User talk:Alison/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

Clodagh Rodgers

I rewrote an article, Jack in the Box (song), the song by Clodagh Rodgers. I think it would be an interesting DYK hook but I think it needs more sources. I was wondering if you knew anything about it; it was rather interesting to me. Mike H. Fierce! 09:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully these will help! :) ~Eliz81^(C) 09:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Fclass

Hi Alison, when/if you get time, would you be able to do a CU on User:Fclass/User:Auto Racing Fan? See my talk page for more. Thanks, Gwen Gale (talk) 01:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Already done --> Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Auto Racing Fan - way ahead of ya, today :) - Alison ^❤ 01:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Ta! I knew it was him but at least now nobody need give it a second thought. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Welcome message

After seeing the name in my watchlist, I just had to check out the blue link at the user's talkpage, which led to the (expected) great discussion over usernames, and the mention of compilerbitch - which I'm glad I checked out too (marvelous pictures (hopefully soon at Haughton-Mars Project!)).  :) Anyhoo, I did just want to mention that your (I presume) welcome template is decidedly low-contrast and hence hard to read. I'd strongly recommend changing the colour scheme somewhat (dark text on a light-background is universally recommended). (There are some good colour-blindness simulators linked at Wikipedia:Colours#Using colours in articles too). That's it, sorry to bother ya :) -- Quiddity 01:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Compilerbitch (yes, she's here, too) is awesome, isn't she? I know her in RL, as it happens. Either way, you're absolutely right about that hideous welome box. It's a mess, and I intend to change it soon as I have a chance here. Thanks for letting me know :) - Alison ^❤ 05:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Busyyyyyy

I'm sorry, I'm neglecting my email, as well as many of the requests above. I'm swamped right now with day-job, family and good ol' daily life. I'll get to things as quick as I can! Sorry ... - Alison ^❤ 23:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Not Sockpuppetry

You blocked a bunch of accounts, Thais Alexandrina, etc., for sockpuppetry.

That was wrong. There was no sockpuppetry. Most of those accounts, as far as I could keep them straight, anyway, never referred to any other posting in a false reinforcement manner.

Wikipedia, as far anyone can tell, allows multiple accounts. Sockpuppetry IS ONLY when you abuse that by creating accounts that falsely reinforce each other to create a false appearance of consensus. I never did that.

Most of these accounts were actually article specific, so it would be impossible to create any such impression.

The only reason why this request was made was certain users, administrators actually, are pursuing some sort of vendetta over pervious edit disputes.

Your blocking of these accounts is wrong, there was no sockpuppetry, and you are being used to further some other person or person's unethical adgenda.

How you all deal with this kind of backstabbing all the time is beyond me. Not Thais Alexandrin (talk) 22:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Radiomango

I got a rather threatening email from Radiomango before Josh disabled his email, is it worth forwarding to anyone or just a RBI thing? MBisanz ^talk 02:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Wikipéire again

You might be interested in this SSP on User:Wikipéire. You checkusered one of his socks - I forget which one. I’ve Googled 78.16.xx.xx and 78.19.xx.xx and noticed these pages where your name pops up here and here and here (although I’m not sure what the last one entails). I know it’s impossible to prove - but if this is the same person, he could have edited as ‘78’ a hundred times. Does Wikipeire sound to you like an any editor you remember? --Matt Lewis (talk) 02:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Misspelled move

Can you help me with something? Eamonn's love of Irish got the better of him a little, and he moved Irish Defence Forces to Óglaigh na hÉireann (Irish Dence Forces). There's two problems with the move. Firstly, the Defence Forces themselves (and everyone else) call them the "Defence Forces" in English. (See: military.ie/.) WP:COMMONNAME would therefore suggest the page be titled as it was originally. (Who's going to type in "Óglaigh na hÉireann (Irish Defence Forces)" when looking for this subject?) Secondly, the spelling is wrong. Humorously so. Can you (or another admin) reverse this change until it is discussed and/or the spelling can be corrected? Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 20:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Apologies. No action necessary. I've corrected myself. (I didn't realise I could. Issues with "RTFM".) I'll update the talkpage and work on WP:CON with editor who moved. Guliolopez (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Is a disambiguation page for a country allowed?

We need to know this on Republic of Ireland talk. I'm asking you and Jza84, as you have both recently voted in a poll on this talk page. the question is asked here? --Matt Lewis (talk) 23:09, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Is a disambiguation page for a country (state, etc) allowed? --Matt Lewis (talk) 23:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Can we move Republic of Ireland to Ireland (state); Ireland to Ireland (island). Then create a disambig page, called Ireland. GoodDay (talk) 23:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't asking about the specifics. Alsion has already voted "no" to Ireland (state) as it goes. --Matt Lewis (talk) 23:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Sock puppet note

I wasn't sure whether you'd received the e-mail I had sent with all the detailed information about this sock puppet case in which you were involved because of an oversight issue. In any case, I posted this several hours ago, as one of the related IPs has been reverting old edits again. It's posted at WP:AN/I, but it's been 5 hours or so and the posting hasn't had a response. The sock came back and reverted again. I didn't know if you could deal with this or not, hopefully so. Wherever this location is, it's been used twice, several hours apart, so it may be a stable location? Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I am becoming quite upset with Wikipedia administrators and what seems to be the lack of desire to do anything about this. First let me say I am quite grateful for the removal of personal information that was done. But Rlevse then asked me to send any data I had about this person to you or to Thatcher, I believe for checkuser inquiry. I sent it to Thatcher. I sent it to you. I sent an email to Thatcher asking for verification that it was at least received. I posted the above note here, hoping for at least an acknowledgement that it had been received. I assembled and posted a checkuser request after the sock returned despite having invaded my privacy and posting it for any and all to see. I posted the notice at WP:AN/I after the sock returned. Outside of one adminstrator at the WP:AN/I dismissing my request for a longer block on at least the newest IP, no one appears to be acknowledging that I'm even here.

I appreciate the fact that this sock master frequently uses public internet access sites, and that the posts regarding my personal life were so well scrubbed, but it seems to me that the IP from where it was posted should have at least had a temporary block. It happened two weeks ago and the IP was 206.170.104.66. I am certain that the newest IP the sock used should have been blocked. If this person is using a public computer site, and other users aren't happy that they can't edit on WP, then let the site operators stop the person from using their equipment. Don't leave me vulnerable to convenience yet to be determined possible editors who can't be bothered to register. I would so like to be told that Wikipedia considers the combined actions of this person to be a problem and that at least dialogue is occurring behind the scenes to determine what can or should be done. It's a matter of common courtesy to at least acknowledge the problem still exists. It's unacceptable to be tilting at the windmills of non-action which seems to be saying that Wikipedia doesn't take my protection from malicious sockmasters seriously enough to at least go through the motions of blocking the most recently and most severe behaviors of this person. Is there someone elsewhere in Wikipedia I should be contacting about this? Wildhartlivie (talk) 12:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Fclass again

Hi Alison, could you please have a look at User:Noble12345? This is very likely User:Fclass again. Thanks! Gwen Gale (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

That's  Confirmed - Alison ^❤ 05:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Matt Lewis

Hi Alison. I've never (I don't think) contacted an admin with a personal problem before but these posts are beginning to creep me out [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] (I asked him two questions hereand I'm still waiting for a reply). Is this reasonable behaviour? Can anything be done? Scolaire (talk) 20:15, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Looking at this objectively I don't think Matt means any harm but does have rather an unfortunate way of expressing himself at times. The Thunderer (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

FWIW that is not my take on it - not this time anyway! Matt and I have a history but this is up a notch. Scolaire (talk) 20:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I can see why. The concept of going through your edit history and labelling you must feel quite offensive. I certainly feel that good faith and respect isn't being exercised, certainly when you consider my comments thus far though. Nothing a good (metaphoric) kick up the arse wouldn't cure though? It works with my wife (sometimes).The Thunderer (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

e/c I've asked you to wait a bit for a reply Scolaire - please be patient and wait for one (despite what you say I'll have to read through the most of the debate again). This is twice you have tried to get me into trouble when you do know I'm working flat out to help the project, despite what I see as the most oppressing negativity heaped onto people I'm working with to get them to 'pack up their bags' and go home. IMO, you have been over-bearingly one-way about this, and all I have done is respond to what is in front of me. You have not ceased in your argumentative force (admit it), and this is just another part of it in my opinion. I have just said to you I am working on something you may even like (or accept) - what is wrong with waiting for that? A equally long (if not longer) list of diffs I could compile about you over this matter will look a lot worse than the above, in my opinion. And Alison as an admin would need to look at both sides. I honestly went from thinking you were a strong republican (initally over you insisting on 'association' football as I am not normally on Irish pages) to being a NI unionist with a complicated Irish/British view on the Ireland matter, through conversation with you in this debate. Somebody else brought you up in a 'list', not me: I just corrected them (or so I thought).--Matt Lewis (talk) 20:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Matt, he's not trying to get you into trouble. He's asking for mediation by someone we all respect. Scolaire is concerned about the situation and is looking for a way to resolve it because he feels a bit picked on. Have you never felt that way? What would you like to see happen here?The Thunderer (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

He's not the only one who feel picked on here, believe me. I suggest waiting to see what I have to offer you both (and this is just a distraction to that). These are just storms in teacups compared to the wider issues. I don't even want to look at why I felt mislead - although I certainly will if I'm pursued on it. I am always in a position to compile a big case 'against' if I feel I'm forced too, as I only ever react to things I see. The last thing I have time to do is go around causing trouble.--Matt Lewis (talk) 20:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to offer me anything. I just want to see an end to this bickering. The Thunderer (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello? Alison? A reply would be nice! All I asked you for was an opinion. The man is "collecting evidence" on me and won't tell me why. Is that okay behaviour? Yes or no? Scolaire (talk) 06:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

It's past midnight here. I'll have to comment tomorrow sometime as this is not straightforward and I'd rather not make some off-the-cuff comment I might later regret. Tired after travelling all day .... - Alison ^❤ 07:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

In the meantime, I'd recommend both of you step back, consider all this to-date and preferable try to keep away from stepping on each other if at all possible - Alison ^❤ 07:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

g'day allie...

I was taking a look at my 'far too long to' watchlist earlier, and was reminded of the existence of this page.... dunno why I though of you, but I did, and I thought I'd ask you to take a look - I think you've commented on stuff like this in the past? either ways, I'm interested in your thoughts :-) Privatemusings (talk) 02:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

ps. I guess this counts as a 'bump'?! - hope you're good :-) Privatemusings (talk) 04:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Heyya PM. Okay, I'm on it :) Give me until tomorrow though, as I'm only just back after a glorious Wikipedia-free, work-free and drama-free long weekend. Totally chilled out. Hope you're good, too! - Alison ^❤ 04:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

My behavior

I like to apologize for what I've done.Max Mux (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Youngtrigg

It appears this RFCU was also created, but never properly listed. It should probably get deleted per the other checkuser. D.M.N. (talk) 13:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I have already taken care of it, thanks. Tiptoety ^talk 17:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a matter that is of serious importance in the United States.

Candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are involved in the allegations of wrongdoing and the press are following the issue.

It makes no difference if Young Trigg has stopped editing. He has admitted working for the McCain campaign and using SPA for POV sockpuppetry regarding the Sarah Palin page. Other Wikipedians are concerned becaue this is a very serious precedent and the implications are that it may be systematic and indicitive of admitted government involvement in propagandizing the media.

If a user can set up an SPA any time they want to skew the tilt of Wikipedia for political purposes and then escape unscathed this will continue until the encyclopedia itself is damaged.

The only remaining issue is how high up the chain of command the attempt to mislead the public goes. If people who were interested parties to the selection of Sarah (working for the McCain campaign does make you an interested party, but not so interested as if you are part of the vetting of Sarah) are editing her page and Wikipedia takes no action the press will have a field day. The issue is already frontpaged on the Daily Kos.Rktect (talk) 18:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#User:BigDunc The Thunderer (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

• No problem. I have given both a parties a final "sort it or ArbCom sanctions". Let's see how it goes. Black Kite 21:04, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Beh-nam returns?

I got this message recently on my talk page: The vandal who keeps switching the images on Template:Pashtuns is the indef banned User:Beh-nam. He is a radical Shia Farsiwan from Toronto, Canada, who is engaged in bashing ethnic Pashtuns everywhere on Wikipedia. His latest sockpuppets are Special:Contributions/PashtoonEditor and Special:Contributions/User:Mohammad777. You may report these sockpuppets to User talk:Alison, she is very familiar with Beh-nam and will be able to block him from future vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.67.129 (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC) Thanks! --Enzuru 23:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Highly likely to be Beh-nam, yes. And the complainant is, of course, Nisarkand :/ I know it's a pain, but can you possibly file two checkuser requests, please? I'm crazy-busy today and also, we need to start re-tracking these guys if they're both truly back. They don't have to be massively detailed, just some diffs and names, etc. Thanks! - Alison ^❤ 23:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

Do you think if we changed all the clocks back to yesterday, we could claim that we were being unfairly forced to work on a holiday? (The worst thing about Long Weekends is they eventually end! :P) :D SirFozzie (talk) 23:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Godz, yes, Fozzie. I was away for the whole weekend and, y'know, the work both on-and-off Wikipedia just squished itself up into today. Same stuff, and not dealt with :) I feel your pain, man!! :) - Alison ^❤ 23:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Signsolid's sockpuppets

Hi Alison. Did you check the accounts and IPs that I gave you in my previous message here? That was my previous message: User_talk:Alison/Archive_25#Another sockpuppet of Signsolid. I think they are sockpuppets of User:Signsolid. I further found this account and this IP address which I think are also Signsolid's sockpuppets:

• User:Usergreatpower
• User:88.111.120.139

Could you check them along with the ones I gave you in my previous message? Also, I see you asked me whether I could send you an email concerning my account that was blocked because I was wrongly accused of being one of Signsolid's numerous sockpuppets myself. How can I send you an email given that I don't have an account anymore? Do you have a public email somewhere? Thank you. Keizuko —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.107.236 (talk) 23:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok- will do. Soon as I get a minute here. Sorry for the non-response before. I'll look into it just as soon as I can - Alison ^❤ 23:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

This one appears to be  Inconclusive, technically. However, behaviourally they look very similar - Alison ^❤ 05:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyking's RFA

Yeah sorry, didn't realise it was closed. Still, the result was right, so no harm done. Grace Note (talk) 08:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Like hell it was right! Just Raul and few cranks who despise a fine content contributor. --Dragon695 (talk) 23:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipeire et al

Hello there Alison! Could I tempt you back to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ovlem? I suspect there's a correlation between Ovlem (talk · contribs) and ThatsGrand (talk · contribs), indeed you see these two in the same places, but never at the same time! I'm inclined to block but "innocent until proven guilty as they say".... :S Hope you can help --Jza84 |  Talk  19:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done and  Confirmed - sorry about the delay - Alison ^❤ 07:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It's reassuring that my insights served me right. Thanks again! :D --Jza84 |  Talk  13:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

New sock?

Hey Alison, do you think you can tell me if this is NisarKand or Beh-nam?

PashtoonEditor (talk · contribs)

Khoikhoi 07:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

 Confirmed as Beh-nam. See the "Beh-nam returns?" thread above .. it never made it to RFCU :/ - Alison ^❤ 08:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Nisar has also been hanging out on my talk page as 119.30.69.70 (talk · contribs) and 119.30.66.155 (talk · contribs). I think I'm going to range block him right now as well. I've looked into it and it would hardly cause any collateral damage. Khoikhoi 08:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I just ran a check and blocked about a dozen Nisarkand socks, some old and some new. He's still very much about - Alison ^❤ 04:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Images from vam.ac.uk

Hi Alison,

User:VAwebteam has added a rake of images lately, sourced to images.vam.ac.uk, tagged with GFDL tags, and marking them as OTRS permission given by ticket #1332999 [6]. Can you please confirm that this ticket extends GFDL license to all images at that website? Stifle (talk) 09:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep! Specifically, User:VAwebteam has permission to use images from the Victoria and Albert Museum website[7] under the GFDL - Alison ^❤ 09:47, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Yet another User:Fclass

Hey Alison! Could you have a look at User:Oldnew when you have time? Thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

No need now, he admitted it. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

 Confirmed anyways, BTW - Alison ^❤ 23:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

User:EmmaRoad

I think Mystery Man/EmmaRoad, who you've blocked before, has reappeared as User:WillowGrove. I also think they are related to other blocked accounts like User:John celona and User:Lemonsquares. I have a long, unfortunate history with the John celona sock. Lemonsquares and EmmaRoad mostly ignored me. You can find more about my involvement on my talk page, under the heading "SerialStatutory rapists". Would you please do a check user to see if User:WillowGrove is a sock of some banned entity or entities? Thanks. David in DC (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Can't resist returning to the site of prior edits before being blocked.Please check him out. David in DC (talk) 23:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. David in DC (talk) 02:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help, and sorry about the delay! - Alison ^❤ 07:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Great Googly Moogly!

You have mail. SirFozzie (talk) 23:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC) (who's hiding under his desk.. if all this occurs by 8 pm on a friday, what is the weekend going to bring?)

What a co-inkydink! So do you :) - Alison ^❤ 00:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Potential Admin Abuse alert

User:Waggers has taken to espousing some political opinions on my page, which is fine. But he seems to be implying that I must agree with them, or else. Could you please get a grip on him before he does something silly? (And Ali, I know you are busy with RW stuff etc, but I'd really appreciate if you could get to this before the fire spreads and burns someone). Sarah777 (talk) 00:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I have sprayed some flame-suppressing foam on the situation. Jehochman ^Talk 01:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Yayy!! Thank, you Jehochman :) Saved the day again! - Alison ^❤ 01:10, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Fire seems to have re-ignited due to the arrival of a second British Admin with a nationalistic POV. Sarah777 (talk) 02:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Fear not, Sarah. That's your User-page, where (IMHO) you need not apologies to anyone for you views. GoodDay (talk) 02:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Taxwoman et. Al

Any chance you can shoot me a backgrounder, if you're aware of it? I'd like to know more as I seem to be likley to get dragged into this.--Tznkai (talk) 05:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Ummm. I know about as much as is being discussed on Wikipedia Review right now. Basically, we've had Taxwoman, Poetlister and a number of other accounts being linked to the one person. There's also Cato, who had checkuser privs on wikiquote who's just been emergency de-checkusered and is also another likely sock. There's a whole lot of other stuff, too. Check this thread at Wikipedia Review for minute-to-minute stuff - Alison ^❤ 05:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and man- you picked a really interesting time to come back. 18 months away and head-first into mayhem! :) Welcome back, BTW - Alison ^❤ 05:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

As a side note...

I have the blanky, but coffee calms me much better, and I prefer reading or listening to Keith Olbermann or Bill Maher than popping chill pills. In any case, I noticed the WR thread on me while doing a search for my (Internet) name (I'm not letting my real name loose). As for taking things personally, well... I tend to be retributive rather than contemplative and am quick to fly off the handle. I've done my best to try and avoid allowing my RL traits creep in and interfere with my editing, and so far, I'd say I'm doing a rather good job (minus the SIHULM incident, which I've been trying to distance myself from for a few months now).

(I also spotted an expected page which I've passed on to friends for a quick laugh; they're funnier than Carlin is.) -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 05:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Well you did, yes :) I was pretty-much the same, too, back in the day though the scourge of Wikipedia were JB196 and RMS, both of which are pretty-much over now. I had to distance myself from things, too, back then as I was getting sucked in. Keep your RL name under wraps, too, and don't let that out. Look at what happened in my case :/ But you are way more chilled and serene than back in the heat of the Mudkipz mayhem ;) - Alison ^❤ 05:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC) (Red Bull works, too :) )

But I don't like energy drinks... they distract me too much from my custom material... Besides, I'm still having a bad case of tard problems on my talk page, and am thankful I have that side page set up to avoid legitimate discourse being wiped away by forced memes. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 05:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Ugh, are they still at that?? Geez already. Same with Thatcher, BTW. He was getting hit by Channers at the same time each day for weeks and regularly had to prot/unprot just to prevent people from getting bored wasting their time reverting the idiots. Speaking of, I'd an ED troll here earlier. Awfuly funny, no? - Alison ^❤ 06:09, 6 September 2008 (UTC) (ah, no actually :-D)

Yeah, unfortunately :P it's sporadic in re me, however; the last spurt was last week, and I seem to have the precognitive ability to see a Tower card in twenty Internet Hate Machine members' Tarot spreads and move the discussions out of Dodge in time. What people don't see is that they have more than one target; protecting a talk page just makes them harass another of their favorite targets. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 06:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

And one of my main calming sites has just turned into Normandy... le sigh'... -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 06:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

:( Hold tight, dude. Have you thought about going to another wiki to chill? When the going gets rough, I go here. It keeps me sane, there are no wars whatsoever, very few vandals, and just tons of quiet and really productive work. Just a thought - Alison ^❤ 06:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't one of my main calming sites - it's a forum I frequent. Recently, the administrators there have gone absolutely batshit and banned me for a reason that couldn't stand up on its own if you propped it up against Mount Rainier. There's a thread there to get me reinstated - and once I am (poll says 28-2), there'll be a thread to get the admins responsible banned or desysopped. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 06:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm back there. Expect me to retreat there when things heat up (especially since a silent coup was staged) :D -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 22:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yayy!! :) - Alison ^❤ 22:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey

I assume you know Gwen Gale decided to give me one last chance. I'm thankful she did because I really did change. Anyway, in Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 August 30, I nominated Image:Imslayout.PNG for deletion because there is a perfect .svg image that exist in the Indianapolis Motor Speedway article. Could you delete it? Fclass (talk) 16:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:10, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gwen. And yes, Fclass, welcome back ;) - Alison ^❤ 05:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

I have sent one. Acalamari 16:45, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you may well have the answer now, and more. Sorry for not getting back sooner, but I'd a bunch of behind-the-scenes stuff going on, as well as being away for the weekend. Hope all's well with you! - Alison ^❤ 05:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Matt, again

On his talk page he has some interesting things to say about you Alison. Also, his tone is becoming increasingly threatening. Do something about him. Sarah777 (talk) 21:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:JimboIsMe

This user was hit by one of your checkuser hardblocks just after being unblocked to allow a username change. I think I can guess the answer, but would you mind taking a look? Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:21, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Hersfold. No, sorry - please leave this one blocked. It's just some sockvandal gaming the unblock system - Alison ^❤ 05:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Page protection

Thanks for upgrading Alex's, I only just noticed! But does this mean I can't be Grawped? He makes it sound like I'll be happy. rootology (C)(T) 07:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can always remove it again. But yeah, no grawpmoves for you, sorry! :) - Alison ^❤ 05:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

New sockfarms

Hi Alison -- would you mind checking the several sockfarms I found this evening (accounts created 8/31 and 7/8) to see if I missed any? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 00:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I was in the middle of doing just that. You missed a bunch, and unblocked one or two hits too, but I think that's the lot. You're being complained about on WR, too, by the way :D - Alison ^❤ 00:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Poor Grawpalike. He was bragging on ED that he was going to sit on these accounts for four months so that they couldn't be checkusered. Thanks so much!! And when you get a minute, I have a few more from 8/30. :D NawlinWiki (talk) 02:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep, will do. BTW - who ever told him checkuser data on account creations went stale so early?? Does it? Does it not?? :=D - Alison ^❤ 05:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello

If no-one else has done so by the time you read this, would you care to take a brief look here: [[8]]? It doesn't seem worth opening a proper RFCU over.

Many thanks,

Brilliantine (talk) 18:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, done and  Confirmed, yes - Alison ^❤ 18:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that one seemed to stir up a bit of a nest of worms. Fancy a look at this [9] thread as well? those are some weird edits. Brilliantine (talk) 06:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, Thatcher beat you to it :) Brilliantine (talk) 07:26, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Heh - he's always doing that :) - Alison ^❤ 07:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Multiple blocks of multiple socks?

Ali, Can you confirm that Pureeditor, Ovlem, Wikipiere and now ThatsGrand are all confirmed socks and what is the evidence (especially in the latter case). They are certainly all Irish; I just hope that isn't the real problem. Sarah777 (talk) 01:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, thanks a mil for dragging me back over there. I'd kinda let it slide a bit :) Looks like there may be a result, too. More later ... - Alison ^❤ 05:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Question II

Are 200.120.191.196 (talk · contribs), 216.249.51.237 (talk · contribs), and 200.120.188.71 (talk · contribs) all dynamic IPs? -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 01:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

The first and third are likely to be, yes, as they're owned by a Chilean ISP. The middle one is not; it's owned by Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario, and is directly assigned within their organization - Alison ^❤ 05:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Danke. A couple friends were curious (this relates to the coup mentioned above). -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Bodging WP edit by edit)} 08:18, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks for the help. ^_^ ~One of Jéské's friends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.193.90 (talk) 08:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoa!! :) - Alison ^❤ 09:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

More, more!

Would you mind checking my block log again? I think my last 18 or so (created 9/7) are the genuine article. Then there are the 18 or so Irish placenames before that, which could be the real thing or the imitation (whoever it is, are they giving you a nod? :D) Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

• Wow! Thank you! See my note on User:Quentin Tarantino -- this was a "using the name of a famous person" softblock. And I found one more group, starting with User talk:Major Tom, this is ground control, but only got 4 of them. You're the best, NawlinWiki (talk) 22:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't quite know what you're doing, or where your sources are coming from ... but you appear to be getting better and better at this. Right now, I'm picking up all the ones-and-twos but basically all of these are Grawp, grawp-a-like or other hapless sockers getting caught in the middle. All in all, keep up whatever it is you're doing. And BTW, I'm not sure what that Irish placenames thing was about but it made it awfully easy to detect and block 'em all :) Keep checking my block logs because I'm just doing bunches here and there whenever I get a minute. It's actually pretty fast to work through them - Alison ^❤ 22:22, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
  • 'nother update. Blocked hordes of AL vandal / Grawp-a-like / Grawp. Looks like quite a few were registered, then forgotten about (Grawp, mostly). Also blocking a large number of Chinese and Taiwanese open proxies which, surprisingly are more and more often supporting XFF. It's kinda ... like, too easy :) - Alison ^❤ 22:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
    • Ok, that's the lot. Check my block logs .... - Alison ^❤ 23:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
      • You rock. Thanks again! NawlinWiki (talk) 02:00, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

← And judging from the response, I'm calling that a success. It's fun to watch the toddler throw a tantrum :) - Alison ^❤ 06:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Where's One Night In Hackney?

Hello Alison, how ya do. Would you happen to know what ever became of ONIH? GoodDay (talk) 23:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hackie's gone quite some time now. I have no idea as to where he is as he's no longer in touch :( - Alison ^❤ 23:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Okie Dokie, thanks. GoodDay (talk) 23:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

One Night In Hackney is still editing, on and off - under a new name though. Some kind of sanctioned sock puppetry, I think. I always think that if Wikipedia confuses me so much, god knows what it does to your "average Joe" who just wants to contrubute. Sir Fozzie is the one to contact about ONIH, I think they are friendly off Wiki.

Is this really the "encylcopedia of everyone" - or the "encyclopedia for political geeks", I wonder? --Matt Lewis (talk) 13:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry...

...about this. I didn't realise it was a personal attack about a real person. Sorry about bringing it up. D.M.N. (talk) 16:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all. When oversight is added to the whole picture, things can get really confusing - Alison ^❤ 04:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

*ping*

Hey Allie, I think you can safely ignore the email I sent you, regarding the JVM thing. I've gotten some off-wiki confirmation on the situation, and ArbCom is now aware of the situation. SirFozzie (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure, Foz? I'd some questions on the whole matter - was totally confused - and wanted to catch ya on Skype for the details. Lemme know if it need looking into, as it appears to be fairly serious - Alison ^❤ 21:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I have some further information for you on that. Check email shortly. You can catch me on Skype after work if you're on. (edit: email sent) SirFozzie (talk) 21:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Proxies

Hey Alison, I was wondering if you could give me some information on how you catch proxies. That is if you have time, you can email me about it if you don't want to reply at your talk page. Regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  18:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure! Let's take it to email :) I'm just about to go off-line here but will get back to you later today - Alison ^❤ 18:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Good, just gave you an email :) --Kanonkas :  Talk  10:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to leave you another notice Alison but I haven't got a reply back from you, hope you can get back to me. Thanks. --Kanonkas :  Talk  10:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if you have forgot this, but I still haven't got an email back from you. --Kanonkas :  Talk  10:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

 Note: - I need to followup on this tomorrow!!!!!!11One! - Alison ^❤ 05:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Hope you can help me now, if you have time of course. --Kanonkas :  Talk  05:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Got back to you on e-mail. --Kanonkas :  Talk  14:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't change

I know you were burnt by Poetlister, but I think you still did the right thing. Just because they were right in this case does not necessarily mean we should abandon WP:AGF. I generally take Poetlister as an exception to the rule. --Dragon695 (talk) 12:44, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Dragon - thanks for that kind note. To be honest, I'm still reeling from the whole debacle. I'm not sure what to think on the whole thing. I was very wrong on the whole Poetlister matter and will write about it some more, here, later. I've some apologies to make. Many of us were fooled, and for ages too. I'm trying not to let it erode my belief in others but hey, PoetGuy kinda damaged things in a way and for many AGF cases in future, there'll always be someone to shout; "Remember the Poetlister Fiasco!!". Ugh! The worst aspect is the hurt that has been inflicted upon very real, innocent people who have absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia. That angers me the most. Thanks again, Dragon - Alison ^❤ 06:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

*poke*

Does this seem strange to you? Definitely not a normal newbie. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:14, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

OMG!!!! That's my full, real name!!!11!!! Oh wait, it's also on my userpage :) Well, I guess grawp-a-like has to get his jollies somewheres. Pity about all the socks he left lying about, too - Alison ^❤ 01:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC) (thanks for catching that!)

Well, I wasn't sure if I should say something or not, but I figured it was likely that he was trying to get back at you for checkuser-ing (HA! I invented a word!!!) him in the past. Geez, you've been busy tonight. What are you trying to do, break MiszaBot? I feel sorry for it - so much work reporting all those blocks on cvn-wp-en. Seriously, do you have a script to do all those? Or do you just open all the windows in tabs and then click "block" in quick succession? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

It takes seconds to block a dozen of his socks. Seriously. You can see the timings in my block logs. While those guys take minutes per account create, I can block a large number in two or three seconds; hence the complete and utter waste of everyone's time (but some more than others ;) ). There are also new functions in Checkuser to automate all that but I couldn't even be bothered. Let's just say that this particular sock-puppeteer did a Really Bad Thing™ at one point, knows of it and doesn't care. A little pain his way, however trivial, is a good thing right now - Alison ^❤ 01:36, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

You know, I was going to be silly and start a new section with *pokemon*, but I think we know what memes would shortly appear after that, and I think it's for the best. SirFozzie (talk) 01:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I herd you liek that sort of thing. Oh no!! Here comes Jéské :) - Alison ^❤ 01:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

RAWR!!! -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Call me Mr. Bonaparte!)} 09:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a few today

Groups headed by User:Judge Gabberslug (found 2), User:Wax on Leather (found 4), and User:Not as hard as it looks (found 5). No hurry -- thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 18:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, NW. Found another bunch, too. You're getting more accurate - Alison ^❤ 04:48, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Haroon Khan (boxer)

The article Haroon Khan was deleted but LilKhan seems to now have created it as Haroon Khan (boxer) in order to avoid this. I think was word is needed.--Vintagekits (talk) 22:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Special:ListUsers/jaredhater

Can you take a look and see if there are any that aren't quite that obvious? Thanks. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey Alison. Just wondered if you saw this. (sorry about that last edit, my cat jumped on my laptop and somehow managed to type that gibberish, move the mouse somewhere else, and hit the "enter" key before I could react.) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Funniest. Edit. Evar![10] I was wondering whether I had to call the paramedics or not!! Down to business - what exactly is it you want me to do here? - Alison ^❤ 01:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

jaredhater (talk · contribs) created several, well, painfully obvious socks, and I was wondering if he had any that aren't quite as, um, blatantly obvious as "jaredhater1" and "jaredhater2".

(as far as my... interesting... edit goes, I was like "Oh, crap" when I saw Firefox say "Sending request to wiki.riteme.site..." in the status bar. I hit stop, but apparently the request went through anyways. I'm just happy I wasn't playing around on Special:BlockIP/ClueBot (Yes, I have filled out that page before.... :D ) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:37, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

They all came from the one IP address, which is now blocked. I found another sock or two, too - Alison ^❤ 04:47, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protect

I semi-protected this page for a little while due to The Usual Antics. Acroterion _(talk) 18:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh joy!! ChanDrones .... poor Grawp must be feeling a bit sad - Alison ^❤ 21:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC) (thanks for the prot ;) )

I like to think that it darkened his day a little. As usual, move protection expires with the semi - yada, yada (can't we make them independent one of these days?). Acroterion _(talk) 21:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for advise

Could you take a look at this? Thanks, Enigma ^message 01:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

IP addresses: a massive protest is needed

I've simply had enough of removing vandalism from - and generally dealing with - IP addresses. I'm having to make a SSP on a group of IPS now - what a waste of my time. I sign on to contribute, not to do this. When you know it's a sockpuppet hiding as an IP what do you do? When they have nowhere left to go they suddenly find the huge power offered to them of simply commenting and editing as just an IP. What could be better for an already anti-social editor? Seeing the vandalism on this Talk page makes me wonder what benefit could possibly be worth all this.

In protest, I am planning to resign from Wikipedia at the end of this month (September). Anyone else want to do the same? Surely I'm not alone here. Administrators tend to make light of IPs, and advise not to get too involved and encourage them. But what if the vandalism needs reverting? The obsessive run of edits need changing? Shall we all "not get involved then"? It just simply makes no sense. --Matt Lewis (talk) 19:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Just take a break. Caulde 19:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Is this an organized boycott? Enigma ^message 19:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Why not? I just made this - but why should I? It's not what I want to do here. --Matt Lewis (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

You think that's bad? Think of Orlady's task with Jvolkblum. Now there's a case and a half! Caulde 20:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

e/c I'm prepared to do a lot myself - it's the IPs I object too. This guy (Wikipéire/Wikipeire - even his name is annoying) has managed to use three different IP's in a row - all clearly him. I don't even know how he did it. It seems to me they can do what they want when they accept they are mainly going to be editing as IPs. The amount of commenting freedom on 'contentious' articles they get is huge - and who bothers cross-checking all those numbers? This guy would be easy to spot if he was forced to create an account, as he's been well documented now, since from early in the year at least. Multiple IP's though? It's surely got to stop. --Matt Lewis (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, Matt, I hear what you're saying. It's all a great big waste of everyone's time when sockpuppeteers like Wikipéire take advantage of things. I've been chasing socks around here since early 2004, and it's getting worse, not better :/ You should try being checkuser for a week - it's enough to drive anyone screaming mad. I'm really very busy in RL right now but, as you just put in the donkey-work into that SSP, I'm going to run it thru checkuser. Your evidence is impeccable, and that will cut out a lot of the timewasting. Sit tight! - Alison ^❤ 20:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

And  déanta - Alison ^❤ 20:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

But not the one I want! --Matt Lewis (talk) 22:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I get on online and find Watchlistac, you you did checkuser has just moved two Ireland pages - what the hell is going on??? --Matt Lewis (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

It's the time - I shouldn't really be spending as much as do, as it is. How else will things change if people don't push for it? --Matt Lewis (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

What's worse is I can't find admins willing to work at SSP any more. :( Enigma ^message 21:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you imagine if something happened to Alison? Wikipedia relies too heavily on the charity of too few individuals. --Matt Lewis (talk) 21:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Can you imagine... I try not to think about it. Enigma ^message 21:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

lol - you guys! :) What would happen is that everyone would miss my RCU work, ArbCom would step in and appoint another one or two, then it would be business as usual! We could seriously use a few more checkusers. There are only a handful doing all the real work on the project right now. We all know who they are. However, anyone who's interested should check out Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee CheckUser appointments August 2008 and get signed up now - Alison ^❤ 21:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

They stopped accepting applications on 8/29. I wasn't aware of the process, though. Maybe if I become an administrator, then I'll eventually apply... Enigma ^message 22:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

But you are saying that the work you do is what arbcom expects from you, and that makes me really uncomfortable - it's not on on a number of levels, as it's too much for you and such a small group of people. With all these IPs around? And I can't image there being much of a queue for your job. Today, you unfortunately didn't manage to tick the IP I particularly wanted to catch (the one who edits every day). I'm 90% sure it's him, but looks like I'll have to do the labourious diff case I did for ThatsGrand. My position is the same - come October (when I've done a few things I want), I'm out. I'll set something up first on IPs - an IP difficulties task force perhaps - somewhere people can sign. The problem for me is that I'm actually here to write prose - not to protect certain sentences, or spy on people who can get an article locked in a flash. Wikipedia needs people who actually want to write (and in a number of places too), but it's just an impossible environnment for them in too many areas. --Matt Lewis (talk) 22:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

78.16 Dublin range

On and on and on and on. Nearly every day, often all day. Is there actually a way to stop him? --Matt Lewis (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

It's too much. Too much. I've checkusered the range above and have now softblocked 78.16.0.0/16 AO (ACB disabled) for 48 hours. There should not be a whole lot of collateral damage, but this nonsense needs to stop. It's more than just you that's up in arms about this. Let me know how things go and, all going well, we may indeed extend the anonblock duration - Alison ^❤ 07:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Protection

Hi, Alison.

Is it possible if both of my userpage and talkpage could be unprotected - previously I had it protected due to me leaving this project and carried on editing other wikimedia foundation projects like Wikiversity which I'm active on - but I wouldn't mind returning to Wikipedia. Terra (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

All  Done - Alison ^❤ 07:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Jacksonoliver

You can take that account off sock puppetry so other people can get that name. This was not an account of Grawp. It was a redirect to my page after I changed my username.--Cory Malik (talk) 17:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Cory. Unfortunately, after your account was renamed, your old name was taken by Grawp for use in vandalism. This has happened before and is no reflection on yourself, but it definitely was Grawp, as it was also  Confirmed by checkuser - Alison ^❤ 19:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Second opinion, please

Could you check User:ЮЮЮЮЮЮ this one for me? It fits a known pattern, but let me know if you're comfortable with the block. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 22:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Good block. Dozens of socks there. I've blocked the IP, too - Alison ^❤ 00:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

SUL/TOR

Seems to have another TOR node, see this one etc. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 00:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

That's a SUL account, yeah. Someone else is already on those ;) - Alison ^❤ 00:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Pls help clearing my username of accusations!

Hi Alison!

Could you pls help me and speed up the checkuser process that Jehochman started against me at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eastbayway? Imho the "evidence" is ridculous, all I did wrong was voting against Cirt (because of the secrecy, not because I support Scientology in any way). This is a stain on my good username, and I hope you help me debunking these accusations as soon as possible. It is my understanding that all it takes is an admin using that checkuser link to clear my name of the accusations. I would love to get that nonsense off the table soon. Thx. Gray62 (talk) 17:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I'll see what I can do, but note that a number of other checkusers are already all over this case. Hopefully, it will be sorted soon ... - Alison ^❤ 20:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

It appears that Sam Korn (talk · contribs) has declared your account to be  Unrelated to the others - Alison ^❤ 21:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm glad he weighed in. Thx, Alsion, and sry for unnecessarily bothering you with this! Gray62 (talk) 22:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Slow down with the blocking

Alison, could take a bit more time before blocking alleged socks of Wikipiere?? That guy does more good editing in his brief appearances that most of his detractors. Sarah777 (talk) 18:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

And now I see you are going around reverting some of his good work. Sarah777 (talk) 18:05, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Well no, Sarah, I won't. There is no earthly way that this nonsense can be construed as 'good editing' - no way. The rules apply to everyone here, and nobody gets to override that because "they're right". If everyone did what he's doing, mayhem will ensue. I don't care what his POV is or whatever, he's now causing other editors to leave the project and that's where I get involved. Even Guliolopez - one of our sanest and most long-term editors here - has taken off to gawiki. The Matt guy has been driven to distraction, etc, etc. It's not on. Now, two of his IP ranges are softblocked for 48 hours with ACB disabled primarily to see how things go. If he keeps up this nonsense, I'll start locking all this stuff down. Others may likely be inconvenienced by all that, and I understand that, but then again that's what this guy is all about. He's right and to hell with everyone else :( - Alison ^❤ 19:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

IMHO, all unannouced sockpuppet masters deserve getting banned. GoodDay (talk) 00:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

One place I could have done with his vote is here. I took a gamble doing so much to get rid of him right now, as keeping this taskforce from deletion will be precarious unless people can be encouraged to get back into the debate. I may have made a mistake starting it with a proposal, but to me the taskforce and the poll it starts with are two different things. AfD's always make me nervous, as not everyone who contributes reads into the subject at all, and it's ultimately a headcount in the end (or it always seemed to be at least in the one's I've seen). As the debate has been 50/50 recently, and with Pureditor/ThatsGrand/Wikipeire out of the way, it's nervous times for me right now. I just hope WP:IDTF gets the interest that I gambled on. The taskforce is being called "forum shopping", I call it a desperately-needed new approach that can bring disillusioned people back into the fold, and effectively keep the main-article talk pages free for their subjects when those silly "moratoriums" aren't imposed. It's all about progress, and the whole Ireland issue (with or without Wikipeire) desperately needs addressing - the usage tables alone prove that.--Matt Lewis (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Mail

Check your mail. I need answer on that CU result. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:33, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Replied. Check your mail, as that's an urgent one - Alison ^❤ 23:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Alison thanks so much for dropping by my RfA, I respect you and your contributions and was uplifted by your support. Slàinte! Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at this guy

No, this is not about Matt et al. Check out this guy's user page. I don't think this is allowed. I happened across it from the media copyright questions page even though he had apparently not signed in. Cheers ww2censor (talk) 05:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. You're absolutely right on that userpage. Wikipedia is so not a dating site - Alison ^❤ 05:09, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Unblock review / User_talk:Khoikhoi#Unblock_request_on_User_talk:Pukhtunman / User_talk:Slakr#Pukhtunman

Hiya. If you get a chance, I was trying to review an unblock request, but not having any place to direct the user as to the findings is proving to be decently challenging. :P Anyway, if you get a chance, pretty please either deny the unblock request or something. :P --slakr^\ talk / 06:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I've  Confirmed that, per checkuser, and have left a note over there - Alison ^❤ 06:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello

If you are not too busy, would you mind taking a look at a checkuser request currently open? Thanks...NeutralHomer • Talk 01:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

While I understand the reason my checkuser request was denied, I am confused as to why it was. Allow me to explain. Even though "Chrismichelle" only made one edit, it seemed that after he/she was "called on" that edit, they went back, pretty quickly, to the IP address. The single edit that "Chrismichelle" made is exactly the same kinda edit (removing the logos) that the IP was making. Plus, leaving both accounts open, leaves a chance for this person to come back in a day or three when people take the Office of Strategic Services page off their watchlists. So, I am kinda confused. - NeutralHomer • Talk 19:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

If somebody behaves exactly like somebody else, then it's not a huge leap to expect that they are somebody else; it doesn't need a checkuser to confirm, and checkuser is not really the right forum to get somebody blocked for something like that. Tombomp (talk/contribs) 20:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The reason I requested a checkuser is I see alot of other users requested checkusers to block two users, so I was kinda following that lead. Once I got the checkuser confirmation, then I was going to take it to AN/I for the block. CU was just a step in my process. - NeutralHomer • Talk 01:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

But you certainly don't need to do this; you can just post on ANI right now... Tombomp (talk/contribs) 20:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I thought it was a necessary step. My apologizes. I think I will wait and see if either come back, if they do, then I will take it to AN/I. Thanks for the help, I apperciate it :) Take Care and Have a Great Weekend...NeutralHomer • Talk 20:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Coup, redux

You've got mail. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Ed, a cafe facade!)} 01:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Request

Would you mind taking a look at WP:AN#Possible block-evading agenda account? You have a reputation for fairness and honesty, which is more than can be said for some of the other admins involved in the discussion. Will Beback, with whom I have been involved in a content dispute, is looking for a pretext to ban me. --Terrawatt (talk) 06:24, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Years in Ireland

Ali, you may recall that I got an indefinite block from your pal Sir Fozzie which damn near turned into a permanent one. The "crime" was reverting the deletion/merger of a series of 100 articles covering the 500s and 600s in Ireland which deletion had been rushed through by a small group of editors without following any proper procedure (which was later acknowledged). In effect I was almost banned for doing absolutely nothing wrong except restore about a dozen articles I'd created.

I'd like you to note that still, three months later, the only centuries "merged" are those two that I had worked on. The centuries before and after those two remain as they were that night of the hyper-rushing through the so-called "decision" to delete them.

As this clearly illustrates the real nature of the proposal I'd like to revert the entire "merger" process (which was never approved) and restore 100 articles. Can you ensure that I can do this without Fozzie or some other Admin jumping in?

And you might also look at the bot, Lightbot, which appears to be trawling through all Irish articles de-linking every link to the "Years in Ireland" series (much later years and mainly Ardfern's work). By what authority has this bot been let loose? Sarah777 (talk) 19:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, can you give me an example of where this has happened? I've raised a number of concerns about Lightbot in the past, and this sounds like another instance of it exceeding its remit. It has permission to remove links to the basic year articles (e.g. 1984), but it does not have permission to remove links to subject-specific year articles (e.g. 710 in Ireland, even when it has been piped to appear 710). — ras52 (talk) 14:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I've found some examples, and raised the issue with the bot owner. — ras52 (talk) 15:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

It has got worse; it is now changing "Years in Ireland" to simply linking the year, period. eg - 1847 in Ireland to 1847. See Ballinglass Incident as an example. Sarah777 (talk) 09:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

MarthaFiles

Hey, when you have the time, can you please check out the latest CheckUser request regarding MarthaFiles? His socks are editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti Jewish Arabism as well. Khoikhoi 00:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Note

Not quite sure what you think of this, which appears to be Steelerfan-94 creating a new account. D.M.N. (talk) 16:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Everything I'm doing is legal I've talked to a Admin and it's fine. Also while I'm at it you have new mail from me Alison. RKO 4 Life (talk) 16:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems like its made its way to ANI. D.M.N. (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Now he's back with Steelerfan-94 account... D.M.N. (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Chris Baker

Chris Baker turned 18 on November 29, 1987. Before November 29, 1987, Chris Baker cannot marry Jordan Timmins (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Ulster Defence Regiment

Hi Alison,

As always your intervention is appreciated when the situation seems to be getting beyond control. Would it be too bold of me to ask you to restore the last removal of content by BigDunc so that the article can remain in its complete form for reader reference during the period of the protection? I would appreciate it, thank you. The Thunderer (talk) 20:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

No I can't, sorry. I've protected it at an an arbitrary version and have no sway on the content whatsoever. You can make an {{editprotected}} request on the talk page if you like and another admin will evaluate it - Alison ^❤ 20:33, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Wont work Is the request controversial? Administrators can only respond to requests which are either uncontroversial improvements (correcting typos or grammar, formatting references, etc in articles; this is controversial as it is the additon of unsourced content. BigDunc^Talk 20:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank your for your advice Alison, I've placed the request. Even if they can't restore the removed information at least your very sensible protection will give me time to have it ready for inclusion after the unprotect. It's a bit difficult defending one's edits to two other editors at once, as well as trying to comply with User:Rockpocket's advice at the same time. I must accept my shortcomings in that respect. The Thunderer (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

And it is very hard to follow advice i got from RP too when an editor has ownership of an article. BigDunc^Talk 21:02, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I have addressed this request on the talk page of the article. Risker (talk) 21:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Fellow editors can I respectfully request that we don't start the usual habit of sniping at each other on someone else's talk page? We've managed to maintain our decorum through rather a difficult period and it would be nice to think we can continue to do so. I apologise to Alison for this unwarranted intrusion. The Thunderer (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Alison, as the reason for protecting the UDR page was an edit war which cannot continue due to ongoing sanctions on another ediotr, would you consider removing the protection at this point to let us other editors get on with it? The Thunderer (talk) 10:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like I'm a Sockpuppet again?

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Ulster_Special_Constabulary#Attitudes_and_image

Irish spelling is the same as UK spelling, not US, right?

Hi Alison. I hope you're well. I just got a sudden moment of self-doubt (not like me I know). It's a few years since I've been to Ireland; can you reassure me I was right here? No need to intervene if I was right, just reply here if you have time. --John (talk) 03:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

John, you're correct on that one, IMO. See Hiberno-English and American and British English differences - Alison ^❤ 04:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Bah, I think I have edited both those articles in my time here. Sorry to bother you, and thanks. --John (talk) 06:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

John, we spell stuff like wot the Queen does....Sarah777 (talk) 08:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Tsk. Typical British Imperialist PoV! The Queen spells stuff like wot we do! Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 09:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course, sorry. How silly of one. Sarah777 (talk) 09:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Requesting uninvolved opinion

There is a discussion at Talk:Liancourt Rocks regarding:

1. Whether the proposed Disputed Islands infobox is neutral in its presentation of basic article information
2. Whether there is a valid reason to exclude the proposed infobox from the article

I should note that I am involved in the discussion, but I do not want to influence your opinion should you choose to offer one. I merely want some uninvolved editors to view the discussion and then offer an opinion. If you choose to participate, please post your opinion in the RFC comments section there. Thank you for your time. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 05:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Tag Teaming

Alison it has got very tired now this constant accusation of tag teaming. Could you please stop with it now. I have stayed away from this article and The Thunderer for a long time now popping in very rarely to make small edits with the help and advice from RP. It seems now that I am prohibited from editing any article that Thunderer is on, is that the case? I have had private emails with him and IMO have come to an understanding about were we both stand. If me and Domer are a tag team then surely TU is a tag team partner of Thunderer as can be seen with the edit war that took place on the USC article. And before anyone jumps up I am not saying they are. They have similiar opinions so will both edit in a similar way like Domer and myself. On a side note and I know it is nothing to do with you but IMO the 2 blocks imposed are a bit harsh. BigDunc^Talk 10:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. Either way, this nonsense needs to stop - Alison ^❤ 19:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Alison, attention please

Would you or somebody stop that Lightbot date destroyer NOW. It is vandalizing hundreds of articles. Sarah777 (talk) 10:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have no problem blocking real live editors on dubious grounds but will allow a bot rampage through the work of dozens of editors unchecked. Sarah777 (talk) 10:06, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The Dunc, the Troubles, the Arbcom

I am thinking that BigDunc needs to be added to the list of parties to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/The Troubles. If he's going to play at being mini-Domer48, he should play by the same rules Domer48 does. Any problem if I submit a request to amend the case? Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing, but perhaps an ArbCom Enforcement section wouldn't go amiss? SirFozzie (talk) 15:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Could anyone of you explain to me how or what rules I have broken in the last month since I made an agreement with Black Kite. This seems like a circling of the wagons by the admins in defence of Alison who is plain wrong in this situation. I know me saying that will not endear me to fellow admins especially Fozz, but WTF is going on here BigDunc^Talk 17:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that's an excellent idea - Alison ^❤ 19:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Still dont see any explanation of what I have done. BigDunc^Talk 20:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You'll be able to read all about it here. I'll let you know when you're being talked about (as opposed to talking about talking about you, which is where we are now). Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipeire as User:Tempac

He went straight to Editors (his old Wikipeire fave that he's avoided for a time as he couldn't hide there), around all his haunts (piping Ireland, esp at Man United's Roy Keene etc), and is back on British Isles talk. He's not particularly hiding himself, so he can't expect it to last. I've come straight here (as I think you asked for Wikipeire?) as it is unquestionably him. He actually hasn't stopped as his dynamic 78.16 IP's (but who does stop when they have the freedom of their IP?) I can't be bothered with the IP anymore, but I'm not happy with him so easily creating another account.. after a while they look authentic, and a few editing on the 'Irish' matters don't seem to mind that it his him at all. --Matt Lewis (talk) 01:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

blocked - Alison ^❤ 02:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi guys. I understand why you blocked him again (given that he was falling back into some old/bad habits in editwarring) but I was actually keeping an eye on him. (Having spotted this new account 5 minutes after its first edit). Anyway, despite some lapses (which I pulled him up on [11]), he was largely behaving himself, and I think a block under "mul-abuse" may have been just a little premature. As noted before, he clearly gets something out of the project and does actually contribute some positive things (and - in fact - in blanket reverting him, some vandalism he reverted has been re-introduced in a few places). Anyway, I'm not questioning the block, as the warring on 4 Associations Tournament may have warranted it. I just think that - if he comes back again in some other form (which I think very likely) - I would think it worthwhile to take any new "accounts" on the merits (or otherwise) of their actual edits. Rather than taking a block/revert on sight policy. And largely let him prove himself - unless of course he falls back into his piping/warring ways. Guliolopez (talk) 11:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree that the recent manifestations have demonstrated a more mature approach to editing. However he is still a sock puppet. A return with a full confession of past practice, a promise not to repeat and an acceptance of mentoring, no more than one rv etc might justify being open to his return, but without that transparency the continued deception seems to me to justify immediate blocks on discovery. --Snowded TALK 11:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Understood/agreed. As much as anyone, I was very very annoyed by the disruptive/deceptive/vandal behaviour a few weeks ago. And I havn't forgotten that. I suppose my point was the same as yours really. A return can really only be sustained if he behaves himself, makes an acknowledgement of some kind on his prev behaviour, and accepts some boundaries on editing (like staying away from articles/subjects he's been unable to resist screwing before). IE: What I said above - but "formalised" under the acceptance/acknowledgement conditions you note. Guliolopez (talk) 11:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

What if (in sudden a change of heart) Wikipéire went around de-piping Ireland - would either of you support a return then? --Matt Lewis (talk) 23:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The guy still uses "rv vandalism" when reverting someone else's idea of the best edit, I notice when looking at his latest IP reported below. Some change. He has wasted hours of people's time. People forget that he started as User:Melvo over a year before he was Wikipeire. I don't remember him being a "good editor once" either - you should see what he did at Scotland and Wales (at Wales he attacked the anthem, the flag, its traditional-only status as 'a principality' and finally its status as a valid country). He was a grade A shite - and he came straight back ot Wales as Pureditor too, forcing people to find mediation over the Intro, when only one other edito was kicking a fuss. There is still a poll-or-no-further-change enforcement there due to it now. My question is: when was Wikipéire this "once a good editor" that I'm reading about? I worry that this is could be subjective opinion based more on some of his underlying political views (though I would hope not his more hard line ones).

People forget that he started out as User:Melvo over a year before he created Wikipéire - I saw no reason for him to let go of Melvo when I looked at his origins of Wikipeire, so I can only assume he has always socked. Who knows what he was up to throughout 2007? He may recently have admitted what he is doing instead of protesting to the last minute, but that was down to my decision to focus on chasing him - it hardly equates to honesty, and I've got the usual abuse from him for being 'sad' enough to do it. He has always found it easy to lie, and he has he shown appreciation for another person's POV, or someone else's time. If we let back in all who behave like because they remain problematic and there is nothing else we can do, we'd be neck deep. I've certainly given up chasing him (he's right - I should have better things to do), but others are noticing him now: the work done in getting him recognised has paid off.

Wikipedia must seriously regulate the use of IPs, and allow regular users to simply monitor the new accounts. The encyclopedia could advance massively if this is done (although I don't believe Wikipedia's purity is a particular concern to anyone within its management).

One thing else too - nobody knows how many businesses use this encyclopedia as a 'commercial website' with massive in-built link popularity (ie search-engine status for their keywords). They only need a local newspaper to pass notability (nobody seems to want to remove these things) and the bandwidth is theirs to use. Office-based IP accounts do most of the the edits, and the part-time manager goes around Wikipedia advancing their wares, building personal kudos as an editor, and attacking competitive factors. This is hard to stop, but without the ability to use IPs, commercially-minded people would be a lot less successful - as would other serious COI hiders. Not to mention trolls, puppetmasters, obsessives and vandals.--Matt Lewis (talk) 23:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Want to know if this is you or an impersonator

There's someone on ED that is using the name Alison and claims to be you. Is this you or an impersonator? Check39843penny (talk) 06:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Are they claiming to be me? - Alison ^❤ 07:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

A gift

 CheckUser is not magic pixie dust Jehochman ^Talk 04:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thank you so much!! I'm absolutely going to use that. We should add it to the checkuser template, IMO. Awesome, thank you!! :) - Alison ^❤ 07:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Been done. :) I was the first CU to use it in reporting results, to boot... see Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#Coberloco :) However the image is defective as it should be redone as an .svg and uploaded to Commons, surely other projects will want to use it as well. ++Lar: t/c 23:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Way ahead of us all, as usual :) I'll try converting it later in Inkscape if I get a moment here - Alison ^❤ 00:03, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipiere again zzzzzzz

Hey Ali, I know you must be bored off your .... by now with this, but he's creating a couple of accounts every day right now - can we do an incremental checkuser or would you prefer a new case to be logged? Most recently I blocked User:Dessence and User:HellBhoy and User:RaRaRioter. He's tugging on a few heartstrings lately and I'm keen not to foul up the blocks, AGF and all that, even though generally speaking the WP:DUCK argument can be applied quite easily. What do you think? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

(really busy here!) - yep, they're all  Confirmed - thanks for the blocking. I'll scan for more but I notice he's using another Irish ISP to register accounts, then he skips back to his usual, softblocked range. Let it be known that if he keeps that up, he'll find his other IP range softblocked awfully fast, too, given that it's not well-trafficked. Are we getting bored yet, Rambling? I sure am! - Alison ^❤ 07:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I appreciate you're rushed off your feet Ali. I very much appreciate the quick action and confirmation. I'm almost bored of it, but I'm not giving up...! Take care and, if possible, take it easy! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

The range seems to be clear now, so that should be the lot. Just let me know next time you find one - post it here - and I'll likely catch the others. See Guliolopez' comments above, BTW - Alison ^❤ 07:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Will do. Roger, wilco, out. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Unprotect Request

Alison would you consider unprotecting Ulster Defence Regiment? The Thunderer (talk) 15:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather not, TT. I'm not seeing much agreement on the talk page. It's probably best to ask another, uninvolved administrator to review the situation. They can override my prot if they like, but you guys need to come to some arrangement first, otherwise the problems will just start up again - Alison ^❤ 23:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Domer can't post to the talk page at the moment Alison - he's blocked. He isn't even allowed to edit his own talk page. The Thunderer (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I understand, but it's not about Domer48 at this point. There needs to be some agreement reached about the article and the fact that Domer is blocked right now doesn't give anyone carte blanche to revert to "their" version. There's no urgent hurry on unprotecting and I'd much rather see some dialog on the talk page so you all can have something here the you agree on. No? - Alison ^❤ 00:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually reversion wasn't what I had in mind. I'va managed to contact the author of a book who has supplied me with some pictures and permission to use them, along with text from his book, which is a "soldier's history." I had intended to provide new material for the article and leave the contentious stuff alone until it can be discussed. The book is reproduced on the web here. The Thunderer (talk) 00:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

On reflection it is rather late here so I'm going to give it up for tonight. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to consider this overnight? I'd be grateful. The Thunderer (talk) 00:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipiere again

Can you check User:Editstan please? Cheers my dears... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC) And User:TwoSnowmen. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done - all others clear - Alison ^❤ 23:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

*ping*

You have email. Any thoughts? SirFozzie (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Lots, and none of them very sweet at all, as you can imagine. Catch ya on Skype later ;) - Alison ^❤ 00:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

K K... :) SirFozzie (talk) 00:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

House1090 is up for unblock; your opinion is sought

Hi Alison. You did one of the checkusers on this guy. See this thread at WP:AN if you want to give an opinion on his unblock. EdJohnston (talk) 20:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've commented over there and am recommending he be conditionally unblocked - Alison ^❤ 21:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: your recent edit to Encyclopedia Dramatica

Lol wut? That is quite the boisterous edit summary for what looks to be a whitespace change. :) Pray, don't leave us mere mortals in the dark. We too yearn to be let in on the joke. Protonk (talk) 22:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Email me ;) - Alison ^❤ 22:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Theft!

Out of courtesy, I did "steal" your format for your committed identity for new own committed identity.;-)--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:26, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Cool! So long as you didn't copy the cryptographic hash, too :) - Alison ^❤ 22:43, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Commons request

Hi Alison. Can I ask you to delete Image:Sprengel's Deformity.png on Commons? I thought I was the copyright holder of my own X-rays but apparently that isn't the case so technically I wasn't allowed to upload it though I did so in good faith. Thanks, EconomicsGuy (talk) 03:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep,  Done - pity, too, as it was a super image - Alison ^❤ 03:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikieire

Alison,

User:SitNGo appears to be User:Wikipéire -- certainly they have not denied it. Djegan (talk) 15:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

User:SitNGo banned as a sockpuppet. Regards. Djegan (talk) 15:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

To be accurate he did admit it when it was raised on the new talk page. My gut feeling is that we might be able to redeem him this time and I have placed a comment/request on Jza84 talk page to see if there is someway forward. I won't repeat those comments here/ However finding a rehabilitation route might might less costly than continued sock puppetry - and we might get a good editor. He has done some good work. --Snowded TALK 15:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

 Confirmed - one more instance of this and I'm softblocking his second range ACB. I'm sure the guy is redeemable an' all, but this is wasting everyone's time now - Alison ^❤ 15:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I've asked him to stay out of any response or edits and if he does attempt to edit under an IP then I'll confess I have been naive and back away. I'm going to try and work with him direct to create a statement and request from him (with conditions) for re-admittance. Its probably got a low chance of success, but its worth a try. --Snowded TALK 15:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Dynamic IP help

Could you help me out a bit? If you look at Talk:Dave Meltzer's history you will find probably the most bizarre and longest running edit war on wikipedia - a war over a single talk post over vandalism on the talk page with the two participants being a dynamic IP from the range 41.245.*.* who removes the section and a single purpose account whose only edits are to revert that IPs reverting the removal of the section. The edit war dates back all the way to March 2008, and it itself was due to an edit war that started in October 2007. This seemed more like a novelty than anything else, and as the SPA was only reverting the removal of a correct talk topic from the page while the IP was a dynamic and was impervious to blocks I had to stand for sprotecting it a few times. However it has become evident the dynamic IP is also vandalising other articles thus making it a bit more dangerous. Is there any avenue to take in trying to get a dynamic IP blocked? –– Lid^(Talk) 00:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lid. That's a pretty bizarre story, all said. I took a look at what is on that IP range and, unfortunately, even a softblock will have major collateral damage. It belongs to a large ISP in South Africa and the IPs are quite dynamic. It might be an idea to semi-protect the page for a while if the vandalism gets really bad. I'm sorry - that's not the news you wanted :( - Alison ^❤ 00:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

That's part of the issue, the vandalism is so minor (IP removes, SPA re-adds) it's hardly needing of sprotection and I have tried that twice already. As soon as the protection wears off they go right back on to reverting one another and I'm left with no discourse. The major issue, however, is the IPs vandalism streak but, as you said, I've hit a dead end. On the upside the Meltzer edit war is pretty fucking funny for how trivial it is. –– Lid^(Talk) 01:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Mmmm. Well, if it's relegated to some obscure talk page, you could always let them have at it, I guess. Disruption to the project is minimal, really, and they're largely wasting their own time. If it starts spreading, we can re-look at it, I guess - Alison ^❤ 01:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much Alison

Thank's but I want to say if I do any vandalism by accident or a wrong edit let me know please and again thanks!House1090 (talk)! —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC).

No problem at all. I'll leave you with this edit :) - Alison ^❤ 01:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks it means alot to me, and if you need anything, just ask. House1090 (talk) 03:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Ina Fried

An article that you have been involved in editing, Ina Fried, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ina Fried. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rklawton (talk) 12:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

TylerPuetz

Hey Alison, Can you double check a few things?

Is 24.251.72.114 a static or dynamic ip (take a reasonable guess). Check that TylerPuetz had used 24.251.72.114 on the 12 September 2008. He's claiming its an IP shared amongst at least 8 people....  «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Old sockpuppet deletion

I would want to know if I could delet one of my old accounts and delet the wikipage? Its my very old sockpuppet, User:Omarsito. House1090 (talk) 22:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for deleting it. House1090 (talk) 22:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

But I wanted to also ask you if the account is deleted? House1090 (talk) 23:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Heyya. I've deleted the old userpage but I can't delete the account as it's not technically possible. Just ignore it as it's unused now and ancient history :) - Alison ^❤ 19:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Cool! THKS House1090 (talk) 22:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That ANI thread

Hello Alison. In regards to that closed thread on WP:ANI about User:TylerPuetz, I'm not sure what to say of it. I do think that you did the right thing, but I wasn't even around to say anything about it. Of course, you did find that it was actually shared IP, in the end. Whether it was the same person, my guess is as good as yours. I warned that earlier IP myself over a month ago, but I didn't bother to "investigate" any connections, other than what I knew (same user). TylerPuetz did admit that it was him right after that, but I don't know what to make of this whole thing. I'm glad that it's over with, and hopefully TylerPuetz avoids making the same mistake (IP edits shouldn't be made on user pages even if it's the same user). Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 00:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Troy. The problem there was that .. well, it had basically been dealt with by the final-warning. Unfortunately, bringing it to ANI only ramped the drahmaz™. In the end, it actually wasn't a shared IP - I just want to clarify that - but following an email conversation with TylerPuetz, I'm satisfied that the matter is now well and truly over. Thanks for the note ;) - Alison ^❤ 17:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

OK

Thats grand, no bother. Will you remove the e-mail address carter-lad@live.co.uk and delete it from edit history. I don't think i know how to delete edit history. Also it stands to sense that you delete it of this page to if you don't mind. Its just that that e-mail addy isn't mine. Ogioh (talk) 11:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Domer

Alison, may I draw your attention to what I beleive is a an abusive attack on Domer48. His has had his ability to talk on his own page removed for spurious reasons; he has had a punitive block on the outrageous charge of "template abuse". So, yet another Irish editor who is seeking to remove British pov from Ireland-related articles is being silenced? Is this how Wiki generates "consensus"? Block all the dissenting voices? Sarah777 (talk) 14:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, I just checked and his talk page is currently unprotected, so he's free to comment there if he likes. In fact, his block ends today, if it hasn't already - Alison ^❤ 17:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed the 'edit symbols' on his sections. I'm getting senile. GoodDay (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AE

I'd like your input on Domer48 on AE.--Tznkai (talk) 21:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Friendly reminder. If you don't have anything you wish to add, please just tell me.--Tznkai (talk) 18:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I likely do, but I've been too busy here. I'll try taking a look later but I have to say that I'm burned out from the Troubles ArbCom and related issues. I'll try pop in later if I can .. thanks for letting me know! - Alison ^❤ 04:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Range Blocks

Hi. User:LessHeard vanU suggested you might be a good person to ask about range blocks. Lately we've had quite a bit of a problem with an editor vandalizing numerous Disney articles and talk pages, making spurious redirects, creating duplicates of templates, undoing article clean ups, MoS violations, etc, with the very rare good edit mixed in. Through two SSPs Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/70.146.241.244 and Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Iluvteletubbies confirmed what I had already figured out from the editing history, that these were all the same person. He has thus far edited under at least 7 usernames and 19 IP addresses. Some of the articles he's hit are on long term semi-protection, which has helped some, but he also moved out into the Teletubbies arena.

When he continued making new socks to evade the indef bans, and continue using IP addresses as well, I filed an AN/I report, which confirmed measures needed to be taken, and that he was also causing lots of problems over at Simple Wikipedia in the same sets of articles. During the AN/I, range blocks were discussed and one was implemented for 68.220.160.0/19. However, he also appears with IPs of 65.0.16X.XX. I also don't know how to tell if the 68 range block is covering most of what he uses (I have a full list at User:Collectonian/Links#Disney vandal). Would it be possible to also range block the 65s, which he appeared again today with, and made another sock account? Any other ideas on how to at least slow him down so an hour a day isn't wasted undoing his edits.-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Collectonian. I'll take a look at this in a short while ... - Alison ^❤ 21:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks! -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to touch base on this issue. He made at least two more named socks today (I suspect I'm dealing with a third now), and hit with another IP. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't mean to seem to rush, but this guy just returned with another sock Teletubbiesfantalkcharacters (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and IP 74.249.96.152 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and made a massive mess of a bunch of Teletubbies articles. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Collectonian, I'm really sorry, but I'd a ton of stuff to do. I've processed your information at User:Collectonian/Links#Disney_vandal, found some sleeper socks and softblocked one of the ranges. Hopefully, that will slow the guy down a bit. And sorry for the delay - my RL stuff is getting in the way of Wikipedia :) - Alison ^❤ 04:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem and thanks! He seemed to go a bit nuts today...I think now he's just doing it for the attention :P Hopefully this will at least make it a bit harder for him to keep it up. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Beh-nam again

Can you please block these IDs, they are deffinately the banned editor User:Beh-nam again.

• User:Scythian77
• User:Dundapanj
• User:PashtoonGhafar

Banned User:Anoshirawan, User:Tajik may also be involved in this but not sure. Anoshirawan is from USA and Tajik from Germany.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wish good luck to you and your strange accusations. The Scythian 22:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Why is my accusation strange to you? Beh-nam has close to 100 different socks who constantly vandalises Pashtun related articles. His latest sock was User:GeorgeClintonWiki, editing Pashtun people on September 15, 2008. Then these new socks come to do similar edits on the same article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

You have no basis for it, and took ZERO initiative to seek any dialogue or consensus in our dispute. Trying to label me a "banned user" with no proof, simply because I may disagree with you, is a disgrace. The Scythian 22:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Nisarkand :/

1. Scythian77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Unrelated
2. Dundapanj (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Unlikely
3. PashtoonGhafar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Confirmed
4. GeorgeHarper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Confirmed

- Alison ^❤ 22:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks dear Miss Alison —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

The saga continues here --Enric Naval (talk) 17:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Eric! I've just  Completed this one, too. One Beh-nam and one Nisarkand - Alison ^❤ 18:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

NisarKand

Hello, another editor seemed concerned that User:Pakhtunking is actually banned editor User:NisarKand. Could you possibly look into any IP connection between these two accounts?

• User:NisarKand
• User:Pakhtunking

The Scythian 22:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Pakhtunking (talk · contribs) is  Confirmed as being a Nisarkand sock. Big surprise there :/ - Alison ^❤ 22:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your time, Alison. The Scythian 22:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Dear Miss Alison, just because I am editing from Islamabad Pakistan, that does not mean I am other editor. Pakistan has 160 million people and most have DSL internet connection in their homes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Nisarkand. There's a lot more evidence than just your city. Thanks for trying, though - Alison ^❤ 23:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

lol thats cute   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 10:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Wikipedia is lucky to have an admin like you, and that's the truth. I will now do my very best to reward your faith in me. DollyD (talk) 10:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

In agreement, Administrator Alison is super-duper. GoodDay (talk) 12:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Alison the Rockin Admin   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

lol - you guys!!! :) - Alison ^❤ 18:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Our pal on Gaelic Wikipedia

User:Felex'ja, User:Úsáideoir nua, User:LFOT, and User:Excuse Me Mr. -- same old, same old. NawlinWiki (talk) 11:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, NW. I've blocked them all over there now. Global block might be a good idea there - Alison ^❤ 18:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Old account is old

File:Red Bull 250mL Can.jpg

Have a couple of these in the meantime :)

But i think it's your friend Bluegold somehow :p Unidentified man in green firing turret (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Y'know, I'd say that's highly likely, Johnny. Fortunately, as you say, the account's four years old now!! Longest. Block evasion. Evar! :) (Thanks for the Red Bull, BTW, but I'm still blocking ya. You know the deal - sorry!) - ^__^ - Alison ^❤ 03:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Severe Checkuser Backlog

Just want to bring it to your attention (as you seem to be the main checkuser person) that Checkuser is in a severe backlog. The oldest request is from the 10th of September (almost 3 full weeks old). Any help would be appericated. - NeutralHomer • Talk 07:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Okies. I'll try paring it down over the next few days. YellowMonkey is over there right now, clearing up, BTW - Alison ^❤ 08:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you both very much :) Please let me know if I can ever be assistance in helping with checkusers. If you all need extra checkusers, I will be glad to sign up. - NeutralHomer • Talk 08:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope this proves that it's not entirely a thankless job. Thank you! :o) ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ will never be anybody's hero now 10:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Oooh - thanks, Redvers :) - Alison ^❤ 19:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

What are you posting here for??! Party's over! Get back to work. To be serious now, I got all the obvious ones. I just wondered if there are any more that I missed. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

lolz @ Painfully obvious sockfarm comment in the logs :) Yes, it looks like you got them all. There's no sockmaster or anything ... - Alison ^❤ 19:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC) (working already!!)

Time for a non-vandalism check?

Heya! Since you're around... ;) There's an unblock request from someone operating from a hardblocked range (hosting company). He doesn't dispute that fact, and says he's the only user on that -personal- proxy. Could you please check if Xorlev (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) is really on the 75.126.215.26 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) range and that there is no foul play? I'm leaning towards giving him an IP Block Exemption if everything seems correct. -- lucasbfr ^talk 19:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

That checks out just fine, Lucasbfr. He's just logged in to another IP to post requests. If you do that, can you leave a quick note on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption? Thanks! - Alison ^❤ 19:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Allie! I went ahead and granted him the exemption. -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey guess what...

NHRHS2010 (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		You have a good sense of humor; you make me smile. NHRHS2010 |  Talk to me  22:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)