Misplaced Pages

User talk:Thatcher: 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 11:47, 9 September 2008 editThatcher (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,287 editsm Changed protection level for "User talk:Thatcher": semi not needed for now ← Previous edit Revision as of 13:08, 9 September 2008 edit undoSynergy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers21,794 edits User_talk:Fatal!ty#Blocked: hmmNext edit →
Line 93: Line 93:
Oh geez. Why is it whenever I approve someone for rollback it seems to go wrong? (rolls eyes) ] ] 11:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC) Oh geez. Why is it whenever I approve someone for rollback it seems to go wrong? (rolls eyes) ] ] 11:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
:No problem, just be sure to ask me before you ever get engaged :) ] 11:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC) :No problem, just be sure to ask me before you ever get engaged :) ] 11:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
::I had been watching this users edits since he MfD'ed the wikipedia sandbox. Although I was surprised to see him after only one month of editing at . And he was soon followed by after only his third day. How do I ask that the !vote be discounted without my obvious bias? ''']'''] 13:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:08, 9 September 2008

Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    Thatcher is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.
    My admin actions
    ContribsBlocksProtectsDeletions
    Admin links
    NoticeboardIncidentsAIV3RR
    CSDProdAfD
    BacklogImagesRFUAutoblocks
    Articles
    GANCriteriaProcessContent RFC
    Checkuser and Oversight
    CheckuserOversight logSuppression log
    SUL toolUser rightsAll range blocks
    Tor checkGeolocateGeolocateHoney pot
    RBL lookupDNSstuffAbusive Hosts
    Wikistalk toolSingle IP lookup
    Other wikis
    QuoteMetaCommons
    Template links
    PiggybankTor listLinks
    Other
    TempSandbox1Sandbox3Sandbox4
    WikistalkWannabe Kate's toolPrefix index
    Contribs by pageWatchlist count
    Talk archives
    12345678910

    11121314151617181920

    21222324252627282930

    Puppet theater

    Hi, Thatcher.
    Here're two possible sockpuppets of PaxEquilibrium (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki).
    I've never had problems with these accounts, by few things drew my attention, that makes me believe that they might be his sockpuppets:
    - interest area (Montenegro, History of Montenegro)
    - very short edit period - this is the feature of SPA's and sleeper accounts
    - because of limitation of checkuser tools, it'd good to see if they are sleepers
    - these accounts had communication with PaxEquilibrium (and Pax with them)

    6 edits, 4 on 30 June 2008 (2 times on the talkpage of PaxEquilibrium and ) and 2 on 10 July 2008 Here he refers to Pax's opponent and In fact, Petar Montenegrin appears here as the opponent to Pax (Pax Equilibrium uporno širi prosrpsku propagandu, "Pax persistently spreads pro-Serbian propaganda"), as the one that disagrees with Pax. Was that done with the purpose of confusing the others? Out of 6 edits, he already found Pax?

    Even here. Pax talks with him on his talkpage (puppetmasters often do that: talk between puppet and master). Here appears favourite Pax's idea, "fully incorporated into a ], the newly acquired ]n land, then called Zeta" (saying for Montenegro as "Serbian land")".
    I don't want to etiquette these two accounts, I just want to remove any suspicion. Thanks for the attention, Kubura (talk) 14:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

    ...could be his puppet too. Pax was obssessed with one shaky reinterpretation of historical source De Administrando Imperio, which he used to conquer the articles like Pagania. It appeared that Pax puppets were talking to each other, in this case Pax said "wellcome" to User talk:I am Mario 45 minutes after his 1st appearance. An anon contributing (User:Adam Bishop asked him in the talk page: are you Mario?) to DAI article transformed to User:I am Mario. Pax did distinguish himself from this anon , in the same way as he did it elsewhere too, like here , as you can see he criticized his own sock edits. While his socks were wild and extreme POV pushers, Pax as master had image of an objective contributor. This account was created in May, there's possibility that Pax created it to support his claims in Pagania article, where he was opposing consensus reached by other users involved, as well as prolong an earlier anon actions in De Administrando Imperio. See Talk:De Administrando Imperio. Can you check User:I am Mario please. Zenanarh (talk) 07:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

    Excuse me if I bother you, but I do believe this is Pax, User:I am Mario's, User:Pasha011's and User:Progwa's edit dates are overlapping: 24/25 August, 1 Sept, 6 Sept. I'd really apreciate if you check this user, I'm not ghost hunter, just don't want to waste my time with some octopus. Thanks. Zenanarh (talk) 01:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

    You confirmed Pasha011 to be a sock of Pax, User:Progwa prolongs his game there . Zenanarh (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

    pgbb

    I was about to indef block this user myself. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

    Yuck. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

    Nocturnalsleeper

    This refers. What is FT2 up to now. I am checking out NS's edits but they seem great to me, and an editor we should definitely try to keep. User:Burrburr has a massive socklist, but these seem to be harmless (I am checking out now). What is the history on that one, please? Peter Damian (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

    OK I see this also refers. Who cares. He is doing good work. Peter Damian (talk) 18:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

    • I looked very briefly at the checkuser evidence on Nocturnalsleeper and found that he has been using multiple accounts, and using them to edit the same articles. He is technically unrelated to Burrburr (but maybe he just changed ISPs) but the behavior pattern is the same; lots of socks making apparently good edits. Now that someone has objected to Nocturnalsleeper and we have discovered the socks, we can't really pretend nothing is happening. As long as he has not been making disruptive or bad faith edits, I would support allowing him to continue to edit from a single account (and blocking all the others). Perhaps you could talk to him? But I can not support allowing him to use multiple overlapping accounts on the same articles, even if the content of the edits is good. Thatcher 18:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

    GG - new SSP case

    Hi Thatcher, I'm normally a bit sceptical about the GG false alarms we've had, but a small group of users has turned up that I would be most grateful if you could have a close look at whenever you have a few minutes. See Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Giovanni Giove (6th). Many thanks in advance, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 00:04, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

    Re: Allegations

    No problem. I was actually involved in trying to keep things calm, and apparently thats out of style now.--Tznkai (talk)

    Checkuser request

    Hi, I was wondering if you could do a check on Thewikiqediarollbacker (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki), as he is a new user, yet knows about rollback and arbcom, as you can see from his edits(I didn't bother linking the diffs as he only has 4. I know this isn't much evidence, but things just don't line up. Thank you for your time.— dαlus /Improve 07:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

    Please tell me you didn't forget about this, or did I do something wrong?— dαlus /Improve 11:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
    I've been very busy lately (see the note above). But there is definitely some funny business going on here. See User talk:Fatal!ty. Thatcher 11:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

    Really going now

    Nothing to do with that particular incident, just the whole thing. Thanks - I believe you were one of the good ones, but it is all too much. Scrambling password now. Peter Damian (talk) 20:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

    Sorry to see you go. Interesting aftermath. Thatcher 03:09, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

    Petition

    Hi Thatcher, I intend to petition Arbcom re Giano's civility parole, which appears to be unworkable in practice, ill thought out in theory, and ultimately a license for unnecessary wiki-drama that aren't any good for the project. I'm not sure this has been done before - I don't think the format of RFC is appropriate as this will be a petition of support, not a drama inducing dust up regarding Giano in general. Unless you think otherwise, I'll put it at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/petitions/Giano - although perhaps I should put it on a subpage connected to the case. Any thoughts? --Joopercoopers (talk) 09:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

    I don't really have any thoughts or recommendations. I'm not sure you can avoid drama, though, as there are bound to be people who oppose. The problem is that while special civility enforcement against this person is not working out, neither is it appropriate for editors to be calling each other idiots and making deliberately cutting and insulting remarks. Thatcher 10:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

    Email

    You can disregard my email. I ended up talking to smoddy. Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 21:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

    Checkuser

    Please see my question at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Nyannrunning. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 01:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

    Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/TylerTown101

    Even if the sweep came back negative, can you comment on whether the two named accounts are indeed the same person?Kww (talk) 02:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

    User_talk:Fatal!ty#Blocked

    Oh geez. Why is it whenever I approve someone for rollback it seems to go wrong? (rolls eyes) Neıl 11:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

    No problem, just be sure to ask me before you ever get engaged :) Thatcher 11:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
    I had been watching this users edits since he MfD'ed the wikipedia sandbox. Although I was surprised to see him after only one month of editing at my RfA. And he was soon followed by another after only his third day. How do I ask that the !vote be discounted without my obvious bias? Synergy 13:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)