Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:25, 24 February 2008

This is Jehochman's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 7 days

Please leave a new message. I answer posts on the same page.

user:UkraineToday sockpuppets

Jehochman,

is there a faster way to block new socks? As soon as one is blocked, new ones sprout up, restoring the same edits. I see a new IP, 68.38.31.220, just a few minutes really after you blocked based on the 5th report.

Ironically, I was thinking about asking if there was any way to revisit the initial ban (Ukraine is politically divided down the middle. On the issues he tries to contribute on, here on WP, he is more or less alone, and clearly feels that one POV is getting pushed.) He might have helped balance articles - but his naming of RL ids and his ban-evading sock-use are too much. Jd2718 (talk) 16:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, just block them.  ;-) You can leave notes for me or any other administrator who is familiar if there are very obvious socks. Jehochman 16:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Were it so easy.  :) I am not an admin (nor should I become one). But in this case these are dirt obvious, and he creates them in flurries. I assume there will be 2, 3, 4 more, and then nothing until next weekend, or the weekend after. Here's another, newer: 80.97.94.178 . (didn't you range block in the 80.97s? ) Jd2718 (talk) 17:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Not yet. I am stepping out. Please take this to ANI for follow up. Jehochman 17:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll file at AN/I with the arrival of the next sock. Jd2718 (talk) 17:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Abusive sockpuppets

I have blocked both confirmed accounts from Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Smerdyakoff. I have raised the situation for further review at: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Sockpuppet situation needing more research. If you have further insight and/or evidence into the situation, it would be sincerely appreciated. Cheers! Vassyana (talk) 11:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Article probation

Given that you have been instrumental in setting probation for several articles, could you please take a look at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#Article_probation_-_proposal? Thank you. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Cera Products

Deletion of CeraSport and CeraLyte

Hello Jehochman

I have been out of the loop for a while. I would like to get clarity on this topic if possible. I left this message on the talk page of the person who did delete the said pages.

"I am not an employee of this company. I have been away since I added these articles. My first article about this company was approved as should its other aspects. See Talk:Cera_Products.Coke, Pepsi, Gatorade Powerade all have a presence. All their research is in-house reseach. What Cera Products offers has been academically proven in peer review journals and is used in the medical field. Gatorade and powerade have not and are not recomended by physicians. These articles are worthy of being published in Misplaced Pages because, the product has been scientifically proven and it is an evolution of high quality natural health products for rehydration."

Is there anything else I can do?

User_talk:jabaker75

Yes. Level with me. Your goal is to promote these products, isn't that right? This is apparent from the tone of your post. Jehochman 21:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, with the understanding that every thing on wiki is a promotion of information. Please see Risperidone. As such, cera products has been verified by FDA, and numerous academic, peer reviewed journals. Again please see Talk:Cera_Products. My current understanding is that as long as there is enough WP:RS then the material is substanciated. True?

With apprieciation for your work.

Jabaker75 (talk) 00:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Not true. These products should not have their own pages. They have not received sufficient independent coverage to warrant separate articles from the company. Debating this with me is not productive. I recommend you discuss this at Talk:Cera Products. I strongly urge you to disclose the apparent connection between yourself and the company. Perhaps you are a dealer, affiliate, PR agency employee, or other connected party. Jehochman 02:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Personal attacks on Talk:Homeopathy

Would you take a look at please? —Whig (talk) 22:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Josepha Marschke

Hi, did you actually place this request at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser? It doesn't look as if you did, and I was wondering if that was required? -- Roleplayer (talk) 03:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

A clerk will list it eventually. Jehochman 03:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

OK :-) -- Roleplayer (talk) 03:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Deadly nightshade

More of the endless homeopathy stuff. Perhaps you could suggest to some of the editors that undiscussed reverts are a bad thing? --Akhilleus (talk) 03:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Come to my page. . . I have a response. Thank you.TheDoctorIsIn (talk) 08:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Please note my comments on my talk page that I believed that I was following the guidelines of the conditions stated at Talk:Homeopathy/Article probation. Arion 3x3 (talk) 18:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I am respectfully requesting that you lift my 7 day ban on homeopathy related articles. I sincerely believed that I was following the letter and the spirit of the guideline at Talk:Homeopathy/Article probation: "Avoid making repeated comments about the subject of the article" ]. There did not appear to be any reasonable reason for me to repeat what had been discussed so extensively and repeatedly. ] I also did not revert, but made changes in accord with what appeared to be the consensus (after very long and extensive discusssion) at the article discussion page: I removed the inappropriate therapeutic claims for homeopathy, and simply returned 1 sentence (with reference) stating that the plant was used in the manufacture of homeopathic products. Arion 3x3 (talk) 00:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic amended

In light of continued disputes, remedy 4 adopted in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic is amended by adding:

"Additionally, any uninvolved administrator may impose a reasonable editing restriction (for example, 1RR) or page ban upon any editor who repeatedly engages in disruptive or uncivil editing of Free Republic or any closely related page. Prior to imposing such a ban or restriction, a warning should be given on the affected user's talkpage. All bans and restrictions shall be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Free Republic#Log of blocks and bans."

All editors, particularly including single purpose accounts and editors who have or may reasonably be perceived as having a conflict of interest, are strongly urged to edit Free Republic and related articles only in conformity with all Misplaced Pages policies and with this committee's prior decision. If the enhanced administrator authority provided in this ruling does not improve the situation on this article after 30 days, a request for a more formal Arbitration Committee review may be submitted.

For the Arbitration committee, Thatcher 16:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Frustration on Talk:Quackwatch

I was wondering if you could help mediate a dispute at Talk:Quackwatch#consensus or no consensus (also see related discussion at Talk:Quackwatch#These conclusions could apply to the pseudotemplate itself). Ronz appears to be deliberately stonewalling when I ask him to present his arguments for inclusion of the pseudotemplate. It's impossible to carry on an actual discussion about the content this way. I'm hoping that an outside, authoritative voice might help to break us out of this cycle. --Infophile 20:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

(Update) Well, things have gotten a bit better with some effort, so mediation might not be necessary at this point. Ronz's behavior still does leave a bit to desire here (almost as if he was trying to make us waste time), but hopefully we're at least past that. --Infophile 22:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

re User:Arion 3x3

Just a heads up, following the discussion at their talkpage the editor has posted a request to lift the article block at WP:AN. You may wish to put your side. LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

First of all, thank you for lifting the ban and changing it to 1RR per day per article. I had already made a commitment to do that one month ago on the Homeopathy talk page at the request of Jossi (he asked all to make that commitment, and only a few did). Secondly, you wrote to me: "Anybody who reverts you twice without discussion should receive the same remedy, so just let me know if it happens. Additionally, if you know who the problem editors are, please do tell and provide diffs of three to five egregious examples for each editor." Where do I submit this information to you? Arion 3x3 (talk) 03:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for archiving. . .

Hi Jehochman, thanks for closing this SSP case diff. I see that C1 looks to be on a wikibreak, hopefully s/he can recharge, I fear that WQA may have caused him/her too much stress over the long term. Anyways, thanks, R. Baley (talk) 23:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/LakeOswego

Thanks for your comment at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/LakeOswego. I didn't go straight to RFCU because I though that code D didn't apply if the outcome of the AfD wasn't affected. I guess I will, and they can accept or reject as necessary. — Scientizzle 03:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

The outcome was challenged at ANI, wasn't it? This could be brought to DRV. If there was real abuse and an appearance of sock puppetry, I think the checkusers will accept it. Jehochman 03:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a solid rationale. Thanks! — Scientizzle 03:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

A question

First, an answer: EVP is the idea that ghosts talk to the living by interfering with their televisions and radios. The answer of "interference" doesn't seem to occur to its adherents.

Second, a question: If I look over the arbitration decision on pseudoscience, I see a few different categories of pseudoscience. If the science in my favorite weeping sore, What the Bleep Do We Know, is described as pseudoscience in only a couple of sources, but "tosh", "balderdash", "quantum nonsense", "a tortured theory of quantum mechanics", "quantum mysticism", "a hoax", and "actively distorting science" in the remainder, do I get to treat it as Theories which, while purporting to be scientific, are obviously bogus, such as Time Cube, may be so labeled and categorized as such without more? Or Theories which have a following, such as astrology, but which are generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community may properly contain that information and may be categorized as pseudoscience? Or is there someplace on Misplaced Pages that this issue would get discussed that isn't a battleground?Kww (talk) 03:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Article talk page, and if that fails, WP:RFC. Jehochman 03:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll beat myself over the head with a hammer instead. At least I'll eventually stop, and I'll feel better when I do.Kww (talk) 03:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

well done on WP:AN#Unjustly banned from editing homeopathy related articles for 7 days

Well handled, I thought, a very reasonable way of handling it. And I liked what you said in the response. :-) delldot on a public computer talk 08:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation

Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Misplaced Pages:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Misplaced Pages:Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz 09:04, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Canvassing warning

You're too late! I already got all the canvassing in that I wanted to do before you warned me. Absidy (talk) 16:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)