User talk:MichaelBillington/Archive6
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:MichaelBillington. 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. |
Your RfA
No problem Michael! · AO Talk 09:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
The RfCU
Hi, thanks for the comments at RfCU, I wasn't sure of the procedure really. I actually think I'll leave it unless there is a similar pattern in the future. Cheers again. --I'm so special 15:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, see you around then. --Michael Billington (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I checked this page out following from your comments at the notability discussion. It is tagged as a stub. It looks pretty complete - it's a pre-season comp, how much needs to be said? Were any unusual rule modifications in place - that's about the only other thing that would really need to be added. I'm removing the stub tag. Garrie 22:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- This is why wikis are so great. I created a stub, an anonymous editor expanded on it quite a bit, and now it's not a stub anymore. No rule changes that I'm aware of, but some time I might add a knockout chart. --Michael Billington (talk) 02:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Congrats
You have earned your promotion. And thanks for your hard work here. Cheers! JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 00:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hrm
|
The Software Development Barnstar
I, CableModem, award you the Software Development Barnstar for (Cause it looks cool). If you liked this barnstar, then please leave a message on my talk page so it looks like everyone likes me. |
--CableModem^_^ 05:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Oh yay, I've been awarded my own barnstar. :) --Michael Billington (talk) 05:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Of course. I gotta inflate my editcount in some way don't I? :D ==CableModem^_^ 05:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I wasn’t sure if this was intentional – the word Development in your award is missing an "o". Or then again, "spell check" is software, I get it. I think... ;-) JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 22:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, it was a typo that I'd copy+pasted into the title. :) --Michael Billington (talk) 00:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- I wasn’t sure if this was intentional – the word Development in your award is missing an "o". Or then again, "spell check" is software, I get it. I think... ;-) JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 22:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
CSD tagging
Hiya. First off, thanks for the thank-you - always nice to have a talk page used for something other than warnings and complaints. Secondly - yeah, I do tend to use multiple tags, you caught me. My logic may be mal-formed, as I'm not privy to the admin-process - but as I imagine it, an admin would browse by speedy delete categories. So, especially at off-hours, I like to have a little bit of redundacy - otherwise, if the only admin doing speedies at the moment happens to be more of a G1 nonsense man, and I tag A3 nocontext, the article may linger long enough that the creator will zap the tag. However, my knowledge may well be flawed, and this "redundacy" may be more headache than its worth - let me know if this is the case. I also assume that you're not referring to a combined db/prod, which I'll do occasionally if an article is a weak borderline (usually A7 with "many people find Joe's Garage Band to be the most important indie band ever in history"), so if some technicality-minded admin feels it "passes" the A7, the prod can still remain, less work for all involved. --Action Jackson IV 07:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Congratumalationz
Congratulations on passing your RfA! :) Ale_Jrbtalk 09:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for unblock
Just quick note to say thank-you for your good faith in unblocking me. I promise I had nothing to do with any vandalism or disturbance on this site; I can only assume I share a common ISP with some morons with too much time on their hands. FusionWarrior 16:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
My editor review
Thanks for gracious words, undeserved, but gratefully accepted. Incidentally, I'm in the middle of admin coaching with User:The Transhumanist (we're both on Wikibreak) and I happily agreed not to stand for adminship until he deems me to be ready. My grasp of policy needed some tuning (though I think I'm getting there now) --Dweller 12:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
The way to do things
I don´t like the way you did things deleting WestStart-CALSTART. You didn´t include a warning in the creator talk page. It was created after discussion about it --Altermike 07:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Open proxies
Hi - you've been helpful on the open proxies talk page, I'd appreciate your help again, because I still haven't figured out the proper procedure... The person who had been using the open proxies to vandalise my userpage seems to be making a concerted effort to continue vandalising my page, and new IPs are turning up: 192.117.19.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), 213.8.59.91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), 217.132.164.6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). What's the simplest way for me to check if these are open proxies? --woggly 15:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Without going into the details of it, I'll tell you that they are all registered to .il (Israel), and are from different ISPs. They aren't in any redlists as open proxies, and one of them is a dynamic IP. It seems unlikely to me that they either of the 3 are open proxies. It may be more likely that somebody is either editing from work/school or is getting friends to edit for him. --Michael Billington (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. Sorry to be a nuisance, but I don't know how else to deal with someone who is deliberatly being a nuisance... woggly 17:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Ca$his Page Deletion.
I was wondering why you deleted Ca$his's page. Isn't MTV a credible enough source? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheCoffinRobber (talk • contribs) 03:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC).
Unblock List
Michael,
We have an application from you to join the unblock list. It will be approved once you confirm that [removed] is your e-mail address. Capitalistroadster 21:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, that's correct. --Michael Billington (talk) 01:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
About 199.245.188.21's recent unblock
Could you please leave a {{Request accepted}} notice at User talk:199.245.188.21 as the unblocking administrator? The IP's owner might not know that it is unblocked. Jesse Viviano 01:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
MWT
I don't want to use Mike's Wiki Tool. Can I remove my username on the list of users who user MWT? Jet123 21:28, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed your name. --Michael Billington (talk) 01:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Block on Open Proxies
Hi, Michael. I saw you blocked all open proxies for only 5 years, but IP that is open proxy usually get blocked indefinitely. Is there any reason you blocked open proxy for 5years? Your response would be appreciated. Please, respond in my talk page. Thanks in advance. Daniel5127 | Talk 03:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, there is a reason behind it. Simply because an IP is an open proxy now does not mean it always will be. To steal Centrx's words, it's because "most IPs are no longer open proxies after so long a time. Many are no longer open proxies even after only a month or a year, let alone 5 years."[1] If these IPs are still open proxies on April 14 2012, we'll re-scan and re-block them accordingly. --Michael Billington (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
detecting open proxies
I'm guessing that, from your blocking of open proxies, that you know how to identify them. I am a technological luddite, and I am wondering about some IP addresses that have been committing the same vandalism, but are very different addresses. Would you be willing to take a look for me? Natalie 05:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've taken a look at it, and I don't think any of them are open proxies. They are all owned by ISPs based in Cambodia (.kh), so it's probably somebody who has access to multiple computers (perhaps one at home, one at school/work, one at a library and another at a friend's place?) I hope this helps. --Michael Billington (talk) 05:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Dang. Thank you for checking! Natalie 06:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Open proxies
Thanks! You can add me to the list if you want. Cheers, Korg (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Bushranger is now ACOTF
Hi. You voted for Bushranger, which has been selected as the new ACOTF. Please help to improve it if you can. Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 14:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
new vandalilsm from an IP user you blocked (203.125.213.162)
Hello. I just now reverted vandalism at Talk:Music. When I checked the IP contribs it seemed like all vandalilsm, so I went to the user's page at User talk:203.125.213.162. There I saw many warnings culminating in a 48 hour block with a notice from you. It appears the IP started vandalizing again when the block expired.
I thought it would be best to inform you of this rather than post on WP:AIV, since you're already familiar with the situation. If you'd prefer that I post this on the notice board, please let me know.
Thanks. --Parzival418 05:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've blocked the IP again, this time for a week. Thanks for telling me. --Michael Billington (talk) 08:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to help - thanks for the quick action. Have a good day! --Parzival418 08:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for being there
|
Simeon_H's "thanks for being there" barnstar | |
| Thanks for being there Mike, you are a true friend. T. Kewl the First 11:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
Nonsense
A tag has been placed on Troy Pannell, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Xtreme racer 04:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Contested accordingly. --Michael Billington (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Mike's Wiki Tool
Your Wiki Tool is awesome for reverting vandalism! I just downloaded it a few minutes ago, and I've been able to revert vandalism really quickly in a short time. Thanks for writing it. Pyrospirit Shiny! 00:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Glad you like it. --Michael Billington (talk) 00:35, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, would it be possible to add a feature limiting edits shown to the mainspace? That would really speed things up so I don't have to skip over talk page, Wikipedia: stuff. Pyrospirit Shiny! 03:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
block this guy
This user, User:70.254.250.131, has been vandalizing Sexuality of William Shakespeare. Apparently, he has been block before. I noticed your comment on his talk page and wondered if you could get him blocked again or knew the process to go through. Apparently, he doesn't intend to change. Wrad 19:17, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Regarding block of 164.107.199.18
I see you blocked 164.107.199.18 for blanking the redirect article Danny ziemba. I misinterpreted one of his edits as vandalism, and reverted it, but it seems like he was actually trying to tag the article as vandalism. The two redirects Danny ziemba and Dan ziemba (now deleted) were created today by User:Le Scarlet Douche. — Nivix talk 05:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ack, looks like I buggered it up a bit. I'll lift the block now, Sorry about that. --Michael Billington (talk) 06:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- All fixed now. --Michael Billington (talk) 06:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The revert.
Thanks for that reversion of vandalism to my user page. :) Acalamari 01:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. --Michael Billington (talk) 01:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi-lo :-)
Guess who has today off school eh eh? :P. Heh well I'll talk to ya tonight. Have a good 'un. — Deon555talkdesksign here! 00:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Notification!
Hello. This is just a friendly notice that Wikipedia Weekly episode 19 has been released!
- In this episode:
- New Mission and Vision statements for the WMF
- The Chaser springs Jimmy Wales
- new uses for categories
- vandalism studies
- Unreferenced BLPs.
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.com/2007/05/05/wikipedia-weekly-19/ and as always, you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly, we're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project, we've got some cool guests lined up and it makes it much more fun if people tune in!
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 20:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery - if you do not wish to receive such notifications please remove yourself from the list.
Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
TOR proxies
The issue is bigger than just page deletion; half of the deliberately vandalistic or vicious personal attack accounts I see these days are using TOR proxies that have been "soft-blocked". Because there are so many TOR exit nodes, soft-blocks do absolutely no good whatsoever; there's always a new exit node to be found. The account user just fishes around till they find an unblocked TOR proxy, then they're free to do what they want. When open proxies are blocked, then they're forced to use their own IPs. Jayjg (talk) 00:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well in that case, we can agree on one thing. Hardblocking tor as a solution to hijacked admin accounts is moot. I don't see how soft-blocking is useless either. It stops users creating sock farms from tor, or from editing while logged out. The sock accounts have to come from somewhere, and assuming that we block tor proxies based off an accurate, up-to-date list such as this one (after filtering to only grab exit nodes, of course), that will have to be the user's own IP address (or from other open proxies which we haven't caught yet, but almost certainly will at some point). Note that there was a bot proposed to do this a while ago, which failed at RfA --Michael Billington (talk) 02:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not talking about Main page vandalism, or password cracking, which are recent and ephemeral problems. I'm talking about run of the mill nastiness. There's lots of it out there, and people are getting away with it using TOR proxies. That has to stop. Jayjg (talk) 02:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for this!
I can totally use it to improve Alpha Kappa Alpha. Real96 21:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Block of 68.80.88.216
Michael,
While I appreciate your enthusiasm in criminalizing tor proponents, I am in fact not a tor exit node (whilst several places think I am, which has also resulted in k-lines on EFnet and Freenode). If you would actually ping such ports on my machine yourself, rather than relying on outdated data from other websites, you would know this. Even the tor.noreply.org link given above does not have me listed. Here's another clue.
Search4Lancer 05:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've unblocked it now, but it was infact an exit node when I blocked the IP. I was working with data that was under 24 hours old, copied below (I'm a nut about record keeping, sorry
:))
- --Michael Billington (talk) 07:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- 10-4. What I found really interesting was that as far as I knew, when I tried to make myself an exit node, it didn't work due to having to forward ports through my router. Yet, all these sites claimed I was an exit node. Still not sure if it worked, but due to the k-lines on IRC, I changed my torrc file and stopped running tor altogether. Search4Lancer 21:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 20 | 14 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)