other, try this. Tijfo098 ( talk) 15:00, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
I don't for one minute think that you were accusing me of bullying, [40] but others might. My view on bullying is very simple, and one that has caused me some problems here on Wikipedia: don't turn the other cheek, don't go pleading to "authority" in the expectation of "justice", just get stuck in and sort it out. Bullies are only allowed to be bullies because nobody has the courage to confront them. At junior school I was the anti-bully if you will. I'd batter anyone I saw picking on some kid, and nobody ever tried to bully me.
Now I come to think of it they did try. I remember one day that Tommy Findlay was pushed by his gang to challenge me to a fight after school (does that kind of thing still happen?). He was a little scrap of a thing, any boxing board of control would have ruled the fight illegal, and luckily he had the good sense to scarper before I arrived, But that's a story best kept for my memoirs. ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 18:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi there.
How can I get an SPI I opened closed? I'm now of the opinion that it was a misunderstanding - over-enthusiasm on my part, and lack of experience on the other two editors parts.
Don't want to waste anybody elses time with it when there's no need.
Thanks. Chaheel Riens ( talk) 10:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
In the hall of fame: [41]. :-) Tijfo098 ( talk) 09:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
I have placed the unblock request of DownRightMighty ( talk · contribs) on hold because:
Please review the unblock request and respond. Thanks! ~ Amatulić ( talk) 21:18, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Oh by the way, we generally allow logged in editors to edit from proxies (or we should do).
Rich
Farmbrough, 02:40, 30 October 2012 (UTC).
The Distinguished Podstar | ||
For what is possibly the finest sentence composed on wiki this year: "What he reacts badly to is being 'handled' by 'the management' (as he perceives it) - this is much, much less of a problem for the encyclopaedia than civil POV pushers skewing articles by eliminating their more forthright correctors, spammers, advertisers, political censors, sly vandals, Randy in Boise and anything that affects the continued creation and maintenance of accurate content." -- RexxS ( talk) 13:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC) |
Elen of the Roads, you've confirmed the IP range and this editor has three times trolled on arbcom pages, now in this farce of Cla68 If you can give some explanation of why he came to edit Grunsky matrix as Ansatz ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) did, that would be a start. 99% of the edits are by me: the article is a specialist article created by on geometric function theory. Please explain. He has trolled in the past about five times in Ferhago's 2012 request for amendment, with as far as I remeber four different accounts. Why exactly do you think it might not be him? Mathsci ( talk) 20:56, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for keeping an open mind on this issue. Spar-stangled ( talk) 21:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Elen, please see my comment about this on RFAR. If you feel there is any impropriety in me commenting in this section, feel free to take the discussion with me to my talk page or to the arbitration request.-- The Devil's Advocate ( talk) 00:40, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
you've got what you want, sod off
|
---|
We still haven't got to the bottom of why you blocked Pen.
Rich
Farmbrough, 23:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC).
In A Child of the Jago the typical response to an unwanted request to borrow a pan was along the lines of "I haven't go one, I'm using it, I already leant it out and what's more it's at the menders." To a large extent your prevarication here is beginning to create the same impression. You said
These all look now like red-herrings. Meanwhile 2 months have elapsed. Having a good turn of phrase, and using humour makes you a very personable editor and admin, however at some point you have to actually engage your brain and moral compass. I believe it is quite likely that Pen will not request an unblock, and may never even use his talk page - and even that that might not be a bad thing. Nor do I delude myself that were Pen to request an unblock, and be unblocked there is not a significant chance that he would be reblocked at soem later date. Nonetheless there is a moral and pragmatic imperative to stick to one's word, regardless of the other good reasons. This is not just about Pen. For example I trusted you to stick to your word and you have let me down - and wasted a lot of my time. Possibly Bish and others were expecting you to keep to what you said too. This sort of thing is not conducive to a good working environment. Please now, without any further delay, do what you said you would, and restore Pen's talk page access. All the best,
Rich
Farmbrough, 02:36, 30 October 2012 (UTC).
Elen, I apologize for stirring the pot. What I observed is two editors I respect (RF and yourself) apparently stuck in an interaction that neither of you seemed to be enjoying and appared to have a straightforward solution. I used the existing rope essay as shorthand for the concept that unblocks are cheap and no lasting harm to Wikipedia would occur if it turned out not to work. I believe Bish does have a valid point about the etymology of the phrase being sketchy; unfortunately WP:UNBLOCKS ARE CHEAP is redlinked and I don't have wikitime to write it today. Nobody Ent 16:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
--- |
You marked this SPI as checked: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Logical_1 but no check was done. IRWolfie- ( talk) 01:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Obvious puns given the last two edits of Special:Contributions/63.3.19.129. Tijfo098 ( talk) 00:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Since Special:Contributions/Miufus turned out to be a sock of a more established editor ( User: LlamaAl); perhaps Special:Contributions/I_remember_halloween should be investigated as well. Tijfo098 ( talk) 00:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
By the way, LlamaAl put a WP:LITTLEBROTHER defense here. Tijfo098 ( talk) 01:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
[51] Bali/Dan is back at calling people "anonymous propagandists," despite having been blocked before by you for continued personal attacks. Are you allowed to handle it, or should I take it to ANI (some threads on your talk page discuss Bali if you want to refresh on it)? -- Jethro B 04:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
For spotting the latest Sock of User:A Nobody. Mt king (edits) 08:01, 1 November 2012 (UTC) |
Hi Elen, you placed this SPI on hold. I haven't found any documentation on exactly what that signifies and I was just checking up because I didn't know if on hold meant a couple hours and you forgot or a couple days and it's still on hold. There's obviously no rush. Ryan Vesey 17:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Elen. I'm alarmed by the proliferation of GA reviews that don't result in good articles. It makes us look stupid. So I'm asking a couple of admins where I should go to open a discussion of this. It seems to be a largely rogue process. Cynwolfe ( talk) 11:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Bish, Elen, Rich: I've been trying to work out in my head how to say this, hoping to formulate something especially enlightened, pithy, succinct or compelling. Having crossed paths with all of you all overs the years, I've developed appreciation and respect for your efforts here. Seeing this develop has been like watching the beginning of a car crash: you see it develop, you know it's going to be bad, and there doesn't seem like there's a damn thing you can do to stop it. The best I've come up with is:
You're all acting like idiots, please stop.
I don't see specific enumeration, or relative ranking of your recent missteps, as a useful exercise. Penyulap was blocked by Coren back in July, followin an ANI discussion, so the good or bad of the block is on him. Whether or not Penyulap's talk page access is enabled isn't really significant to Wikpedia - the Encyclopedia. It's not that important, and certainly not important enough for ya'll to be at each other's throats. You all are hereby banned by the Ent from interacting with each other for a week or so, or until your brains return to their usually rational state. This ban will not be enforced by blocks, threats or noticeboard dramas, but rather (hopefully) by their being enough sanity in your respective brains to see the wisdom in what a very old Ent is sayin. Nobody Ent 15:16, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Mt king (edits) 00:20, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Mt king (edits) 00:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)