User talk:Alison: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:03, 12 May 2008

3D-Palace notability

Hi. I wrote an article about a website that is a pioneer in the 3d application video tutorials. It is considered spam, even if it was the first company to produce end to end video tutorials. I consider that being pretty important. If this matter isn't worthy to be in an encyclopedia, I ask you why is the 3D Buzz article still online? I followed that article as an example, and so far 3 of the articles I wrote were considered spam. I've read the guidelines, but they are very ambiguous. I await your response on my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by InProgress (talk • contribs) 10:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Z. Rivkin M.D.

im editing rhinoplasty at the moment. but im very new to it all. just started last week. u can see my contribution to the talk. i think this section on Alexander Z. Rivkin M.D. should be removed. or at least greatly mondified by addition of many other surgeons. not including me. although im a surgeon, im not of international stature! im an ENT surgeon from toronto. what is the least irriating and kindest way to proceed? do we need some type of concensus process?Oakleysmith (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help or just a pat on the head?

Hihi...I don't know if you remember me....I was one of the instigators in the Tedious Z stuff. Anyway...I stumbled on an AfD that was closed, I felt incorrectly...so I took it to review [[1]]. I am getting completely frustrated with this process. It seems that just because no one likes the guy (heck, not even ME!) that no one will admit that there is enough there to show notability...Could you take a look and give me a reality check? I may be way off, but I just feel like there is enough there. I appreciate your time and help or kick in the pants...whichever you decide to give :) (oh, btw, did you see TZ's blog, he's been kicked offa ANOTHER forum for the same thing!!) LegoTech·(t)·(c) 07:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I've recently been prodded toward adminship, but I'm nervous about taking it on and I feel I need coaching. I have it on very good authority that you are an exceptional admin coach, so I thought it best to make your acquaintance and ask for your help. Please, can you help? Serendi ^podous 14:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

I've cordially invited you to help open a fresh can of worms... — iridescent 16:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ban evading sock-puppets advice on collateral damage if blocked

Hi Alison I'm sorry to bother you with this but Jehochman recommends I contact to you about a banned user who is ban evading using University of California Santa Barbara library and IT dept IPs. (See my post to Jehochman for details).

User:Anacapa was banned for using multiple IPs (24 from UCSB) to avoid scrutiny while povpushing and trolling on Shunning, Menonite, Gender, Project Gender studies, Feminism, Rape, Incest and other articles. A full history of his disruption is here in this report. An archive of the ban discussion is here

Anacapa was also found to be likely using sock-puppet accounts (see RFCU case here). One of the IPs he used in the last few days was previously blocked by Coelacan for this same reason[2].

Jehochman recommended that I contact you in order to asses "how many unrelated users are in this range, and if there would not be too much collateral damage, could we have a range block". The range in question includes these IPs: 128.111.97.148, |128.111.95.110, 128.111.95.171, 128.111.95.38 (I think the range is 128.111.0.0/16 but I'm no expert in this area) other IPs used by Anacapa can be seen here but the 4 listed here are the 'live' ones.

Thanks for taking the time to go through this and sorry if this is a really complex issue but Anacapa is quite a complex troll--Cailil ^talk 14:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching

Hey there Alison, I'm looking through the admin coachee requests trying to find people who are A) qualified to run for adminship right now and B) people who need some help, but could be a candidate in the future. I found a candidate whom I think could be an admin, but needs help. According to the coaching status page, you are willing to take on a coachee, so I was wondering if you could take a look at Realist2? That link will take you to the section of his talk page where I vetted him some.Balloonman (talk) 17:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Can I get back on the whole admin coaching thing? I've let a few requests slide so far (to my shame!) and, to be honest, I'm not sure how I feel about coaching right now. I'm a little wikifrazzled and could use a break and am unsure if I can give a candidate the attention that they need and deserve ... - Alison ^❤ 03:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Alison. You have new messages at Atyndall's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Checkuser

You did a check on Sumerophile (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) which resulted in a block, currently active. In the meantime we have Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) who has today introduced a dozen or so cfds such as this one, relating to categories and redirects heavily edited by Sumerophile. Moreover Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes opened the account on 26 April (S was blocked for 72 hours on 25 Apr). So I think these 2 are related and checkuser might confirm this. -- roundhouse0 (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This one's been sorted now! - Alison ^❤ 06:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock help needed

Hey, Alison. Someone's requesting an unblock of one of the IP addresses you recently CU-blocked. Would you mind taking a quick look if you've got the time? Thanks... User talk:Exxolon#Here we go again... Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Hersfold. I addressed this one yesterday & everything's all sorted now. Thanks for letting me know - Alison ^❤ 22:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An invitation to the NotTheWikipediaWeekly

Greetings! You have expressed an interest in joining in with the next NotTheWikipediaWeekly episode. We now have a confirmed date and time: the episode will take place at Friday, 9 May 2008, at 00.30 (UTC). For that episode in various local times, see here. If you'd like to attend, please "enroll" at Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Confirmed participants. Please also feel free to browse the suggested topics for this epsiode. We look forward to seeing you on Friday at 00.30!

All the best, Anthøny 22:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just signed up as being there, but it already is over. You missed it. Sorry.--Filll (talk) 02:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.... ah no!! I must have got my times wrong as I was sure it was at 5:30pm tomorrow :( - Alison ^❤ 06:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Alison. You have new messages at Atyndall's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Unblock

Please see: User talk:AaronSw. Thanks! Tiptoety ^talk 02:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

' Sorted' now - thanks for that! - Alison ^❤ 06:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you! Tiptoety ^talk 22:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day alison

...and I was sorry to miss you at the podcast recording earlier - it was quite an interesting one, and the audio is all online now over at WP:NTWW - hopefully you can make another one before too long (in fact, p'raps I'll look for you on skype next week sometime to try and discuss an idea I've got....)

In other news - I also wanted your advice about something..... I've created a 'long term straw poll' for the ideas at WP:OPTOUT, which is located at Wikipedia:OPTOUT/Long_Term_Straw_Poll (I don't think the current deletion discussion is going to delete it, which is good, and I'm not really worried about that aspect) - but what I was wanting some advice about is where the community draws its lines in regard to 'canvassing' - I'm obviously notifying you about it here - and I'd like to drop a note in the talk pages of the other folk who commented at the proposal talk page to hear their views (both in support, and 'against' the proposal) - any thoughts you've got on whether or not that's a good idea would be welcomed.

cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 06:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Big Thank you!

Hello Alison! Just wanted to send you my sincere thanks for sorting out the infuriating situation, that was the IP block fiasco. I do hope that the vandal is either caught or stopped. I feel extremely honoured at being allowed this unblock, and you can be sure that I shall continue to fight my relatively new war in improving articles and fighting vandalism! Whilst I acknowledge I'm a newbie, I really want to learn as much as I can, its just Wikipedia can and is at times, very confusing! Regards, δ²_(Talk) 07:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm absolutely delighted to have helped and that you're back in action again. This is the best resolution we could have hoped for; you back editing and the vandals being stopped :) Thank you for everything you do for the project, too - Alison ^❤ 19:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please

If you could i would like you to rename me from iordanis_athanasiadis to iordanis_777.Thanks in advance and have a nice day.--Iordanis777^listening 08:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(knocks on door—hi Alison :) Hi there, I'm afraid only bureaucrats can rename users. Alison has checkuser and oversight rights, but she's not a bureaucrat. You may post your request over at Wikipedia:Changing username, or ask one of the helpful folks on this list for assistance. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Fvasconcellos :) Yes, you'll need a Bureaucrat to do the job. Fortunately, it's pretty straightforward. Just follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username and so long as the name you want isn't taken, it'll be easy! If you need a hand filing the request, just let me know - Alison ^❤ 18:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And don't worry if you inadvertently make a mistake - I clerk there and will be more than happy to fix it up :) -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 18:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the immediate reply.Have anice day!--Iordanis777^listening 06:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could checkuser be used in this way?

Hi Alison,

Flo suggested that you might be able to help resolve the viability of an idea relating to the use of checkuser in wiping VK's slate clean, so if you have moment do you think you could take a look at User talk:Giano/Terms for VK's return#Forgotten_socks? Any guidance would welcome :)

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BHG, I've replied here. This sounds like it could be workable and I'd certainly be amenable to help - Alison ^❤ 18:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ha!

You beat me to the bisexual revert!Good job! Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 17:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fast on the draw ;) - Alison ^❤ 18:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Enigmanman/Scarian

Hi Alison, I was following the discussion at AN/I, and sorry if I'm missing something here, but are Scarian and Enigmaman one and the same? Forgive me if I've overlooked something. Best, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're not, no. But they're obviously in contact. I wouldn't worry about it ... - Alison ^❤ 21:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. I was a bit confused, that's all :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question

Are these accounts confirmed as socks of User:NisarKand or User:Beh-nam, I was a bit confused by your comment. Also, I was unable to locate the IP that reported it in the page history to block them, do you happen to have that? Tiptoety ^talk 22:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heh - well the fact is that Afghan-related articles are replete with socks, and RFCU cases are no different. The anon who filed that case was User:Beh-nam and the checkuser-proven socks were indeed User:NisarKand. I've updated the case now to clarify that but I seriously don't blame you for not knowing. Both of those sockers and constantly reporting each other!! :) - Alison ^❤ 22:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, just wanted to make sure I was tagging their userpages correctly. Thank you. Tiptoety ^talk 22:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket

Could you please verify that ticket #2008041110026206 verifies that Image:Machinedrum.jpg is released under the GFDL, and if so let me know on my talk page? A user has claimed this and I just want to be sure it's all in order. Stifle (talk) 22:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that the subject/owner has given "express permission" for the above image to be used on Wikipedia. License was not specified but the ticket was closed as successful - Alison ^❤ 23:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:PatPeter

Hi.

I've a concern, and I would like your thoughts.

The user above has been a sock puppeteer for some time now.

As I recall, he was banned due to an inordinate amount of time in user space, coupled with a fake suicide threat. It was determined that he wasn't here to build the encyclopedia.

Since then, I've encountered him using several IPs. (172.164 172.165 172.167 172.168 and some in other ranges as well 6x. 7x. ) And using several accounts. (See: User talk:The Big X and User talk:Sox207 in particular. And here's a checkUser)

So now I'm in a quandry. In looking over his multitude of edits, they're mostly involving userboxes (Note the name User:Babelious) or harassing other editors when they revert him. (See this lengthy tirade.) The few exceptions mostly include animated television.

I think I've now discovered a "sleeper" account (which has several other sock and IP probabilities with it), and may do a checkUser, but first I wanted to ask:

Is it worth it?

Does it matter if I'm reverting him as an IP or as an account.

I'd love to say he's a well-meaning editor, but the way he attacks people on talk pages and his past actions suggest that this is rather not likely, and besides the want to play with userboxes, he sees Wikipedia mostly as a game.

So here's my quandry. I'm finding myself tempted to unblock him and just say "skip it." His forays in mainspace, rare though they are, are typically non-disruptive minor edits (while often reverted half the time for various reasons related to the edits themselves).

Am I being too forgiving? Probably. (And probably due to the fact that other than him and another indef blocked editor, I don't do much vandalism patrol or blocking.) But anyway, I'd like your thoughts on this.

(I'm honestly wondering if you even remember being involved in the ban discussion at the admin's noticeboard. If I didn't encounter him periodically. I wonder if I would.) - jc37 01:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Urgh! I remember PatPeter very well indeed. His homophobic userboxes, the fake suicide and the police calls, his wikilawyering and his attacks on me and others. I have to say I checked his main account and yes, he's socking again. ROWikian (talk · contribs) is

Confirmed as being PatPeter. Just look at the contribs. Personally, I think you may be being a bit lenient, given the way he has treated others. To be honest, he's largely worn out the goodwill of the community, IMO - Alison ^❤ 05:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right (of course), I guess it's more likely me tired of chasing sock after sock. (Though I'll have to say that I've gotten fairly experienced with his typical contributions.) Any suggestions? - jc37 05:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROWikian is now blocked.

Do I ask you here about User:Wolfdog1 or write up a checkuser?

(After looking over the contribs of several PatPeter IPs, and looking at Wolfdog1's contribs, and noting his similar subpages, and a lot of the same userboxes on his userpage (compared to PatPeter's). Needless to say, I sincerely hope I'm wrong.) - jc37 06:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For you!

Hello Alison! I've decided to give you some flowers in an attempt to prevent you from finding dreadful every time I drop by at your talk page with a checkuser request for Polscience. Hope you like them! :-)

This bouquet is hereby presented to Alison!

And now (when you least expect it) here comes the dreadful checkuser request for User:Polscience, bwahaha. :-P New suspected socks: User:Fitzier, User:Selma Kaufmann, User:Abdel Cader and User:Monica Arria. Could you please have a look at them when/if you have time? Thank you. PS- I hope you liked the flowers, they were not meant to be just a shameless bribe but a nice gesture towards a user who truly deserves them. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 03:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhh, so the trick is flowers. (snaps fingers) If I'd have only known...

(Guess I better go look for some : ) - jc37 03:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You guys!! Oh and Husond, I guess you think you can bribe me with flowers, huh? HUH?? Well okay, maybe :-D

Confirmed - the following accounts as socks of Polscience (talk · contribs)

Selma Kaufmann (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Scholt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Alexuss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Briggitte (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Ardholt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Annuitcoeptis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
NoSoclorum (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Fitzier (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Abdel Cader (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Monica Arria (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hussond (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - doing the impersonate/redirect thing. Blocked this one myself :(
Jk69696969696969 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Natalia Vodianova (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

- Alison ^❤ 05:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Alison, great work! This guy surely has a lot of free time. Egad. Best regards, Húsönd 14:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A gift of flowers : )

Ooooh - more bribery, and this time from Ireland :) Thank you so much! - Alison ^❤ 05:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Thanks for granting me rollback! I'll use it responsibly. Sleepaholic (talk) 05:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Glad to help :) - Alison ^❤ 05:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have email...

...and you will do in a few days. Ta, --1qx (talk) 18:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Not to bother you, but I really need a reply on that email that I sent you. Thanks! Mww113 (talk) 18:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since flowers seem to work....

Just kidding! You Deserve them! But I still need an answer! Thanks! < The reason for the bribe Mww113 (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awwww - thank you! :) I really need to think re. that email. Can I send it on in confidence to the c/u community? - Alison ^❤ 04:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, :) Mww113 (talk) 14:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam

Allison, on the checkuser, User:Litrboxr, who I suspect to be NisarKand, slipped in the accounts Duvarngreen and KyleSmithX as being confirmed sockpuppets and then uses this page to revert several edits by them. Can you correct this? Vinh1313 (talk) 19:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I misunderstood Litrbox's edit although I'm skeptical about Duvarngreen and KyleSmithX being Benham. Vinh1313 (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User: Toomiasy vs. User: Tomeasy

There is a new user with a handle very similar to mine editing articles that I used to edit. What makes me most suspicious is that their user page redirects to mine. Since I had a similar experience not too long ago with an avatar of mine stemming from an IP originally used by User: Polscience I would like to ask you to check, whether again I am facing a kind of fraud. Tomeasy (talk) 03:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed as Polscience, as well as another five sleeper socks (and a Husond impersonator). All blocked now :) - Alison ^❤ 04:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Isn't it possible to block the related IP, instead of tracking again and again Polscience's reincarnations? Tomeasy (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. He uses a different IP nearly every time - Alison ^❤ 04:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Please can you drop in on David Lauder's Talk page. --Major Bonkers (talk) 13:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Alison.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. For now, I think I'm going to take a bit of a wikibreak, as this experience was somewhat draining. Hopefully, I'll be able to put more energy back into OTRS now as well. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 242: / Line 242: @@
 == Rfb participation thanks ==
-Hello, Wub.
+Hello, Alison.
 I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After [[Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/Avraham 2/Bureaucrat discussion|bureaucratic discussion]], the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. For now, I think I'm going to take a bit of a wikibreak, as this experience was somewhat draining. Hopefully, I'll be able to put more energy back into OTRS now as well. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 19:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Archives
2004	Entire year
2005	Jan • Jun						Jul • Dec
2006	Jan • Jun						Jul • Dec
2007	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2008	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2009	Jan • Jun						Jul • Sep			Oct	Nov	Dec
2010	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2011	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2012	Entire year
2013	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2014	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep • Dec
2015	Entire year
2016	Entire year
2017	Entire year
2018	Entire year
2019	Entire year
2020	Entire year
2021	Entire year
2022	Entire year
2023	Entire year
2024	Entire year