Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ivanvector: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:39, 19 October 2016 editSheriffIsInTown (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers59,626 edits Re: Bbb23← Previous edit Revision as of 19:36, 22 December 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,380,734 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Ivanvector/Archive 19. (BOT)Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{DailyBracketBot}} {{nobots}}
{{trout me}} {{trout me}}
{{User:Ivanvector/Protection notice}}
{{Ombox
| type = speedy
| image = ]
| text = {{large|'''SCAM WARNING!'''}}
If you have been contacted or solicited by anyone asking for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article, such offers are <u>'''not legitimate'''</u> and you should contact '''''{{no spam|paid-en-wp|wikipedia.org}}''''' immediately. Please see ] for more information.
| style = border-width: 1px;
}}
<!-- User talk header added by subst'ing the {{Usertalksuper}} template, modifying with new instructions. --> <!-- User talk header added by subst'ing the {{Usertalksuper}} template, modifying with new instructions. -->
{{tmbox |image=] |text='''''Welcome to my talk page!'''''<br> {{tmbox |image=] |text='''''Welcome to my talk page!'''''<br>
Line 8: Line 16:
* Thanks for stopping by! * Thanks for stopping by!
}}
}}<!-- from 'subst:Usertalksuper' -->
{{tmbox |image=] |text=''']''' Emails sent through this form are private, however I may share their content privately with other users for administrative purposes. Please do ''not'' use {{tl|ygm}} on this page: if you email me I will have already received an on-wiki notification.}}
<!-- {{busy|] (])}} -->
{{archives|banner=yes}}
<!-- {{No Internet|message=&nbsp;My new connection continues to be a pain, to the point that now I can't connect at all. My ISP is shipping me a new modem but won't be here until next week, if that solves the problem at all. If I am needed ''urgently'' please use the email function, as I will not be checking in otherwise until this is resolved. Assume that I have ''not'' read anything posted on this page while this notice remains.}} -->
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
| archiveprefix=User talk:Ivanvector/Archive | archiveprefix=User talk:Ivanvector/Archive
| age=720 | age=504
| header={{aan}} | header={{aan}}
| numberstart=3 | numberstart=13
| maxarchsize=100000 | maxarchsize=100000
| minkeepthreads=3 | minkeepthreads=5
| format= %%i | format= %%i
| archivebox=yes | archivebox=no
| search=yes
| box-advert=yes
| box-separator=no
}} }}


== Kosszonom szepen == == {{UTRS|97275}} ==


I have the notion that I recently read you responding to someone who had a similar problem while proxy-blocked. I can't remember the solution. (Was it just to go somewhere else, reset the password, and come back?) Perhaps you can help? -- ] (]) 02:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the wb. There is always a time when my infuriation at minor errors and slips and stuff in Misplaced Pages 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 &ndash; 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.
:{{yo|Asilvering}} replied on UTRS. The outlook is not good, unfortunately. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 14:46, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:: I have now closed the appeal. You don't need to know that, and there's nothing more for you to do, but I mention it just in case you may be interested in seeing what I wrote in response to your comments. ] (]) 17:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:::{{yo|JBW}} thanks. One thing that might be worth explaining: any user can send a password reset to another user, if they are logged into an account, or if they're not logged in and their IP is not blocked. You need to provide the email associated with the account, and as a security measure the form will not tell you if you got it right. It just says something like "'''if''' the details you provided match, then the user will be sent a temporary password." There is no way to know if the email actually was sent. It was worth a try anyway. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 17:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: I have never tried to send a password reset email to another user while logged in, so I can't comment on that. However, I can assure you that if I am not logged in I can send a password reset email to any user, provided they have an email address attached to their account, I am not subject to an IP block, and I know their username, without having to know their email address. I have done it before, to help users unable to get a reset email because of an IP block, and to make doubly sure I have just logged out of my account and sent one to myself. ] (]) 19:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: I've just sent one to you. I have no way of knowing whether you have received it, but if you have, then I can promise you that I don't know your email address. ] (]) 19:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::{{yo|JBW}} that's interesting, are you using ] to do that? It always prompts me to enter the username and the email address (like I described), but I haven't tried logged out, my work VPN is blocked. Also I did get your emails (no worries about the heads-up) but I didn't get your password reset. I sent myself one earlier today from my alternate account so I don't think it's my mail server blocking them. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 21:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::: OK, as I said, I have never done it while logged in, but in case there is some difference between doing it logged in and logged out, I have now sent a password reset email to my alternative account, JBW3, while logged in as JBW, and it worked fine. ] has fields for username and password, but it says "Fill in '''''one''''' of the fields to receive a temporary password via email" (my emphasis) and it works with just the username. I have no idea why you didn't get my password reset, unless I misstyped your username or something. I will try once more, copying and pasting your username to be sure, and I'll be interested to know whether it works this time. ] (]) 23:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::Can you reset the password while the IP is blocked, though? I thought that was also a problem (on top of how Special:PasswordReset doesn't work to send the email in the first place), so maybe I misunderstood. -- ] (]) 03:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::::: Apparently yes. At least once, and I am almost sure more than once, I have sent a password reset email in this situation, and then been thanked by the editor, who told me that it worked. ] (]) 10:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::: Aha! I've got it! The message that came up after I posted another request on ] says "Only one password reset email will be sent per valid account every 24 hours in order to prevent abuse". ] (]) 23:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)


== Administrators' newsletter – December 2024 ==
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 ] 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 ] violent seascape mural {{convert|15|ft}} by {{convert|12|ft}} 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-]ing 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 ], perhaps I should concrete it back in again and have ] and a ] 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).


] from the past month (November 2024).
I had a great re-entry doing a rather uncontroversial article at ] 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. ] (]) 16:30, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


] '''Administrator changes'''
: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 ], 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 ] and on topics around my new location which I think deserve some coverage, like a draft I'm working on of an ] 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. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 21:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
|]
}}


] '''Interface administrator changes'''
== 27century ==
:] {{hlist|class=inline
|]
|]
}}
:] ]


] '''CheckUser changes'''
Sorry, I checked 27century for prior blocks, but didn't realise that there was an open SPI. I blocked ] and ] 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.
:] {{hlist|class=inline

|]
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. - ] (]) 23:12, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
|]

}}
:{{yo|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 {{ul|Vanjagenije}} again just in case). ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 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. - ] (]) 00:34, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


] '''Guideline and policy news'''
== Reg move of SPI ==
* Following ], the ] has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the ] within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
* Following a ], a new speedy deletion criterion, ], has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.


] '''Technical news'''
You , 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. &mdash;]''']''' 01:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
* Technical volunteers can now register for the ], which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
:Hi there {{ul|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 {{noping|Itsbalaa}} and {{noping|Lakshmikandh}} as socks of {{noping|Editor 2050}}, and this has nothing to do with {{noping|Abhinand1234}}? ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 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. &mdash;]''']''' 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. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 02:08, 22 September 2016 (UTC)


] '''Arbitration'''
==this is becoming too much==
* The arbitration case '']'' (formerly titled '']'') has been closed.
<small>moved to ] ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 00:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)</small>
* An arbitration case titled '']'' has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.


----
== Please comment on ] ==
{{center|{{flatlist|
* ]
* ]
* ]
}}}}<!--
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by ] (]) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)</small>}}
<!-- Message sent by User:DreamRimmer@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=1259680487 -->


== ARCA ==
The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 53741 --> ] (]) 04:26, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


Hi Ivan, per your comment on my now-archived RFPP discussion, I'm wondering which section of ARCA applies to my request. Are you saying that an ArbCom decision would need to be amended in order to remove a particular talk page restriction? ] (]) 20:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
== Alternate account ==
:No, the page protection is an enforcement action, and that's what would need to be modified. You want the second bullet point in the header box at the top, under "submitting a request", the one that's for an "arbitration enforcement action issued by an administrator". You'll likely be asked if you've attempted to resolve the problem with the issuing administrator as part of this process, so if you haven't you might want to do that first. {{ul|El C}} is pretty reasonable. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 21:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
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 ] for policy. If I'm wrong about this, please just point me at the policy. -- ] (]) 13:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
::Sounds good, thank you. I have reached out to El C on their talk page so we'll see how that goes first. ] (]) 21:13, 3 December 2024 (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. -- ] (]) 13:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


It looks like your naming of ] broke the bot's parsing, which is leaving a red linked "close" case in the set. Maybe rename to second oldest? ] (]) 19:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{ec}} 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 ]) 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. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 14:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
:Yeah it was fun trying to get the tags to work on that, and I didn't check what happened to the table. I'll rename it. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 19:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)


== SPI Investigation ==
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. -- ] (]) 14:06, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


I am unsure of the exact rules surrounding SPI Investigation discussions, am I allowed to respond directly to another editor, or should my comment be contained to a different section? Should I even respond at all? <b>]</b> 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
== Disclosure of alternate accounts ==


== https://en.wikipedia.org/Lockerby_Composite_School ==
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? ] says: '''Editing project space''': Undisclosed alternative accounts are not to be used in discussions internal to the project. ] 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. --&nbsp;]&nbsp;] 14:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
:The two sections I referred to in the SPI are:
:*]: "{{green|Alternative accounts should always be identified as such on their ]s, except where doing so would defeat the point of the account. ] such as {{tl|User alternative account}} or ] may be used for this purpose.}}"
:*]: "{{green|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 "{{green|Editors who have multiple accounts for privacy reasons should ''consider'' ] a ] or members of the ] 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. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 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. --&nbsp;]&nbsp;] 16:15, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


Hi:
== Kim Kardashian RfC ==
The Lockerby Composite School Misplaced Pages page was recently edited to include controversial information about a murderer, a pipe bomb threat 25 years ago, and inappropriate teacher controversies. I am not affiliated with this high school, but noticed that other high schools in this school board (Rainbow District School Board) do not have such commentaries and the original write-up of this high school compared to other Rainbow District School Board currently on Misplaced Pages.
I went back to revert these controversial edits (by creating a Misplaced Pages account), but the person who added the controversial information, re-instated their edits. There was a note to say to contact/reach out to an Administrator on a list to review changes made. As such, I selected you to please review the controversial edits made.
Ultimately, I do not believe that the editor (Kline) used appropriate judgement to edit the high school Misplaced Pages page by writing several controversial information pieces. The editor (Kline) appears to be 'slandering' this particular high school.
Thank you for your considerations - I appreciate you looking at the page, history, and contributions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/Lockerby_Composite_School ] (]) 03:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)


:{{tpw}} While I won’t mention your username here, please log into your account before making any edits, including leaving messages on talk pages.
You previously made a change at ] 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? ] (]) 16:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
:It seems there’s an edit war between a more positive and more negative version of the article. Please keep in mind that Misplaced Pages has a policy of maintaining a ] tone and giving information the proper amount of ]. So you’re partially correct—the page could benefit from more balance. My suggestion would be to address Kline directly, as {{they|Kline}} rightfully noted that the revert was unexplained at the time. ] ] ] 07:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:Hi there, thanks for bringing my attention to your request. In the future, you should use the {{tl|edit semi-protected}} template (instructions at the link) to request this sort of change, that way your request will show up in ] 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. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 18:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
:I noticed an inconsistency in your messages about your connection to Lockerby Composite School. In this message, you mentioned you're not affiliated with the school, but in an ] you said you're editing ''on behalf of'' the school. This raises concerns about a conflict of interest, which is likely why {{U|Diannaa}} issued a notice. If you are affiliated with the school in any way, it's the most ethical course of action to be honest about that. ] ] ] 07:48, 7 December 2024 (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. :) ] (]) 19:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
:Hi:
:Thank you for replying pomptly - I appreciate it.
:I will address the concerns with Kline directly.
:In terms of affiliation, I do not have any stake, volunteer, or work for this institution, but did attend to the school for a brief time many decades ago.
:Again, thank you for your time and I appreciate your input. ] (]) 12:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)


== WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge eighth anniversary ==
== ORCP ==


<!--The box below was generated by ]-->
Hi Ivanvector, I’ve just been having another look at your entry at ]. It may well be time for you to start a new poll and see what happens. ] (]) 07:07, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
</noinclude>{| style="border: 2px solid gray; background-color: #FFFFF0; vertical-align: middle;"
:{{yo|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 ] 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 ] 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. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 21:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
|rowspan="2" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" |'''The Red Maple Leaf Award'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This maple leaf is awarded to '''Ivanvector''' for writing the article ] during the eighth year of ] of ]. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! ] (]) 16:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
|}


== Please comment on ] == == Feedback request: Misplaced Pages proposals request for comment ==


]Your feedback is requested &#32;at ]. Thank you for helping out!<br/><small>You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of ] subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by ].</small> <!-- Template:FRS notification --><div class="paragraphbreak" style="margin-top:0.5em"></div> Message delivered to you with love by ] :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact ]. &#124; Sent at 19:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
The ] is asking for participation in ]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 54619 --> ] (]) 04:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
== Nomination for deletion of ] ==
==Re: LanguageXpert SPI==
]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> – ] (]) 16:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
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 Misplaced Pages than fishing and hunting socks of one master. ] | ] | 16:12, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
:{{re|SheriffIsInTown}} Your comment was disruptive and Ivanvector was absolutely correct to revert it. Try to behave.--] (]) 16:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
::Thanks for your note, {{ul|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 ]ment unless you understand what that means; your accusation here shows that you do not. ] (<sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub>) 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. ] | ] | 17:41, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
:::{{re|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. ] | ] | 18:39, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:36, 22 December 2024


SCAM WARNING! If you have been contacted or solicited by anyone asking for payment to get a draft into article space, improve a draft, or restore a deleted article, such offers are not legitimate and you should contact paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org immediately. Please see this page for more information.
Welcome to my talk page!
  • If you are adding a new comment section, please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
  • If your comment is about an article, please consider adding the comment to the article's talk page, instead of adding it here. Misplaced Pages is a community effort, and other editors might have valuable opinions. You could add a comment here to let me know about your comment on the article's talk page. If I think your comment is about an article I may move it there and leave a note here saying I did so.
  • I absolutely hate conversations that thread across multiple pages. If you add a comment here, I will reply here. If I left a comment on your talk page and you reply here, I will move your reply back to your talk page. Please add this page to your watchlist to be informed when I reply.
  • Thanks for stopping by!
⇒ Start a new Talk topic.
Click here to email me. Emails sent through this form are private, however I may share their content privately with other users for administrative purposes. Please do not use {{ygm}} on this page: if you email me I will have already received an on-wiki notification.

Archiving icon

Archives: Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present.


UTRS appeal #97275

I have the notion that I recently read you responding to someone who had a similar problem while proxy-blocked. I can't remember the solution. (Was it just to go somewhere else, reset the password, and come back?) Perhaps you can help? -- asilvering (talk) 02:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering: replied on UTRS. The outlook is not good, unfortunately. Ivanvector (/Edits) 14:46, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I have now closed the appeal. You don't need to know that, and there's nothing more for you to do, but I mention it just in case you may be interested in seeing what I wrote in response to your comments. JBW (talk) 17:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
@JBW: thanks. One thing that might be worth explaining: any user can send a password reset to another user, if they are logged into an account, or if they're not logged in and their IP is not blocked. You need to provide the email associated with the account, and as a security measure the form will not tell you if you got it right. It just says something like "if the details you provided match, then the user will be sent a temporary password." There is no way to know if the email actually was sent. It was worth a try anyway. Ivanvector (/Edits) 17:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I have never tried to send a password reset email to another user while logged in, so I can't comment on that. However, I can assure you that if I am not logged in I can send a password reset email to any user, provided they have an email address attached to their account, I am not subject to an IP block, and I know their username, without having to know their email address. I have done it before, to help users unable to get a reset email because of an IP block, and to make doubly sure I have just logged out of my account and sent one to myself. JBW (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
I've just sent one to you. I have no way of knowing whether you have received it, but if you have, then I can promise you that I don't know your email address. JBW (talk) 19:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
@JBW: that's interesting, are you using Special:PasswordReset to do that? It always prompts me to enter the username and the email address (like I described), but I haven't tried logged out, my work VPN is blocked. Also I did get your emails (no worries about the heads-up) but I didn't get your password reset. I sent myself one earlier today from my alternate account so I don't think it's my mail server blocking them. Ivanvector (/Edits) 21:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
OK, as I said, I have never done it while logged in, but in case there is some difference between doing it logged in and logged out, I have now sent a password reset email to my alternative account, JBW3, while logged in as JBW, and it worked fine. Special:PasswordReset has fields for username and password, but it says "Fill in one of the fields to receive a temporary password via email" (my emphasis) and it works with just the username. I have no idea why you didn't get my password reset, unless I misstyped your username or something. I will try once more, copying and pasting your username to be sure, and I'll be interested to know whether it works this time. JBW (talk) 23:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Can you reset the password while the IP is blocked, though? I thought that was also a problem (on top of how Special:PasswordReset doesn't work to send the email in the first place), so maybe I misunderstood. -- asilvering (talk) 03:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Apparently yes. At least once, and I am almost sure more than once, I have sent a password reset email in this situation, and then been thanked by the editor, who told me that it worked. JBW (talk) 10:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Aha! I've got it! The message that came up after I posted another request on Special:PasswordReset says "Only one password reset email will be sent per valid account every 24 hours in order to prevent abuse". JBW (talk) 23:31, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024).

Administrator changes

added
readded
removed

Interface administrator changes

added
readded Pppery

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

ARCA

Hi Ivan, per your comment on my now-archived RFPP discussion, I'm wondering which section of ARCA applies to my request. Are you saying that an ArbCom decision would need to be amended in order to remove a particular talk page restriction? 71.210.42.253 (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

No, the page protection is an enforcement action, and that's what would need to be modified. You want the second bullet point in the header box at the top, under "submitting a request", the one that's for an "arbitration enforcement action issued by an administrator". You'll likely be asked if you've attempted to resolve the problem with the issuing administrator as part of this process, so if you haven't you might want to do that first. El C is pretty reasonable. Ivanvector (/Edits) 21:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good, thank you. I have reached out to El C on their talk page so we'll see how that goes first. 71.210.42.253 (talk) 21:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Cases

It looks like your naming of Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/1+1=yes broke the bot's parsing, which is leaving a red linked "close" case in the set. Maybe rename to second oldest? Izno (talk) 19:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah it was fun trying to get the tags to work on that, and I didn't check what happened to the table. I'll rename it. Ivanvector (/Edits) 19:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

SPI Investigation

I am unsure of the exact rules surrounding SPI Investigation discussions, am I allowed to respond directly to another editor, or should my comment be contained to a different section? Should I even respond at all? Brocade River Poems (She/They) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/Lockerby_Composite_School

Hi:

The Lockerby Composite School Misplaced Pages page was recently edited to include controversial information about a murderer, a pipe bomb threat 25 years ago, and inappropriate teacher controversies. I am not affiliated with this high school, but noticed that other high schools in this school board (Rainbow District School Board) do not have such commentaries and the original write-up of this high school compared to other Rainbow District School Board currently on Misplaced Pages.

I went back to revert these controversial edits (by creating a Misplaced Pages account), but the person who added the controversial information, re-instated their edits. There was a note to say to contact/reach out to an Administrator on a list to review changes made. As such, I selected you to please review the controversial edits made.

Ultimately, I do not believe that the editor (Kline) used appropriate judgement to edit the high school Misplaced Pages page by writing several controversial information pieces. The editor (Kline) appears to be 'slandering' this particular high school.

Thank you for your considerations - I appreciate you looking at the page, history, and contributions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/Lockerby_Composite_School 208.96.69.226 (talk) 03:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) While I won’t mention your username here, please log into your account before making any edits, including leaving messages on talk pages.
It seems there’s an edit war between a more positive and more negative version of the article. Please keep in mind that Misplaced Pages has a policy of maintaining a neutral tone and giving information the proper amount of emphasis. So you’re partially correct—the page could benefit from more balance. My suggestion would be to address Kline directly, as he rightfully noted that the revert was unexplained at the time. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 07:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
I noticed an inconsistency in your messages about your connection to Lockerby Composite School. In this message, you mentioned you're not affiliated with the school, but in an earlier message, you said you're editing on behalf of the school. This raises concerns about a conflict of interest, which is likely why Diannaa issued a notice. If you are affiliated with the school in any way, it's the most ethical course of action to be honest about that. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 07:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi:
Thank you for replying pomptly - I appreciate it.
I will address the concerns with Kline directly.
In terms of affiliation, I do not have any stake, volunteer, or work for this institution, but did attend to the school for a brief time many decades ago.
Again, thank you for your time and I appreciate your input. 1958LCS (talk) 12:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge eighth anniversary

The Red Maple Leaf Award
This maple leaf is awarded to Ivanvector for writing the article Pituamkek National Park Reserve during the eighth year of The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 16:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Misplaced Pages proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Misplaced Pages talk:Notability (species) on a "Misplaced Pages proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Sucharit Bhakdi

Template:Editnotices/Page/Sucharit Bhakdi has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)