| Revision as of 07:27, 8 September 2006 view source213.42.2.22 (talk) →Banned in other forums← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 04:44, 23 August 2019 view source The Blade of the Northern Lights (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Oversighters, Administrators55,774 edits See edit summary for the main pageTag: Replaced |
| (70 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{NOINDEX}} |
|
== SProtected == |
|
|
|
{{historical}} |
|
|
|
|
I sprotected the page due to Tojo vandalism and distortion of information -- ] | ] 00:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Diabetes== |
|
|
GT sockpuppets making edits on Diabetes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Henna Pod removed a link I added with no explanation, a la Tojo , and also tried to do a similar thing to one of Profsnow's contributions on Ham Seok-heon . This is exactly what Rok Bura had tried to do previously suggesting a similar MO to Tojo . Rok Bura has been making all sorts of edits on diabetes mellitus, "supported" by john murphy and xemija. |
|
|
{{User|PaulWicks}} |
|
|
|
|
|
:While similar in style I think there is insufficient evidence to ban these three editors. The discussion has ended, and the chromium triumvirate has not received much support. ] | ] 21:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Surely something a checkuser could establish? --] 21:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Articles under attack== |
|
|
GT is currently using sockpuppets to revert (even minor) edits I have made on these articles. As I am not an admin I am unable to ban, and can only label them as such. I am requesting that admins with an interest in preventing vandalism block these accounts or run checkuser if they are not convinced I'm correct in labelling them as such.--] 21:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
* ] |
|
|
|
|
|
Whilst we're at it, why in the hell hasn't someone done a range block yet? I've got better things to do with my day...--] 21:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:I have blocked the entire Tiscali UK Limited range for one week. Hope this helps. This was also announced on ] -- ] | ] 23:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::I have undone the blocks per user request. See ] and ]. --] 13:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Okay, the Tiscali users on Chirs 73's talk page sort of have a point, but why do they feel anonymous editting to be such a necessity? And now we'll have GT back in force. How about talking, at least, to his ISP about this problem, and if they blow us off, well, at least we tried. --] 15:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::And as expected, my user page, the Parkinson's article, and who knows what else are currently being vandalized by General Tojo. ] and ], I'd like to hear you rationales and your proposals for alleviating this problem. --] 22:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::: You're actually saying that you didn't even think about contacting his ISP before putting a block on millions of Tiscali UK users? Tiscali aren't some tin pot outfit they're the 3rd biggest telecommunications service in Europe, give them an e-mail they won't bite. 14:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::Given uk laws Tiscali are likely to respond to complaints.] 15:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:::: Yo! Pay attention! a) I didn't put the block on; I'm just a lowly editor/user. 2) There was discussion and thinking of contacting them, but concern about what they would require before taking any action. To repeat myself, I'm looking for suggestions, not a scolding. This is a very tough problem and I gather unusual for a vandal/troll to be this persistent. Your help would be welcome; your Monday-morning quarterbacking is not so useful. --] 15:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::: part 5 is probably the part of interest.] 16:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::I can't offer help, there's nothing you can do regards this apart from contact Tiscali, my point is that discriminating against millions of UK users because of one person surely isn't right. I can't understand why you think blocking millions of people wouldn't be a problem, hence why the aggrieved tone from myself and others, I've just been accused of being this Tojo guy for standing my ground on Chris' talk page. 16:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ISP abuse report == |
|
|
|
|
|
] appears to be preparing an abuse report to Tiscali . Check the thread for further updates. I'm going to drop him/her a Talk page note offering assistance if needed. --] 05:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:it is largly in arbcoms hands now any in any case I'm going to be away for a week.] 10:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Some of those responses there are disgraceful. People on high horses thinking they are more important than anyone else. Do they actually research ISP's before banning them. For example - Blueyonder UK, is the brand name for the internet service provided by NTL:Telewest, in their Telewest franchise areas. Next year, NTL:Telewest will become Virgin Communications and both NTL and Telewest television, telephone and internet services will merge. Any blocking of this new ISP will deny access to every single person with a cable internet connection in the UK, as Virgin Communications is the sole owner of the cable network, bar one or two small towns. I'll be contacting Tiscali and advising them to go apesh*t. ] 10:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:These decisions were made after a long and painful process of having to deal with an abusive, wikistalking and sockpuppeting user. You're incorrect about cable internet - those have fixed IPs, while the range blocked is a Tiscali dialup range. |
|
|
:As was indicated when the 86.106 range was blocked: Tiscali will be unblocked once it has freed us from General Tojo. ] | ] 05:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::It's akin to terrorists releasing the hostages once the demands have been met. Look at what happened the last time that occured, it led to the new Isreal-Lebanon conflict. Whether its a fixed range or (correcting you here) the entire ADSL range for tiscali, blocking all the IP addresses of an ISP has the same effect and on that link someone did say they had experience of blocking the cable internet provider blueyonder (ntl:telewest). You havn't even tried e-mailing Tiscali which makes this a farce. Blackmailing ISP's isn't going to work and they'll encourage more users like myself to come on here complaining. ] 08:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::I have made this comment elsewhere, but I think it's important to I shall mention it here too: I found this morning that I am blocked from editing at home (where I have Tiscali) '''even when I was logged in'''. It was my understanding that IP blocks only block anonymous edits, so why are registered users also being blocked? It's ridiculous ] ] 09:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
(Tojo removed -- ] | ] 11:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Dear me, how old are you? Are you proud that your childishness has led to inconvenience for everyone else? Just grow up ] ] 11:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== URL Blacklisting == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi everyone, viartis.net has been added to the WikiMedia spam blacklist , but before p4.forumforfree.com can be added, all to it have to be removed. Are there any articles which Tojo's older forum is still a good idea to link to? -- <span style="border: 1px solid">]''']'''</span> 15:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:On second thought I don't think we can safely blacklist p4.forumforfree.com since Tojo will probably create a new forum on that site and may get assigned p1,p2,p3 etc. instead which may cause too much collateral if we try to blacklist them as well. There's currently 33 links to right now. Comments? -- <span style="border: 1px solid">]''']'''</span> 16:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::: I think as a starting point, blacklisting p4.forumforfree.com may suffice for now. I guess if he goes to p1, etc. we should cross that bridge then. ] 20:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: So in other words you're supporting the blacklisting of the entire forumforfree.com domain (through no fault of their own) because of General Tojo? It's bit too similiar to the Tiscali block we had earlier for comfort in my honest opinion. But then again, ] does frown upon posting links to non-] notable forums. I'll raise the issue with the administrator's noticeboard tomorrow. -- <span style="border: 1px solid">]''']'''</span> 20:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::My take on Bridgeman's sites is that it is a literature review with an end to support a particular point of view. Nothing unusual in that; you see people doing that in the peer-reviewed literature fairly often. They usually do more in the way of critiquing than Bridgeman does; his sites are pretty much cut-and-paste. The citations themselves are okay, but what's bothersome is Bridgeman's bombast about the authoritativeness and exhaustiveness of his site. That would be misleading to a reader without research background or unfamiliar with the field. --] 16:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::So do you think viartis.net should continue to be blacklisted? -- <span style="border: 1px solid">]''']'''</span> 16:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::Yes, I do - it's nothing unique and is indeed a slanted presentation. --] 16:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I've spotted General Tojo trying to sockpuppet the linkspam team. ] -- <span style="border: 1px solid">]''']'''</span> 09:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Banned in other forums == |
|
|
|
|
|
This recent discussion on Brain Talk 2 communities is worth looking at. He has had trouble getting along in other online communities! ] 01:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
'''Try getting the facts right Wicks. I was banned from two forums. On BrainTalk I was banned for politely proving somebody wrong. The Moderator responsible on BrainTalk has been shown to be particularly malicious and intolerant and is the subject of widespread complaints for banning just about everyone without reason. You of course (deliberately) forgot to mention that because it proves that I was not the cause. Another was for merely adding a web site to HealingWell that contained no advertising. They are particularly intolerant as they don't allow any web sites at all. Here on Wickedpedia it was solely for having a Japanese username. Intolerance and abuse of power is rife amongst Forum administrators. Many of them will ban anyone that merely diosagrees with them. Here on Wickedpedia, some abuse power or like you try to make use of their abuses in order to get somebody out of the way so that they can more readily add the useless crap that they think is good information.''' |
|
