Jump to content

User talk:MuZemike

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.171.231.16 (talk) at 18:31, 3 October 2010 (Another quick thought...: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Or: The War Room

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!


User:MuZemike/Menu

Unblock request

Thank you for your block on this user. I wanted to let you know that the user has elected to "vanish" your block template on their page. I am uncertain if they are allowed to do this during their block period. Hasteur (talk) 13:12, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, there's actually a discussion about this here, but I personally am against to what they're proposing; it doesn't really matter to me if the user does or not, as long as unblock requests aren't blanked. He may need to be informed that everything is still present in the pages' histories, so blanking block templates, AFD tags, etc. accomplish virtually nothing. –MuZemike 14:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, this explains a lot. Stuff like this is a good reason why little kids need to stay away from Wikipedia in general, pedophilia notwithstanding; then again, there would be virtually no way to enforce age limits (YouTube is a prime example of such failure to do so; look at all the accounts there who claim to be 106 years old). –MuZemike 14:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2010 September newsletter

We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. New Orleans TonyTheTiger (submissions) leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by Hungary Sasata (submissions) with 1175 points. Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :)

Hi there, I'm User:Addihockey10, you may have heard of me, if you haven't - well here I am :). I was wondering, I was looking for someone to coach me and help me understand policies to an administrator caliber. I have put a request at WP:Admin coaching but it looks pretty inactive at the moment. I was wondering if you (or someone you know) would be willing to be my admin coach. Thank you for your consideration. Happy editing! --Addihockey10 17:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:AbraKadabraAlakazam.png

Just wondering, what exactly did you do here? Blake (Talk·Edits) 22:12, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just compressed the size of the PNG a little bit; there shouldn't be any cosmetic changes to the image itself. –MuZemike 22:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then. It just did not change much in size, so I was wondering if it was worth it. Blake (Talk·Edits) 22:16, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh hey, just letting you know that I commented on your assessment. Just in case you didn't watch the page. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scaredy_Bat

How do you know User:Scaredy_Bat is a sock puppet of User:Kagome_85?

And did User:Scaredy_Bat make any posts at all?

>.> sorry User:Kagome_85 forced me to quit here because of consent harassment and cyber stalking I use to be. User:Moukity

User:Kagome_85 actually has other accounts other then whats listed here

142.163.135.140 (talk) 22:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have checkuser, that's why. –MuZemike 22:42, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh OK Thank You Tho I must warn you User:Kagome_85 Will just make another account after another, It will never stop.

142.163.135.140 (talk) 23:36, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Scruffy" vandal

He's apparently planning a mass addition of "scruffy" to tons of talk pages tomorrow. He's also using multiple IP addresses. Could you please rangeblock him? ~NerdyScienceDude 22:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where did he say this? –MuZemike 22:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
71.178.152.143 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
71.178.154.43 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
I don't know where the threat was, but Scruffy is talking about "2:30" for some naughtiness. (I'm assuming the range would be too wide - might be easier just to semi various users' talkpages). TFOWR 22:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The threat is here. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: See also some archived older discussions:
--- Barek (talkcontribs) - 22:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can I haz sox?

Hi, just curious if you'd be willing to run a CU on Zarapastroso (talk · contribs), Isvie Mandalov (talk · contribs), and all IPs used to check for unblocked socks (if you haven't already). Thanks in advance, Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 02:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment): Yes, you can haz sox, but onlee in red. kthxbai. - NeutralhomerTalk02:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I haven't, and I probably won't bother, most of these ranges are too busy for me to hardblock or even softblock. Oh and Neutralhomer, I'd watch what type of Sox mentioned around here. We don't see red around here, because it's all black and white ;) –MuZemike 04:26, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I knew I would run into a White Sox fan with that comment. :) At least it wasn't one of these sox. :) - NeutralhomerTalk04:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to open a ban discussion on AN regarding this idiot. Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 04:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Who's going to preside over the ban discussion? Bill Buckner? –MuZemike 04:33, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AN notice about the scuffy vandal

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 04:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't think that's going to do much to discourage him from his abuse. –MuZemike 04:47, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's mainly because a de jure ban will make dealing with him easier, especially because he's taking advantage of dynamic IPs. Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 04:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As it stands, I already just use RBI with his edits on-sight, as do others. I read far enough to confirm per WP:DUCK, then pull up his contribution page and start hitting the revert button after blocking. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 04:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:John254/mass rollback.js Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 05:01, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another Yongle sock, this one also vandalising

Peter I of Russia (talk · contribs) is an obvious Yongle sock, but also taking an AfD template from an AfD I started and adding it to other articles. I thought that the IP range block would stop this. Any suggestions? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 06:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked another range on top of 3 more socks. –MuZemike 06:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Another editor has deleted a template (in Chinese, not English) he created. Dougweller (talk) 07:59, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this user scruffy?

Earlier today (in my timezone at least), What is to be said? (talk · contribs) was blocked as a sock of Zarapastroso (talk · contribs), a.k.a. Scruffy. Now I've noticed Desalinado (talk · contribs) whose activities so far exactly mirror those of the sock's initial career, issuing welcome messages to new users, possibly in order to gain auto-confirmed status. The evidence isn't incriminating enough for a block, but I wonder if an SPI is called for. The first sock let two weeks pass between the initial stage and the actual vandalism, which makes me wonder how many other sleepers are around. Favonian (talk) 17:47, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about filing an SPI; it's  Confirmed. –MuZemike 18:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another quick thought...

Dear MuZemike,

Thanks for defending me on WP:AN. I wanted to ask a quick question: Do you think the person will stop now? I think the threat of sanctions with his school/IP will suffice. I think this person was having fun, but I seriously doubt they want real trouble. This contradicts what I said moments ago on Access Denied's talk page, but after noticing your report I decided to interject.

Secondly, I.recommend trying to reconcile with the person. He or she seems to be upset with the project and knowledgeable og certain functions (ex.basic HTML). This person was probably a long time vandal at one point before and simply changed his/her tactics, or (what I personally think) an editor who was disaffected by certain members of the community. Adversaries should be spoken to and reasoned with. They are also a good thing because they make you stronger. So why not ask "Why? What are your motives?". Revert, block, ignore may help for most but maybe not for this person.

Thirdly, I recommend waiting after speaking with the person to see if they'll vandalize again. If they don't, squash it. If they do, send him or her to hell.

Thanks for your time and reflection.68.171.231.16 (talk) 18:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]