Jump to content

User talk:Lofty abyss/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Communism

Are you the one who edited the Communism page to say "Communism reules===Capitalism drools"? If you are, please leave me a message. I have no preoblems with Communism (in fact, one of my best friends is a Communist (a Stalinist) and I respect that), but I'm mildly peed-off at vandalism (MILDLY, so don't think I'm a Bible-thumper or something). I would like a reason why you did it.

And if you didn't do it, I'm sorry. I just don;t like to see pages mildly vandalized.

```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by RepublicanPartay (talk • contribs) 21:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I reverted it. -- Mentifisto 21:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Devil's Island (Novel)

Hi there. Just a note, as you selected "A7" as the deletion reason: Remember that novels and other books are not covered by A7. People might get confused with such deletion reasons. Regards SoWhy 11:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Right, sorry. I selected that because of the non-notable reason in the prod. -- Mentifisto 11:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the welcome. Cheers mate --The Diamond Apex (talk) 14:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for blocking that abusive user User_talk:94.168.208.63. -AltruismT a l k - Contribs. 11:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Deleted Page

Hi, I would like a copy of my deleted article: Yackel. Thanks

Davep86 (talk) 08:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Done; it's at User:Davep86/Yackel. -- Mentifisto 02:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for un-vandalizing my user page. That was the first time mine's been hit; I feel like I've been officially initiated into Wikipedia now. Townlake (talk) 23:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, welcome to the club. ;-) -- Mentifisto 23:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the anti-vandal work you're doing at pages like Buoyancy. Just a quick heads up, though - you missed the 4 vandalism edits prior to the version you reverted to. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: User:Ais523/watchlistnotifier.js

"watchlistnotifier can't determine whether a watched page has changed" is an error message, that shouldn't come up normally; it doesn't come up to me. As always with weird script bugs, try bypassing your cache, to see if that fixes the problem. It can also sometimes come up for a while if something weird is going on with the Wikimedia servers (such as high lag). Note that the error means what it says; if it comes up, the notifier doesn't know whether there was a change to a watched page or not, because the server hasn't told it. (In other words, there might have been a change it doesn't know about). --ais523 10:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

London Buses route 136 Blank Page

Hi Mentifisto. You said not to put a blank page on that article. Here is the reason why I did this: One day, I created that article, without anything that violence Wikipedia articles. I took a long time to create the page, I used the Infobox etc. (I saved my work) But another day, I went on my PC to have a look again on the page I created, and what happened? Someone removed everything and put a redirect to List of bus routes in London. I was angry on whoever did that, because I took a long time to do it. And I didn't receive any message on my Talk. AimalCool (talk) 15:25, 16th April 2009 (GMT)

Sorry about that; if you'd like to discuss it with the user who redirected it you can contact User talk:Jenuk1985, otherwise do you want the article deleted? (Since pages aren't just left blank... although it'd be best if there was a redirect.) -- Mentifisto 14:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Sock puppet 00frodo3

Thank you for indef blocking 00frodo3. This user also vandalizes with this IP address (which is not currently blocked), and has in the past operated this growing list of socks. Since the IP address was used to vandalize my user page after you blocked the user's sock, would you consider blocking the IP address as well? It appears to be a vandalism-only address with an extensive block log. The same IP has sent me off-wiki hate email. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:46, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 03:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. You might want to add a note at User talk:165.24.246.245 to that effect. -- Scjessey (talk) 04:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

AIV and removing an edit

How do I/we go about removing this edit by a user I put on the AIV list? tedder (talk) 19:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I just did. If you think it's severe enough that it needs to be hidden from admins as well you could request oversight. -- Mentifisto 19:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. No, admin-only is enough for me, it just didn't look like the sort of thing that should remain in the edit history. Is there a more accurate policy to follow than WP:BLP for things like that? tedder (talk) 19:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Well I suppose this section or harassment in general. -- Mentifisto 19:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 21 April 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

User making a lot of stub pages

User:Dr. Blofeld has been making a lot of stub pages about towns in Guinea lately. They aren't necessarily spam, but he has made probably 50 stubs that are extremely short. I wasn't sure what to do about them so I fugured I'd ask a Sysop first. Δnnuit Cœptis 15:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

He always does that... they're valid stubs though, as you say, so there's not much to do about them. -- Mentifisto 15:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, one more question

I had an account previously called The Black Void and I was an autoconfirmed user on that account. I just need to know how to become an autoconfirmed user again. I only made about 120 contributions on that account and I became an autoconfirmed user. Do I just need to help clean up the site and make contributions or is there something more that I need to do? Thanks, and I promise this will be my final message to you. Δnnuit Cœptis 00:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, no problem about the messages... you need to have been registered for 4 days with at least 10 edits (which you already have, and more) to become autoconfirmed, so now it's only a matter of time. -- Mentifisto 00:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Satisfied customer

I just came across user Bizarro Mentifisto (talk · contribs). On digging a little deeper, I noticed you indef'd the last sock, Bizarro World GaryColemanFan (talk · contribs). I've already reported at AIV, just thought you'd like to know. KuyaBriBriTalk 16:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, yeah, thanks. -- Mentifisto 16:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Mocdlondon

Please see the unblock request added by a third user. I think we can unblock them, but thought I'd point you at it first, since you blocked them. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem with unblocking them but maybe we should wait until Mangojuice's request is fulfilled? -- Mentifisto 20:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Well done!

The Admin's Barnstar
Everytime of an evening when i go to WP:AIV, before I get a chance to block a user, I find they're already blocked. And it's always the same blooming admin blocking them! Mentifisto! Well done, a great start to your mopping :) --GedUK  20:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Yeah it's busy tonight. :-) -- Mentifisto 20:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I added those ones to Maralia's list.LeadSongDog come howl 21:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Block of Ryan Atwood

I would like to respectfully request that you extend the block on Ryan Atwood (talk · contribs). In addition to the vandalism on articles, he has awarded himself two barnstars that he copied from User_talk:Madhero88 and replaced "Madhero88" with "Ryan Atwood", falsely claiming they were awarded to him by the same users who awarded them to Madhero88 ([1], [2], and [3]). Is this not considered editing other people's talk page comments in an unacceptable manner? KuyaBriBriTalk 22:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed; I just hesitated because he didn't necessarily have vandalism-only edits in 2007, but they are now. -- Mentifisto 22:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar for dealing with sockpuppety

The Barnstar of Diligence
Thanks for all of your hard work and quick action with blocking countless sockpuppets. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome! :-) -- Mentifisto 00:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for responding to my post and blocking User:71.179.215.211 as quickly as you did. I suspect this is the same individual as User:Noamagne, who also vandalized Irena Sendler three times today. Could you please block that user as well? Many thanks! LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 18:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 19:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me...

I have THOUSANDS of socks, so don't even bother! He was a sk8er boi (talk) 08:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thou

ar't kind. Dlohcierekim 03:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Thou art welcome. ;-) -- Mentifisto 03:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry

What i was trying to acheive by these apparant "Social Need-nots" is to brighten someones day and to encourage loging on to Wikipedia and to encourage the eagerness of seeing someone taking time out of their day to type a little humor on their page. And seeing as though nobody has complained about it except for u i do not see the importance of typing such an offencive message.

Thank You

Thank you, Mentifisto, for the rollbacks. Talk about instant gratification. :) » skraz talk,contribs 10:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. :-) -- Mentifisto 10:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Block warning

I noticed you put a 24 hour bock on User talk:58.161.88.19 after their vandalism edits. I don't have any objection--this user wasn't making worthwhile edits--but they hadn't been sufficiently warned prior to blocking. The entire history on the IP had only made 2 edits, and User:Michael93555 hadn't warned the user before bringing it to AIV. AIVs are routinely declined on persistent vandals for lack of warning. This user had no record, nor had they been sufficiently warned (only had one warning that I added after their second edit), nor had they edited after a warning (they had not been warned at all).

I spend quite a bit of my wiki-time battling vandalism myself, and perhaps I don't have the full context here, and maybe you had reasons I'm unaware of. I don't think anything needs to change in regards to this block, but for new users, some sort of warning is appropriate. Shadowjams (talk) 08:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, it was an oversight of mine. It just seemed like they were on a bad faith rampage. -- Mentifisto 09:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

mw:Special:Code/MediaWiki/49791

Just wait for Brion to update the live site to r49791 (currently 1.44.0-wmf.3 (b4aac1f)), and this link will appear :) Stwalkerster [ talk ] 09:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice. Well done. :-) -- Mentifisto 10:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for entrusting me with Rollback. That was incredibly quick! Icseaturtles★ 13:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Yep, it's meant to be hassle-free. ;-) -- Mentifisto 13:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello!

Do you happen to know anything about Cad Bane from Star Wars? --Abce2 (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Um, no, sorry... I don't know that much about it. -- Mentifisto 19:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

IP talk page abuse

Can you please change the block so User_Talk:124.158.32.247 cannot edit the talk page? Momo san Gespräch 貢献 01:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 01:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Could you review a block you made...

See User talk:81.23.48.120. His objection has merit. He made a good-faith, referenced edit to an article, was reverted. When he tried to re-add it, you blocked him for vandalism. I don't see where his actions were necessarily vandalism. He didn't even seem to get past 1RR here; could you please explain the block in more detail on his talk page, or perhaps aloow me to unblock him since it seems he may have been blocked in error? Thanks! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I actually thought that his edits were in bad faith because of this diff, which is clearly vandalism. But if you think everything else is fine and he could be trusted in the future you can unblock him, no problem. -- Mentifisto 01:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Stop it

I just was putting in some very good information when you locked it. Please unlock it.Nohars (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but there was much background IP vandalism as well; it expires in one day anyway. -- Mentifisto 14:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear that there is background IP vandalism. What fun is it if you falsely add a country to the list of swine flu countries? Seems stupid to me. Nohars (talk) 05:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

company names

Thanks for your note. Actually, I didn't think of it from that angle till after you'd blocked and messaged them. Which is just as well. I was going to watch and wait-- their intent seemed pretty clear with a copy/paste advertisement for the article text, so I figured they would give up after seeing their "contribution" deleted so quickly. I'd have probably wound up blocking them anyway, whether with a hard or soft block depending on how they responded. If they insisted on abusing Wikipedia for nefarious gain, then I'd have hard blocked 'em. If they made constructive edits, I'd have gone for the soft block with an explanation and and opportunity to to change to an appropriate user name. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 15:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Come to think of it, I don't think they had much time to respond. 3 minutes from welcome, to article review with warnings, to block-- went pretty fast.
And I never even saw their userpage. Egad! What are people thinking when they come here? Guess they did not understand the "-pedia" part. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 15:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You're fast

You sure are fast at WP:AIV, nice work! :) Cirt (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Animum's easyblock script gives me an edge as well. :-) -- Mentifisto 21:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Article deleted

Hi, I posted an article of the company i work for. I called the article "The HR Practice". You deleted this article on April 24, 2009 at 07:46. Could you please let me know as to why this article was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawncrasta (talk • contribs) 08:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted because it read like an advertisement (as opposed to it being neutral). Also writing about a company you work for is generally discouraged just for that purpose (see WP:COI). -- Mentifisto 09:06, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Gosh darnit!

You're dead right. I completely misread the time stamp. Oh well! THAT'LL teach 'em not to edit for nearly twelve whole hours! - Vianello (Talk) 03:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Good to see you around again...

UAA or COI?

Should I report User:Nexploresearch to WP:UAA or WP:COI/N? He started this article Whip it! Now whip it good! 05:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it's more UAA with that kind of direct name. -- Mentifisto 05:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks (db-author)

Dear Mentifisto,

Thank You very much for doing my speedy deletion upon author's request" for me on page Ayoreo (disambiguation) (now Ayoreo being the primary topic).

Best wishes,

Physis (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Doniago (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thank you for cleaning up the vandalism on my user page a few days ago. Muchly appreciated! Doniago (talk) 12:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Mentifisto 00:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Page Deletion-Infringent on my Rights

What is it you people hold against Religion? This site is a sad excuse to hold back religion, not allowing for religious aspects to be posted, so, I a tired of this crap,I'll find an unbiast site to use, the never you people have, getting in the way of my freedom of religion... —Preceding unsigned comment added by AchillesTruth (talk • contribs) 00:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

No, it was an unsourced most likely invented religion (and random names aren't sources), and that's why it was deleted. -- Mentifisto 00:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Not random names, the people who I spoke with. No one respects religion, as it should be a freedom, not your choice to pick and choose what you like and don't. Perhaps I was hard on my assessment of this site, but I was only pointing out what you people made clear to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AchillesTruth (talk • contribs) 06:39, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

CptLavender

Just reblocked the above account by accident. I'm sometimes on automatic once I've investigated and made the decision to block—somehow my eye skips over the notice someone has already blocked.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:49, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem. -- Mentifisto 00:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Please protect IP talk page.

Hello, you just blocked User:72.249.77.168 but that person is replacing the talk page with unpleasant images. Could you please tweak the block or semi-protect that page? Thank you. LovesMacs (talk) 02:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 02:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

153.107.97.0/24

As I'm sure you've seen, this entire range has been causing havoc, once a month, all at the same time. The IP range is coming from "NSW DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING". It's about noon on Friday there right now, so I don't know if this is lunch hour fun or something else, but I wanted to let you know the IPs I've seen (and you probably have too) that are involved. They include:

  • 153.107.33.161 (blocked)
  • 153.107.97.158 (final warning)
  • 153.107.97.157
  • 153.107.97.155
  • 153.107.97.156 (blocked)
  • 153.107.97.154 (blocked)
  • 153.107.97.151 (blocked)
  • 153.107.33.157 (out of smaller range, but similar edit history and timing)

Some cleanup still needs to be done on .151's recent edits, and maybe the others too. Thanks for the help. Shadowjams (talk) 02:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, this is probably the school too: Carlingford High School Shadowjams (talk) 02:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
If they only do it once a month how could we block the range? -- Mentifisto 02:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting blocking the range. I just wanted to give you the heads up on the research I did. Maybe it will stop. They did it March 30 (around 10 Sydney time) then again April 30/May 1 (around noon Sydney time). Sort of an odd pattern. Shadowjams (talk) 03:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm so confused

Hello? Hi there. I created a page back in the fall. It had all kinds of problems and I just tried to delete it ... but then I got scared like I was doing something wrong. Can you look into it? The page was Arthur Osver. I made it. Now I think it's irrelevant. Last time I looked it was blank, but the title was still there. Can you get rid of that too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morrellmc (talk • contribs) 04:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, it's done; don't worry about doing something wrong since everything can be corrected here. I don't think the article was that bad either and others could always improve on it. -- Mentifisto 04:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Me again ...

Okay, I just looked at my "contributions" and it said my IP addressed was being watched for vandalism!? dear God, what did i do?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morrellmc (talk • contribs) 04:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it since it was a bot posting automatically after detecting a blanking (other than that since IPs can be dynamic others may actually vandalize but instead you'd receive the message after the IP is reallocated). -- Mentifisto 04:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

LAB Records

Please could I have the text of the incomplete article regarding LAB Records you deleted? I understand it did lack notability, but as I said it was incomplete and I have a list of sources saved and ready to help write the article and show notability. Thanks Addug (talk) 15:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Done; it's at User:Addug/Lab Records. -- Mentifisto 17:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again, just need to try and establish notability now. Does their bands featuring in major magazines, appearing in support of notable bands count as notability? Or would I have to create the individual band pages first? Addug (talk) 09:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
All that's necessary is independent, third-party reliable sources about the label itself, mostly. If their bands feature in major magazines then the case is even stronger (why the label is notable is the only thing you need to state in order to avoid WP:CSD#A7, though). -- Mentifisto 09:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Fast work!

Thanks for your help with vandals! Really fast work. talk ProSpider 18:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. You're doing good as well. :-) -- Mentifisto 18:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Re: RD Reynolds and others

I just wanted to say thanks for all of the blocking you've had to do lately because of one guy. It's been going on every now and then for years now and for whatever reason he's decided to pour it on thick lately. Can't anything be done to finally nip this in the bud for good? DX927 (talk) 20:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so... just like they can't stop Grawp permanently. -- Mentifisto 03:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixing All-American Rejects

Thank you for fixing the article. Can you please explain to me how you were able to undo a bunch of edits at once? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stocklone (talk • contribs) 03:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I used rollback but you can also use Twinkle or it can easily be done by going on the unvandalized diff, pressing 'edit' and saving it. -- Mentifisto 03:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Sozza

Hey man wazzup?! Blocked?! how could you? could you plz unblock that IP address. Its a school IP address, i think. If you could that would be great. I can still be blocked though. If i make a new account and add good changes can you unblock me though? I only did it cus i tried to change something else with another account ages ago and it was reverted. The original text was wrong and i corrected it. I even told the user but he was too stubborn to care. So i was angry. BTW are you a friend of MathCool10, does he even have a life? Srsly he was stalking me on wikipedia. Anyway. Bye!! BTW this is SCIENCE117 with a different account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MathCool11 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

If you don't vandalize you won't be blocked. -- Mentifisto 01:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Wtf... Can this account be blocked for stalking me? (Note that I had a username change from MathCool10 to MC10) MC10 | Sign here! 03:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

69.122.130.99 on AIV

Could you please look at the posting for this user on AIV, please? Thanks! - NeutralHomer • Talk • May 3, 2009 @ 01:17

I'm just not sure about it since it's not clear-cut vandalism (and I don't know whether the edits are factual or not). -- Mentifisto 01:23, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
They aren't.....
In this edit, the user changed WPIX from a CW affiliate to an Independent. WPIX is a CW affiliate.
In this edit, WDCA was changed from a MyNetwork affiliate to an Independent. I live near DC and I can confirm that WDCA is not an Indy and is a MyNetwork affil.
Seconds later, the user did the same with this edit making WDCW an Indy and changing the call sign to the VERY old WFTY (which it hasn't been since the late 90s). WDCW is not an Indy, but a CW affiliate.
Some of the same vandalism happening in these three edits spanning two different markets.
Looking at the user's contribs, this is nothing new for the user and the reason the user was blocked for a month. - NeutralHomer • Talk • May 3, 2009 @ 02:10
Alright but it didn't do it again after your warning so there's no urgency for a block. -- Mentifisto 04:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
This and This popped up this morning from the same IP. Clear vandalism from the user after the warning. It has since been reverted. This shows that the warning from me had no effect. - NeutralHomer • Talk • May 3, 2009 @ 22:28
Just a quick follow-up...after some more vandalism on the 4th, User:Toddst1 blocked the anon for 1 year. - NeutralHomer • Talk • May 5, 2009 @ 12:20

User Talk:NedScottPN3142339291

Can you block him from editing his talk page? He is connected to a sockpuppet investigation I made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/129.2.175.70. Momo san Gespräch 01:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 01:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

An award for you

The Working Man's Barnstar
This is for your speed, efficiency and prowess in carrying out block requests. Excellent work. talk ProSpider 03:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome. :-) -- Mentifisto 04:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

User talk:164.58.104.33 Talk page abuse again

Another IP abusing talk page, please block them from editing? Thanks again. Momo san Gespräch 04:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 04:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

70.161.218.169, vandal

This user, [4], has been blocked 3 times for vandalism and has recently started up again with vandalism on school pages. Even though he hasn't vandalised past a fourth warning, due to his extensive history of vandalism and extremely likeliness of repeat offence, I would like to notify you. Thanks. prospider‡ 06:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, based on the timestamps it's unlikely they'll edit again soon and probably won't for many days. -- Mentifisto 06:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

80.231.135.1, also vandal

Hey Mentifisto, I got your name from Prospider, and I have a somewhat similar case to report--this IP's edits to Danny Gokey. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 19:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Still, based on the timeframe they're unlikely to vandalize any time soon. It would be better if it's reported when it wouldn't stop after a final warning. -- Mentifisto 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Expert Sex Change

Hey. I just thought you would like to know that those redirects may have been legit. Their website used to be "expertsexchange.com", which can certainly be read the wrong way, which may be the rationale behind the redirects. See this page. I'm not contesting it or anything, just thought you might want a heads up. --UsaSatsui (talk) 20:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm, they weren't G10 then but expertsexchange had already existed anyway... -- Mentifisto 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting vandalism on my user page. Apologies for the belated expression of gratitude. I get busy and lose track of the time...but, the effort you put forth is greatly appreciated. Tiderolls 20:42, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem; just the normal course of my activities. -- Mentifisto 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk page abuse

User talk:Juklun31 Can you please block him from editing the page? Thanks. Momo san Gespräch 02:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding User:ChrisChanSonichu

It's mentioned at ANI here. Momo san Gespräch 03:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me. -- Mentifisto 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

deleting of my page

Hello. I'm struggling like crazy to navigate my way thorugh wiki and composing a page for my struggling band that HAVE had a very lucky opportunity on the whim of having our songs used for a series called 'All The Small Things' airing on BBC one on tuesdays. the show has had over 4m viewers per episode

I have web sites and sources that can verify this! I have no idea how to link these in officially I've tried asking for help everywhere and putting notes on talk pages etc. but no replies. wiki is very difficult to understand and we do have the right to be mentioned on the site.


Please help, MarcTheStringsPlayer —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcTheStringsPlayer (talk • contribs) 13:04, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

It was unverifiable; it was discussed here. -- Mentifisto 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for acting so quickly about repeat vandalism on Kristin Kreuk. Rob Banzai (talk) 14:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Mentifisto 21:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Page deletion query

Just spotted " "Template talk:EdJogg/ProjectNaviTemplate" ‎ (Speedy deleted, blanked or requested by creator)" in my watchlist, which rather took me by surprise (a) because I hadn't requested it, (b) because I hadn't blanked it, and (c) because I didn't know it was there (ho-hum)! Was there any history or previous content associated with this page?

The related template is in constant use, although rarely changed.

EdJogg (talk) 10:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes - it was created (and blanked, thus the delete) by User:Sticky mess. They had left you a message in the first revision, do you want me to paste it to your talk page? -- Mentifisto 10:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that depends how offensive it was! I had no real problem with your tidy-up, I was mainly wanting to make sure I hadn't done something months ago and forgotten about it. This was presumably a recent action or it would have been resolved previously.
EdJogg (talk) 11:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually the message isn't offensive despite the username. It's something about Somerset Space Walk. -- Mentifisto 11:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
In which case it is probably someone trying to say "Why haven't you finished this article yet?!"
Please do copy it to my talk page. Hopefully they will return and work out how to find me to get an answer!
EdJogg (talk) 11:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
THANK YOU!
Actually, I'm almost speechless! I quite understand it won't mean anything to you, but this contribution is like gold dust for the article! In fact, something much rarer. I am so glad I bothered to follow this up, and thank you again for your assistance!
EdJogg (talk) 11:54, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
No problem. ;-) -- Mentifisto 10:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Block of user 69.214.14.62

How come he can edit[5] before block expiration? --M4gnum0n (talk) 12:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm butting in, but I believe most Blocked Users/IP's can edit their own talk page (Because they may want to request a unblock using the template).
If you have more knowledge regarding this subject, then am I correct?
Limideen 10:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, you're correct. -- Mentifisto 10:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

User 78.33.99.229

This IP address belongs to the Powys County Council area; therefore it is a school address. All vandalism can be attributed to pupils in one of the schools. Apologizes on their behalf. 78.33.99.229 (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Mentifisto 10:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Open proxy 201.193.44.200

Seeing the block log, i'm not sure if you know this but usually open proxies are hard blocked to prevent anon's from accessing wikipedia. You may want to change the block so anon's on the open proxy cannot access wikipedia. Momo san Gespräch 20:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually at meta http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM:NOP No restrictions are placed on reading Meta through an open or anonymous proxy. Just happened to find the policy regarding this. Momo san Gespräch 20:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Blocks never prevent the reading of WP... just the editing. -- Mentifisto 10:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank You!

Dear Mentifisto, Thank you for indef. blocking Patagonia the luvverly. I think it was unnecessary to put that on a page, as that could have been placed on the IP's own talk page. The strangest part was a request for blocking!

From,
Limideen 10:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a typical account created only for vandalism. -- Mentifisto 10:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For all your work blocking vandals! It is much appreciated! ThoseStarsBurnLikeDiamonds chat 23:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome! :-) -- Mentifisto 00:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

User:DaChimp1800

Hello,

Just a question. Did you block User:DaChimp1800? Thanks!--gordonrox24 (talk) 13:17, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Law did originally but I just reblocked it from editing its talk page. Thanks for informing me. -- Mentifisto 13:21, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Vandalbot?

Mentifisto, I am New Page Patrolling and I notice that we have some spammer making pages with the same Fuck wiki/swastika pages. What can we do?! --Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 00:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Not much besides what's being done already (reporting it to WP:AIV, although it's not a necessity to tag the pages since they'll be deleted anyway when they're blocked). -- Mentifisto 00:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm...Okay. I'll keep a lookout. Thanks. --Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 00:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Protecting Jimbo

I appreaciaate your work, but Jimbo said not to protect his page and it shouldn't. Change it back. 99.29.236.85 (talk) 02:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It's just semi-protected; there was simply too much vandalism over days and it became too tiring. -- Mentifisto 10:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

One more question

Hey, is there a citation template for citing movies or films? I'd like to work on an article and there's a documentary that I think has some useful information. I know there are the ones for citing the web and citing books, but I can't find any for citing movies. Δnnuit Cœptis 18:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it's {{cite video}}. -- Mentifisto 11:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Oops

Sorry about that :) decltype (talk) 15:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

No prob. ;-) -- Mentifisto 15:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

72.14.172.170

Thanks, Mentifisto, for blocking my school. It just so happened that the vandals were sitting across the room from me, and they said (yelled, more like it) that they "Wouldn't stop until [they were] perma-banned". Thanks again :)

SpK (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome (eh... asking for it). -- Mentifisto 18:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I got helped by you. Keep up the good work!--Caspian blue 19:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) -- Mentifisto 19:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

That was the fourth time in a mere two days that you were the blocking admin for a spambot. Thanks for that lightning fast speed on blocking them, it certainly saves me a whole lot of pages that need to be tagged (And of course, a whole lot that needs to be removed). Keep up the great work :) Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 09:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I certainly seem to cross their path frequently. ;-) -- Mentifisto 09:20, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

User:121.97.109.75

Hi, regarding the block of User:121.97.109.75 - he posted 5 times the same comment on my talk page, which I ended up assuming it was vandalism but I may have made a mistake. See his last comment in particular: [6]. Just though I would mention it, as it's not clear whether he was actually vandalizing or editing in ignorance of WP's policies. Laurent (talk) 09:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Given another chance, then. -- Mentifisto 09:54, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Longer block?

Hi. You just blocked 89.207.208.16 (talk · contribs) for 24 hours, after a string of vandal edits. This IP has only the day before come off a three-month block (they must have marked it on their calendar); would you consider a longer block, or shall we give him one more chance? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's only 24 hours because the previous block was presumably unrelated (considering it was because of a checkuser and perhaps dissimilar articles) and it didn't have a long history of vandalism. Although if it returns after a day vandalizing more we could block them for months, again. -- Mentifisto 12:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
OK. I took an interest because this ISP (Yorkshire and Humberside Grid for Learning) has been the source of a lot of vandalism. They own the whole range 89.207.208.0 - .255, and before Christmas there was co-ordinated vandalism from several of the lower-number IPs. I enlisted SoWhy who blocked the range .0 - .15 for a month, then three months, then (as they always restarted soon after the block expired) for 6 months on 20 April. At that time the only higher IPs with any vandalism were this one which was on a 3 month block and .17 which was on a 2 week one, so it didn't seem worth extending the range. I see that .17 has just been blocked again for 6 weeks, having re-started as soon as his 2 weeks expired. They're hard cases, this lot. I'll keep an eye on this one, but I'd take quite a large bet that he'll be back within a few days. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:DUCK is out of a pond

Hi, Mentifisto. Can you recall blocking of an agenda-driven IP vandal 67.130.101.122 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) on Buddha Jumps Over the Wall yesterday whose geolocation is near Boston, MA? The editor evaded the block with other static IP. 173.48.210.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) Their geolocations are all near Boston. Could you take a look at this? Thanks.--Caspian blue 21:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

They're sourcing their edits now, though. -- Mentifisto 21:40, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
But the block evasion is a violation.--Caspian blue 21:43, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

re WP:AIV

Damn, I thought I was there quite a bit but...

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You are there before I am, when I am, and after I leave... LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Heh, thanks! :-) -- Mentifisto 21:40, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Unluckyyou

I would like to give Unluckyyou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) another try. He is on unblock-en-l begging for mercy. I will monitor him closely. (He claims it was his brother). Fred Talk 22:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'm all for second chances. -- Mentifisto 22:09, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Recreating Deleted Pages Warnings

Hello Mentifisto. I thought i'd ask you about this as I know you deal with alot of vandals and blocking of users. The other day I nominated a page for speedy deletion under A7: Unremarkable band. The page was deleted quickly. When I checked the page later, the page was still there meaning the author had recreated the page. I looked in the User Warnings for a warning about Recreating speedily deleted articles. There was only the {{subst:uw-repost|Article}} warning for Recreating deleted articles previously deleted at AfD.

I was therefore wondering, how would I go about requesting a warning about Recreating speedily deleted articles? Also could the warnings not be a single-level but multi-level? Therefore if the user continues to recreate a speedily deleted article, they can eventually be reported at WP:AIAV.

Thanks, Neutralle 08:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I usually use the {{uw-create}} set of warnings if they keep recreating deleted pages but otherwise I suppose you can ask for the creation of these specific warnings at WT:UW. -- Mentifisto 09:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Would you mind modifying this block?

Hi. I tried to leave this request regarding TraceymadeupBS at AIV, but the helperbots wouldn't let it stay up. Thanks. --Dynaflow babble 09:38, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Done (although it could've originally been reported to AIV instead of UAA). -- Mentifisto 09:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the blocks on those pesky IPs I've been reporting at WP:AIV. Keep up the good work! C.U.T.K.D T | C 09:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Mentifisto 09:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Well deserved

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Reporting vandals to AIV is almost a joy now. Thanks for your quick actions! Yintaɳ  10:02, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
It's appreciated. :-) -- Mentifisto 10:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Just FYI :)

[7] I've been slapped on the wrist once for tweaking a block without informing the original admin :) -- Luk talk 15:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, it's no problem. ;-) -- Mentifisto 15:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I am trying to create informatio about Tanita Corporation. I am an employee of Tanita Corporation but I am unable to create this article. Can you stop deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanita2625 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Even if the company is notable the article cannot be copied line-by-line from a copyrighted website. It was also in a spammy tone. -- Mentifisto 21:58, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Many Thanks

This is long overdue ...

The Admin's Barnstar
For always being around whenever a vandal needs to be blocked. Thank you, your work is appreciated. :) T'Shael MindMeld 00:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
You're welcome. :-) -- Mentifisto 00:08, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Block of User:Bop It Guy20

He is asking for his block to be shortened to 2 months. He also stated that his reasoning for vandalizing and personal attacks was because "he felt like it." I've told him that there is a slim-to-none chance his block would ever be lifted. He also then proceeded to threaten that he would use his IP address to vandalize and blank pages. I have warned him about this too, but it might be useful to decline his unblock request. Please advise. --(GameShowKid)--(talk)--(evidence)--( 16:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind - the request was denied. --(GameShowKid)--(talk)--(evidence)--( 16:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Well...

I'd like to personally thank you for blocking Threaduck. --The Legendary Sky Attacker 08:44, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Mentifisto 18:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject User Rehab

Would you be interested in joining this project? We need more editors who share a burden for rescuing promising editors who have gotten into serious trouble because of behavioral issues. IF (a fundamental condition!) they are interested in reforming and adapting to our standards of conduct, and are also willing to abide by our policies and guidelines, rather than constantly subverting them, we can offer to help them return to Wikipedia as constructive editors. Right now many if not most users who have been banned are still active here, but they are here as socks or anonymous IPs who may or may not be constructive. We should offer them a proper way to return. If you think this is a good idea, please join us. Abce2|AccessDenied 04:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. -- Mentifisto 18:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

by the way

Meant to mention it on the Admin. review, but I like that little "dos c:\>" archive thing you go going on there. Cool, brings back some memories ... lol. ;)— Ched :  ?  17:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it's nice I got it from User talk:Van helsing. :-) Thanks for the review as well. -- Mentifisto 17:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Blatant Racist editing

Hi Mentifisto

You kindly acted on a report just now of vandalism on Sol Campbell [diff] by User talk:86.153.188.51. I thought such blatant racist editing would receive an immediate block as per Wikipedia:No personal attacks rather than just a 1st level warning. Please can you advise how I should act in future, many thanksTmol42 (talk) 21:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, in that case the edit had been made some time prior and the latest was not clear vandalism so the IP may have possibly be reassigned but generally I think it's best to give them a {{uw-vand4im}} warning so as to prepare them. -- Mentifisto 18:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Mentifisto, Thanks for your feedback and I am truely sorry to trouble you again but I am left even more confused and need to know where to refer to to get an understanding of the line is drawn on racism on Wikipedia. The IP used the term stupid n*****r (in caps) at 20:38 on 16th May. This to me is just as bad as it gets. I reported this to WP:AIV at 21:19 and you applied the warning at 21:20. I can only assume you looked at the later edit to Didier Zokora which was not obviously that offensive to me at least. Thanks Tmol42 (talk) 19:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I am also a little confused. I agree that there is a fine line in dealing with personal attacks. I simply would like this line pointed out so that we will know how to deal with it in the future. Thanks, T-95 (talk) 20:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, I think it's down to individual discretion; blocks are preventive, so if the IP is unlikely to commit another similar edit in the next ten minutes or so it'd be somewhat redundant. Personally I'd give them the above immediate final warning so they know the consequences of their actions. -- Mentifisto 20:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Mentifisto, thanks for the speedy feedback. I'm not an Admin so don't have a perspective on what's the role of blocks etc. I guess to be honest I just have a different outlook on this sort of behaviour. Put it this way if this language was used by one of my employees they would be out the door immediately, no second chance. I remain intreged as to WP policy on racist etc abuse so will have a stroll around the policies, cheers Tmol42 (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, and accounts would probably be blocked but IP addresses aren't usually static. -- Mentifisto 21:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

User:205.152.162.35

Is back, and is vandalizing talk pages again; he's hit me and User:Dr. Blofeld that I'm aware of this afternoon. Thought you'd like to know, as you're the one that blocked him previously. --User:AlbertHerring Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla! 17:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

User talk:216.73.77.232

Hi Mentifisto, could you please block this user? There has been an outstanding request at WP:AIV for one hour now and this user has had nine warnings. Thanks! JulieSpaulding (talk) 17:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm, some of the warnings are stale though (going back months) and it doesn't seem to have continued after your two. -- Mentifisto 18:06, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

block

Hey Mentifisto, on 12 May you blocked IP 203.125.212.130 for 24 hours for repeatedly vandalizing a couple of articles, including 1592--well, they're at it again. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 05:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Smile!

I thought you deserved a smile for being a wonderful wikipedian... --Mr. Mentil (Goldblattster) (talk!) 01:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

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

:-) -- Mentifisto 17:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

AIV

The only time I've reported IPs without a level 3/4 warning is when multiple IPs restored reverted vandalism to a talk page. I assumed they were somehow connected and automatically reported them. And I haven't reported anyone in several hours.Drew Smith What I've done 13:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Userpage

How on Earth did you get your userpage... erm... transcluded like that? I know where the sub-page is, but how did you get it to show up as left-to-right text on your main userpage? Until It Sleeps 06:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It's the right-to-left override character. I was experimenting with it in my sandbox as well. -- Mentifisto 17:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Anon 88.109.57.45

I wonder if you could take another look at 88.109.57.45 (talk · contribs), whom you recently blocked. He/she repeatedly is adding garbage to the IPs talk page, and making personal attacks in edit summaries. I realize users can edit their own talk page even when blocked, but I'm not sure if that applies to adding junk to a IP talk page. If nothing can be done, I understand and will leave it alone. But I wonder if it's reasonable to semi-protect the page. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Welcome. -- Mentifisto 17:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Anon 209.98.36.253 and Bobjborj

Apologies as I don't yet know the proper way to suggest a block ... perhaps you can look at 209.98.36.253 (talk · contribs) and Bobjborj. The first is an IP address of a school whose students keep adding silly edits to pages despite warnings. Perhaps a short block is in order? BobKawanaka (talk) 16:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:AIV would be best for a faster response but for now I blocked the IP and warned the username. Thanks. -- Mentifisto 17:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

About my Signiture

Thankz for the reminder, Mentifisto, and I removed all data from the User:Betax/Sign page. I can't really delete the template since I have used it a little, but from now on I'll try to use the ~~~~ template.
By the way, if you can, please delete User:Betax/Sign, since I have not learned how.
--Betax 01:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Attention needed

Hey. Normally, I wouldn't, nor do I do this. But a report I just filed is in need of immediate attention. Once you read the report, you'll know why. Please have you and another Admin look at it. [8]. Deavenger (talk) 22:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

If it's about the .90 IP the block was already done. -- Mentifisto 22:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
A block on one of them was done. However, this has been going on for 2 months, and several protection was enacted. One of the protection just came out today, and this was the latest IP. The report I linked is the third report of it's kind. Deavenger (talk) 22:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for removing vandalism from my talk page! -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 21:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey!

Thanks for the revert on my talkpage. OtisJimmyOne 22:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Pickbothmanlol leftovers

Put this on Nawlinwiki's Talk but then noticed he hasn't edited for a week. Since you're quite effective when it comes to vandalism as well I figured I'd better forward it:

I take it you are aware of our "friend" Pickbothmanlol. I've been cleaning up after his new puppet User:LaughingPickles12 and found some pages and redirects, virtually all the same, across the various userpages of his socks. I tagged them all for SD but since this might be confusing for an admin who just comes across one of the lot I thought it might be wise to mention them all here. Seeing how you're popular with puppetmasters and such ;-)

User:Pickbothmanlol/Casual, User:AltecLansing12/Casual, Wikipedia:Be_casual, Wikipedia:Casual. Enjoy. Yintaɳ  23:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Done, although actually I'm not that familiar with Pickbothmanlol myself. ;-) -- Mentifisto 00:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Block, but no statement on discussion page

I think I read this diff correctly, and that you blocked User talk:80.130.105.126. However, there is no block showing up on the page; are they blocked?--StormRider 00:15, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for reminding me. The most reliable way to see if someone is blocked is through the logs. -- Mentifisto 00:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Requesting Evidence for Sockpuppetry Investigation

Good (time of day when you are reading this). I am presently in the process of filing a sockpuppetry investigation against User:Misternortob, possible alias to User:HollywoodExperte (who was blocked). I saw you deleted an article created by the former, "Ewan james melville". I would appreciate it if you could send me a copy of this deleted article, or direct me to someone/thing that could, so that I may use it as evidence in this investigation. Thank you for your time. Intelligentsium (talk) 21:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Would you still require it since the case is closed? -- Mentifisto 22:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
No, thank you for offering. I thought it would take longer to close and require more than my testimony and a few edit histories. Intelligentsium (talk) 02:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Request for copy of deleted article

could you send me a copy of Mediacrat to zaiger@klulz.com? I would greatly appreciate it. --Zaiger talkplx 01:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Mentifisto 02:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Please stop vandal

Please stop vandal RadarJim, clearly out of control. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

He's already indefinitely blocked. -- Mentifisto 12:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Google9cf94b248960b35e.html

Hi - I saw that you CSD'd as G2. I just wanted to make sure you knew that the reason why I marked as G3 is because this is really a hack attempt. Posting this article might give the poster access to google analytic's tools on Wikipedia data (the person would look like an owner of Wikipedia in google's eyes). I suspect WP already has an agreement in place with google to prevent that from happening, but I am not sure. Given the severity of this, I thought G3 was appropriate. Please let me know if you disagree. Regardless, I reported the poster to AIV. Thanks.    7   talk | Δ |   23:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about it so I thought that it would be best to speedily delete it as a test (since that's what it said it was). -- Mentifisto 23:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Understood, thanks. It's gone and I guess that's all that matters.    7   talk | Δ |   23:17, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
JFYI - started a discussion about the overall issue here.    7   talk | Δ |   00:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for informing me. -- Mentifisto 00:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Just a note to say thanks for your very rapid user permissions. Mouse Nightshirt | talk 23:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Mentifisto 23:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy Notice...

I have shamelessly stolen your talk page border. If you'd rather I didn't, let me know and I'll remove it. Cheers, t'shael mindmeld 05:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, it's no problem. It's all share alike here. ;-) -- Mentifisto 05:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah, cool beans. Thanks. :) t'shael mindmeld 05:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lofty_abyss/Archive_4&oldid=1089749902"