User talk:Ivanvector/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

WP:AIV

Hey, just a heads up, Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism is generally only for obvious spammers / vandals. If you are having sockpuppet issues, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations is the right place to report those. In other words, AIV isn't a one-stop block shop. SQL^{Query me!} 22:18, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@SQL: thanks, I appreciate the feedback. I thought these edits were pretty obvious. I'll see about making an SPI case though. Cheers. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:22, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Versions in translated page template

Thanks for doing the stub at Talk:Cibuntu, Cigandamekar, Kuningan. I'm not sure if you know, the version number in the {{translated page}} tag (on the talk page) is (only) a named parameter (version=), not as a positional one. I've fixed it. Si Trew (talk) 03:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. I thought it was acceptable to do it either way. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Where Sinners Meet

Hi. While I disagree with your comment at Redirects for discussion regarding this redirect, and BDD's decision to close it, I understand your rationale. The issue is that the CSD was removed by an editor/admin (not sure, but I think they are an admin), who did not check any of the sources of the current article to see if the title was correct. I understand when a film is known by more than one name, like Portrait of Alison/Postmark for Danger, but that's not the case in this instance. The name is simply incorrect. BFI calls it by its correct name, IMDB calls it by its correct name, AFI calls it by its correct name, and contemporaneous sources call it by its correct name, yet Wikipedia has it by an incorrect name. Even the only other citation in the article calls it by its correct name. Regardless, if that's the way admins want it to appear on Wikipedia, no skin off my nose. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

@Onel5969: oh I believe you're absolutely right. This was purely a technical close, because what you're asking for is for the article to be moved over the redirect, and that's supposed to happen through Requested Moves, a separate process. I think you absolutely should request (on the article's talk page) for it to be renamed. That's not something we usually process at WP:RFD is all. Do you need help making a move request? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 02:38, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

@Onel5969: I didn't hear back from you, but I've opened a move request on your behalf. Please see Talk:The Dover Road (film)#Requested move 10 February 2016. It's possible that I misspelled your name in the ping above; if you did not see my comment then I apologize. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, but as I said above, I was pretty much done with that issue. It's incorrect, but if admins want to leave it as incorrect, that's beyond my control. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:54, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Lucy DeCoutere

I put semi-protection on the article a few hours ago to clamp down on drive-by IP assassination, but I see that the most recent revert was done by an "autoconfirmed" editor who came back just for that purpose after having not made a single edit to Wikipedia for almost nine months prior — and one of the IPs registered a brand new user name just to throw an allegation of biased editing at me on my user page. So, particularly given the autoconfirmed user, I'm soliciting opinions on whether I should escalate the page protection to full admin-only or not — I'd prefer not to, if at all possible, but I'm not sure what other choice we have if sleeper accounts are waking up just to attack her. Bearcat (talk) 01:46, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Never mind. The same sleeper undid your revert after I posted this comment, so I've gone forward with full protection for one week. Bearcat (talk) 02:03, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Masturbation redirects listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Masterbated and Masterbatory. Since you had some involvement with these redirects, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 20:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I already did though. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I had noticed that. Blanket hit everyone that participated in the previous discussion, so it could in no way give the impression of selective notification. Best Regards, —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 21:05, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Callmesir7

You referenced an edit by Callmesir7 in one of your diffs in the SPI report for Fangusu. Do you suspect that editor is a sock as well? (I mean, that edit was their only edit; it may be inconclusive right now due to lack of evidence, but I was just wondering.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I've observed it's one of Fangusu's patterns to restore edits which have already been reverted, and they're not always her edits, so I don't think it would be right to retroactively declare Callmesir7 a sock. CU would be stale, but I requested to confirm a technical link with the more recent socks just to be sure. Bbb23 seemed to think the behavioural evidence was enough. I'm sure it helps that Fangusu came swooping in on an IP to defend the sock within minutes of me opening the SPI. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Your e-mail

I need an unblock request from the user to act.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:00, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Redirect categorization

Hi Ivanvector! You've been interested in redirect categorization and the This is a redirect template in the past, so I wanted to let you know that there is a discussion at Template talk:This is a redirect#One parameter that might interest you.  Good faith! Paine  21:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Need Help Redirect and my most recent talk topic cannot find response--Redirect discussions confusing to me.

Sorry, but the redirect causes confusion for me. I find it necessary to start another discussion. I have all of the most recent info re: harry dennis (musician) after receiving updated information from him directly. I would like for the text box at the top of the page with the "warnings" to be removed. All of the info is linked or referenced to a point as not to oversaturate the page with info. Other information is self-reporting from my interview(s) with Mr. Dennis. Will you or someone remove the box that precedes the info because it is distracting to readers and in someway suggest that info is false or misleading. Harry Dennis is affiliated and knows the most notable personalities, musicians, dis, etc. in house music. When I learn how to insert images, I will insert a couple to support his information. Please respond to back directly to me because I may not find your answer in redirects. Thank you. --DA01 21:50, 19 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DLOFT01 (talk • contribs)

Does the autosearch subvert hit counts for redirects?

Hi Ivanvector,

I have been thinking the last couple of days, about Shlivovitz. I've decided to !vote for a weak keep for it, but the surprise to me is really that it got literally zero hits before the discussion at RfD. You would think it would get a few, since it's a fairly obvious misspelling (not to the online dictionaries an-other spelling, and my woodware dictionaries don't have it). And not even any bot hits.

It set me wondering, does the "autosearch" – I don't know the official name for this, but if you type a search in the Mozilla taskbar or another dropdown like that – does it automatically take you through the redirect without registering a hit for the redirect in the page log?

Since the autosearch detects and displays redirect titles, it obviously has some nous to the fact it's a redirect to another article (how clever its parsing is, I have no idea). If it then of its own volition performs the redirect, rather than letting the WP/Wikipmedia server do it by an HTTP request for the redirect page, then no hit count would appear in the page request log. (That, of course, is assuming that the search itself causes no hit to the page log – but that must be the case, else every single search result would be in the page log.)

If my premiss is right, this would mean we could never trust the stats for a redirect of itself because we don't know how many have been pre-empted, if that's the right word, by the autosearch doing the redirect itself and requesting not the redirect page but the target page. This of course benefits our readers (and HTTP servers) in not round-tripping via a redirect, but leaves us with queer stats for how many hits it gets.

The telling point, I think, – and both you and I have alluded to this in past RfD discussions – if is you hit a redirect for something but the page says it was redirected from somewhere else (or does not say it was redirected at all). I've not paid close attention to this.

You're better at this than I am, so perhaps a few words in the right places to the Wikimedia folks would clarify this? In the meantime, I am suspicious of obvious misspellings/alternative spellings and Rs without diacritics and so forth that are recorded as getting no hits.

Move this question to somewhere else if you think more appropriate.

Best as always. Si Trew (talk) 16:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

PS Got a hardback copy of Fowler's 2nd ed Modern English Usage, 1968 ed, in a cheap shop in Hungary today for about a twonie. Very pleased, goes nicely with my 1st ed. Si Trew (talk) 17:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: Sorry for delayed response, I did see this but then I got distracted by something (probably either furry or shiny) and completely neglected to respond. I think I can clarify some of this based on what I think I know about how I think these things work. Our stats tool (either one) rely on pageview stats from a server dump report, which as I understand it is the number of times that pages are loaded, regardless of how the user (/bot/crawler/whatever) arrived at the page. If the page loads, that's one pageview. If you're searching through autocomplete (that's what I call it) then your browser is calling Google (or whatever) to pre-fetch search results from some database (its own cache, likely) and guess at what you mean to type, but when you actually navigate (hit enter or click one of the results), you're going through Google's architecture before you're redirected to whatever it thinks your target is, usually its own search results unless you have something that defaults to "I'm Feeling Lucky".

Google's results page is all essentially plain URLs, so if you click on one going to Wikipedia, you're ending up at our page that lives at that URL, which might be a redirect or might not be, it's up to Google to figure that out. If it's a redirect, then the redirect loads (one pageview on the redirect) and then Wikipedia's software displays the page at the target, but I don't know if that counts as a pageview at the target or not. I think it does, but I'm not sure.

As for Wikipedia's native search, it prefetches results in much the same way as Google does, and I think that comes from calling page titles from the database (and not actually loading the pages) so prefetched searches don't count up pageviews. Then, if you execute a search on a page title that exists, you get put through to that page; I'm not sure if that's by making the browser call the URL from the server or some other magic, but the end result should be the same as an external search as far as pageviews go.

Now I'm guessing there must also be some way to discount pageviews from redirects, otherwise Wikipedia's aggregated statistics will show two pageviews for every article that gets loaded via a redirect. I don't know how that works. It could be that redirect pageviews are flagged somehow, and the new stats tool is set to disregard them, but I don't think that's it since we can see hits on other redirects. I think it more likely (as implausible as it is) that Shlivovitz actually didn't get any hits during that time.

And as for diacritics and such, it could be a weakness of the server dump. It is not case sensitive, as I recall, although that might have been an issue with the old stats tool.

I'm not sure if this answers your question or not, but hopefully it's useful :) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Very useful indeed, thanks. I was entirely unaware that the autocomplete went via Google, I thought it was all in the Wikimedia software. That would explain the redirects not getting hits so much as one might think. I think as I alluded to, one way to distinguish is whether the final page has (Redirected from such and such) below the article title: I hadn't been paying attention, but often it doesn't even when one searches for the exact redirect title, which I assume means that "something" along the way has cached – in some loose sense – the mapping from the redirect to the target and done a bit of DIY. While this is helpful to readers to save the extra redirect request (and of course I am not talking about HTTP 303 or whatever it is HTTP 451 does not -> List of HTTP status codes redirects but amounts to the same thing), it does skew the stats.

Now I thought', differently from you I think, that a bounce through a redirect did indeed count as two pageview hits in the Wikimedia server logs, one for the redirect and one for the target. Perhaps I was wrong there. Obviously the redirect is counted (sometimes) otherwise all redirects would be zero hits. I had assumed the target was also counted, and so tended to do a ready reckoning myself of the number of direct hits against the number of redirect hits when deciding whether I thought a redirect from misspelling and such were useful (the kinda "Redirects from incorrect things" super-category that we don't quite have, which I judge slightly differently from "Redirects from similar things"): to labo(ur) the point I regard {{R from incorrect spelling}} differently from {{R from other spelling}}).

It's not a big deal, really, since stats are just an indicator and not the be-all and end-all, but probably I will place a little less emphasis on them in future. ~Rather like taking the train from Liverpool Street or Kings Cross to , one travels hopefully, usually arrives, but either way at Cambridge). Er, no, that metaphor really doesn't work. Oh well. Si Trew (talk) 10:02, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh how odd. HTTP 451 is an article, but at List of HTTP status codes#Internet Information Services 451 is listed as "451 Redirect". will our work never end?. Si Trew (talk) 10:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I removed it from the list, appears from talk of 2012 to be an in joke (a genuine publication in IET or some such, but an april fool's joke I think), which would be harmless but that it masked me trying to find the right codes or indeed the article except I kinda "know" to search exactly: HTTP 307 and HTTP 308 go where they should, to the List_of_HTTP_status_codes#3xx_Redirection. HTTP 207 is not this directed to section (my typo). Oh dear, have cans, will open. Si Trew (talk) 10:53, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Did you ec with yourself? Happens to me sometimes. HTTP 451 is not a joke, it was a real response to net neutrality a few years back, wherein it became potentially necessary to produce an HTTP service code for content which a government had embargoed, which was not a situation foreseen by the specification. 451 of course is a reference to Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, and its addition to the specification coincided either with Bradbury's death or with an anniversary of the book, if I remember right.

As for autocomplete, I think I misled you. Wikipedia's search function uses Wikipedia's own database, if I understand at all how it works, but the search built into your browser uses whichever search engine you choose. Some browsers allow you to choose Wikipedia as your default search engine, which is interesting. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Sock or not? What do you think?

Thanks to the whole debacle that we both know about, I've noticed that my ability to smell socks seems to have heightened. So, I'm wondering if you smell the same smell I am smelling when comparing these two accounts: Promise.scout vs. Prompri? It may also be worth stating that the latter account/editor erroneously declared themselves a "Wikipedia Online Ambassador" on their user page. Steel1943 (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

• My sense is these accounts are definitely related, although I'm not sure if they are one person, or two people who know each other. It's telling that Prompri lists "Promise Scout" under other names in the infobox they put on their user page. Speaking of the userpage, there's personal info there that possibly should be revdeleted, and I see that there are other deleted revisions in the page history but I can't tell who oversighted them. But the two accounts didn't technically violate WP:SOCK until they both edited the Pokemon20 AfD, and they appear to be young, so maybe this could be resolved by discussing with the user and getting them to disclose if they are just using alternate accounts for some reason. However, Prompri also seems to know what sockpuppetry is based on their comments about Wikia. But I can't tell what their motive would be here, they didn't even vote the same way at the AfD. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions. Since you have had some involvement with the Reintroduced, Reintroducing, Reintroduction, and Reintroductions redirects (i.e. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 5#Re-introductory), you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. —Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 03:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

SPI duck block board?

I read somewhere that you may think that a WP:DUCK WP:SPI "quick block" is a good idea. I may agree with that. In fact, I also think that there should probably be a guideline where sock masters with enough proven instances of socking should have official WP:SITEBANs. Steel1943 (talk) 01:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Mailing list confirmation

In case anyone comes by to confirm identities in an email I just sent: yes, it was me that sent it. Cheers. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:49, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Sig

Have you changed your Sig lately (within the last couple of weeks)? It appears spanning multiple lines on my android tablet, lots of empty vertical whitespace. Only in edit window, the basic syntax highlighting edit box based one. Si Trew (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: no, I haven't changed it since June of last year. It has a span tag in it, maybe your browser is misinterpreting it? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:44, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Maybe. I don't attempt any large edits on the tablet anyway, so it's not that bothersome. Si Trew (talk) 15:19, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Bounce back redirect

I was just looking through my talk page of the discussion we had of whether A redirect -> B article mentions A redirect counts as a redirect loop. I dunno why but I never got back to you, I think "bounce back redirect" is the perfect term. Trampoline would be too obscure, but bounce back is common enough even stupid English people and half-awake Canadians know what that means. Brilliant term.

I tend to blank my talk page quite often so we better put this discussion somewhere, perhaps over on WT:RFD? I don't think that would hurt to do that, the discussion technically obviously didn't take place there but it is more easily accessible there than being buried in a user talk page that I regularly cut down (I leave the insults usually and delete the compliments). Si Trew (talk) 05:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

SPI follow-up

Note that I didn't receive any ping from you from a training subpage regarding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Icerat/Archive. I don't even know where the training subpage is...--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I could've told you that, Ivanvector. Ponyo is unpingable. She's always claiming she doesn't receive pings at SPI. More seriously, if a CU doesn't respond to a ping and you can see they're around, go the extra step and leave a message on their Talk page. As for the training page, Ponyo, you turn left at the farm, right at the woods, and follow the crumbs until you reach the gingerbread house. Then watch out!--Bbb23 (talk) 00:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-- I took the one less traveled by. No SPI training page there!--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:39, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23 and Ponyo: Well then trouts all around, I guess. Just when I think I understand how pings work, they go and do this. Lousy pings. The training page I'm referring to is Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerk training/December 2015/Group work, and the edit where I thought I pinged you was this one. You're both right, I should have followed up on Ponyo's user page or in an email, but I was already frustrated around that time with other people not responding to questions (mostly unrelated) and made a bad call. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 12:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you OK

Hi Ivanvector you are conspicuious by your absence at RfD. Is everything OK old bean? Nobody requires you to edit here but I am just a bit worried that you haven't been editing anything. Is it all right with you and yours? You have to get back cos there are lots of Canuck redirects from Neelix I need you to give a looksee. But enjoy your Wikibreak, as long as there is nothing wrong with you and yours that is fine, I am saying as a distant friend I do really care about you. No idea where you live in Ontario I guess, no idea what your real name is don't want to, but just a bit worried about you. Are you OK mate? Si Trew (talk) 07:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for checking in! I assure you I'm just fine, I have just become quite busy in real life. My company is in year-end and we've also changed our corporate structure for the new fiscal year which is causing us (me) a fair bit of challenges with the HST. Plus I am tying up loose ends and handing off many community things I've gotten myself involved with in Toronto (where I live at the moment) before my wife and I move out of Ontario next month, so my Wikipedia time is rapidly approaching zero. It'll get better and I'll be back, but for a month or two I'll be around pretty infrequently. I'll take a look at the new batch of Neelix redirects if/when I have time over the weekend. Cheers! Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 13:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh it is great to see you back and I am glad you are busy and doing well in real life. I have done quite well over here in Hungary that I don't have to work for the next six months so am also taking a break in real life however it never seems to happen really because me missus keeps me on a short leash. Glad you're OK. Si Trew (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Me hand is getting a bit better I went to the dohanybolt the cig shop and the chap there gave me a stanley knife so I cut all the pus out of the wound. Feels a lot better now. Sometimes I wish the missus was here rather than gallivanting about to Salzburg annd so on when I need her but what can I do. She has all the money and credit cards so I have to survive on a twonie for a week and I don't have a doctor or hospital. I'll survive I just sometimes think it a bit unfair I did not marry Ford Motor Company I married my wife. I distinctly remember the day. Si Trew (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

It was the perfect day actually. Our little house was about a hundred yards each side from a nice old English church and the riverside at Eaton Socon so a friend of mine who has an old 1949 Riley Motor drove the missus a hundred yards from the house to the church and back again. We had some Hungarians over to celebrate our wedding and had the service in C of E in the KJV thankyou not the modern rubbish but on the left side the wife to be's side it was in Hungarian and on the right side in English. It was a great day. Best day of my life. Of course just being the bloke I was not kinda much part of the proceedings that is how it should be but it was a perfect day. August 4 but I forget the year seems a long time ago now. Six or seven years ago. I do love her you know, the best thing ever to come into my life. Si Trew (talk) 12:54, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how to put things sometimes but I am very good at "Connecting up" I can connect up all kinds of little things so the flowers cost seventy quid not seven hundred because I knew a florist at the market, in fact the vicar asked me whether he could use the way they were arranged in future services because they looked lovely down the aisle just a few early chrysanthemums. I can kinda pick everything together which is why I think I am good at Wikipedia. I am not brilliant at anything but my mind goes in a hundred different ways and I can pick anything together and make sense of it. I am diagnosed with bipolar disorder or as it used to be called manic depression I dunno why they always have to put new names on things. I don't take any drugs for it because it comes and goes and the antidepressants like Citalopram only kick in after about two weeks when it is too late. While I am in the kinda "up" stage I am going to list as many of the Neelix at CSD or RfD as I can because I can get through a stack of em while I am "up" but if at any time you think it is too many just warn me to back off will you my Canuck friend? Si Trew (talk) 13:04, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I'll do what I can, although I'm not really monitoring. I'm especially not monitoring CSD since there's little I can do there, and I think RfD can handle what you're throwing at it. I continue to reject the notion that Rfd being busy means that it's backlogged. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:47, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

OK old bean

I back off that is fine thanks for the advice. When someone abuses me or hurts me I fight back. What would you do? But I appreciate the advice and I will back off. Si Trew (talk) 21:33, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate the impulse but I think you know it'll just get you in trouble here. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:35, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

The trouble I am getting into is because WP keeps pinging me with messages and stuff when I am trying to trog through the things so I get a bit kinda confused sometimes. But if that editor comes anywhere near me in real life and I have me steel toecaps on then I think well he or she better have a health card on he or she. Complete damned insults and I am not saying I am always right just trying to trog through them. I will say in that user's defence he or she had the honour to reply at WP:RFD so that user has some honour or honor. I respect that. Si Trew (talk) 21:40, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

She offered her honor

I honoured her offer

So all night long

It was on 'er and off er

 Si Trew (talk) 21:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Abou Ben Adhem

Abou Ben Adhem (May his tribe increase) Woke for a sleep with a deep dream of peace The Lord said now old Adem has gone, that's fine But I'll count him as one of mine

Wendy Cope I think but not sure. Si Trew (talk) 04:28, 13 May 2016 (UTC): I am just going to take me coat and grab me hat Leave me worries n the doorstep (which is filthy) And just direct my feet To the sunny side of the street Can you hear that pitter-pat And that happy tune is your step Gold dust at my feet on the sunny side of the street I used to walk in the shade With those blues on parade Now i'm not afraid Moreover cross over If I never had a cent I'd be rich as Rockefeller Gold dust at my feet on the sunny side of the street. Bang bang in a four four D major now this is the problem with Irving Berlin, George Gershwin, as a porter or on the German railway. 04:36, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That new section, etc

And the confusion I originally caused here- sorry! Therer was no particular issue, and your revert was fine. I mean, iI wasn't that concerned whether it's a new thread or not. Also, apologies for not acknowledging you sooner- somehow I didn't get the ping, and just happened to see your edits whilst going through my own history. Cheers, _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

embeaver

Shurely that would be a neologism. Nice one! What would it possibly mean without well the obvious porno senses. Nice one! I note for the record that we do not actually have embeaver and if there is any danger of it being created I think we should kinda immediatelly revert it. Nice one. Si Trew (talk) 08:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Can I recommend embuggerment too; exemplar context: "All that embuggerment X is going through at An/I" _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 13:52, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Ha! Yes I meant for that to be an example of a clear error that if someone had made a redirect on, we would not keep it just because it makes the encyclopedia easier to use for people who can't spell. It's silly. And it's about as close to WP:POINT as I'm willing to get. Also, when I talk about beavers, I am always referring to Castor canadensis because I think they're neat. They are the only other animal species on earth besides humans that build structures visible from space! I think the other usage are neat too, but there are better words for it. Natural disambiguation! Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 13:58, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

OOOh embuggerment is brilliant. That would get you a bit in Scrabble not too much for the letters but if you could whack it out going up (as indeed of course... oh never mind) Wouldn't that even legally be buggery? (Obviously not so much nowadays although still is a criminal offense I think in the UK man against man but has never been an offense man against woman I think) I don't think the act of buggery has ever been technically withdrawn in the UK which makes well a queer pitch for people in homosexual marriage because although consensual sex is allowed at the age of sixteen still they are not allowed to be an uphill gardener legally, technically, I think. What people do in their own homes is their own affair that is my opinion. There is a great caption to a Willie Rushton cartoon when they finally decriminalised homosexuality in the UK in 1963 that goes (this was probably written by Barry Fenton) "Gentlemen you may be, of age you certainly are, but you can hardly call Grosvenor Square a private place". Albert Haddock would have actually have taken that as a test case as a misleading case because Grosvenor Square technically is a private place it is not public property or common land, it's owned by the Grosvenor Estate. They even made the USA sell their embassy on the corner. So it can't be public and private at the same time can it? Roads can, they become private at different hours of the day or night depending on whether it is allowed "to passage and repassage along the Queen's Highway without causing an obstruction" (which technically also means in the UK if you park your car, bicycle or dog anywhere, because you are obstructing the passage and repassage and repassage of traffic, you are forming a criminal offence). The best people to ask for this would be the London Hackney Carriage Office well the people who licence taxis in London. Any London cabbie would reel it off to you usually while setting his meter to double time if you don't watch him). Si Trew (talk) 13:26, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I think it is quite hyperfalutinating to suggest that embeaver is WP:NOTDIC though. I don't know what others thought it might mean. I saved a hedgehog this morning. Si Trew (talk) 13:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

the thing you point at the tv and it changes the channel

My Ontarian Canadian family called it something and I can't remember what they called it, it is very odd in British English what is it. You know what I mean it has infrared thing and suddenly it goes from CBC to well CBC2! I am deliberately going round "The Projects" so as not to put words in your mouth I can just can never remember what it is in Canadian English. I'm not sure why I even want to know this except I hate having a gap in my memory. There is probably an article on remote control but deliberately not linking that they called it something different. The word made sense to me but not the meaning. Si Trew (talk) 13:15, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you thinking of the "clicker"? "Channel changer", maybe. I don't think those are unique to Ontario or Canada, though. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 13:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Remote control? -even Brian Blessed says it. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 14:31, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Actually the French use Zappette (zapper!) or Télécommande. So being Canada...? _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 14:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

He said Ontario. French is not in particularly common use there. I mean, sure, plenty of people speak it, but in the same way that plenty of people speak it in California. (I'm not making any precise statistical claim here.) --Trovatore (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

There's quite a bit of French in Ontario, in isolated pockets in the south, and in the north it's practically 50/50; some areas are primarily French. See Franco-Ontarian. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah, OK, I did not know that. I think a lot of Americans sort of have Quebec mixed up with the rest of Canada. I'm slightly more sophisticated; I just identify Ontario with the GTA :-) --Trovatore (talk) 20:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you over at ani

I have only looked at the ani thread for the topic ban of our friend user hullabaloo. I am glad that went in my favour I believe it makes the encylopaedia better. I should just like to thank the Court for their careful decision. It is the right decision. I was unhappy to hear that I am not the only editor this person leaves abusive remarks on edit summaries. Thee and I can have a joke because we know it is a joke. I don't imagine we shall find that user at RfD very much. I have to make a very careful judgement call and I get it wrong some times. You put it better than I could. If someone in real life called me the things I did I would punch his lights out and wash his mouth out with soap and water. I can't do that on Wikipedia and the editor knows that. Nemo me impune lacessit and all that or in Lallans wha dar' meddl wi' me. I am really rather a placid person but get my goat up and I will get you a goat. No hang on that must be wrong. Si Trew (talk) 13:08, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Ever heard me swear hear? I am not seven years old. Si Trew (talk) 13:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Ohh I have to go and get some toy soldiers because there is a lovely toy truck it has NATO on the top that my landlady was throwing out. I need about thirty toy soldiers ideally they would be lead ones but of course cannot do that nowadays. They may have some plastic ones at Tesco but that is not going to be the same. Nice truck don't know why they threw it out. You save those for your second child. The wheels all work with my hand I can not quite get the wheel mechanism at the front going but it will go with a jewelers screwdriver and a bit of that it will go. I can do the bit of that but my hand is still not so great on rotation. That is OK now I know the problem I can fix it. Just hard getting caps off of UHU and stuff like that. Only needs a bit of glue and some toy soldiers and it will be fine. Orwell says somewhere that because he did not like his friends being pacifists that "You can't give a boy toy pacifists. That won't do. They want to play with soldiers". I get some somewee my well nephew but not by birth is seven years old perfect age for a boy and once I fix it up it will look brilliant. Just hard with this hand. I can type easy but the rotation to do the screwdriving and stuff is very hard for me. I am kinda a Dutch uncle to him I am just this weirdo English bloke who lives in our house and that is great because the Hungarians have to learn English to make a living. So we do it half in English and half in Hungarian. Sweet little kid and annoyance as all kids are. I am quite happy to teach him English but I do not know where to start I am no teacher. It would save a lot of money they have tp pay a lot for English language education lessons. I have not quite got that level of trust yet. I shall. I will save them a fortune over the years. Being an uncle is the best you can have all of the fun with none of the aggro. Si Trew (talk) 13:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Were you to get me a goat, the wife would be tickled pink. Although we're renting, so maybe not just yet. Regarding Hullaballoo, mind you don't fall into WP:GRAVEDANCING, I've seen users get long blocks for it. I think our friend Legacypac has had a run-in with that recently. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

"erratic behaviour"

I tried to keep the conversation in one place i.e. at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive923#Indiscriminate deletion tagging and utterly uncivil comments by User:SimonTrew but of course it seems to have spread to my talk page and other pages.

I try to explain to you my "erratic behaviour". When you're looking through a stack of Neelix redirects and this is just how the human brain works with pattern matching then after a while they all start to look the same. Then I deliberately change tack and look at something completely different so that I don't start listing loads that are superficially literally to the human eye similar but could well mean different things, then I switch back. So I have not been going through the list at all in any kind of linear fashion.

I had a very bad hand injury so I have not been typing too well so I realise I have more typing mistakes than usual. Actually in this message I seem to have managed none so far but that's a bit of a coincidence. One thing I was trying to do, just as a personal thing, was using going through the Neelix list as therapy for my hand injury to exercise it, manipulate it, and if that brings a bit of good to Wikipedia then all the better, but it was three very deep cuts on my right hand (I am right-handed but have been doing pretty much everything left-handed) that I got from picking up some bit of litter from the street, a bit of glass or sharp metal or something I don't know, and to type here and exercise it helps it out a lot.

I am not sure, because I have not and will not check, what your reference for the personal insult thing was but it may have been calling you a stupid Canuck. If you were offended by that, or by any other remark, I truly apologise because I am not in this world to hurt other people's feelings. It was meant purely as a joke and quite the opposite I have the utmost respect for you and all the hard work you do at WP and I know you work at places other than RfD. I probably just put it very badly and for that I can only sincerely apologise and ask you to accept my humble and sincere apologies. I am not trying to win any favours at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive923#Indiscriminate deletion tagging and utterly uncivil comments by User:SimonTrew here, not trying to WP:CANVASS, but if a man is in the wrong he stands up and says sorry and I was in the wrong. I get lots fired at me but that does not mean I should kinda ricochet one at you. I'm sorry. Si Trew (talk) 23:43, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I really do not mind if I am banned or not. I couldn't care less, I have other things to do in life. I have children's toys to mend which I can't quite do yet because of this hand injury then they can go to a nursery school. I have wallpaper to put up which I can't do yet but it has to wait. I am staying off that discussion because of the clean hands doctrine. WP:ANI is not a court of law, of course, but I am not going to go wandering in there with me size eleven steel toecaps and start barging around the "court". That would do no good to anyone. Certainly would do no good to me. But what I can do is say sorry when I have hurt someone's feelings. Si Trew (talk) 23:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: since obviously you can't be arsed to click on a convenience link to a discussion when one is given to you, like this link here, the blue text with the underline and the arrow, which if you click on it goes to the record of the edit you made which I was referring to, here is what you wrote:

Nor without the experts I call on User:Plantdrew and User:Peter coxhead are brilliant at taxonomy, User:Mjroots popped up unexpectedly the other day I was not sure if that user was active to do a railway one, User:Lenticel does the East Asian ones, I tend to take the European languages, User:Ivanvector and User:Tavix well I dunno the first is just some idiot Canuck so what does he know but they both do a lot of general mopping up, User:BDD is good in the background. It is starting to sound like an Oscars award ceremony I know but I think they should have some credit too because well we have got it done. They thought we'd never get it done and we did. I have probably missed a few so I apologise for that. User:Steel1943 is a stalwart, all the regs at RfD. TOGETHER WE DID IT. WE DID IT LIKE WHAT WIKIPEDIA SAID WE DID AS A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT TO MAKE THE ENCYLOPAEDIA BETTER. We did it.

Only another four lists to go! Si Trew (talk) 17:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Look, I tried to offer you some constructive criticism of your editing pattern, and you've misinterpreted the lot of it to the point where I don't think you actually read what I wrote even one tiny bit. So fuck it, I'm sure as fuck not your fucking babysitter, do whatever the fuck you want. A person who won't take advice is someone who doesn't deserve to have it wasted on them.

Take care of your hand, and see you 'round the RfDs. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I read every word you wrote. Ivanvector, what you are doing with your potty mouth is actually doing what I get about four or five times a day from editors who don't understand that with listing redirects from Neelix I am trying to make the encylopaedia better. I would have expected better from you than just to swear off but I feel like that sometimes and I don't do it. Now get a control of yourself, keep your anger to yourself, because I have to take the punches every day from people a lot worse than you when I am doing these Neelix redirects. You're a good man and go and just punch a wall or something you do not have to take it out on me. I realise I am being the stool pigeon for listing all these redirects but I would like to swear and cuss and say whatever, but I don't. I am just the fall guy at the moment. You're the second today I will expect three or four tomorrow. I expected better of you. Si Trew (talk) 00:15, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I guessed it was the "some idiot Canuck" remark that offended you and indeed you have duplicated it. I can only apologise. That was meant very much tongue in cheek and sometimes things do not come across well in writing do they? I can only sincerely apologise for that, as I have done before. I do appreciate your hard work at RfD and so on and I was kinda being ironic or whatever but if it came across that way well all I can do is stand up and say sorry as I have done already. Now, if someone won't accept an apology that is their problem. The apology was offered sincerely, if it is not accepted, at that point it is not my problem. Show me a man who never makes a mistake and I shall show you a liar. Now, for the second time, I offer you the apology. Are you going to accept it? Si Trew (talk) 00:24, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

The erratic behaviour of User:Ivanvector is also something I think should be taken to ANI. Comes along casts aspersions at WP:RFD makes accusations with no back up and blows hot and cold is very erratic. I think that is very erratic behaviour. This editor User:Ivanvector makes accusations against several other editors to back up his own case. He never answers and never replies. (Now does that ring a bell? That is what I get every day going through these redirects). This user is not an admin but continually closes and lists things at RFD which apparently only an admin should even though we have {{nac}}. Ring any bells? If you were treated as I am treated you would be as pissed off as I am. Try it, just try it for a couple of hourse trogging through the Neelix list and see how much abuse you get back. You're relatively polite but you're wrong. Zou post my comments on your talk page so I don't get a chance even to be notified of what is there, I don't watch your talk page. You'd think it weird if I did. Then you swear with your potty mouth that my grandfather would wash it out with soap and water, and then go around making more accusations. I expect it from people when I list redirects I did not expect it from you. You are no better than I am but at least I can put a sentence together without five f's in it. Si Trew (talk) 00:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hockey on the ice listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hockey on the ice. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. . Right now this links to bandy, which is quite ridiculous if you ask me. Hockey on ice is ice hockey, and the redirect should justifiably go to that page. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

well I thank you

After the recent run-in you and I had I am glad at least we are on speaking terms. That was a bad one and if I said anything that personally offended you, again, I can only apologise. I am glad we are on speaking terms. I have to be cagey I don't know if that exists in canadian english but kinda stand off of things because with the Neelix redirects I really have to stand back and be kinda the judge and jury and I have to be very kinda stand-offish. I am glad we are on speaking terms. Let's get on with it. Si Trew (talk) 23:42, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I am glad to move past it, and I apologize for my part in it. For what it's worth, I don't take offense from some gentle Canuck ribbing, I dish enough of it out. I was merely concerned about the perception that others might have had that that was a comment worth taking offense to. "Cagey" in the meaning I'm familiar with means, well, eccentric, and I suppose that describes both of us at times. Generally, I've been known at times to be a fan of Corrie Street and Doctor Who and the like, so I'm familiar with some of the English slang, and I get what you're saying most of the time. I don't have any close English relatives any more, we've been in Canada five or six generations now. But anyway, I consider it one of a few points of pride to not hold grudges, and I have a few that are well earned, but I keep it off Wikipedia. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Och no in British English it means more, how do I put it cagey, not exactly introverted but wanting to hide something from others. I amm glad you accept my apology. Now we can virtually shake hands and make it better. I have listed a number of Neelix ones at RfD today (my time it will be tomorrow your time) and taken several to CSD. Thank you sincerely for accepting the apology, done and dusted. There's quite a few Hungarian ones at which of course I am the expert so I am trogging through those at the moment. These have been made in the usual mysterious way by someone who has no knowledge of Hungarian um orthography and so on so they make very little sense. Belo I. that well known Hungarian king (kíraly) for example. That would be a bit like calling well well I dunno Her Majesty on our coins Elisabetho, makes no sense, like Scotking makes no sense. We have loads of these kinda compound words that are just thrown together with little thought. But I do believe Neelix was in good faith in making them and Neelix said he never used a bot he was just a quick typist and I for one believe him because I can take em out almost as quickly as he put them in. Thanks for the worry about me hand it is just me right thumb really but I only use that to whack the space bar so I just try to exercise it a bit but sorry if I miss. I have a beautiful old Hungarian comptometer that I want to repair. someone threw it in the rubbish/trash and it is a fine machine just needs a bit of oil in the works and that kind of thing, but haven't quite the dexterity right now. Fingers are all fine I just got a nasty cut from something some bit of litter/trash I picked up off the street to put in the bin/trashcan. Si Trew (talk) 01:41, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

ta quicky over at RfD

User anarchyte is starting on the Neelix list. Unfortunately he (if he is a he) has tackled exactly one that I did yesterday and sent via CSD to delete a lot of them leaving a lot left because the kinda more sensible ones I left for another day, which seems to be today! So I am trying to have a kind word that these can go straight CSD rather than RfD under the WP:G6 Neelix concession and a word from you in the user's shell-like might be useful? Very keen editor and should not discourage that we might get there by Christmas 2018 if keeps up at this rate!

"Concession" maybe sounds odd to you does it? In Hamilton, Ontario it meant essentially a well how can I translate a block of things owned by the government and rented out. (Deliberately not trying to translate accurately) a housing estate. I know literally that the Canadian government, or rather the Ontario government, gave concessions to things to build this or that, I can't think of the English English word but actually yes in English English it would be to grant a concession a limited license essentially but that probably sounds very odd to you doesn't it? In fact my Canadian family lived on Concession Street. Must sound odd to you. Si Trew (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (talk page watcher) @SimonTrew: Hiya, I've stopped listing them at RfD as you asked. I've listed ~10 so far as G6 with the rationale "Neelix redirect. Other glacier related redirects were taken to RfD here". I realised that listing over 100 at RfD wouldn't be a good idea and even condensing them into one still resulted in a reasonably screwed up edit history. (and yeah, I'm a male). Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

That's the way to do it. Any doubt give RfD a shout. But most if you are sure just be WP:BOLD and take straight to WP:CSD. Obviously we need WP:CONSENSUS but a lot are just so obviously nonsense you can take 'em straight there. Sorry to squat on Ivanvector's page you can delete this Ivanvector I have made the same point on anarchyte's user page (I like the user nick by the way). Absolutely no problem if you are in doubt listing them at RfD, I do like way too often, but with the Neelix ones you're in danger of "flooding" as I call it and then nobody can pick out others listed for other things, then, on the other hand, I get told off if I put (neelix) to make it clear that I am WP:NPA so I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't. Si Trew (talk) 12:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem chatting here, talk pages are for talking and I'll let the bot archive when it gets around to it. I only just changed one of your templates because I dislike its use. I believe it was actually the British colonial government which split up what is now Ontario and Québec into townships which were further divided up by concession roads which were generally just numbered (1st Concession, 2nd Concession, etc) but many were given names as towns grew around them. Calling one Concession Street just seems kind of lazy. You can see the concession grid in most cities in southern Ontario still, including in Hamilton, but it's screwed up because of the escarpment running through the centre of town. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

So...

...Look who's back! It's been a while. Steel1943 (talk) 19:43, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Ha ha! Oh, Steel, it's been like a week. [1]. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:05, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I had no idea. Guess they stopped reverting my edits. That, and I did a "watchlist flush" recently, so ... ha, yeah, no wonder. Steel1943 (talk) 22:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

User: Helenmitchell

Hi Ivanvector. I saw your post at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sevcohaha. I was not aware of the connection between the username and a real life individual. Would this particular choice of user name be, in your opinion, not allowed per WP:IMPERSONATE if this person is not the real "Helen Mitchell", regardless of whether the account is a sock of Sevcohaha? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:38, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly! I'm not terribly familiar with the WP:USERNAME policy. AFAIK, it's only a violation of a policy if a user is actively impersonating a living person (i.e. directly claiming to be the person) or behaving in a way which might lead someone to believe that they are the person. The second point might be true in this case. If you're concerned you could report to WP:UAA and have an administrator take a look. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirect

Why are you reverting my edit which removes the Non-breaking space improperly given in a code example? Code examples, in their direct nature, are not meant for user readability, which the supposed reason you reverted my edit. The code example given for REDIRECT is broken because of the non-breaking space, which I am trying to remove. I opened a discussion about this on the relevant talk page, please respond there. ....SandwitchHawk.... (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 02:01, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Filipz123

So I say "Are you serious?" and you completely ignore my arguably uncivil comment and thank me. I need to take interpersonal skills training from you. Actually, I was more ticked off at the sockmaster and his endless use of different IPs that make a couple of edits and then stop. Almost every day someone brings IPs to SPI, and it's almost always a waste of time, even though it's understandable. Regards.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: nah, you were right to call me out on that one, I was sloppy, and if your comment was uncivil I kinda earned it. I do need to work on my suggestions when IPs are involved. I think we can do better with this one, but he's gonna be a thorn in our side for a while. Yeah, it's frustrating. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 02:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Prince Edward Island Route 15 Comment

Hi. Sorry my bad. I forgot to fix it when I copied it. Thanks. JLOPO (talk) 22:42, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

@JLOPO: Thanks! I was just about to leave you a message. Thanks for filling in the talk page in the first place, I made a few other articles and forgot to do it. Cheers. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

SPI case on Front page

Hello. Can you please tell why my SPI case[2] is not showing on the front page at WP:SPI? Have I done anything wrong? Thanks. Ramaswar57 (talk) 17:36, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

@Ramaswar57: Hello! It looks like you did everything right, but the SPI page transcludes a table from another page that can be slow to update. If you want to force it, load Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cases/Overview and do a force-reload (usually Ctrl+Shift+R) in your browser. Note that that only forces it to reload for you, the server may still display a cached version for other users for a few minutes. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:41, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

It is showing now. Thank you very much for the kind response. Ramaswar57 (talk) 17:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Kosszonom szepen

Thanks for the wb. There is always a time when my infuriation at minor errors and slips and stuff in Wikipedia outweigh, over the days, my infuriation at the people who cannot see why I am infuriated. I do think there are things wrong with banning someone immediately when they voice any legal concern – because then they have no chance to explain themselves, without subterfuge, before it gets out of hand and goes to court. Nevertheless, let that pass for now, I have backed down graciously although with rather a primary school finger telling me off.

You'll be pleased, or at least not surprised, that in the meantime I have redecorated my study and installed a new second-hand computer with a new second-hand hifi and a new second-hand cat. (Nah, actually it is the same cat, nobody would give me a trade-in). The cat quite likes cheddar and fortunately Hungarian Lidl has some nice strong English cheddar, he likes it much more than the local cheese (although he likes that too). I have been doing lots of painting and decorating and doing up the house while my wife has been working abroad, got two and a half rooms done and new electrics and stuff, so have not been exactly idle, but she can break things about as quick as I can fix them. I have painted nice rather turneresque violent seascape mural 15 feet (4.6 m) by 12 feet (3.7 m) on my next door neighbour's walls that face my study, with his consent cos he can't see that wall but it needed re-stuccoing anyway (strange Hungarians put plaster on the outside of the walls, so I did that) but the sea I painted at the bottom gives me a bit of mal de mer, perhaps I should concrete it back in again and have hovercraft and a hoverport instead of the tall ships and stuff. Still as eccentric, and still I hope that eccentricity is as valuable to wikipedia as it always has been, like a good spider lurking in corners and grabbing all the little bits of flotsam that come by so they don't bug other people. (If you can use flotsam for bugs floating in the air rather than things floating on the sea, not sure).

I had a great re-entry doing a rather uncontroversial article at WP:PNT from Spanish to English, which turned out to be a one-woman revolutionary party, so was not quite as uncontroversial as I first thought.. hey ho, I will immerse myself into the intelligentsia at RfD for a while, if that is OK with you.

Hope all is well with you and yours in Canadaland. Si Trew (talk) 16:30, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Hey ho, Si! I'm genuinely glad that you've found your way back. While you've been out, the wife and I and our cats gave up on the big city and moved a little over a thousand miles away, closer to you I suppose, to a cute house in a beautiful city in Canada's smallest province, where she works in theatre and I work in looking for work. I've been doing a fair bit of house work myself, and growing a proper vegetable garden. On the other side of it I've been pretty inactive around here, and pretty well absent from RfD, partly due to being busy and partly due to a bad internet connection. Truth be told I'm tired of the Neelix drama and endeavouring to stay out of it as much as I possibly can, and at the same time trying to actually work on some content. My attention's been on sockpuppet investigations and on topics around my new location which I think deserve some coverage, like a draft I'm working on of an old French colonial road which I ended up on entirely by accident some time ago. Anyway I'm sure I'll run into you around here at some point, RfD is sure to draw me back in before terribly long. And the maple leaf emoji changed, so you'll be spared pages peppered with them at least for a time. All the best. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

27century

Sorry, I checked 27century for prior blocks, but didn't realise that there was an open SPI. I blocked User:FredericDe and User:Pablo Linz‎ as duck blocks. I see that FredericDe was the account in the SPI - I had been looking into Pablo Linz and saw the connection with 27century, and then wondered about the article completed in 27century's sandbox, so made the same connection that Blythwood (and subsequently you) made with FredericDe. Pablo Linz is a clear paid editor, but also has sufficient editing similarities to 27century to have triggered this in the first place.

I've been finding that indefinitely blocking paid editors who (generally) disclose on their main account just leads to them relying entirely on throw-away socks and not disclosing at all, so I was hoping to convince 27century to stick to the one account and meet the relevant policies instead. It may be overly optimistic, though. - Bilby (talk) 23:12, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

@Bilby: I agree, just blocking these paid editors outright seems counterproductive, then they just become a pain the ass to clean up after. 27century does seem like the sort of editor who could be convinced to abide by policies, after all they did disclose when they were asked to. On the other hand, making alternate accounts to hide their conflict of interest is an escalation in misbehaviour, and in my opinion a strong message is needed to correct that. I don't think anyone would be upset if you tried to coach the user while they are blocked (pinging Vanjagenije again just in case). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 00:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm very comfortable with the block - it is warranted, and I seriously considered it anyway. Longer but not indefinite blocks don't seem to work - I tired that with another paid editor, and they started using socks with only a week to go before it expired, so I think the current length is a good one. I'll try talking more and see how it goes. I had hoped that they would end up following policy, so it is worth a go. - Bilby (talk) 00:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Reg move of SPI

You moved the filing here, but the original move of the SPI was because this account was unrelated to the farm. Here, I'm specifically asking about this account as the other one (and the associated farm) has no bearing on this case as they are definitely not related. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 01:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there SpacemanSpiff, thanks for pointing out my error. I'd like to correct this but I'm not quite sure what's going on. Are you saying that you want to investigate Itsbalaa and Lakshmikandh as socks of Editor 2050, and this has nothing to do with Abhinand1234? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 01:45, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Yup, that's it. This all came about because of an article I had to delete and salt, it's been a problem for over six months now, all courtesy of these three and a few other (now stale) accounts. The Abhinand one is more interested in Malayalam actresses than Tamil ones. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 01:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I think I've corrected it. The notice about the moved case is a template and I don't think I can change it, but I'll see what I can do. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 02:08, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

=me again

Well, I've been going through some Wikipedia relapses. You may delete this once you read it, I do not mind. I find it excruciatingly difficult to restrain myself from sharing my array of information on an open and well distributed encyclopedic database. The information I add is not even a fraction of the plethora of sourced and researched information I have. I understand that the reason I was blocked is because I warred instead of civily taking it to talk and presenting detailed evidence. However, I am afraid I have burned my bridges. I would just like an honest opinion from you; based on your knowledge of Wikipedia community, do you believe the 6 month wait to appeal could be worth it for me or should I give up entirely? I just want to know for my own mental sake over a 6 month period that could only lead to disappointment. And I also want people to stop calling my edits nationalistic. Some may have been wrongly portrayed by removing information and adding my own, I understand Wikipedia is a collection database of many sources. There is an editor on here who received an award for abundantly contributing to Bulgaria. I am not a petty nationalist! I just have an interest, but my information includes everything from Mexico to the Balkan and past Persia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.61.118 (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

To be short, yes, I do think you can come back. I certainly can't say it's a sure thing, but if you can follow the standard offer, show that you understand why you were blocked and own up to that and to your sockpuppetry history, most editors who review unblock requests will recognize this as a good sign that you'll edit without getting into trouble from then on. In the meantime you can contribute to other wikis, like the Serbian or Croatian Wikipedias, or whichever other languages you can contribute in and assuming you're not also blocked there. Editors who can show productive edits on other wikis have good evidence that they'll be productive here too. Just make sure to keep yourself out of trouble if you do decide to edit another Wikipedia project. Good luck. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Ivan, I'm not sure who you think this is, but there is virtually zero chance he would ever be permitted to edit Wikipedia again given his history, and I don't "approve" of you, particularly as an SPI clerk, encouraging him otherwise. I've blocked the IP for 72 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:14, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: noted, and thank you for being direct about it. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:16, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

We've gone over this several times before. I would welcome you back after the "standard offer" (and 6 months is a long time). WP:AGF pretty much requires that all editors do so, should there be consensus to make such an offer in the first place. Your past abuse of other editors makes that difficult, but I wouldn't oppose it - Bbb23 seems to disagree.

However I don't think you could do this (but please, prove me wrong). Your behaviour so far has been that you don't have the self control to do so, even for a day. Every time this has come up in the past, you've broken basic good behaviour by repeating the same problem edits even whilst we were still discussing the future.

There's also the problem that your edits just aren't all that good. You're often simply wrong, almost never sourced, and still very, very biased and blinkered. You assume that "that which you've read of" is always the only instance of something, rather than merely one of them, and not necessarily the first or most important. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:23, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: hi Andy, thanks for adding your input here. As was fairly assertively observed by Bbb23 above, there's practically zero chance of this editor being allowed to return here, given his history. Observe that he is still socking today. Don't waste your effort, I already wasted enough. I'll be archiving this as my next edit. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 22:52, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

this is becoming too much

moved to User talk:Filipz123 Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 00:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Alternate account

Hi. I can't see why your're asking for a block here. This is a legitimate alternate account, and there's no policy requiring me to make it public. Please see Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Legitimate_uses for policy. If I'm wrong about this, please just point me at the policy. -- Markshale (talk) 13:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the notification policy: "Except when doing so would defeat the purpose of having a legitimate alternative account". My motivation in doing this is to protect my privacy: laptops can be stolen. I have never misused this alternative account: I take great care to make sure I use it within policy. -- Markshale (talk) 13:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, disclosure is required. If you have a reason for wanting to keep your alternate accounts private, that's fine, but then you must contact (i.e. email) a user with CheckUser access (see Wikipedia:CheckUser#Users with CheckUser permissions) to make a disclosure. They will privately confirm, and will post something on-wiki to say they received your disclosure and confirmed that your use is legitimate, but your information will be kept private. Otherwise, you are violating the policy, and must be blocked. Since the user you are accused of being is a user banned by the Arbitration Committee, we have to treat your case very strictly. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

You shouldn't need that. A checkuser should be able to verify what my main account is: I've edited from the same address on my main account today. Flyer22's accusations are completely illegitimate, and I'm really quite offended by them. -- Markshale (talk) 14:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Disclosure of alternate accounts

I saw the conversations going on about alternate accounts and saw your comments that policy requires them to be disclosed. Can you point to the policy that says that because I can not find it? WP:ILLEGIT says: Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts are not to be used in discussions internal to the project. WP:SCRUTINY also talks about undisclosed accounts. So if there is a different policy that says alternate accounts must be disclosed, we need to fix the policies so they don't contradict. -- GB fan 14:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

The two sections I referred to in the SPI are:

• WP:SOCK#LEGIT: "Alternative accounts should always be identified as such on their user pages, except where doing so would defeat the point of the account. Templates such as {{User alternative account}} or one of a selection of user boxes may be used for this purpose."
• WP:SOCK#NOTIFY: "Except when doing so would defeat the purpose of having a legitimate alternative account, editors using alternative accounts should provide links between the accounts." and "Editors who have multiple accounts for privacy reasons should consider notifying a checkuser or members of the arbitration committee if they believe editing will attract scrutiny. Editors who heavily edit controversial material [...] are among the groups of editors who attract scrutiny even if their editing behavior itself is not problematic or only marginally so."

I'll note the policy says "should" and not "must". Since the case in question involves long-term abuse by a user banned by ArbCom and globally blocked, and the user accused is editing in a controversial topic area, I believe that their use of alternative account(s) should be reviewed. I don't need to know what their alternative accounts are and I'm not entitled to know anyway if they want to keep them private, but someone with CheckUser access (i.e. someone approved by WMF to keep private information confidential) should confirm that they are using their alternative accounts in a legitimate manner. That's my interpretation. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:09, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

I understand the sockpuppet investigation concern in that specific case and that is why I didn't tie this into the case. I just saw a what appeared to be a contradiction and was looking at cleaning that contradiction up. I see now there really isn't a contradiction. -- GB fan 16:15, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Kim Kardashian RfC

You previously made a change at Kim Kardashian that was later reverted without consensus. The outcome of the RfC (to restore your edit) has not been enforced. I cannot make the edit because the article is semi-protected. My edit request has not been answered. Would you care to restore your edit? 2A00:23C0:A680:CE00:35CA:C6EE:E7C2:F74D (talk) 16:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for bringing my attention to your request. In the future, you should use the {{edit semi-protected}} template (instructions at the link) to request this sort of change, that way your request will show up in the list of requests and will (hopefully) be responded to sooner. It looks to me like the edit was never made after the RfC closed, rather than it having been reverted. I've left a note below your request anyway. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for sorting it out! I now see the difference between a semi-protected edit request and just making a note on the talk page, thank you. :) 2A00:23C0:A680:CE00:609D:CE60:6088:B8D4 (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

ORCP

Hi Ivanvector, I’ve just been having another look at your entry at WP:ORCP. It may well be time for you to start a new poll and see what happens. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:07, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kudpung: hi there, and thanks for your note! I've been following discussions about our admin attrition problem, and ORCP itself, off-and-on for a while now. Back when I added myself to the list I had in my head that it was "just for fun", I have a lot of criticisms of the RFA culture and wasn't at all interested then in subjecting myself to it. I also couldn't think of any use that I would have for administrative tools at the time, gnoming my way through venues like WP:RFD as I was. I think that ORCP is weak on that point: editors running for RFA without any obvious use for the tools seem to get called hat-collectors and sink their own RFAs pretty often, and ORCP doesn't pick up on that. Anyway, since that time I have run into at least one situation (as an WP:SPI clerk) in which administrative tools could be of some use, so I've been thinking about it more. I have some work to do, and then maybe I'll list myself again. I'm still quite certain that I would get shot down on content alone, which I'm well aware is a weak area for me. Anyway, thanks for drawing my attention to it again. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Re: LanguageXpert SPI

My comment was constructive criticism of the way accounts are being fished and reported under LX and none of them were confirmed as him. 19 accounts and none of them were him. Since you were involved editor, you should have open-heartedly accepted the criticism instead of reverting. Being a CheckUser Clerk or even a CheckUser does not give you immunity from constructive criticism. I do not think that my comment violated any policy and you overstepped when you removed it. It was directly related to that SPI and was added under the proper space available for other users to comment and it's not just you, there are others who have also made it a hobby of reporting any accounts they disagree with under LX. There are some who do nothing else except coming back after a while and report an LX sock. There is much more to do on Wikipedia than fishing and hunting socks of one master. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 16:12, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@SheriffIsInTown: Your comment was disruptive and Ivanvector was absolutely correct to revert it. Try to behave.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, SheriffIsInTown. I didn't want to say in a formal thread that your comment seemed like trolling, but your comment seemed like trolling, and was unwarranted in any case. Ultimately I removed your comment because it was simply wrong: several accounts were tagged as LanguageXpert socks as a result of these investigations. In the case in which you commented, an account with the name of a former sock plus the word "returns" is indeed worth checking, although it's ultimately of little consequence who the master is if the account is obviously a sockpuppet; this just happened to be the case open at the time (there are many overlapping cases in this area, as I'm sure you know). We do not endorse requests with no merit, and if you think we have, then your criticism is well-taken, but in this case you are wrong. And you should not accuse other editors of involvement unless you understand what that means; your accusation here shows that you do not. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:09, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

You are referring to TouristerMan and the returns version, they were never confirmed as LX and I do not think they are LX. If accounts were tagged as LX because they were possible or likely then I think they are tagged wrong, they should be in their own SPI. They are not LX. I do not know what possible or likely means when it comes to CU. Do they show up in the same city? Do they show up using same IP range? Same province? If they show up sharing an IP then they should be categorized as confirmed, sharing an A class IP range does not confirm anything. My comment was a good faith comment and had merit. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 17:41, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Bbb23: lol, come on,I give you pile of evidence and it is never good enough for you but here people open an SPI with one-liners and you do the check without asking for more evidence and that also knowingly that reported socks do not belong to the master they are being reported under. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 18:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Trust that when a case is filed under the wrong master, we do our best to check against other sockmasters that we know are active in the area as well, as some of the tags in these recent cases show, and don't make connections that we can't back up with evidence. I can't comment on the CU data and I doubt anyone who has access will be able to give more information than has been given already. I don't know what else we can tell you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

ANI

Hi Ivanvector, I've removed both April Fools threads at ANI, As you commented on one I feel it's only fair I tell you - I don't mind the whole AFDing and Mfding thing but I feel the jokes should be kept off of ANI as admins could potentionally miss important threads ... that and the fact if one editor starts a thread they all start one,
If you (or anyone else) believes they should remain then I have no objections to anyone reverting as you are an admin afterall but in my eyes these sorts of things should be kept off of ANI not potentially encouraged,
Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:36, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

I saw that. No objections here, just joining in a bit of fun but it's not like I'm going to go to Arbcom over it being removed or anything. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG

Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

• Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
• Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
• The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
• The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

• A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Possible Soulspinr socks

Do User:70.49.231.184 and/or User:Katy Park look like socks of User:Soulspinr to you? If so could you please add them to the open SPI? Nixon Now (talk) 11:39, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Possible VJ-Yugo sock

Hi Ivanvector

I noticed a new account user:Kornblade was created some days back and its edits resemble VJ-Yugo's previous sock accounts. Its adding the same content in the Terrorism in Yugoslavia page [3] which you removed some time back [4]. Could you look into it. Best.Resnjari (talk) 11:54, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@Resnjari: yeah, probably. The user was Korn Blade, btw. This user typically creates several accounts in batches as sleepers, so I've requested checkuser attention at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/VJ-Yugo. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:58, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Much appreciated.Resnjari (talk) 15:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)