Jump to content

User talk:Rlevse

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tezza1 (talk | contribs) at 22:42, 16 November 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

MY TALK PAGE



User:Rlevse User talk:Rlevse User:Rlevse/playground User:Rlevse/awards User:Rlevse/files Special:Emailuser/Rlevse Special:Contributions/Rlevse User:Rlevse/images User:Rlevse/Notebook User:Rlevse/sandbox User:Rlevse/Todo User:Rlevse/Tools
Home Talk About me Awards Articles eMail Contributions Images Notebook Sandbox Todo Toolbox
My Admin Policy: I trust that my fellow admins' actions are done for the good of Wikipedia. So if any of my admin actions are overturned I will not consider such an action to be a "Wheel War", but rather an attempt to improve Wikipedia. If I disagree with your action, I will try to discuss it with you or with the admin community, but I absolve you in advance of any presumption of acting improperly. We should all extend the same benefit of the doubt to our fellow admins, until they repeatedly prove that they are unworthy of such a presumption. For every editor, I try to follow WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL and expect the same in return.


WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:21, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 44 29 October 2007 About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 06:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For keeping a good head on your shoulders so you can pull mine out of the nether reaches more times than I can count. (I run out of fingers and toes at 24) Chris 07:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preity Zinta FA

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TruthCrusader

Before you continue falling for the word of a troll, misinterpret the timing, and continue to insist on using false equivalency, consider the following:

1) I hadn't been editing Wikipedia in a month. What drew me back was tracing the source of someone leaving a comment on my blog, reading "fuck off, you wikipedia nazi". And hey, look where its IP address led to. Very helpful of TruthCrusader. I left a message telling him he'd been rumbled, and lo, another message shows up (though this time he thought to use an anonymizer first):

I know who you are....a[n] ... arrogant bitter angry fucktard whose alcoholic father raped a ... woman and had the misfortune of fathering YOU...piece of shit who uses the fact that he was taunted all his life ... to bring misery and bitterness to Wikipedia. You're the worst example of a wikipedia editor and a human being in general.
...you come across as a bitter 15 year old emo kid. You will never amount to anything except a lonely old english teacher (which means you are also probably a pedophile). The best thing for you to do would be to blow your fucking brains out.

Lemme know how that double-standard troll-enabling philosophy works out for you.

2)The stuff documented publicly isn't the worst thing that TruthCrusader seems to have done, but it shouldn't be dredged up unless absolutely necessary, since the energy-suck that's already taken place is bad enough, more drama is unhelpful, and there are privacy issues involved. He's blocked, and that should be the end of it.

3) And before you continue badgering Jpgordon, I should tell you that I have been advising not just Jpgordon, but two other admins, and they don't seem to have objected so far. If you want, I can ask them to contact you directly with their opinions -- or you can just stop assuming bad faith from a long-time admin and member of ArbCom, namely Jpgordon. --Calton | Talk 14:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are the one assuming bad faith, not me. I am only trying to find out what I need to know to make a correct decision. Since when is asking for input badgering? Your attitude here does not help your case. RlevseTalk 14:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Hello Rlevse. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue that you may be involved with. You are free to comment at the discussion, but please remember to keep your comments within the bounds of the civility and "no personal attack" policies. Thank you.

--Gene Nygaard 14:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on categories

I would like to ask you if you can call an RfC on categories. Category:Esterházy consists of Hungarian people who lived in the Kingdom of Hungary for centuries, even Britannica says they are Hungarian. See House of Esterházy where I brought three sources for the statement, all the articles about different members of the family say they are Hungarian. The category "Slovak noble houses" is added there by a Slovak user, because after the Treaty of Trianon a few of them lived in Czechoslovakia for a while like half a million ethnic Hungarians are living in Slovakia today as a minority. They were forced into Czechoslovak citizenship after World War I, does that make them a "Slovak noble house"? Squash Racket 14:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found it interesting that User:Squash Racket ask you for RfC without notifying me, although I am involved in this content dispute. To address his misleading message, that category ("Slovak nobility") was not added by a Slovak user, but by a respected admin User:Olessi, who, as far as I know, has never claimed any Slovak identity. Members of the House of Esterházy have lived in the territory of Slovakia for centuries and some of them have been citizens of Slovakia (or/and Czechoslovakia). The word "Slovak" in the category "Slovak nobility" is usually not interpreted as "of Slovak ethnicity". "Slovak" is an adjective related to "Slovakia". Squash Racket knows it very well as he has never removed the category "Austrian nobility" on ethnocentric grounds. Squash Racket seems to believe that everyone living in the Kingdom of Hungary was ethnically Magyar and all the nations that broke from the kingdom after World War I have no history prior 1919. I find this belief too simplistic because the kingdom was multiethnic, Latin (not Hungarian) was the official language for most of its existence, and the noble families had predominantly the class or confessional consciousness, not the ethnic one. Central European noble houses were so mixed and multilingual that a strict application of modern exclusive ethnic categories does not usually make much sense. However, Squash Racket insists on removing any mentions of non-Magyar nations from the articles on history of the region and highlighting the alleged Magyar ethnicity whenever possible. After many clashes with him in the past, I am quite fed up with all this. Tankred 15:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did not start an RfC, I was asking how to do it (I found no RfC for categories). The category was reverted by you multiple times, I don't know who added it originally, because I was not here. Members of the family lived in the Kingdom of Hungary for centuries. You talk about misleading messages? The word "Slovak noble house" means one thing, just like "Hungarian noble house". I don't know if Austrian noble houses should be removed, because some members of the family had German names, I will look into that also.
Not everyone in the Kingdom of Hungary was Magyar and I never said that (misleading messages?). Why does Britannica talk about them clearly as Hungarians if everything was so multiethnic then? Because Tankred is a better source than them? Before I forget it: noname The New York Times also talks about an ancient Hungarian family Esterházy. If you can pull up a source as credible as Britannica stating the House of Esterházy was a "Slovak noble house", category may remain. Squash Racket 15:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And about your nationalism accusations: you did that 10 minutes after you posted here[1]. Squash Racket 16:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can start an RFC, you don't need me. I really don't know much about this area of history, so I'm not sure if I'd be much use. If you start the RFC, I'll at some point comment if you remind me. RlevseTalk 21:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nrcprm2026 Sockpuupet

The evidence linking User:Starkrm to User:Nrcprm2026/James Salsman will be forthcoming after the RfCu is complete, It was filed on 10/16 and I have no idea why it has taken so long for anyone to act on it. The accusation that this is some kind of wild goose chase or a fishing expedition is without merit, as the newly listed users on the RfCu have a editing history that matches his previous behavior.

Don’t threaten me with a block unless you yourself have some kind of evidence that I am not acting in good faith. Salsman has used dozens of sockpuppets [2], [3] in the past to evade his arbcom decision and now his complete ban from Wikipedia. Its editors like Salsman that have caused many users to leave Wikipedia in total disgust, and I think you should be a bit more understanding of that fact, and the need to aggressively police users like Salsman. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 16:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(from closed RFCU) “ Confirmed Becongito = Squee23 = CME94 = Publicola = Lots of other accounts blocked socks. Other accounts unrelated. --Deskana (talk) 11:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)” RlevseTalk 12:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, so we can expect Becongito, CME94, and Publicola to be indef-blocked very soon, right? I appreciate it. Thanks for your help in this matter. John J. Bulten 23:29, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I already did Squee23, forgot about the others, just did them. I'd say TDC owes Starkrm and I an apology, but I'm not holding my breath.RlevseTalk 23:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This makes me sad. The various socks of Nrcprm2026 have been extremely helpful and utterly nondisruptive on the Plug-In Hybrid entry. But, I am sure you have your reasons.Fbagatelleblack 01:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You just admitted a reason. If there nothing disruptive, why would he need multiple accounts on one article? Nrcprm2026 has multiple sock and cu cases onhand and dozens of known and suspected socks. You'd think he'd get the hint after awhile.RlevseTalk 01:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest reason is that User:Nrcprm2026 is BANNED user (see his user page), not merely blocked, any of his known socks have to be indef blocked. RlevseTalk 11:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the change you made in Scouting in Pennsylvania. Thta happens alot in the state pages. If you're going to remove those links, they should go into the article someplace. This speaks to a need for a standardized format for all the state articles for each council, district and camp is liusted, along with the links. --evrik (talk) 21:12, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This sockpuppeteer is trolling, deleting sock puppet templates and warnings, and breaking the 3rr rule. Steven Greiner 02:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First. I'm not a sockpuppeteer, Rlevse was wrong, but I accepted his decision.
Second. You have broke the 3rr rule, but I not. The second edit adds new information.
Third. You are a sockppupeteer 72.68.8.119/71.125.85.144 /Steven Greiner/Drjsveca/et cetera.
Fourth. You can't edit my user page, I can edit my user page.
Fifth. You are trolling and deleting 3rr templates and warnings.
Sixth. You are reverting established editors without discussing on the Tekken 6 talk page. Englishrose warned you in Tekken 6 history page (21:25, 1 November 2007) and you... undid his edition! --Sinh 02:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, you broke 3rr. I made three reverts. You made more than three. It still counts as a revert if you delete the default edit summary. I am not a sock puppeteer. My IP is 75.125.48.82. That is a shared IP so I have my own account. You are the one trolling and deleting templates and warnings given my an admin. I did discuss on the talk page. You are the one causing a revert war by adding questionable content during a dispute. The only established editor in the discussion is King Zeal. Steven Greiner 02:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning from me, this is for both sides and whatever sock puppetts may or may not exist. Learn to behave and work things out or I'll protect all the Tekken pages and block both of you. Drjsveca is definitely a sock of someone as legit new accounts don't make SSP reports right off the bat-sorry I didn't notice this before. I'm blockingDrjsveca. However, I still think Pedro is a sock too. Reverting editors who make legit entries with refs is a mistake, cease and desist. There is definitely fishy stuff going on here, stop it, all parties. Non admins should not be removing sock tags, whether it's your user page or not. Sinh violated 3RR, not Steven Greiner, it takes 4 edits to vio 3RR. BOth are warned on this now. Both need to use talk pages before making controversial edits. RlevseTalk 03:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other IP, same person, it's evident on the history of my discussion and user pages. And Steven Greiner is not a new user, also it's evident. He wrote on the Tekken 6 talk page when Englishrose warned him, not before. And he can´t constantly edit the article against the consensus, it's vandalism. My reverts are consensuaded with others editors. He broke 3rr (3 by Steven Greiner + 1 by 72.68.8.199).--Sinh 03:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think Drjsveca is 71.127.212.103 who created account just to make the SSP report because IPs can't make SSP reports. Sinh is adding controversal material into the article. My reverts are also consensuaded with other editors. I am not 72.68.8.199. My IP is 75.125.48.82. Just because more than one person is reverting your vandalism and trolling does not mean they are the same person. Debatable material should be removed and worked out on the talk page. It is better to have less content than bad content. The article is about an unreleased video game. More information is coming. Be pacient and stop telling other people to read the rules when you are the one who is breaking them. This is the second time Sinh has broken 3RR. Steven Greiner 03:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tekken 6, which this seems to be mostly about, has been full protected. This will expire in 3 weeks. Info on future releases can be added to articles if it has a valid ref--this also seems core to this dispute. Everyone chill out and wait for the release.RlevseTalk 11:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What??

Think you crossed the wires. You blocked Netmoger saying that was his sock. Unblock him asap. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 16:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OOPS, SORRY, my goof. RlevseTalk 16:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OH a demand from a master. I am begining to like wikipedia. Anyway, Relevse, why is that you jumped on the guns to block an apparent sock and still like to have confirmed socks around ? Are we all loosing sense of reality ? What happened to not being a Hypocrite Watchdogb 16:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What or whom are you talking about? RlevseTalk 16:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL it's okay guys :-D now he's unblocked. --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie | tool box 16:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Watchdogb-Kelbaster was attacking both Lahiru and Netmonger and I was doing three things at once on wiki and made a simple goof, Lahiru merely pointed it out. RlevseTalk 16:28, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that netmonger should be unblocked but my concern is something else. Jumping on the guns to block an apparent sock when sock masters (I don't like naming users) run around free. Doesn't this particular unproved sock get same treatment (IE unblocked) like others ? So that we all do not violate WP:AGF being a hypocrite Watchdogb 16:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do lots of SSP cases, and Kelbaster is a sock or meat, no doubt about it. If you're not going to tell me who you're talking about, I can't do anything about it. Also, there are so many socks on the Sri Lanka issues, we'll never find all of them. Email for privacy if you like. RlevseTalk 16:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ding you got mail Watchdogb 16:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

Sorry to bother you here, but in your declined block request [4] of Auroranorth, you simply cited his long block history. Alot of his blocks were in his early days as a wikipedia user (early active days) since his last block, he has come back to wikipedia with a purpose and has made some good contribs. All I am asking is that maybe you see past his block history. I think the week ban was very much on the harsh side, i think 48 hours would be appropriate. Please note: I am not an A-grade troll or anything. Thanks for your time. Twenty Years 02:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/TyrusThomas4lyf (5th)

I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the one week block placed by Jéské Couriano (e.g. [5]) was merely a provisional block in response to my request: [6]. That is, I thought that the one week block was merely to provide time for a consensus to be made on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/TyrusThomas4lyf (5th). This is a permanently banned user, after all, so I don't see how the one-week block is commensurate with this user's past history. Are you sure that you don't want to leave this case open prior to this case receiving any commentary? Myasuda 02:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas is indefinitely blocked,[7], the IP for a week. We can't block IPs indef. If there's more to this, ask Jéské to respond here. RlevseTalk 02:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re User:Mattisse complaint at ANI here

Hi. You placed a {{resolved}} tag with the comment "Editor indef blocked" on the above matter. I have reviewed the block logs and neither party, Mattisse or User:Cyborg Ninja, appears to be blocked (nor are they notified on their talkpages). Have you blocked either editor? If so, I would like to discuss the reasons - but I am more inclined to think that the template was intended for another matter. I have, in the meantime, removed the template. Cheers. LessHeard vanU 11:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, yep, that was a goof, sorry and thanks for correcting it.RlevseTalk 11:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. LessHeard vanU 11:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Olga

Can you check my translation of polish article about Olga Drahonowska-Małkowska? Sorry for late translation, I will try to do it faster next time. Jpp.pl 12:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. Her father was a trustee of what? He was a trustee of farm, which was property of polish baron.

2. Does finishing school "extramural" mean she studied at home or was tutored outside of school? She studied at home

3. In English, Polish and Scout/Scouter/Scouting are proper nouns and start with capital letters. ok

4. I notice you used British English, not American. No big deal -;) i don't see the diffrence yet :)

5. Was their son born in America? When did they arrive in USA and when did they go back to Europe? Her son was born in USA, she arrived in 1915 and go back in 1916

6. What country did she take the students to in WWII before she went to the UK? Probably to Romania, where most of polish goverment goes, but i will check in sources

7. Did she remarry after her husband died? no

Thanks for the prompt reply! PS, you forgot to log in, your IP is from Prague, Czech Republic.
  • British English--colour, organise, instalment,
  • American English--color, organize, installment

Hi Rlevse. Thanks for that. —Moondyne 14:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Looks like his teen fan club is rallying, no surprise. RlevseTalk 14:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying your decline on Auroranorth's block. Much appreciated. Apologies for commenting on your decline, you were merely doing your job. Thanks alot. Twenty Years 15:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this comment. Don't worry about the first one.RlevseTalk 15:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: AN

I've responded there, and apologize if my comment came off the wrong way. Cheers, east.718 at 20:12, 11/4/2007

Thanks, yes it did not appear as humor. Regards.RlevseTalk 20:14, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Silverye is not a sockpuppet!

  • You left a note saying that this user was blocked as my sockpuppet. I have no idea who this user is or what their agenda is, but he/she is certainly no sockpuppet of mine. What possible evidence do you have? That the user agreed with me on a Talk page? This action of yours seems capricious and unfair.   Skopp   22:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I said your likely sock, not was your sock. Even if it's not a sock, it's still an SPA. RlevseTalk 23:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reversed myself based on evidence sent by Silvereye.RlevseTalk 11:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Gene

Sorry, I forgot to reply to your comment on my talk page. I am aware that Gene is already under a few bans. Most of my interventions to WP:ANI have to do with Gene and his occasional violations to those bans. It's exhausting. I wish that an effective, permanent remedy could be worked out. Any ideas? Best regards, Húsönd 00:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yep, indef block him. Gene has had plenty of chances to reform, but hasn't, a la ignoring his move ban, repeated incivility, etc. He's on his last leg. I do not ever see him reforming, so any infractions from here on in and I'd most likely support an indef block. RlevseTalk 00:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't agree more, and I would support an indef block as well. Gene causes more trouble than benefit, Wikipedia would fare well without him (would fare very well indeed as proven by his long wikibreak with its refreshing lack of diacritics conflicts). Húsönd 01:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's important to distinguish the previous solved diacritics issue from the current civility issue. As it is, as administrators involved in the case and/or in its discussions, I think it would be useful if you could comment on the latest here and here. Thank you in advance, Mondegreen 17:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GlassCobra's RfA

My RFA
Hey Rlevse! I wanted to say thanks a ton for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I was really afraid that after the IRC thing, you'd oppose me. ;) Anyway, I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any backup or second opinions! GlassCobra 01:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

B

It looks like B retired. )-: --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 13:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptions has begun again after a lull

See here and here. Thanks Taprobanus 14:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please take another look at the thread you started on WP:ANI about your block of Beh-nam? Thanks, Fut.Perf. 18:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See response there.RlevseTalk 20:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for reconsidering. Fut.Perf. 21:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock of Vintagekits

Hi. I'm reading the continuing discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unblock request review needed at User talk:Vintagekits and I notice that you have not given your rationale for unblocking Vintagekits. I wonder if you would mind doing so. (Your unblock reason ("per talk page request") does not really make it any clearer.) Thanks in advance. --John 23:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See comment just left there.RlevseTalk 00:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

Remembrance Day


--nat Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?! 03:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need your input

Hey Rleves , how u doing ? I would appreciate it a lot, if you could make a comment at the Srilanka talk page. Some people are insisting adding some stuff, which I think is not necessary. If we are to go by this, we need to add same thing for another 100+ countries!! I consider this as a blatant insult to my country ,and would like to know what you think of this.

And about the reconciliation project,As I have told you before I would only join after a full sock-puppet check on all the controversial users. I don't think its appropriate for me to talk and discuss things with people,who I consider socks.I am extremely sorry, but I can't honesty talk to those kind of people.Iwazaki 会話。討論 14:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied at the talk page Sri Lanka. Thanks a lot for your input.Iwazaki 会話。討論 01:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did 2 edits at the Batticaloa article, one was a revert and other though I mistakenly wrote it as rv in the edit summary, I was merely adding the edit restriction tag to the article. I thought I must inform you this, otherwise some people might misunderstand the situation and might think I have violated 1RR (when I didn't). Also I would appreciate it, if you take a look at the comments made by Bodhi-dana at the talk page. Some one is running a mock at the article removing references/sources like no tomorrow. Thank youIwazaki 会話。討論 06:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please do something regarding this vandalism? Even after your comments at the talk page, he hasn't stopped this.Thanks Iwazaki 会話。討論 18:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Call to attention

Just wanted to notify you about this [8]. Thanks. Sinhala freedom 15:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sri Lanka issue

Re: User talk:Black Falcon/Archive 4#Sri Lanka issue

Thank you for the invitation and please accept my apologies for the late reply. Of late, my editing time has been almost entirely consumed by various Africa-related articles, tasks involving WikiProject Africa, and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion (which has a substantial backlog that I'm working on). I see that the discussion on the AN/I subpage has already closed; still, I would like to help in any way I can so ... please briefly let me know how I can be of use. Thanks, Black Falcon (Talk) 00:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For now, just keep an eye on the disputes and chime in when necessary. They are normally here or on the SLR project talk page. RlevseTalk 02:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I've watchlisted the SLR page and will keep an eye on the 20 or so SL-related articles on my watchlist. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 04:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be a big help. Thanks!RlevseTalk 10:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I'm awarding you this prestigious Defender of the Wiki Barnstar because you have gone above and beyond to prevent Wikipedia from being used for fraudulent purposes. Wikidudeman (talk) 19:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Basic admin work. Wikidudeman (talk) 19:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFA BeanoJosh2

Hello Rlevse, seen as you are the only admin to have voted in the request, I would like to flag your attention to the edits of BeanoJosh on his requests, which are unprecedented and alarming. It may have been a syntax problem with my computer, but has BeanoJosh removed all his oppose comments here? Rudget Contributions 20:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. He's says on the RFA it was an accident, but he won't make it anyway. RlevseTalk 21:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for continually protecting my user space. It's very much appreciated! --Oxymoron83 17:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem!RlevseTalk 18:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Snowolf

The point is that "vandalism-only user" would be, for instance, someone who adds InfectedPenis.jpg to articles about math, or does a find-and-replace to convert every occurrence of the word "mammal" into the word "reptile" into articles on zoology. Snowolf may be a problem in many ways, opinionated and rude and uncompromising, but he is a genuine user. Just look at his list of pages that he's created himself.

You don't have to use the reasons in the pulldown menu; they're just suggestions. DS 19:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to wheel war, but I'm not sure you have a full grasp of the background here. I know that, my point is my picking vandal only vice vandalism by mistake does not warrant unblocking in this case. Yes, he is a user, but he has been warned and blocked multiple times and still does not get it. His disuption can not be allowed to unseat the community effort to make the Sri Lanka peace effort on wiki come undone. All the other Sri Lanka editors are at least trying to cooperate on the peace effort. If this effort fails, the Sri Lanka case will go to Arbcom, like Digwuren and the East Europe articles. This was all worked out in standard dispute resolution process, see the WP:SLR pages and the links in the tags at the top of many of the Sri Lanka articles. RlevseTalk 19:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that he deserved the block; my point is only that he should not have been blocked for that reason. I was going to reblock him for the duration, but then I realized that there were only 4 of the 72 hours left, so... meh. He was blocked for 68 hours, that should be enough. He's done enough to earn his punishment; don't punish him for things he didn't do. DS 19:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, even though we end up at the same defacto result.RlevseTalk 21:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Fed-up with User Beh-nam (means without name in Persian)

The user User:Beh-nam freqnetly removes photos from the article Malalai_Joya without having any reason for doing so. Please warn him/her. She/he has been blocked many times in the past for such destractive edits. Thanks. Sodaba 23:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Left msg on talk page. RlevseTalk 23:31, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But he/she still continue to remove the images. سودابه 22:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sodaba (talkcontribs)

You around?

I've been watching this username that I almost reported to UAA, but noticed the bot had reported it, so I didn't. However, it was removed from the list with the reason "No contribs". I feel that regardless of the contrib history, this name is a violation of WP:U, and needs a block, and would like your esteemed opinion. [9] ArielGold 23:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yea, but I have to leave in a few. RlevseTalk 23:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I know you don't want to do username stuff, lol, but nobody else I know seems to be around. It's okay if you can't look at it. ArielGold 23:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, Until noticed it too, and went ahead and blocked the name. Go to your hot date! ~*Hugs*~ ArielGold 23:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~*Bonk*~ You have email! ArielGold 18:47, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL Sorry I didn't know you were still working on the article, sorry for the edit conflict! Let me know when you're done, there are a lot of spacing issues in there, with words crammed against other words by accident, I'd be happy to fix them if you like. ArielGold 19:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Re: IRC tonight: Later maybe, I'm talking to My Lord atm! ArielGold 02:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beh-nam

I don't know why Behnam (really Beh-nam) is saying he's never been blocked before, [10], see here. 23:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I meant indefinate block. The real question should be, how would user: Sodaba know that I was ever blocked? I highly suspect that this is another sockpuppet of user: NisarKand. I've known him and his socks for over a year now and I'm familiar with his editing paterns. However I cannot prove it at the moment. -- Behnam 02:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also please take note: why would this user: Sodaba of all the admins come to you... the same admin that user: NisarKand's recent sockpuppet was dealing with in accusatations against me. That was user: Khan182, he was confirmed to be NisarKand's sockpuppet and banned. Is highly doubt this is all a coincedence. -- Behnam 03:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Malalai Joya

Why do you keep removing photos from this article? This would be disruptive behavior. RlevseTalk 23:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I deleted that image is because it has a false licsense. Wikireporter cliams that is his image. But, he also claims that this image is his, which is from decades ago. This person could not have taken both of these photographs. user: NisarKand and his many sockpuppets used to upload images of these two figures and had a well known habit of putting false licenses. Either way, the image has a false license and should be removed. -- Behnam 02:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WOSM crisis

I started a subpage on this matter because there are at least five statements published on the web and three discussions going on. The Swedish discussion is the most interesting as the Swedish International Commissioner (WOSM) answers the questions. --jergen 08:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, very interesting.RlevseTalk 10:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HB

LOL! What a wonderful surprise...and just the right number of candles too...<eek!>. Thanks, man...that means a lot... Dreadstar 10:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rlevse. Can you please comment on the following issue here. Thanks Watchdogb 07:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rlevse,

Looks like other admins took care of this case already. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BigAreolas

Suspected sockpuppets

BigAreolas (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Thanks for the reply, there's no meat or stock puppets, I can fend just fine for myself. Just because someone reads a blog and likes it doesn't make them a puppet. I dont have a 210.0.202.30 as a puppet either, run a whois check on it and see where it is - not even closely related. I'll talk to my friend and see if he's interested at all at continuing to be part of wiki, but I've seen worse usernames. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caddcreativity (talkcontribs) 23:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't mean that this one is okay. RlevseTalk 23:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


did anyone ask him to change his username? He is human and might actually be willing to do it, try contacting him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caddcreativity (talkcontribs) 23:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi

hi, please note my latest edits are not vandalism and i have citations to back my comments up. thanks. --[[79.72.17.43 01:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)]][reply]

RE: QFA

Gotcha, thanks buddy. :) By the way, how do you salt a page? GlassCobra 01:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for unblock

Thanks for the unblock, Rlevse. Let's see how long it lasts…24.19.33.82 06:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance Requested

Would you mind taking a look here: Image talk:USS Kentucky (BBG-1) concept artwork.jpg and possibly bring a voice of reason and clarity? Thanks, MBK004 09:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy, I hear and I agree with you, I've had this same argument with the FU people many times; and whether we like it or not, the way they are interpreting wiki policy is the way it is. Example, if you want an image of an Albanian Girl Scout and can't find one, you're expected to find the wiki category for Albanians on wiki, contact them, and ask them to get you one that's free. Wiki may well be devoid of FU images one day. This is the reality of things.RlevseTalk 12:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sock Blocked?

Here, you said Hippiodude (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was blocked as a sock of White Tyson (talk · contribs). Thought I would let you know the user is still making incivil comments directed at me and others on months old conversations at Talk:Brock Lesnar here and (not months old, but still inappropriate comments) here. And if you look at his talk page he pretty much admits he is a sock puppet, and doesn't care, that is evident here. Thank you for your help. Bmg916Speak 15:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rats, I closed the SSP case and tagged his page, but forgot to do the block. Sorry for the trouble, I just blocked Hippiodude. I am looking into the rest now. RlevseTalk 16:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, I understand, you're probably incredibly busy as I see you are very active at WP:SSP, as well as with other admin duties I'm sure. No worries, just thought I'd bring it to your attention, thanks again! Bmg916Speak 16:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I do a lot here. We need more admins at SSP too. Let me know if you have further problems. Hippiodude could be blocked on incivility alone. RlevseTalk 16:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Will definitely be in touch if there are any more obvious socks. I have a sickening feeling these are actually socks of the banned user Verdict (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) but I would have a harder time proving that. I would help out at SSP most definitely if I were an administrator and a user actually just offered to nominate me, but if I ever do I'm at least going to wait another couple of months as unfortunately a few weeks or so ago I let myself get dragged into an edit war at Kristal Marshall over whether or not she was actually released from WWE, and so subsequently on World Wrestling Entertainment roster as well where I violated WP:3RR and I am extremely ashamed and embarrassed by these actions. However, shortly after being reported the page was locked and I came up with a compromise all sides agreed upon. But again, I am extremely ashamed and embarrassed by what I did, so standing for adminship at this time I just don't think is in the cards. Thanks again for your hard work and help. Bmg916Speak 16:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, you got to resist those urges to edit war and be uncivil. The need for instant gratification can come back to bite you. Let me know if you go for RFA.RlevseTalk 16:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hear ya. Will definitely let you know if I go for RfA. For now though, time to go rake those damn leaves...Bmg916Speak 16:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip, I will definitely do that. Bmg916Speak 19:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite

Thanks for the invite, but, although I am a scout, I'm not sure I have the knowledge to help on your project, sorry! PhilB ~ T/C 18:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auno3

Hi Rlevse, I'm pretty sure that's a sockpuppet, so I've indef blocked him and closed the case. I think the obsession with Cutts is pretty strong evidence.

Nice work on dealing with the SSP backlog--it's nice to see the page so empty! --Akhilleus (talk) 17:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am angry

Yes, I am very angry at you. Why did you facilitate such obvious rogues? Why did you help their lying smear campaign against me? Are you cobbling up an 'Eichmann'-style defence?

WHAT ON EARTH CAME OVER YOU?

Rhinoracer 18:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a sock or a master

Please take a look at the discussion at Edmund the Martyr. EdChampion is a single purpose editor who has been blocked before for edit warring and not engaging in discussion. He knows a great deal about WP policy, yet edits nothing other then Edmund the Martyr. HE is certainly a sock puppet and while I have a pretty good idea who he belongs to - a banned user - I have never attempted to have him checked. He is an annoyance, but all consensus (5+ editors) is against him.

Whatsupwestcoast and I are both members of a Wikiproject, so there is some overlap in our edits, but he is Canadian and demonstrates it with knowledge that only a local could have. I am an American and have never been to Canada. My personal details are all on my user page, EdChampion googled me a few month back to get my cell number, and in my line of work all my info is the internet. I figured I may as well be out with it all. The article in question has gone RfC in an attempt to end this problem once and for all. Consensus is almost certainly going to go against EdChampion (even his name is POV) and he is getting desperate. Do as you will, but please take a moment and have all the facts before you start calling editors "meat puppets" - if that is the case, Angus McLellan, David Underdown, The Rambling Man, Edmund Patrick and others are all puppets, too. Consensus is 100% against the position insisted on by EdChampion and it is not because of article ownership or sock puppetry, it is because he is advancing a fringe opinion that merits no further mention in the article. Please see for yourself. Best. -- SECisek 23:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"could be meat puppets" was a generic statement.RlevseTalk 23:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken, best -- SECisek 23:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, can't you just check our IPs? this is mine: 98.193.26.175 00:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I could if I also knew his and could prove they both belonged to you both. Ask for an RFCU too--that would do it. RlevseTalk 00:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It says: Checkuser on yourself to "prove your innocence"...Such requests are not accepted. Please do not ask. What can I do? -- SECisek 00:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Provide info asked for on your talk page,put it on the SSP page, or I could ask for the RFCU but that usually takes several days to get a result. RlevseTalk 00:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not too worried about it if nobody else is. Thanks for the info, though. -- SECisek 00:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My (Remember the dot)'s RfA

I never thanked you for participating in my RfA a couple of weeks ago. Thank you for your support, though unfortunately the request was closed as "no consensus". I plan to run again at a later time, and I hope you will support me again then.

Thanks again! —Remember the dot (talk) 06:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 45 5 November 2007 About the Signpost

Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy"
News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 3, Issue 46 12 November 2007 About the Signpost

Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale"
News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 08:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my RFA

Thankspam

Hello. You closed the sockpuppet case on MaryPoppins878 which is great! Thank you. Question though, it doesn't look like they are blocked or maybe there's just no message on their account yet? Not sure which, just wondered if the closing and your agreeing means they are going to truly be blocked as a sockpuppet of the permanently banned Grant Chuggle. Thank you for your assistance on the matter. Irish Lass 13:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked it, see [11], but just forgot the blocked parameter on the sock tag. RlevseTalk 13:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!! Have a good day! Irish Lass 13:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking care of Peter zhou (talk · contribs) earlier. If you get a chance, you might want to check out Train t (talk · contribs) - it looks like his first edit is picking up where Peter/Jacky left off. Thanks!  Folic_Acid | talk  16:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Feel free to remind to check on this Train t, it does look suspicious.RlevseTalk 16:11, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:WiccaWeb sockpuppetry

I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. I would, however, like to bring an item for discussion, and that is the possibility that, despite their disparate locations, WiccaWeb and Proxy User (and the other IPs) are the same person. I believe this is possible because of the McChord AFB - Colorado Springs, CO Air Force connection. The language is just too similar, and both appeared about the same time. It's possible he's jumping servers in the Air Force network or goes from one location to the other on temporary duty (very common). FWIW. Again, thanks and have a Wiki day! Mmoyer 16:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are willing to provide a good set of diffs so I don't have to go digging through their logs, I'll reopen. If so, let me know and I'll unarchive the case. It's possible they're different people with similar interests. What is there btwn the AFB in WA and CO other than they're AFBs? RlevseTalk 16:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but there is no connection as Mmoyer might like you believe, I’m just a guy with an opinion and too much time on my hands. And, what does an Air Force facility in Colorado Springs have to do with anything (It's 70 miles SOUTH of Denver)? In fact there are several Air Force facilities a lot closer to Denver: Buckley AFB for one (Not to mention the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, which has an Air Force component - Google is our friend.), but why would an AFB facility in Colorado and one in Washington State share a set of IP ranges? Of course they would not. "Jumping servers"? Good lord. Mmoyer has no clue what he's talking about. But it's irrelevant, this is a personal vendetta on Mmoyer's part, and should be dismissed as such. What any of this has to do with user WiccaWeb is anyone's guess, probably just Mmoyer thinking out of his tail pipe. Proxy User 21:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Information

OK, after an hour and a half of work, here are the diffs and quotes, broken down:

Language similarities (from talk pages):

WiccaWeb:

  • Please don't patronize me with this kind of crap. I've been around bikers most of my life. Mostly Jokers, but the Bandidos don't stray far from that tree, their own public record simply don't support your flowery view. [12]
  • Give it a break. No one would consider that a "personal attack". You're overreacting. And, some might consider YOUR comments on my page as intimidation. Are you trying to intimidate me because you disagree with my comments about the nature of the Bandidos? One might get that impression. I don't intimidate well, I find it an offensive and unbecoming quality all to prevalent here at Wikipedia by the "old timers". Please stop now. I'm sorry you disagree with me about the nature of the Bandidos, but me saying your comments where patronizing is not a "personal attack", it's a suggestion that you maybe need to look at your approach to talking to people. Please get a life and try to focus on worthwhile Wiki activities. [13]

131.30.121.23 (from McChord AFB):

  • It is IMPROPER to remove the Neutrality POV tag. Clearly there is an issue, and it's being glossed over by editors that have a bias of denying factual evidence of the nature of Bandidos MC in favor of a fictional description that ignores documental activities. Until it is PROPERLY addressed, the Neutrality POV tag stays. If it takes filing a formal complaint and bringing in an unbiased admin / editor to hash it out, than that’s the way it will be. [14]

Proxy User (account has only been used on [[[Bandidos]]-related issues [15]):

  • (re-attributing above edits by 131.30.121.23 to himself) It is IMPROPER to remove the Neutrality POV tag. Clearly there is an issue, and it's being glossed over by editors that have a bias of denying factual evidence of the nature of Bandidos MC in favor of a fictional description that ignores documented activities. Until it is PROPERLY addressed, the Neutrality POV tag stays. If it takes filing a formal complaint and bringing in an unbiased admin / editor to hash it out, than that’s the way it will be. [16]
  • As I predicted, you use meaningless centrifuge to restrict content of this article to your point of view (otherwise known as bias). In a week or so, I will add a section on Illegal Activities that will be well supported by proper references, and I will defend it and insure that it stays included. You say that "the statement that the article contains a "fictional depiction of the Bandidos" does not seem entirely true." which of course implies that it is in part true. [17]

Edits to Bandidos:

  1. WiccaWeb adds POV tag [18]
  2. 131.30.121.23 adds "an outlaw motorcycle club with a worldwide membership linked to organized crime including drugs and rostitution" (4 attempts) [19] [20] [21] [22]
  3. 75.172.38.233 adds "with ties to organized crime, drug dealing, and prostitution." [23]
  4. 75.172.38.233 re-adds POV tags (4 attempts, and then blocked) [24] [25] [26] [27]
  5. 131.30.121.23 re-adds POV tag using exact undo action as 38.233 [28]

Summary. WiccaWeb and Proxy User argue with the same style, both visually and grammatically. Proxy User's account is created only after I suggest that Wiccaweb was rude, with his "don't patronize me with that crap" comment. Proxy user attributes talk by 121.23 to himself by changing the signature line. 121.23 and 38.233 make almost identically worded edits, and then 121.23 attempts to add the same POV tag using the same undo action as that for which 38.233 was blocked. As for the geographical distance between the two IPs, any halfway clever tech can bounce off a couple of servers.

Additionally, WiccaWeb's only edit since 22 October (which was to erase a level 2 warning from his talk page [29]), was to respond to your closure of the sockpuppet case.

In short, there's no such thing as a coincidence.

Oh, BTW, I am female, not "some guy". Also, thanks for reconsidering! You poor admins go through so much. Mmoyer 03:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I just noticed: WiccaWeb's response to the sockpuppet case? "Don't think so..." [30] Here's the curious part: This from a user who practically went nuclear over my comment to him that he was less than polite!? [31] It seems more than a wee bit out of character. FWIW. Mmoyer 03:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you've re-opened the case, can you please update your notices of closure on the various parties user pages? Cheers! Mmoyer 14:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias

Hey Rlevse, I just wanted to thank you for cutting User:Rorybowman a little slack and taking the time to explain things to him. He's a kind of a newbie to Wikipedia, but one very few users around who are interested in improving articles about our mutual home town. So thanks again, VanTucky Talk 19:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.RlevseTalk 19:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, me old mate!

Please see this.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 21:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please note that User:Rambutan as a name was shed by means of a username change - it's not an alternate account.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 21:16, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

My power flickered and my comp restarted. When I got back, everyone was gone, lol. ArielGold 23:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SSP

I added more evidence to the Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Verzastyle case. Is this what you wanted, or was there something else? Please let me know! ≈Alessandro T C 13:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to update you on the case; the ip address that was connected in the case blanked the ssp page. lol. ≈Alessandro T C 15:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A user you blocked for 1 month is active as an IP

You recently blocked User:Scipo for 1 week for edit warring. But the user has returned this evening editing unlogged as 205.206.117.219. IP edits mirror the 'edit war' changes made by Scipo. The IP has been tagged previously as being a Scipo 'anon haunt'. 156.34.219.206 03:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Submit a case at WP:SSP and provide good diffs. RlevseTalk 03:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't done one before so I asked a 'logged' user wiki-friend to create a sandbox page for me to play in.(see User:Scarian/Sandbox. I found another Scipo sockpuppet earlier and tagged the new accounts talk page. I will add this new username to the WP:SSP report when its filed showing all the similarities in the edits between Scipo... his home 205.X IP and this new account Arthur2001 (talk · contribs). I am busy at work so a formal SSP will not be done until later on this evening. Once a SSP has been started... and I find more socks(as I suspect there will be) can I just continue to add them into the current case? Or do I have to wait and file a new report after the first one has been dealt with. Thanks for all your assistance. Cheers and take care! -- 156.34.142.110 (talk) 17:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you requested. A case has been opened see: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Scipo. -- 156.34.142.110 (talk) 19:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Lanka Reconciliation barnstar

The Sri Lanka Reconciliation Award
For your merits in bringing about the Sri Lanka dispute resolution, the WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation herewith presents you this Sri Lanka specific award, which is the blossom of one of the world's most loved drinks. — Sebastian 05:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you! RlevseTalk 11:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - sockpuppetry case

http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Userlogout&returnto=User_talk:Rlevse Log out Thanks for closing the harrassing case. For the record, I live nowhere near Chatswood, which is on the opposite side of Sydney. OptusNet must be routing a lot of their traffic through there... Anyway, thanks again! --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Gadget850#Featured List of the Day Experiment. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 12:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected_sock_puppets/Dbromage

It's gone to arbitration [32] but the arbitrators seem disinterested/unaware of [33]. Before I'm banned (potentially due to the actions of a sockpuppet) I'd like someone to make a ruling or make the arbitrators aware of it. A fair hearing is all I ask. -- Tezza1 (talk) 22:42, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]