User talk:Elockid

Hello and welcome to my talk page! Some general guidelines: Please add a Subject/headline when creating new threads Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply). Please sign your posts using "~~~~" Please be respectful and be civil. Like everyone else I do make mistakes If you post a comment here, I will respond here unless you request me to comment on your talk page or another page. You might want to watch this page for a response. You can do this by clicking the watch tab on the top right of the page I'm busy in real life and may not respond right away to your message. Please be patient. Thank you.

Language box

How can I get one of those? Have only been editing WP for 11 months and really should indicate my fluencies (incomplete as they are) on my user page. Martindo (talk) 04:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Here it is. All you have to do is copy it"

{{userboxtop
| backgroundcolor = substitute with any color you want
| bordercolor = substitute with any color you want
|Languages}}
{{User en}}
{{User ilo-4}}
</div></div></div>
{{Userboxbottom}}

Where it says "en" and "ilo", replace those with the language codes that you want to add. For proficiency add a dash ( - ) by the language code and the proficiency level (it goes from 0-5). Not adding a proficiency level is treated as a native speaker of that language. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 04:13, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

White Brazilians

Could you please take a look at this?...

[1] Ninguém (talk) 03:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I'll have to wait to comment until tomorrow though since it's getting late where I'm at. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 04:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

The lead sentence of the total population, I don't see anything wrong with since you're updating outdated information to more current information. The lead paragraphs on the pre-reverted version is largely a block of text without many sources. If more sources were added to support the statements, then editors would more likely support your changes. The same for regions of settlement section. This seems to be also the basis for reverting. Adding more supporting reliable and verifiable sources will solidify your changes and additions. What I think Off2riorob is doing is also reverting lots of unsourced info which is common. Also, in the meanwhile if there is more current opposition, why not start a subpage on your userspace like User:Ninguém/White Brazilian, copy the article and work on it then start a discussion when you're finished with it? Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 14:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Indonesia

Yes, the speedy deletion tag for Indonesia was a total mistake. Huggle was displaying one page, but apparently had Indonesia registered as its current page. Oops. I was heading over to the page to revert, but you were too fast for me. ;) Thanks for reverting. - Pingveno 22:49, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

It happens. I've had the same problems before with Huggle because of the lag. So I understand where you're coming from. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 23:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

South America edit

South America really isn't a dog. Why did you erase that part of the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.23.103.131 (talk) 02:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Because it doesn't relate to the article in a constructive manner. Please see WP:Vandalism under "Silly Vandalism". That summarizes it quite nicely to what that edit is. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 02:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding wrong GDP of cities

The reason I changed Bngladesh gdp is coz of the main Daka article itself claims its got 52 billion dollar gdp not 78 billion also plz look at the source I given: http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/richest-cities-2005.html This shows clearly that dhaka has got a 52 billion dollar gdp not 78! sorry for bad english thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.239.16 (talk) 20:22, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

The Citymayors page is a copy of Pricewaterhouse Cooper's 2005 list and is what was the article based on before. However, the article was updated and now uses the PWC 2008 list which is more up to date. You can find it here at PWC's site. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:29, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok sorry for trouble bye 86.158.239.16 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC).

23prootie3

It may interest you that the banned editor may be editing again, via IP 124.104.35.224. I suspect this IP due to WP:IDART. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:53, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 04:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Why revert my edit?

? --Watkarian (talk) 14:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Because you're are evidently Rayesworied editing the same exact edits and articles. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 14:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

But I do not Purpose to vandal on wikipedia. --Watkarian (talk) 14:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Banned users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia. You may wish to appeal your ban by emailing Arbcomm. But creating more socks will make it much less likely they will lift your ban. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 14:36, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Elockid. User:110.93.136.252 seems to be performing similar edits as banned user User:Rayesworied. —hike395 (talk) 13:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Filled a sockpuppetry case for the IP. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 13:57, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Datamix

Re: this edit

There appears to be somebody using multiple accounts to insert that external link into multiple pages. FYI, I put a notice up on Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard#Datamix. Feel free to add a comment. Jwesley₇₈ 14:22, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Keeping an eye on the pages being edited. Will add any other accounts to the SPI page. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 16:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Brazil

Elockid, could you please take a look in here and give your opinion about it? Thank you very much. The editor Rahlgd insists on adding information about projects that did not begin to be developed yet and are nothing more than plans. --Lecen (talk) 03:08, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sure. I won't be able to comment until after Christmas though. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 03:31, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Elockid, I need your help. I tried to make modifications in the article Brazil but user Rahlgd has [reverted all of them]. All of them. No one can touch the article and he simply revert it. --Lecen (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Technically, since Arbcom hasn't place restrictions on the article, Rahlgd is free to edit as long as he meets policy guidelines. One of the changes from the diff you showed was actually helpful. Rahgld changed the economy figures from the World Bank to the International Monetary Fund which is the standard being used for country articles. I have to ask, do you think Rahgld editing in a tendentious manner? However, in my opinion it does seem that way since he is being opposed by three other editors while obtaining no consensus. In the meanwhile since it seems like any action taken will result in an edit war and get the page protected again, you might also want to seek a third opinion or a request for comment by placing this template: {{3O}} on the article to see if any other editors agree with shortening the article, or asking opinions from WP:WikiProject Brazil or request for comment. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 03:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for answering me. Well, check again the link I sent you. He changed the economy figures while at the same time he undid everything I did before. In his edit there is gives no reason at all to why he did even so I have beem warning everyone of all my actions in the talk page. What he did was nothing more than to camouflage the fact that he reverted all my edits with an apparently harmless change in the economy figures.

That's not the only issue. The article is huge. Simply too heavy. It takes too much to load it because it has overly detailed information that it's not necessary in it. You could help if you participated in the talk page because you don't need to know anything about Brazil to be part of it. After all, the issue it's obvious: the article is too long and full of non important info. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 04:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you that the article is too heavy. I made a comment on that on the talk page already. I think it got hidden with all the comments though. I'll respond to some concerns already stated. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 05:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I know you did, but editor Rahlgd ignored it and reverted everything. The discussion is now being held in here. So far, I and other 2 editors answered. It would be good if you could give your opinion too. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Just finished my comment. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 05:22, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, --Lecen (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I have downsized the article Brazil to 111kb long (from its original 185kb). My last edit was this one. It was originally like this. Please, tell which one you support in the article's talk page. Thank you very much. --Lecen (talk) 20:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

What a big difference! Also commented on the talk page. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

New Section

Hi, I don't see how you count my edit (List of Countries and Outlying territories) as vandalism, I simply added the 'Crown Dependencies' and the 'British Overseas Territories' to size of the listed land mass. Other Countries' Territories are counted as part of the land mass of the country, like the United States and New Zealand. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by George2001hi (talk • contribs) 20:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

The number you keep changing is a sourced number. The figure that kept being added by the IP edit which seems to be you and yourself is not what the source says. Persistently changing sourced data without explanation or anything done can be considered vandalism. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Spammers

If you get any more hassle from them, drop me a line and give me a few pages to add to my watchlist and I'll try and give you a hand! All the best, HJMitchell You rang? 15:21, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for offering to help! Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 15:23, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Like I say, if you need a hand with 'em, just drop me a line and I'll do what I can. HJMitchell You rang? 15:34, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

at D.R. To help you back a bit I've now added your fave page to my watchlist.

And have a great 2010! SamEV (talk) 14:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Glad I could help. Have a happy new years!. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 17:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Nanga Parbat

Xero675 (talk) is User:Nangparbat's sock —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisissparta109 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

If you havent noticed by now I am removing the edits of a banned user not adding anything new to it as usual mrpontiac will be confirmed as a sock and his edits will be removed sad that you abuse wikipedia policys by siding with banned users you are well aware of as being banned Xero675 (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I know it's you. I don't know if whatever you're saying is true. But you're still not allowed to edit. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

And I know your helping Mrpontiac I promise to you by monday this issue will be resolved and once again you would of been helping a banned user once nirvana gets to read my message he will deal with your sock chum thisisparta cheers Xero675 (talk) 20:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

An administrator has gone ahead and reverted your edits including the ones you made on Nirvana's talk page. Once again, I know who you are and have consistently explained to you about banning policies. You know the drill, the pages are gonna get protected, your account blocked. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 23:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey Elockid congratulations your banned chum mrpontiac1 and most of his edits have been removed thanks for your interference ;-) 86.158.177.150 (talk) 09:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

So have yours with your other socks. :) Do you know who blocked them, both yours and MrPontiac? Yes it was YellowMonkey. So much for your bias. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 13:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

LOL the bias will never end unless a non indian admin deals with this case Monkey may have blocked Mrpontiac and his socks but HE WILL NEVER REMOVE PONTIACS EDITS I will have to rely on non indian users such as nirvana888 and Nsaum to remove mrpontiac1 as I find it pretty impossible that monkey can bring himself to remove mrpontiacs edits because there both indians no harm in stating reality p.s I said most of Mrpontiacs edits were removed not all :-( 86.158.177.150 (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Infact so strong is this indian sock nexus that spacemanspiff also refrained from removing Mrpontiacs1 edits even now when its confirmed hes a banned user spacemanspiff also said he would remove mrpontiacs1 edits on the talk page of my other account i made to stop mrpontiac1 however I dont think keeping to the guidelines is what indian admins really do anyways good day 86.158.177.150 (talk) 15:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

It's the smart thing to do to refrain from reverting because he (Spaceman) and I have little or no information on him. I don't know how you cannot comprehend that. It would be foolish of us to revert a user stating that they are banned even though we have insufficient knowledge on him. We can't revert a sock without having sufficient knowledge about them. This is also the case of Barek and other users. But we have sufficient knowledge about you and have continuously reverted which is enough to revert your edits. Nirvana and Nsaum know MrPontiac the most and as such are the users who revert and report him. It's best to report them to Nirvana and Nsaum rather than you reverting them because you're not allowed to edit Wikipedia. You also can't depend on other users who have little information on them to revert because like I said, this isn't how it works. Taking the matter in your own hands isn't going to help because according to the banning policy, any user can revert your edits if it has been identified that you have been editing. If you really wanted to help and revert banned users, following the advice that AdjustShift gave several months back is the best thing to do instead of engaging in more sockpuppetry. Please also respond to my message on User talk:Flashingligjhets. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 16:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

You keep regurgitating the same line about how you dont know about Mrpontiac1 even when there is now a BANNED TAG on his userpage seems to me your being discussed and are in a bit of trouble for reverting so there goes your "It's the smart thing to do to refrain from reverting" theory anyways I wont let your ignorance and stupidity help Mrpontiac1 out I will hit fast and hard wherever indian pov pushers are out to push there trash good luck ;-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.177.150 (talk) 16:51, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Just though I'd comment if that's OK since I've dealt with Mrpontaic1 before and Nangparbat has left alerted to me on my talk page to this new activity. Elockid is from what I have seen is an editor committed to fighting vandalism and sockpuppetry as my watchlist regularly reveals his useful reverts. :) He is right in saying that he was not familiar with Mrpontaic1 (just as I was not familiar with Nangparbat) but is familiar with Nangparbat and thus reverted his reverts. Having said this, I'm sure now Elockid is now familiar with MrPontiac quackpuppetry as it is pretty easy to identify his his tendentious and disruptive edits regarding India/Pakistan. Nangparbat, as I've stated on my talk page, I think the best course of action is not to reflexively revert future cases of Mrpontiac because as Elockid reminds you are not supposed to edit. Instead, you could help by reporting specific edits to Nsaum75, Elockid, or myself and I'm sure he will be reverted in due time. Elockid, If I am contradicting you, feel free to correct me. Now that this case is resolved, I hope future conversations can been done in a less heated manner. Nirvana888 (talk) 17:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

To NP. The banned tag has nothing to do with it. It's the behavioral evidence. Remember, you've also stated that you will not create socks unless MrPontiac's socks are blocked. So I better not be seeing socks like Errormeek (talk · contribs) again and the time here on Wikipedia should be spent reporting. You're wasting you're time trying to as you say "remove Indian trash" because it will get reverted and the article indefinitely semi-protected with socks like Errormeek. So might as well just stop, it hasn't been working. You're also preventing new editors who might want to edit from editing because we have to protect the pages you edit due to your history. Please give that into consideration. Most of the main articles you've been editing are protected and more are to come if you keep up the actions you have been doing.

MrPontiac articles are currently not on my watchlist. If you guys need a hand, I'll be glad to offer up some help. If so, please list some of the articles you want to watchlist. Nirvana, thank you for the comment. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 18:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Mrpontiac's articles are too numerous to list but invariably involve India and Pakistan and often other related countries such as China and the United States. Interests include among others Indian/Pakistani food, society, politics, foreign relations, wars, military, cinema-related articles. I appreciate your help and I'm Nsaum does as well. If you take a look at a few of his more notable socks you notice a peculiar MO and frequented articles. Some IPs are listed here [2] particularly 115.252.*.* Hope this helps. Thanks again Nirvana888 (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Will look into greater detail. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Just so you know, he's a very prolific/abusive editor as you can see by the number of IPs I've just tagged just now and I probably only scratched the surface. That is on top of his 67 confirmed sock accounts. I'll have a look at the Nangparbat case and see if I can familiarize myself with it. Probably best to follow a policy of WP:RBI Nirvana888 (talk) 23:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Mrpontiac again: Qdfgt763547 (talk · contribs). Wouldn't be surprised if there are a cabal of other sock accounts. I think we need another CU. Looks like him and "Nanga Parbat" just can't seem to avoid each other. Nirvana888 (talk) 02:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Probably need a CU. Maybe a hard rangeblock might be possible. A CU will need to look into this though. Investigating range based on the tagged socks and SPI. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 02:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Look's like User:Alison already found the range. 115.252.32.0/20. We should request a block on this range. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 03:03, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, a .32.0/20 range would only block a minority of his IP range but is worth it in my books. Maybe someone can calculate a wider range that doesn't impinge on other editors. Anyway, could you file a SPI or alert a CU? Many thanks.Nirvana888 (talk) 03:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Filed and added to the queue. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 03:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry, my editing in Sao Paulo is just a mess. This issue was to be in the Sandbox, but was accidentally placed in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.46.210.232 (talk) 01:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 01:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

You're being discussed at the 3RR noticeboard

Hello Elockid. See WP:AN3#User:Elockid reported by User:Professional Assassin (Result: ). This is quite a confusing case, due to the apparent summoning of editors from the Persian Wikipedia to join in one side of the dispute. I see you've also joined in a related SPI report. I find that the move of List of languages by number of native speakers to a new title looks strange. I am thinking of closing the 3RR case (if I'm the one to do it) with a week of full protection. If you have any other comments on the situation, or any recommended actions, you could add them to the report. EdJohnston (talk) 15:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Apology

I know I always come out as rude with my comments but is the heat of the moment which gets to me and sorry for accusing you of taking sides and supporting banned users no hard feelings I hope I know your just doing your job anyways I hope I can get out of this wikipedia addiction thingy soon because its highly unproductive for me and a waste of time unless offcourse I become a serious editor which is unlikely anyways hope you can forgive and forget and happy new year! 86.158.177.150 (talk) 21:45, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted. Take care! :) Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 21:46, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

the next time you revert my edits I wont make a fuss of it just hope I can put wikipedia behind me and concentrate on my studies instead my new year resolution which hasnt exactly gone to plan lol p.s these messages are not intended in anyway to gain sympathy 86.158.177.150 (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know I edited 3 articles to revert Mrpontiac1 edits they are Chicken tikka massala, Border and General officer sorry for making another account but I had to remove his edits I know it was the wrong thing to do could you please look over the articles I have edited and remove Mrpontiac1s edits when he returns I will inform you whenever I make an account and inform you of pontiac when I see him hope you understand thanks Openplain09 (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

One last thing I would be greatful if you could discuss this with Nsaum75 and not yellowmonkey as monkey will re add pontiacs original edits for reasons you already know cheers Openplain09 (talk) 11:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Nsaum, Nirvana, and I will handle it. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 14:46, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

This is my latest account as promised I will tell you whenever I make one. With your permission could I just inform you or Nirvana888 and Nsaum on yours/theres talk page whenever I see Mrpontiac1 or one of his buddys like Dewan so you can protect and remove there edits instead of making accounts and reverting there edits please reply back soon if you think its a good idea Slowjammerz3 (talk) 19:42, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if it's allowed. You might want to email a CU. Sounds like a good idea though. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 14:08, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

sorry for editing that south asia article I was about to discuss with a user however he didnt come online as you can see I have refrained from editing most articles except that single one anyways I suggest you keep away from wikireader41 his vedic pov pushing is aimed only at pakistanis cheers maybe wikireader is also now consuming cow urine since he may have reformed ;-)86.153.131.180 (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

one more thing I dont know how my ip is associated with the edit on israel-germany relations! I have never taken interest in that topic any ideas? 86.153.131.180 (talk) 10:04, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

This should give you and Idea of Wikireader41s motives "please refrain from your islamofascist garbage. the article on BNF has nothing to do with BJP. if you have any constructive ideas you are welcome to add them. insha allah soon pakistan will be 5 countries.Wikireader41 (talk) 23:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)"

[3] [4] [5] [6] [7] This is the sort of Saffron garbage he/she comes out with so you can understand that it is only polite that I return the favour to him/her hes also been blocked for pov pushing too much time in the local bjp funded mundir I suppose :-) 86.153.131.180 (talk) 10:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Gracias de nuevo

Ese usuario parece tener una misión de recibir un bloqueo indefinido. Pero ojalá cambie.

Que tengas un muy buen fin de semana. SamEV (talk) 19:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Si. Tambien, tengas un buen fin de semana. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 20:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)