This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks. I've let the ISP know that they should inform their local police of the street address of a suicide threat. Bstone ( talk) 03:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Why are the block logs for User:TharkunColl and User:ShieldDane empty? I thought they were blocked, regards, Joshuarooney2008 ( talk) 07:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
What happened here? You first jumped the gun with a - rather premature - block of TharkunColl, prompted by the - rather problematic - user Joshuarooney. Only eight minutes later, you decline the unblock request [1] (contrary to process; a unblock request should never be handled by the blocking admin himself, the whole point of it is to let others review it), claiming explicitly that "checkuser" had confirmed sockpuppetry. You evidently misread that page. Then [2] you say at ANI that it's a "behavioral" block based on what I said – but I said nothing about TharkunColl whatsoever, and you also failed to acknowledge that you must in the meantime have realised that your previous claim was wrong. Sorry, but this doesn't look very good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
See this, someone else found one of the suicide notes and posted on the noticeboard. Don't think anyone has called anyone with that one yet, but people have talked about it... J Milburn ( talk) 14:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I saw your comment and if you have any concerns, feel free to ask. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I've made a habit of telling you, so just to alert you that there is another thread. J Milburn ( talk) 23:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I received a message from you that I was "vandalizing" the Super Smash Bros. page. This, I feel, is completely untrue. I was just, as always try to, further the wikipedia community. I believe what you changed was how I added an alleged characters part because there is much controversy about Diddy Kong and Sonic (and Tails) being in the Melee version. I feel like there should be a tad of information. I truly am sorry if I hindered you in anyway, but I wanted to be sure you knew my intent was not vandalism. thank you for your time!! Hooty88888 ( talk) 02:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, we've been busily working on how to make tables for a D&D monster list page, and could use your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons#Negotiable concepts. BOZ ( talk) 17:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Or a copy cat... Care to review and block;
See also; User talk:Sandstein#anon harassing my edits
Cross-posted to Alison, too.
Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Care to review and block;
see also [3]. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
another; cheers, Jack Merridew 07:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi i put Crypto does Vages on the Templete can you please send the page that says that boes not belong. Not to be mean just for further refrence. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwilleditu ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks :) -- Iwilleditu ( talk) 19:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Your pet might enjoy the view from the volcano I have a nice view of every day. Take him for a stroll early one morning to catch the dawn. Oh, that's Mount Rinjani on the horizon. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
That's probably Jarlaxle, he likes Forgotten Realms and Star Wars a lot. Johnny Irenicus ( talk) 10:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Just noticed the SUL link on your user page, sounded interesting, but the link is broken - should it be m:Help:Unified login? Bazzargh ( talk) 18:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I am happy to see you look into details of what i have done. 59.149.32.77 ( talk) 19:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
And I have to tell you the editor has a "not-good" record
Hi Jéské, thanks for all you help at WP:CHU. Just a small request - could you take a slightly softer approach with SUL-based requests for accounts that have edits than: "ANY edits in mainspace makes a target username ineligible for usurpation". It isn't strictly speaking true, if the account has few edits and they aren't GFDL significant (vandalism, mino typo fixes etc.) I will consider performing the requests. I know some wikis are giving the accounts regardless of edits, so they may find our approach surprising. If the account they want has very few edits and they don't look very significant, can you point them to WP:CHU/U and I'll take a look to see if we can accommodate them. Otherwise just explain that the local rules don't allow crats to rename the account they want (bear in mind some may have limited english and may have struggled to understand the instructions). Thanks, WjB scribe 22:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Please resist responding to other editors improper behavior with what might be seen as incivility, especially in edit summaries where comments cannot be refactored later. I find it extremely difficult to WP:KEEPCOOL myself dealing with such editors, but the problems tend to get worse when misbehaving editors find reasons for retaliating against others. [4] -- Ronz ( talk) 21:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
First time for me starting an RFC/U. Not sure how much more I should add. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey, can you protect my talk for me? It should be protected for at least another 2 weeks... Sceptre ( talk) 04:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Warthog Demon 00:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that does answer it; but why was my comment a 'threat'? I did not intend to seem hostile - but I did want to challenge the new 'consensus' because it seems like a very odd conclusion. I hope you didn't take that as a 'threat'. If I am off the mark here (about what part of my comment seemed like a threat), what was it and why did you take it as such? — AySz88 \ ^-^ 03:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
HI, do you know why did my request on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for protection for Lamb of God (band) disappear from the section? And I cant see it even in the history page!--Lykantrop ( Talk) 06:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I can't find any hidden note. ":)" desn't tell me anything --Lykantrop ( Talk) 12:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts to protect the Accursed Lands article and talk page. I know it's not a terribly important article, and needs cleanup in its own right, but your efforts on its behalf have gone above and beyond what I'd expected. Jclemens ( talk) 14:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
So, White Cat... I have a Shadow Gelert character available. Want him? -( Doofallslya v^_^v) Ékséj 06:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Dude, when I put down that thing about the mudkip edit, I wasn't trying to be sarcastic. I was serious when I wrote that summary. In any case, the Mudkip meme is popular enough to gain mention on wikipedia, and I felt that brief summary was appropriate. What's wrong with internet memes anyway; they're a big part of our current culture...—Preceding unsigned comment added by StealthsneakII ( talk • contribs) 21:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
What's this about? It was meant to be a jovial "watch out" warning. Second time today someone's misunderstood me. Sceptre ( talk) 07:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Ummm... this ip keeps tapping my talk page in weird ways. Thanks for reverting one of the edits.-- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 08:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the vandalism on my talk page. -- Eastlaw ( talk) 18:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for helping. I appreciate it. But, the flaming sadly continues on IGN...I'll take care that case myself though. SLJCOAAATR 1 ( talk) 21:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do. It's starting to calm down on IGN but, as a just in case, could you lock it for a week? Thanks! SLJCOAAATR 1 ( talk) 01:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so very much! I.O.U.! SLJCOAAATR 1 ( talk) 01:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Per this, I thought you should see this. - Milk's favorite Cookie 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Looking through recent changes, I found an IP making edits to a user page: Fishfishfishfsh ( talk · contribs) (edits on the page are hidden notes). The IP ( 141.209.238.58 ( talk · contribs)) wasn't vandalizing the page, but it appears that the user page and account were created for social networking or blogging purposes only. The user page I found seems to be the second page used for this purpose by the same users, along with Vbushnell2007 ( talk · contribs) (whose page actually explains at the top how to hide comments on the user page). The user(s) who own the pages have not edited anywhere else in WP, so I assume that these are single-purpose accounts. I'm mildly irritated at this misuse of WP, and would like to know it straight if the pages qualify for deletion at all. I don't want to go and begin the deletion process and find out I missed some sentence somewhere explaining how I can't nominate them; I've spent a while looking through the deletion policies, but I'm not sure which applies to this situation. I could just be acting overly-cautious again coming to you (hesitation and procrastination plague me yet), but I'd still like to be absolutely sure. By the way, thanks again for the help before. -- Comandante {Talk} 22:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Through vandalism ..... best to protect your page for non-auto confirmed? Pedro : Chat 22:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[6] Nothings happened to me so far. HalfShadow ( talk) 02:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Want me to get rid of those ridiculous diffs or would you like to do the honors? ¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up my user page. I haven't had as much time to be on patrol lately, so the helping hand is much appreciated.-- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 05:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
talk page. What would you suggest? Enigma message Review 08:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again for your anti-vandalism patrol work.
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
Awarded to Jéské Couriano for his valiant fight against Vandalism by Gavin Collins ( talk) 08:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC) |
Could I ask a favour? The following articles have had their cleanup tags removed by single purpose IP accounts in the last few hours:
Would you mind semi-protecting them for a few days from vandalism by anon IP accounts? -- Gavin Collins ( talk) 08:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
It looks like this user has not learnt anything after you have warned him. I did not want to remove his comments from the talk page as I was not sure what the best course of action would be. I thought you would want to know of his continuing threats. -- Ubardak ( talk) 09:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Maybe it would be best to semi-protect the page for the time being, seeing as numerous anons are out to vandalize this Talk Page. Otherwise, these IPs just seem to be feeding off of other editors' reversions of their vandalism. ~ Homologeo ( talk) 05:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there Jéské. I happened upon SeattleJoe ( talk · contribs)s talk page (after posting a block notice) and noticed you semi-protected it. Would you mind changing that to full protection? That guy is back, posting that he's reported people to the FBI and basically vandalizing his talk page. It's been removed but we outta stop him from causing more trouble. Nobody of Consequence ( talk) 21:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Silly Jeske, you should it doesn't work concerning bots ;) Sceptre ( talk) 23:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response and writing to the user who felt trolled. I refactored my commnets to VoA somewhat. Thanks, SqueakBox 23:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting to have the Rollback permission replaced on my account. I was unaware of the indepthness of the issue that I was getting into yesterday. The admin who took action yesterday and removed from my account is unavaliable at this time, and has stated that I may reapply for use of the tool again. I am finding it aggravating to attempt to revert vandalism and having to go through the undo function. Thanks for your consideration. Dusti speak and be heard! 21:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I have moved the discussion regarding WP:WEB in Wikipedia_talk:Notability#WP:WEB. Please join the discussion. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 22:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you giving a ray of hope that you may unblock. Please think carefully before you do. Soccermeko has proven to be a very tenacious puppetmaster that I have been wrestling with through nearly a dozen incarnations. The main problem is that he isn't an obvious vandal ... he just adds unsourced information and rumours, and edit wars to hold them in. He was ultimately blocked for creating a crew of puppets to agree with him on talk pages. This editor is clearly Soccermeko back again. Kww ( talk) 01:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Good Zinglon! All I did was to look away from my watchlist for an hour and I got this:
What happened? I thought these logs aren't on watchlists. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 04:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that - apparently I've pissed him off enough he's after me now. I'll probably leave it move protected, there's really no reason for anyone to be messing with my user pages. Thanks again. Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 20:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jéské! I was wondering if you could restore Image:Pokemon-diamond-and-pearl-group.png. Maxim removed it a month ago because it had a bad FUR. If I had known that, I would have been happy to improve it. Could you please put it back? I wanted to ask Maxim him/herself, but it seems that he/she has commited suicide (see the user's talk page), so I ask you because you are a Pokémon fan. Cheers, Face 23:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I have updated on what this group are currently up to. -- Roleplayer ( talk) 21:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand. There was one vandalism edit today that someone reverted, and the most recent other editing was on the thirteenth. Little vandalism and no edit warring: why the semi-protection? Aleta Sing 21:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Why did you semi-protect stapler? It just had one anon doing two edits; probably won't be back. Dicklyon ( talk) 17:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Jeske,
You and Percy are the two admins I associate most closely with Wikiproject D&D, so I figured I’d approach you about this (posting this on both talkpages). As you know, there has been a lot of drama over User:Gavin.collins and his editing style and how it applies to RPG articles and fiction articles in general. I know that both of you agree with some of the things he’s trying to accomplish but that you’ve both also had conflicts over his approach to editing. There is a long list of editors that have had conflicts with him, spanning over the talk pages of who knows how many articles and user pages. The RfC conducted six months ago softened his approach somewhat, but the conflicts continue, as seen most recently here today.
Now, we could all continue this way in perpetuity. Perhaps one or more people will get themselves in trouble over it, or it could continue to be a long drawn-out trench war. Maybe Gavin will eventually give up and leave, or maybe the most vocal/active of the RPG editors will do so. But that’s not how Wikipedia is supposed to work. It’s supposed to be discussion, collaboration, debate, and consensus. It’s supposed to be civility, assuming good faith, no personal attacks, and handling disputes like adults. And we just don’t have that on D&D articles when Gavin is involved.
Gavin has very specific, firmly held, soundly-reasoned (in his own mind at least) reasons for wanting things the way they are. This is fine. Everybody he interacts with wants things their own way. This is fine, too. However, in a give-and-take atmosphere of compromise, “Do it my way or else” doesn’t work. Gavin may very well be right about some of the things he’s talking about, but bad interactions have colored people’s perspectives against him. People respond to his words and actions defensively, and soon incivility flies back and forth between both parties and nothing positive can be accomplished (or anything that is accomplished leaves a bad taste in someone's mouth). Sometimes other editors have attacked him preemptively, and sometimes he comes on as the aggressor. I don’t want to think that the numerous people who’ve had these interactions with him are always the ones in the wrong; with Gavin usually the only person on the other side of the coin, he seems to be the common denominator in the equation. If he really was always as right as he seems to think he is, wouldn’t more people be rushing to defend him and his viewpoints?
But Wikipedia, again, is not about being right or wrong; it’s about building an encyclopedia with consensus. Some of us have tried to deal with Gavin politely, and bring up the issue of his civility, or point out where he may be tagging an article inappropriately. This seems to have little or no effect, and this struggle has been going on for over six months now with no end in sight. So, rather than continue a seemingly eternal conflict, I would like to bring up a request for Mediation to try to get us to a point where Gavin can do his thing without butting heads relentlessly. I can only hope that will help. Maybe some mentoring would help with his WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and other issues. Perhaps some of the RPG editors could use this as well, but I can’t honestly see us being the crux of the problem.
Please let me know what you think of this. BOZ ( talk) 18:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you just protected my talkpage, but there are no recent edits in the history. Was something posted there that was deleted from the history? I also noticed that you or someone else did delete some Grawp vandalism from the history. Thank you for the protection and for getting rid of the vandalism anyway.-- Urban Rose 21:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Jéské, and thanks for responding to my WP:CHU request. I have left a question there for you. xpanmanx ( talk) 01:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I note that a few editors may taken the current discussions as an opportunity to remove cleanup tags from articles with obvious or abundant content issues [8] [9]. If this trickle becomes a torrent, I intend to request clarification for these edits, and would hope for your assistance if this turns out to be vandalism. -- Gavin Collins ( talk) 19:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
A comment or few from you in this section would be useful. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 20:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I have noticed a great number of IPs vandalizing or at least replacing your talkpage with unnecessary comments. Do you know why? And to my calculations, this message will be deleted soon.-- RyRy5 ( talk) 02:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I've been keeping an eye on this article, I Love Money: Challenge Show, and noticed it was recently protected. Looking at the history, it seems someone placed the template on the page so, I'm not sure if this page is actually protected or if this is just an attempt to deter other users from editing the page . I also don't see a request for it on the request page, but would just like to double check before removing the template if it's not in fact protected. Thanks! Pinkadelica 02:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
You seem to be getting a lot of vandalism here... any idea why? Moo Chat 02:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea if a bot will tell you, so I might as well post here. :) Just remember that you must sign the request within 7 days or the case will be rejected. You may add any additional content-related issues that you also feel need mediation in the following section: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kender#Additional issues to be mediated. BOZ ( talk) 18:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
So how in the future should I respond to having come across lists of socks that need to be blocked without creating an AN thread? I won't mention the vandal by name if possible, but usually a name is requested. Would it be better in the future if I contact an admin via e-mail for this?-- Urban Rose 13:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. In regard to the RfM involving the Kender article, I'm unsure as to whether or not I should add myself to the list as an involved party, and could do with a bit of advice, as I haven't previously been involved in these sorts of proceedings. I guess I probably am involved, in the sense I've been heavily involved in the discussions in regard to that and some of the other articles, but I don't know whether that means I should be there, and my feelings regarding Gavin aren't as strong as some other editors, it seems. In terms of a successful mediation, is it better if all the main parties involved in the debate are listed? My main interest is to help the mediation to be successful for both sides, and I would be willing to join if that would help the process. - Bilby ( talk) 10:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey Jeske, I think the mediator is seeking comment from you: [10] :) BOZ ( talk) 13:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
On the website ED on the user talk page of "Grawp" there, a person called Lateral (known here as banned user User:Arkalochori) said he emailed Grawp a bunch of his accounts (it's against the rules to link to the site ED so I won't) and those last bunch of accounts were ones that appeared to be Arkalochori socks. "User:WHEN I WAS A YOUNG BOY" acted like an Arkalochori sock since I first saw it when it used to be active and the one you tagged as compromised User:任 made this odd edit [11] long ago to a talk page archive of an Arkalochori sock. William Ortiz ( talk) 10:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Doh! I just realized Arkalochori just admitted that's his account in this edit
[12].
William Ortiz (
talk) 10:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Paizo and Wotc are separate. Mongoose Publishing has nothing to do with either. Please refrain from personal attacks in the edit summary (have you even read the article?). Since the article has been flagged for notability for SIX MONTHS, either remove the tag, or nominate it for deletion. Anything else? CSHunt68 ( talk) 14:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
Considering the image was considered on the discussion page of the article in question as irrelevant to the topic, it deserved to be deleted. By overriding this majority decision, you have proven yourself to believe that you are more important than a majority. You are censuring us, the population of wikipedia, from expressing the will of the majority, and therefore YOU are the one who should get a "warning." Don't believe yourself to be superior to others.
Consider this your own warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.177.210 ( talk) 01:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
So you think that 2 warnings is enough do you? That "vandalism" was good faith editing- by the way havent you seen my recent contributions- i have actually been on RC patrol reverting other peoples vandalism. Agressive editing of talk pages? How is telling people to discuss a matter and vote on it being agressive. May i point you towards wp:newbies?I think you should read it sometime. Regards -- Numpty454 ( talk) 05:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Why, you may ask? For this. That made me chuckle. Keep up the good work! :> Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Thanks. I've let the ISP know that they should inform their local police of the street address of a suicide threat. Bstone ( talk) 03:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Why are the block logs for User:TharkunColl and User:ShieldDane empty? I thought they were blocked, regards, Joshuarooney2008 ( talk) 07:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
What happened here? You first jumped the gun with a - rather premature - block of TharkunColl, prompted by the - rather problematic - user Joshuarooney. Only eight minutes later, you decline the unblock request [1] (contrary to process; a unblock request should never be handled by the blocking admin himself, the whole point of it is to let others review it), claiming explicitly that "checkuser" had confirmed sockpuppetry. You evidently misread that page. Then [2] you say at ANI that it's a "behavioral" block based on what I said – but I said nothing about TharkunColl whatsoever, and you also failed to acknowledge that you must in the meantime have realised that your previous claim was wrong. Sorry, but this doesn't look very good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
See this, someone else found one of the suicide notes and posted on the noticeboard. Don't think anyone has called anyone with that one yet, but people have talked about it... J Milburn ( talk) 14:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I saw your comment and if you have any concerns, feel free to ask. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I've made a habit of telling you, so just to alert you that there is another thread. J Milburn ( talk) 23:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I received a message from you that I was "vandalizing" the Super Smash Bros. page. This, I feel, is completely untrue. I was just, as always try to, further the wikipedia community. I believe what you changed was how I added an alleged characters part because there is much controversy about Diddy Kong and Sonic (and Tails) being in the Melee version. I feel like there should be a tad of information. I truly am sorry if I hindered you in anyway, but I wanted to be sure you knew my intent was not vandalism. thank you for your time!! Hooty88888 ( talk) 02:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, we've been busily working on how to make tables for a D&D monster list page, and could use your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons#Negotiable concepts. BOZ ( talk) 17:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Or a copy cat... Care to review and block;
See also; User talk:Sandstein#anon harassing my edits
Cross-posted to Alison, too.
Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Care to review and block;
see also [3]. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
another; cheers, Jack Merridew 07:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi i put Crypto does Vages on the Templete can you please send the page that says that boes not belong. Not to be mean just for further refrence. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwilleditu ( talk • contribs) 13:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks :) -- Iwilleditu ( talk) 19:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Your pet might enjoy the view from the volcano I have a nice view of every day. Take him for a stroll early one morning to catch the dawn. Oh, that's Mount Rinjani on the horizon. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
That's probably Jarlaxle, he likes Forgotten Realms and Star Wars a lot. Johnny Irenicus ( talk) 10:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Just noticed the SUL link on your user page, sounded interesting, but the link is broken - should it be m:Help:Unified login? Bazzargh ( talk) 18:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I am happy to see you look into details of what i have done. 59.149.32.77 ( talk) 19:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
And I have to tell you the editor has a "not-good" record
Hi Jéské, thanks for all you help at WP:CHU. Just a small request - could you take a slightly softer approach with SUL-based requests for accounts that have edits than: "ANY edits in mainspace makes a target username ineligible for usurpation". It isn't strictly speaking true, if the account has few edits and they aren't GFDL significant (vandalism, mino typo fixes etc.) I will consider performing the requests. I know some wikis are giving the accounts regardless of edits, so they may find our approach surprising. If the account they want has very few edits and they don't look very significant, can you point them to WP:CHU/U and I'll take a look to see if we can accommodate them. Otherwise just explain that the local rules don't allow crats to rename the account they want (bear in mind some may have limited english and may have struggled to understand the instructions). Thanks, WjB scribe 22:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Please resist responding to other editors improper behavior with what might be seen as incivility, especially in edit summaries where comments cannot be refactored later. I find it extremely difficult to WP:KEEPCOOL myself dealing with such editors, but the problems tend to get worse when misbehaving editors find reasons for retaliating against others. [4] -- Ronz ( talk) 21:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
First time for me starting an RFC/U. Not sure how much more I should add. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey, can you protect my talk for me? It should be protected for at least another 2 weeks... Sceptre ( talk) 04:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Warthog Demon 00:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that does answer it; but why was my comment a 'threat'? I did not intend to seem hostile - but I did want to challenge the new 'consensus' because it seems like a very odd conclusion. I hope you didn't take that as a 'threat'. If I am off the mark here (about what part of my comment seemed like a threat), what was it and why did you take it as such? — AySz88 \ ^-^ 03:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
HI, do you know why did my request on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for protection for Lamb of God (band) disappear from the section? And I cant see it even in the history page!--Lykantrop ( Talk) 06:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I can't find any hidden note. ":)" desn't tell me anything --Lykantrop ( Talk) 12:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts to protect the Accursed Lands article and talk page. I know it's not a terribly important article, and needs cleanup in its own right, but your efforts on its behalf have gone above and beyond what I'd expected. Jclemens ( talk) 14:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
So, White Cat... I have a Shadow Gelert character available. Want him? -( Doofallslya v^_^v) Ékséj 06:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Dude, when I put down that thing about the mudkip edit, I wasn't trying to be sarcastic. I was serious when I wrote that summary. In any case, the Mudkip meme is popular enough to gain mention on wikipedia, and I felt that brief summary was appropriate. What's wrong with internet memes anyway; they're a big part of our current culture...—Preceding unsigned comment added by StealthsneakII ( talk • contribs) 21:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
What's this about? It was meant to be a jovial "watch out" warning. Second time today someone's misunderstood me. Sceptre ( talk) 07:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Ummm... this ip keeps tapping my talk page in weird ways. Thanks for reverting one of the edits.-- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 08:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for removing the vandalism on my talk page. -- Eastlaw ( talk) 18:59, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for helping. I appreciate it. But, the flaming sadly continues on IGN...I'll take care that case myself though. SLJCOAAATR 1 ( talk) 21:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do. It's starting to calm down on IGN but, as a just in case, could you lock it for a week? Thanks! SLJCOAAATR 1 ( talk) 01:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so very much! I.O.U.! SLJCOAAATR 1 ( talk) 01:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Per this, I thought you should see this. - Milk's favorite Cookie 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Looking through recent changes, I found an IP making edits to a user page: Fishfishfishfsh ( talk · contribs) (edits on the page are hidden notes). The IP ( 141.209.238.58 ( talk · contribs)) wasn't vandalizing the page, but it appears that the user page and account were created for social networking or blogging purposes only. The user page I found seems to be the second page used for this purpose by the same users, along with Vbushnell2007 ( talk · contribs) (whose page actually explains at the top how to hide comments on the user page). The user(s) who own the pages have not edited anywhere else in WP, so I assume that these are single-purpose accounts. I'm mildly irritated at this misuse of WP, and would like to know it straight if the pages qualify for deletion at all. I don't want to go and begin the deletion process and find out I missed some sentence somewhere explaining how I can't nominate them; I've spent a while looking through the deletion policies, but I'm not sure which applies to this situation. I could just be acting overly-cautious again coming to you (hesitation and procrastination plague me yet), but I'd still like to be absolutely sure. By the way, thanks again for the help before. -- Comandante {Talk} 22:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Through vandalism ..... best to protect your page for non-auto confirmed? Pedro : Chat 22:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[6] Nothings happened to me so far. HalfShadow ( talk) 02:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Want me to get rid of those ridiculous diffs or would you like to do the honors? ¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up my user page. I haven't had as much time to be on patrol lately, so the helping hand is much appreciated.-- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 05:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
talk page. What would you suggest? Enigma message Review 08:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again for your anti-vandalism patrol work.
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
Awarded to Jéské Couriano for his valiant fight against Vandalism by Gavin Collins ( talk) 08:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC) |
Could I ask a favour? The following articles have had their cleanup tags removed by single purpose IP accounts in the last few hours:
Would you mind semi-protecting them for a few days from vandalism by anon IP accounts? -- Gavin Collins ( talk) 08:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
It looks like this user has not learnt anything after you have warned him. I did not want to remove his comments from the talk page as I was not sure what the best course of action would be. I thought you would want to know of his continuing threats. -- Ubardak ( talk) 09:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Maybe it would be best to semi-protect the page for the time being, seeing as numerous anons are out to vandalize this Talk Page. Otherwise, these IPs just seem to be feeding off of other editors' reversions of their vandalism. ~ Homologeo ( talk) 05:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there Jéské. I happened upon SeattleJoe ( talk · contribs)s talk page (after posting a block notice) and noticed you semi-protected it. Would you mind changing that to full protection? That guy is back, posting that he's reported people to the FBI and basically vandalizing his talk page. It's been removed but we outta stop him from causing more trouble. Nobody of Consequence ( talk) 21:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Silly Jeske, you should it doesn't work concerning bots ;) Sceptre ( talk) 23:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response and writing to the user who felt trolled. I refactored my commnets to VoA somewhat. Thanks, SqueakBox 23:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
I am requesting to have the Rollback permission replaced on my account. I was unaware of the indepthness of the issue that I was getting into yesterday. The admin who took action yesterday and removed from my account is unavaliable at this time, and has stated that I may reapply for use of the tool again. I am finding it aggravating to attempt to revert vandalism and having to go through the undo function. Thanks for your consideration. Dusti speak and be heard! 21:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I have moved the discussion regarding WP:WEB in Wikipedia_talk:Notability#WP:WEB. Please join the discussion. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 22:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you giving a ray of hope that you may unblock. Please think carefully before you do. Soccermeko has proven to be a very tenacious puppetmaster that I have been wrestling with through nearly a dozen incarnations. The main problem is that he isn't an obvious vandal ... he just adds unsourced information and rumours, and edit wars to hold them in. He was ultimately blocked for creating a crew of puppets to agree with him on talk pages. This editor is clearly Soccermeko back again. Kww ( talk) 01:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Good Zinglon! All I did was to look away from my watchlist for an hour and I got this:
What happened? I thought these logs aren't on watchlists. -- Altiris Helios Exeunt 04:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that - apparently I've pissed him off enough he's after me now. I'll probably leave it move protected, there's really no reason for anyone to be messing with my user pages. Thanks again. Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 20:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Jéské! I was wondering if you could restore Image:Pokemon-diamond-and-pearl-group.png. Maxim removed it a month ago because it had a bad FUR. If I had known that, I would have been happy to improve it. Could you please put it back? I wanted to ask Maxim him/herself, but it seems that he/she has commited suicide (see the user's talk page), so I ask you because you are a Pokémon fan. Cheers, Face 23:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I have updated on what this group are currently up to. -- Roleplayer ( talk) 21:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand. There was one vandalism edit today that someone reverted, and the most recent other editing was on the thirteenth. Little vandalism and no edit warring: why the semi-protection? Aleta Sing 21:58, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Why did you semi-protect stapler? It just had one anon doing two edits; probably won't be back. Dicklyon ( talk) 17:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Jeske,
You and Percy are the two admins I associate most closely with Wikiproject D&D, so I figured I’d approach you about this (posting this on both talkpages). As you know, there has been a lot of drama over User:Gavin.collins and his editing style and how it applies to RPG articles and fiction articles in general. I know that both of you agree with some of the things he’s trying to accomplish but that you’ve both also had conflicts over his approach to editing. There is a long list of editors that have had conflicts with him, spanning over the talk pages of who knows how many articles and user pages. The RfC conducted six months ago softened his approach somewhat, but the conflicts continue, as seen most recently here today.
Now, we could all continue this way in perpetuity. Perhaps one or more people will get themselves in trouble over it, or it could continue to be a long drawn-out trench war. Maybe Gavin will eventually give up and leave, or maybe the most vocal/active of the RPG editors will do so. But that’s not how Wikipedia is supposed to work. It’s supposed to be discussion, collaboration, debate, and consensus. It’s supposed to be civility, assuming good faith, no personal attacks, and handling disputes like adults. And we just don’t have that on D&D articles when Gavin is involved.
Gavin has very specific, firmly held, soundly-reasoned (in his own mind at least) reasons for wanting things the way they are. This is fine. Everybody he interacts with wants things their own way. This is fine, too. However, in a give-and-take atmosphere of compromise, “Do it my way or else” doesn’t work. Gavin may very well be right about some of the things he’s talking about, but bad interactions have colored people’s perspectives against him. People respond to his words and actions defensively, and soon incivility flies back and forth between both parties and nothing positive can be accomplished (or anything that is accomplished leaves a bad taste in someone's mouth). Sometimes other editors have attacked him preemptively, and sometimes he comes on as the aggressor. I don’t want to think that the numerous people who’ve had these interactions with him are always the ones in the wrong; with Gavin usually the only person on the other side of the coin, he seems to be the common denominator in the equation. If he really was always as right as he seems to think he is, wouldn’t more people be rushing to defend him and his viewpoints?
But Wikipedia, again, is not about being right or wrong; it’s about building an encyclopedia with consensus. Some of us have tried to deal with Gavin politely, and bring up the issue of his civility, or point out where he may be tagging an article inappropriately. This seems to have little or no effect, and this struggle has been going on for over six months now with no end in sight. So, rather than continue a seemingly eternal conflict, I would like to bring up a request for Mediation to try to get us to a point where Gavin can do his thing without butting heads relentlessly. I can only hope that will help. Maybe some mentoring would help with his WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF and other issues. Perhaps some of the RPG editors could use this as well, but I can’t honestly see us being the crux of the problem.
Please let me know what you think of this. BOZ ( talk) 18:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that you just protected my talkpage, but there are no recent edits in the history. Was something posted there that was deleted from the history? I also noticed that you or someone else did delete some Grawp vandalism from the history. Thank you for the protection and for getting rid of the vandalism anyway.-- Urban Rose 21:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Jéské, and thanks for responding to my WP:CHU request. I have left a question there for you. xpanmanx ( talk) 01:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I note that a few editors may taken the current discussions as an opportunity to remove cleanup tags from articles with obvious or abundant content issues [8] [9]. If this trickle becomes a torrent, I intend to request clarification for these edits, and would hope for your assistance if this turns out to be vandalism. -- Gavin Collins ( talk) 19:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
A comment or few from you in this section would be useful. TheBlazikenMaster ( talk) 20:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
I have noticed a great number of IPs vandalizing or at least replacing your talkpage with unnecessary comments. Do you know why? And to my calculations, this message will be deleted soon.-- RyRy5 ( talk) 02:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I've been keeping an eye on this article, I Love Money: Challenge Show, and noticed it was recently protected. Looking at the history, it seems someone placed the template on the page so, I'm not sure if this page is actually protected or if this is just an attempt to deter other users from editing the page . I also don't see a request for it on the request page, but would just like to double check before removing the template if it's not in fact protected. Thanks! Pinkadelica 02:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
You seem to be getting a lot of vandalism here... any idea why? Moo Chat 02:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea if a bot will tell you, so I might as well post here. :) Just remember that you must sign the request within 7 days or the case will be rejected. You may add any additional content-related issues that you also feel need mediation in the following section: Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kender#Additional issues to be mediated. BOZ ( talk) 18:14, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
So how in the future should I respond to having come across lists of socks that need to be blocked without creating an AN thread? I won't mention the vandal by name if possible, but usually a name is requested. Would it be better in the future if I contact an admin via e-mail for this?-- Urban Rose 13:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi. In regard to the RfM involving the Kender article, I'm unsure as to whether or not I should add myself to the list as an involved party, and could do with a bit of advice, as I haven't previously been involved in these sorts of proceedings. I guess I probably am involved, in the sense I've been heavily involved in the discussions in regard to that and some of the other articles, but I don't know whether that means I should be there, and my feelings regarding Gavin aren't as strong as some other editors, it seems. In terms of a successful mediation, is it better if all the main parties involved in the debate are listed? My main interest is to help the mediation to be successful for both sides, and I would be willing to join if that would help the process. - Bilby ( talk) 10:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey Jeske, I think the mediator is seeking comment from you: [10] :) BOZ ( talk) 13:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
On the website ED on the user talk page of "Grawp" there, a person called Lateral (known here as banned user User:Arkalochori) said he emailed Grawp a bunch of his accounts (it's against the rules to link to the site ED so I won't) and those last bunch of accounts were ones that appeared to be Arkalochori socks. "User:WHEN I WAS A YOUNG BOY" acted like an Arkalochori sock since I first saw it when it used to be active and the one you tagged as compromised User:任 made this odd edit [11] long ago to a talk page archive of an Arkalochori sock. William Ortiz ( talk) 10:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Doh! I just realized Arkalochori just admitted that's his account in this edit
[12].
William Ortiz (
talk) 10:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Paizo and Wotc are separate. Mongoose Publishing has nothing to do with either. Please refrain from personal attacks in the edit summary (have you even read the article?). Since the article has been flagged for notability for SIX MONTHS, either remove the tag, or nominate it for deletion. Anything else? CSHunt68 ( talk) 14:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68
Considering the image was considered on the discussion page of the article in question as irrelevant to the topic, it deserved to be deleted. By overriding this majority decision, you have proven yourself to believe that you are more important than a majority. You are censuring us, the population of wikipedia, from expressing the will of the majority, and therefore YOU are the one who should get a "warning." Don't believe yourself to be superior to others.
Consider this your own warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.240.177.210 ( talk) 01:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
So you think that 2 warnings is enough do you? That "vandalism" was good faith editing- by the way havent you seen my recent contributions- i have actually been on RC patrol reverting other peoples vandalism. Agressive editing of talk pages? How is telling people to discuss a matter and vote on it being agressive. May i point you towards wp:newbies?I think you should read it sometime. Regards -- Numpty454 ( talk) 05:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Why, you may ask? For this. That made me chuckle. Keep up the good work! :> Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :) 05:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)