User talk:AmandaNP/Archives/2012/August

This is an archive of past discussions about User:AmandaNP. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello, DeltaQuad. The accounts you've listed here are probably related to the ones at m:User:Mathonius/Reports/Twin spambots and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Redwfm61. It might be useful to block a few ranges (see these log entries today on ik.wiktionary as well as CU-l for more information). Greetings, Mathonius (talk) 10:24, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for noting this, I hit several ranges and sockfarms and have been following CU-l, and a crapload of new accounts are off to stewards. Feel free to message me here about anymore you see, as I check this page daily if not more, most of the time. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi DQ, I'm ready for another run if you'd be so kind. ϢereSpielChequers 11:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll hop on Linux and get this running tonight. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 21:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey all. Some quick but important updates on what we've been up to and what's coming up next :).

The curation toolbar, our Wikimedia-supported twinkle replacement. We're going to be deploying it, along with a pile of bugfixes, to wikipedia on 9 August. After a few days to check it doesn't make anything explode or die, we'll be sticking up a big notice and sending out an additional newsletter inviting people to test it out and give us feedback :). This will be followed by two office hours sessions - one on Tuesday the 14th of August at 19:00 UTC for all us Europeans, and one on Wednesday the 15th at 23:00 UTC for the East Coasters out there :). As always, these will be held in #wikimedia-office; drop me a note if you want to know how to easily get on IRC, or if you aren't able to attend but would like the logs.

I hope to see a lot of you there; it's going to be a big day for everyone involved, I think :). I'll have more notes after the deployment! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, DQ. In this edit I wasn't sure what you meant by "nuke". I decided to take it a meaning "close", but maybe you meant "delete". JamesBWatson (talk) 19:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I meant the latter, but I don't care to be honest. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 21:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

DeltaQuad, I hope you don't mind, but I changed your block of 85.17.0.0/16 from {{blocked proxy}} to {{anonblock}}. The whole class B network does belong to LeaseWeb, but as a colocation provider it then subdivides parts of that range for its customers. Without my knowing any more information, a hard block of a class B network for five years seemed a bit excessive. I shouldn't think we've had disruptive contributions throughout that entire range. Please feel free to change or reinstate the block, however, if you have more information on activities in that range. Thanks! — madman 20:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

This is what I have on that block. Feel free to modify it or unblock it as you see fit. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 17:27, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I should have thought to look through archives. Ohhh, my, that looks problematic; the block no longer looks quite as excessive. ;) I'll look all of that over, see if I can get some more information on potential collateral (I don't see any information for 85.17.0.0) and possibly re-instate a hard block on some smaller ranges. I already hard blocked a smaller range which faceless.me uses. Thanks, DQ! — madman 17:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey DeltaQuad, i thought to inform you about Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wnnse which i have restarted in light of discovering a new sockpuppet. I have given all the information and details on the sockpuppet investigations page. I think you should have look at it. Thanks! TheGeneralUser (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

 Already done Looks like my colleagues got to it before I could. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 17:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, DeltaQuad, I need your opinion and would also like to update you, as you are investigating the SPI here.

• The Sock accuser User talk:Justice007, is provoking editors into edit warring, by reverting the good faith edits of my copy editing, without any discussion on talk page, again and again using abusive and discriminating slang in his edit summaries by personal attacks, Not bothered to respond to discussion when inquired him for his reverts and abusive actions (Muhammad Iqbal#Repeating same source in two line paragraph. and User talk:Justice007#Hi).
• It is not only me but also other established editors who are sure about his multiple SOCK, gaming and are provoked by him into edit warring by his undiscussed reverts.

Let me know for further actions, as I want to work there,and do not want to involve in his gaming and edit warring. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 21:56, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I have replied on the SPI with a status update, sorry for the delay I have created. As soon as I see the reply I will act upon it. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:02, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

As the Admin who place the editing restriction on John Foxe, can you please check out Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:John_Foxe_reported_by_User:ARTEST4ECHO_.28Result:_.29.

• I reverted my closure, feel free to handle the situation as you chose. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:36, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Here's the message I left on the message board:

"Please read the talk page discussion. The reversion, five days ago, was to undo a removal of content, and Kraxler mistook me for a Mormon when I reverted. The whole matter was discussed fully on the talk page, and I think a reasonable compromise was reached. Furthermore, Samuel L. Mitchill is not a Mormon-related article by any stretch of the imagination. Remove the footnote material, and there would be no connection with Mormonism at all."--John Foxe (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello DQ. Formally speaking, it appears that John Foxe ought to be at least blocked for a 1RR violation. Perhaps you have other suggestions. If you have time to add a comment at WP:AN3, it would be appreciated. I notice that you already communicated with Mark Arsten about this report. It is fair to describe John Foxe as unusually persistent. I am somewhat aware of his record through handling some past 3RR cases. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree he needs to be blocked, the length is what i'm unsure about. I have left a response at ANEW/AN3. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Online by any chance? I want to know if it is possible to delete an account? I created an alternate for use with my mobile, and managed to spell it incorrectly. The joys of being up three days straight :o) Darkness Shines (talk) 16:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I am online. It's not possible to delete an account though I can block it never to be used. Give me a poke on IRC or via Email if you need me. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 16:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea how to use IRC, or even what that is :o) So YGM Darkness Shines (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Due to the recent aggressive intolerable personal attack and vandal behavior, I had made some remarks here to continue the SPI. And honestly I believe that it is an immature foreclose of SPI. Regards :)--Omer123hussain (talk) 22:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello DQ. Per the result of User talk:John Foxe#Edit warring at Samuel L. Mitchill I am planning to replace the editing restriction now logged in WP:RESTRICT with the new one. That OK with you? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds better than another block to me, go for it. Hopefully it works this time. Thanks for working this out. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 00:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Updated WP:RESTRICT. I'm assuming that the new ban supersedes his previous 1RR on Mormon topics, so I removed that one. EdJohnston (talk) 15:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Housewifehader needs to be blocked, as its IP, 68.37.29.229 has been blocked. Thank you. TBrandley 03:30, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey all :)

A couple of new things.

First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.

On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

DQ, please give all the diffs and IPs a 2nd careful look, especially the last two (173.63.176.93 & 74.88.160.244). It's because of the history log of the IPs that I was able to pull UP NYC88 and MusikAnimal.
BTW, how did you know that MusikAnimal was editing from the same city? I never told you that, since I didn't know myself! According to MusikAnimal's user page, he is supposedly from Brooklyn, NY, a good 20 miles from Fair Lawn, NJ. I only added him to the suspected list because he showed an eerily similar editing pattern to Thmc1. Furthermore, nearly 100% of the individual articles edited by NYC88 were also edited by Thmc1. It's also no coincidence that the given diffs show all, or most of the suspected IPs & accounts making the same edits to the same section of at least 15 same articles. If you have extra time, PLEASE give these diffs another check as it needs a discerning human eye. They all look exactly, or nearly identical except that the IPs & accounts are different. And, of course Thmc1 is stale since he was blocked! That, however, did not stop him from getting back on WP.
P.S.: You were able to confirm sockpuppets of Munibmalik62 with only 2 diffs from one category as evidence. Surely you could do something with the 15 I gave you which aren't merely a set of coincidences?MBaxter1 (talk) MBaxter1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Please understand that this is purely a technical result given with the assistance of the CheckUser tool. Then, the closing administrator will have to evalute the behavior through the diffs given by you. It's proper custom at SPI for someone to review the material who did not run the check, and that's for several reasons. Don't worry, your case is not close to being closed, someone is still going to look at your diffs and come to their own result. I only use your diffs to justify a Checkuser per the Privacy policy. If you look at SPI procedures, you will find the list on the right, which has a label "Specific to CheckUser" and those are to indicate the technical evidence only or a procedural change of the case status. No one other except checkusers should be using those templates. I hope this helps your understanding and answers your questions. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 21:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi DQ, I'm ready for the next run, thanks. ϢereSpielChequers 16:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done I set it to run. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 00:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I think this is a new suspected sockpuppet of Calvin Marquess: Liang Pengyuan (talk · contribs) which was created few days of the latest one was locked. ༆ (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Could you please possibly provide some evidence that this is occurring? I do not have the time to look through the SPI and find behavioral patterns, and also I don't know what the previous account is that is so recent, making my efforts very ineffective. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

An RfC which you closed is being discussed in several parts of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Floydian 2. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:48, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Mind pointing more specifically please? -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 23:48, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation urgently needs YOUR help! Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 994 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our Help Desk. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Are you autoconfirmed? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. PS: we have a great AFC helper script at User:Timotheus Canens/afchelper4.js which helps in reviewing in just few edits easily! We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 2 or 3 reviews, it would be extremely beneficial. On behalf of the Articles for Creation project, TheSpecialUser TSU

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events: The August 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best August copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC). September 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit the articles tagged longest ago and to complete all requests placed before the end of August. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top six in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged longest ago", and "Longest article". This drive features a much easier signup process. We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. >>> Sign up now <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your participation in my recent RfA, which I withdrew very shortly prior to the deadline. I appreciate your demonstrated interest in my candidacy and the thorough review you gave my statement and answers before coming to a decision on that basis. It shows that you are very attentive to detail and have good analytical skills.

By the way, I'm not sure if you noticed (I suspect you have), but I responded to the views you've expressed there. When you had said that there are "more important reasons" than vandalism for imposing an indefinite semi-protection, my immediate interpretation was that you were referring to biographical articles of people who would very likely be subject to a certain degree of libel in the event that their article remained unprotected. I just wanted to be sure I was clear on that, so as to alleviate any confusion in that area.

As an aside, now that I have a better understanding of your skill sets as a volunteer, I'm starting to think you would have been a good arbitrator after all. I opposed your candidacy last December on the basis that you struck me as more of an administrative, "maintenance work" sort of guy rather than someone who would be best suited for reading through cumbersome screeds of text and coming to a judgement based on careful analysis and consideration for all parties involved. If ever you run again, I might be more inclined to support you than I had been before.

Take care. =) Master&Expert (Talk) 08:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, 8 hour work shifts and a cold make only easy work possible. I'll comment regarding this on Monday or Tuesday, my days off. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It's fine, I'm feeling rather sick at the moment myself. Master&Expert (Talk) 10:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

• You still there? :) Kurtis (talk) 13:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
• Hello, sorry for the delay on this. So I probably was wrong to use the wording "more important" it should be "other important" reasons. BLP violation protection is definitely a big one, and it has it's reasons every once in a while, but also sockpuppeting I'm sure has landed several articles an indefinite semi-protection. There are also High risk templates, userpages per user request, and user talkpage protection of blocked user. Those are the only ones I would say are grounds for indefinite, plus the vandalism you mentioned.

As for going for Arbitrator again, I actually don't think I'm going to be running for it again any time relatively soon. The community was right that it was not a good time in this past year to elect me, and i'm glad they didn't. Also I feel that my communication skills are not sharp enough for arbitration related matters. But thanks for your comment anyway. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 17:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

It's fine, and likewise, I'm sorry I didn't see your response until now. I was quite busy with real-world things, and could only tend to the projects I'd been involved with prior during that time. Thanks for that thorough response, and I can definitely see why sockpuppetry would cause someone to semi-protect an article (but that would also fall under the category of "exceptionally large volume of vandalism"). I didn't list the things you'd mentioned afterwards because the question at my RfA only specified article space.

All right, but at the very least you're a checkuser now, and I definitely think you've done a good job so far. Your communication skills? Meh, barring the occasional grammatical error, you're fine.

Take it easy, DQ. =) Kurtis (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I've no problem at all with the protection of my talk page but having just come back from the pub I have no idea what has happened, nor has history lent me any clues. Please could you let me know what has happened - by email if DENY applies - Cheers,

Egg Centric 22:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, never mind, just found it on my userpage. I know exactly who that will be (sockpuppets of hamish ross). For the sake of saving everyone effort, might as well just leave the protection till it expires. Egg Centric 23:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

P.S. And thanks ever so much for your protection. While it was hardly, erm, saving a damsel in ditress from a burning building in that it was ridiculous of me to put such a thing up on my user page in the first place, and it was naive of me to think that HR had stopped editing (despite his reassurances to myself btw) and frankly I don't even care about putting a penis of mine on the internet, even though that was a drunken offer I had forgotten about... well anyway I do appreciate it, it was for the right reasons and carry on the good work! If ya fancy a barnstar to solemnize this (and I consider my thanks "worth" more than a barnstar so I am happy to do so) then let me know. Ta, Egg Centric 23:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi DQ, just directing your attention to this section of the current discussion of PC. It seems likely that the devs cannot have PC ready to go on the schedule we originally set, and I'd like to see what you, THO, Blade, and James Forrester think about possible ways to work with that restriction. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Dear DeltaQuad,

I saw on the adoption page that you are willing to teach the procedural side of Wikipedia to users. Please would you consider adopting me? Please see my user page, contributions, and talk page for CV and references. Thanks in advance. Geraldshields11 (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello, it's actually been a long time since I've dealt with anything adoption related, so I'm scrambling to get things back together first, but I would be happy to consider you, and sorry for the delay in responding. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

See conversation at User talk:Tiptoety#Help. I'd have unblocked Shreyas.shridhar myself if Tiptoety hadn't explicitly given you the final say, and anyway I am not privy to the information you have. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I have replied there. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 23:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know there's an IP requesting unblock from a range you apparently blocked - at User talk:46.246.21.87 -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:18, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Replied, i'll try and keep a watch on it. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 03:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice here on checkuser, I will continue to block per DUCK, tag accordingly and delete any articles. Regards, GiantSnowman 16:27, 28 August 2012 (UTC)