User talk:MarnetteD: Difference between revisions

Note AOL UK IP's are now owned by Carphone Warehouse so don't be surprised to see their name when checking for HC sock IP's. MarnetteD | Talk 12:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No bother whatsoever

The MO of that anon vandal seems similar to Bambifan, but that IP resolves to Michigan. Bambi does the majority of his nonsense from Alabama. However, if you even so much as think you smell this guy, please let me know. His destruction and damage is nearly incaluculable. Thanks for letting me know and believe me, asking about something like this is not a bother. :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You bet; it was a pleasure hearing from you. You may find this page helpful in regards to Bambifan. The precious little darling has his very own long-term abuse page. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Links for our BoT problem

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/1wikideb1

another

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I believe I've dealt with this editor before when he was editing similar articles using a different IP. He made the same "kids who know nothing hassling smart old me" comments. At the time, he claimed to be a University Professor in Media or some such, posting from his office. Of course, his IP info said differently. He was blocked then, and this new instance is blocked. JoeSperrazza (talk) 20:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the links:

Claiming to be from "one of the top ten universities in America"
Actual location is the teaming metropolis of Copperopolis, California

JoeSperrazza (talk) 20:41, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the info and the links JoeSperrazza. I appreciate you taking the time to do this and it will be good to have it in one place. In the AN report Binksternet supplied the link to a previous ANI discussion seen here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive887#IP troll 66.102.146.179. Stubbornness or trolling either way it is a shame really. Oh, flunking students that disagreed with you is the opposite of what being and educator is about. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PP template on RefDesks

There's no need to remove it, as it does not display when protection is not in place. Leaving it on has the advantage that when the protecting admin "forgets" to restore it, it comes back of its own accord. DuncanHill (talk) 00:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note DuncanHill. It gets removed to get it out of the Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. This has been done since before I started working with the category and the also get removed by Musikbot. It is unfortunate that the desks are plagued by trolls at the moment. Have a pleasant week on WikiP and even more so off. MarnetteD|Talk 00:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I just wish people and bots were as efficient at adding it as they are at removing it. DuncanHill (talk) 00:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You got that right DuncanHill. Sometimes they need to be put into a <noinclude></noinclude> too, though that varies from page to page. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 01:09, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Your assistance with Frank Sinatra is much appreciated MD! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Dr. Blofeld. I am glad I could help. MarnetteD|Talk 14:44, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Worvulgang808

I believe that in order to report a sockpuppet, one must actually report them using the WP:SPI procedure. Template:Sock implies this by stating "Please refer to the sockpuppet investigation of the sockpuppeteer", etc. ⁓ Hello 71 16:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your question Hello71. I know of no requirement that a report be filed. The template also states "expressed a concern" and that was all I had. They did start by performing some of the edits that Pe had done in the past but they have moved on to other things. Please feel free to remove my tag if you wish. This editor is problematic and I did not know that they had returned to editing. Thanks for dealing with the new edits. MarnetteD|Talk 18:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This edit won't work to notify Hello71 - you need to get it right first time. This edit should work, because I put the correct link and a new signature in the same new post. More at WP:Echo#Triggering events. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:47, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So has something changed Redrose64? When I made the second edit I corrected the brackets and I added my signature a second time which, in essence, creates a whole new post. That has always worked in the past. MarnetteD|Talk 14:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing has changed, and it never would have worked. When you delete an existing signature/timestamp and add a new ~~~~ in its place, what you are effectively doing is modifying the existing timestamp. The echo system has always worked by examining the diff, and it needs to see additional text: in this edit, nothing was added or removed, and there are just three characters changed - (( became {{, and 1 became 2. I've been banging on about this for over two years, at WP:VPT and WT:Echo. Typical threads include Wikipedia talk:Notifications#Why didn't it work?; Wikipedia talk:Notifications/Archive 6#Linking and signing; Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#username issue. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info Redrose64. I will simply add a new post rather than adjust an existing one in the future. I do remember that, in the early days of this messaging system, when other editors used {{ping}} it wouldn't notify me. All of the other possible templates did. I wish you well in your efforts to get things straightened out. On another note this weekends Six Nations matches should be excellent. My getting to see all of the fixtures on the same day (and one was even live on the 14th!) has certainly added to my enjoyment of the tournament. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 21:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for trying to educate the confused IP, and sorry you had to get that nonsense on your talk page, too. I had my user talk page briefly protected a few days ago and think I'll have to do it again - the editor is community banned and refuses to listen to any attempts to point them towards policies and guidelines. It's a tedious business, and it has wasted a lot of time for several good editors. Oh well. Have some tea! bonadea contributions talk 06:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome B. Tedious is the (kindest) word for it. The tea is delicious and I hope that you enjoy the rest of your week in spite of this. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 14:25, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again B. I was dealing with this late last night (my time) and did not know who the IP was a sock of. Your edit summaries cleared that up and I have added Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nsmutte to my watchlist so that I can report future problems with this person to the correct place. MarnetteD|Talk 16:54, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Big match tomorrow evening

Tomorrow will be the big decider/clincher for Wales (at home) and for the ever-changing France.
I am wondering when your network will be broadcasting it. — Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard | 11:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am excited for the match G. It airs here at 5pm. Getting all the matches on the same day is such an improvement over previous years coverage. Thanks for the link and best regards to ya. MarnetteD|Talk 14:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IP "confirming" Sock notices

Thanks, I was wondering about that. General Ization ^Talk 23:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While you were typing this General Ization I was leaving a longer explanation on the talk page of the IP who has been helping. I was making the same mistake a couple years ago. Thanks to you for dealing with this pain in the patoot (what do you know - my spellcheck isn't familiar with this old time expression!) Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 23:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RIP GK

Thank you George Kennedy for so many wonderful performances. You part of a marvelous ensemble cast in The Flight of the Phoenix (1965 film), you helped train The Dirty Dozen, as well as making sure Luke could eat 50 eggs in an hour. You were a tough SOB in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot. Perhaps my favorite performance is in The Eiger Sanction (film). Then you showed you could make us laugh out loud in the TV series Police Squad! and the films that followed. The other TV performances are to numerable to list so I will just say thanks again for how entertaining you were. MarnetteD|Talk 23:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP fundraising ideas

Love this! [1] DMacks (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DMacks. Of course the term has been around for ages. I came up with the seasonal scents idea several years ago. Another editor created this - Troll-be-Gone - around the same time. Unfortunately the RTM doesn't work properly in edit summaries. Sadly, there are times when we need the 55 gallon drum of the product :-( Thanks again and cheers to ya. MarnetteD|Talk 23:08, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Day of the Doctor

Sorry. I have now worked out that I accidentally edited an old version of the The Day of the Doctor. Whereas my intention had been to add one word to the current aarticle. Thanks for catching my mistake Dresken (talk) 04:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know what had happened Dresken. MarnetteD|Talk 05:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pipelinks

Thanks for telling me about pipelinks over at Fantasia 2000. I tried doing the same thing you did over at The Prestige (film), but Wrath X won't accept my edits. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 07:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FilmandTVFan28. All I can tell you is that different editors handle these things differently. I think the piping is helpful to readers as it takes them directly to the section of the article about BVP. OTOH WX is interpreting a different part of the overall policy then I use. The one plus is that the section on BVP is near the top of the article. I would be inclined to leave it as it isn't worth getting frustrated over. But that is just my opinion. My apologies if you don't find this useful. Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 15:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For my TPWers

In the "this tickles my funnybone" files I think that this section header may also be the title of a chapter in the upcoming book in the Game of Thrones series. Cheers to all. MarnetteD|Talk 18:19, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

troll

Thanks Marnette.Koplimek (talk) 00:05, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome Koplimek. When I first saw the post on your page I had the exact same "What the heck is this?" reaction that you did since. Then I dug into the edit history of who made the post and found the answer. Trolling is such a pain in the "you know what" :-) Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 00:09, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:40, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yuuummmmmyyy 7&6=thirteen. Thanks so much for this treat. I wanted to make sure Gareth saw you post next time he gets on Wiki so I was glad to help. Cheers and enjoy the week ahead. MarnetteD|Talk 16:50, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker). Hi MarnetteD. To ping a user with = in their username and you're using a ping template, one workaround is to surround the equal-sign with four curly braces like this: {{u|7&6{{=}}thirteen}}

It is easier than it looks once you get in the habit of doing it. Or you can use: {{ping|7&6{{=}}thirteen}}

I think the old fashioned way of pinging will work too using four square brackets like this: [[User:7&6=thirteen|7&6=thirteen]]

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 20:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[[User:7&6=thirteen|7&6=thirteen]] will definitely work; the essential feature is the link, not the means by which the link is constructed. Explicitly numbering the parameter, as in {{u|1=7&6=thirteen}}, will also work and is two characters shorter than using {{=}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:25, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My thanks to you both for the info. This hasn't come up for me before so it is nice to have this for future reference. MarnetteD|Talk 21:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ping only sometimes works. But if you put in <no wiki>"User:7&6=thirteen"</nowiki> I always get it. Unfortunately, my querky (grandfathered) user name gives some bots problems. I am now a page watcher here. I now always watch and add the page of those to whom I have torted. Best regards. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the recent assist

I likely would have caught it myself eventually, but thanks for bumping that IP's comment over to my Talk page from my user page.

Amusingly, the email notification I got when you moved it initially made it look like the comment was from you, and left me concerned that I'd cheesed you off.

Thanks again! DonIago (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome Doniago. I don't use the email notification system so I was unaware of what kind of message it would leave. No "cheesed off" here :-) OTOH I would like be cheesed by this recent winner of the World Cheese Championships just to see what it tastes like :-P Cheers to ya and have a pleasant week! MarnetteD|Talk 02:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism warning

I wonder what that was about. Anyway, thank you. Maproom (talk) 22:22, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome Maproom. There seems to have been an uptick in this kind of trolling recently. Enjoy the rest of your week in spite of this nonsense. MarnetteD|Talk 22:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Maproom: Judging by Special:Contributions/Nunber 57 and Special:DeletedContributions/Nunber 57, that user began by creating a user page and user talk page as straight copies of User:Number 57 and User talk:Number 57 respectively, with absolutely no changes. On being blanked by MarnetteD and deleted by admins, they then went off to post bogus warnings on a variety of user talk pages, pattern unknown.

Shall we see you on Sunday? --Redrose64 (talk) 00:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the followup R. Here is wishing everyone at the meetup has a pleasant time. It is also nice that they scheduled it after the final matches of the Six Nations :-) MarnetteD|Talk 00:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Emperor's new clothes

Me as this other guy, don't know how to put this: Different Theme?[edit] I don't know how to put this into encyclopedic terms well, but I always got a different idea out of this story. I thought it was sort of pointing out that people will sometimes pretend to understand something, or otherwise deceive, in order to look better to others. That sounds vague, so I'll use an example. // On the playground, Joe tells an inside joke to a group of his friends. Tom, who has just started to hang out with this clique, laughs along with everyone else as if he understood the joke, lest he feel alienated.

from the talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes#Different_Theme.3F — Preceding unsigned comment added by Granito diaz (talk • contribs) 21:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Granito diaz how you interpret the story involves WP:OR, WP:SYNTH and WP:SPECULATION. Per WP:FORUM the item does not belong in an encyclopedic article. Please feel free to post it on your Facebook page or in some chat room on the internet. MarnetteD|Talk 21:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Nelson

(a) I thought it was the entertainment ref desk... b) I don't claim Wikipedia is perfect. c) My English is not as good as I want it to be so I try to get it under other peoples attention... But seriously, I'm not that pissed off as the above may sound like, I also wrote into the talkpage but it seems dead for quite a while so I did the same overthere. OXYGENE 7-13 (TALKPAGE) 20:19, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oxygene7-13 if you want help with this article then the place to ask is Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. I would recommend that you ask nicely though. MarnetteD|Talk 21:03, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just asked the question overthere and sorry if I sounded a little less friendly as I intended to be... I was just stunned about the way this was written. My sincere apologies to you, this is not the tone in wich I like to communicate, so once again; sorry. OXYGENE 7-13 (TALKPAGE) 13:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Oxygene7-13. The one thing I would mention is that WikiP now has over 5 million articles. A large number of those are not on any active editors watchlist so flawed articles like the one you found can happen easily. There are always places to bring them to other editors attention. You just have to look for them. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 18:48, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, MarnetteD, that's exactly what I was trying to do here. You reverted my addition on the ref desk, so I guessed you had a opinion about this. The person in the article is a DJ, so I put the question on the entertainment ref desk. Eventually it paid off, you gave me the link to the Biographies-page and now we wait... I have to say, in comparisment to the Dutch Wikipedia, the community on the English one responds very slow, and that due the fact the English community is much bigger... Maybe I'm a bit spoiled... Many thanx for your help and i'll see what happens on the Biographies-page. OXYGENE 7-13 (TALKPAGE) 19:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your input would be very helpful (needed)

I am a new editor, but I know what I'm editing. There is a page for a film (Stateline Motel) with false release dates that have consequentially been copied all over the internet, perpetuating the wrong information. I have made the correct changes twice, but the creator of that page continues to revert. This last time, the user who is reverting the correct edits has used a 2013 book which copied the same erroneous dates from when the film's release information were apparently hacked some years back, and no one seems to care enough to make the obvious corrections. Assistance is needed in getting the correct information to remain, because this user, in addition to being very rude, is dead set on having the wrong release date displayed, which is two years before the film was actually released. Iistal (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Iistal there are several things to mention. First, you have made no attempt to discuss this on the talk page for the film. Until you do that you are in danger of violating WP:EDITWAR. Second, you need to provide WP:RSs to back up your assertions. Please note that edit summaries do not fulfill either of these requirements. You also need to read WP:CANVASS as your message to me is in violation of that guideline. I am afraid that this is the only assistance I can provide you at this time. MarnetteD|Talk 21:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give me a referral to someone who will step in? This should not be considered a personal concern, but a factual concern. Starting a discussion on the talk page would be absolutely useless. We're talking about a low-budget, decades-old B-film that no one is paying attention to. In fact, nearly all the edits that have ever been made to the page are from the individual user who started it. The only way this matter is going to get any attention is by gathering others in for a discussion. Iistal (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I pointed to the above editor in his talk page (he quickly blanked) and in the edit summaries, all the three book sources used in the article say it was released in 1973, and a lot more are available searching in Google Books (eg. [2]). User:Iistal has not supported his claims with any source, and instead has removed the source he did not liked and replaced it with his original research... and let alone the "hijacking" accusations. For the record, La Stampa online archives (link) show the film was actually released in September 1973, as written in the McFarland book used as a source (see La Stampa, 22 September 1973, issue 221, page 7, column "Dove andiamo stasera"). While it is not linkable, it is sufficient to write in the seach bar l'ultima chance ursula and to order the results per date. Furthermore, I added to the article a review published by the same newspaper in November ("Una storia di gioielli: L'ultima chance con Fabio Testi e la Andress", La Stampa 4 November 1973, issue 260, page 8). It's now time to drop the stick, I suppose. Cavarrone 22:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Please read what I typed Iistal. No one is going to do anything until you discuss your concerns on the talk page for the film. After you have posted there you can add a link to the discussion at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. Please make sure that the post is neutrally worded - there are several posts on that page that you can use as an example. I will say it one more time - you will need to provide sourcing to back up your assertions. After that you can proceed to dispute resolution but you must do the things I have mentioned first or DR will not look at the situation. MarnetteD|Talk 22:04, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your post Cavarrone. I hadn't had a chance to read it until after my reply to Iistal above. It looks like your research is solid. I would suggest that you add it to the talk page for the film so that it is there for others to read and note in the future but that is just my opinion. Thanks again for taking the time to fill me in C. MarnetteD|Talk 22:08, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Presumably the dubious barnstar was something defamatory, but have not been around a couple of days so don't know what it may have been. What was on it? You don't have to be too specific if it is horribly offensive. Blackmane (talk) 07:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blackmane. I was glad to help. Yes it was extremely offensive - to the point that an admin had it oversighted and suppressed so I won't feed the troll by repeating it. Apologies as I know all about curiosity :-) Have a great week in spite of this. MarnetteD|Talk 11:16, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given the number of editors the troll targeted, I figured it would be nasty. It's more out of morbid curiosity than anything else. Cheers. Blackmane (talk) 13:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Admins can WP:REVDEL problem edits, but can't WP:OVERSIGHT. That one was oversighted. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:59, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know that R. I should have said that an admin reported it to oversight and then it was suppressed. MarnetteD|Talk 20:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb

In response to your message, could you please correct the page, i understand that they don't usually like to use IMDB, as a reference, because it is a user submitted site, however in order to edit IMDB, they also require sources , so it all works vice versa. Is there a site with all the others who appeared in Freaks film, i ono whey don't also feature many of the uncredited players on site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.42.213.114 (talk) 17:55, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly you are incorrect as IMDb does not require sourcing. In fact their oversight is far less to the point of being non-existent at times. Compared to WikiP you can't contact the person who has approved the false information on their site. Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/Bucharest Film Festival, Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/Yuri Gadyukin and User:Rhododendrites/Chaney are prime examples of things that were listed at IMDb that were complete hoaxes but IMDb did nothing about them until their false nature was discovered and proven here. MarnetteD|Talk 18:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

C-an y-ou s-uck m-y ba-lls again? you filthy f-aggot ;)

ew 79.176.91.230 (talk) 04:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 04:57, 24 March 2016 edit 79.176.91.230 (talk) No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 04:57, 24 March 2016 edit undo 79.176.91.230 (talk) No edit summary Next edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:

	<big>F-A-G-G-O-T</big>		== <big>'''F-A-G-G-O-T'''</big> ==


	<span style="position:absolute;top:-40px;left:-172px;z-index:-1"><big>F-A-G-G-O-T</big></span>		<span style="position:absolute;top:-40px;left:-172px;z-index:-1"><big>F-A-G-G-O-T</big></span>