User talk:DoRD

Welcome to my talk page.

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply).
I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to Watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Ejiro okosieme

Please stop modifying Ejiro Okosieme's page. I created the page, and some of the information on there is false. It is to be deleted Robertb11 (talk) 13:47, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Robertb11: You are placing a user talk page notice in the article. It does not belong there, so I will be removing it again sortly. You have already stated your position at the AfD, so leave it at that. —DoRD (talk) 13:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DoRD: The page needs to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertb11 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Robertb11: That's probably true, but please let the deletion process run its course. Also, don't create, or have friends or family create any more accounts to tamper with the article. —DoRD (talk) 15:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How quickly can it be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertb11 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It will take approximately a week for the deletion discussion to conclude. Please see WP:AfD for details about the process. —DoRD (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. For the record he is born in 92. Not 94. That is wrong along with some other bits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertb11 (talk • contribs) 10:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave the date of birth as it is as it is causing confusion with his football. Nothing else will be tampered during the deletion process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertb11 (talk • contribs) 10:57, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Angusford22 -- Amanda (aka DQ) 12:05, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@DeltaQuad: Yep, see my warning above. FWIW, Robertb is the actual master, as far as I can see. —DoRD (talk) 12:12, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cpsspag

Hello! I had a question for you regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cpsspag. What exactly IS a "Check User"? Trying to learn and I was curious what would lead you to decline a check user request? Thanks in advance. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 15:59, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CheckUser and the top of WP:SPI. There are very strict rules for use of CheckUser, and we avoid using the tool when sockpuppetry is so obvious as in the case above. —DoRD (talk) 17:37, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gamerdude2000 socks?

Is there a sock investigation page for Gamerdude2000 et al? I have a few more accounts to add, based on John Ashton (actor). Ibadibam (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I feel like there is already a related case somewhere, but I can't put my finger on it at the moment. At any rate, I've blocked those accounts along with a bunch more. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 21:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Libelous sock

DoRD and @Vituzzu: Thank you both for recently blocking a user here and here, for seriously abusive editing (now suppressed) that defamed a living person with wild accusations of serious crimes. The misconduct was just repeated under a new username, which seems likely to be a sock for the blocked account. Many thanks if you're able to take a look. —Patrug (talk) 01:05, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, and I've taken care of what I can. @Vituzzu:, you might want to have a look here as well. —DoRD (talk) 02:48, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Hathorn

Just blocked a fresh one per WP:DUCK. Is it useful to file an addendum to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Billy_Hathorn (e.g., to pick up sleepers) for a single IP? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:00, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see anything of interest on that range. I probably wouldn't bother, but feel free to add it to the case as a pro forma report if you like. Cheers —DoRD (talk) 00:13, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hathorn Redux

Not sure if this request is enough of a WP:DUCK to block. Your thoughts? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:48, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't think it's enough for a block, but then again, I haven't had much dealing with this sockmaster. —DoRD (talk) 14:33, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Impostor?

Is this account yours? Maybe better write something on the userpage if is? [Bishzilla always extremely virtuous about any whiff of impersonation or other irregularity.] bishzilla _ROARR!! 21:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah, it's just another creeper trollsock. Thanks for the note! —DoRD (talk) 22:06, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[Bishzilla is interested by the new and forceful term "creeper trollsock".] A bit like Darwinbish? bishzilla _ROARR!! 22:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Euclides of Megara

Hi DoRD. Page Euclid of Megara needs to be moved to Euclides of Megara to avoid confusion with Euclid the mathematician. Reasons and sources are listed at talk:Euclid of Megara.

Also, the disambiguation page Euclides (disambiguation) needs to be undeleted. For this dicussion, please see user_talk:Bkonrad. For Euclid, the relevance is not the obscure historical person but the mathematical iconic text Elements of Euclid. Euclides was Plato's close friend, and person, his philosophy, and his influence are what is of interest. The term "cut-and-paste" is deprecatory, "extract" is more appropriate. Euclides simply does not belong with Euclid's book or the many places and things named after Euclid.

The problem is that from my Plato scholar's perspective, this is an obvious factual naming mistake that needs correction. Current professional preference is for the spelling "Euclides". Since Wikipedia mirror sites and Wikipedia copycats amplify Wikipedia errors back onto the search engines, the confusion is perpetuated.

In my disagreement with Bkonrad, I was unaware that he is an administrator. I assumed that he was simply wrong. Now, on the talk page, it seems that a posse of admins are determined to squash the naming change in support of each other. This request is factual. I have verified this with the area editor of one of the two major online philosophy encyclopedias.

Nonetheless, it appears that my subject expertise will be discarded by the politics of the machinery. Perhaps that is one reason why there are only perhaps a handful competent editors in the philosophy areas of Wikipedia. How can the many less than acceptable articles in philosophy be improved if the experts are over-ruled by politics? ~~ BlueMist (talk) 01:29, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]