Misplaced Pages

I told you to stop reverting my edits.

I'm the fucking king around here. Revert my edits again and I'll fucking sue, (Personal attack removed). --59.13.220.92 11:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

HAHA (Personal attack removed) I JUST GOT ME A NEW PROXY. I TOLD YOU YOU COULDN'T STOP ME. STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MY ARTICLES (DD-WRT, Sveasoft, WRT54G) AND (Personal attack removed). (Personal attack removed). --200.123.130.42 11:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

YOU JUST CAN'T STOP ME! (Last Measure removed) :) --67.86.57.116 12:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

lol-ocle

*monocle* :) Syrthiss 11:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It couldn't last...

My page and others have been hit by User:Irate again, under the unsubtle guises of User:GrahamPP, User:84.9.193.230, User:84.9.210.112 and User:87.75.131.146. I'm got an incredible amount of stuff on in real life at the moment, so can't keep a close eye on things - can these IP's be brought under the existing ban? Many thanks in advance for any help that you can give. Aquilina 11:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

All blocked. If he keeps coming back with new IPs I would recommend asking on WP:ANI for another rangeblock. --Sam Blanning 11:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I spotted you were about, and I needed somebody who knew the case history as it's a long one to explain each time he comes back! If the range block needs redoing or extending I'll go to AN/I though, and let Prodego and Jayjg know as they helped out last time. Thanks once more, Aquilina 12:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

AndrewBourke

Please look at the changes I've made to User:AndrewBourke. Hopefully the sockpuppet won't revert the changes before you read this message. --Tokachu 15:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

No objection here, though personally I would add the sockpuppet tags to the open proxies and add {{sockpuppeteer}} to User:AndrewBourke. It's usually fairly arbitrary whom you label the 'original', and labelling the username instead of the open proxy number makes tagging sockpuppets easier - it's easier to remember "1=AndrewBourke" instead of 1="49.94.69.365" - I made that IP up because, proving my point, there's no way I can remember what the IP actually was :-) --Sam Blanning 15:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Update: The "anonymous" vandal is at it again (as I imagine you know). He's in clear violation of the Misplaced Pages harassment policy, as shown by his edits here. Is an edit block on 62.20.102.128/25 possible? --Tokachu 17:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

He seems to be using open proxies with loads of different IPs from different ranges. I've just semi-protected Sveasoft and WRT54G from editing by new users. I'm also about to put a report on WP:ANI, if you think a range block will help you could add a request there - I don't know the technicals behind range blocks myself. --Sam Blanning 17:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

147.114.226.173

is a proxy server, blocking it to prevent User:ZoeCroydon from editing will cause other users to be blocked during their working day. (Perhaps this is a good thing).

Paul Tracy_|\talk 22:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Blocking work IPs, in my experience, causes much less collateral damage than school, university or library IPs - office workers have much less free time during the day and they aren't naturally attracted to Misplaced Pages as a research tool. The IPs have previous contributions that aren't related to LBC, but none since that campaign of vandalism and trolling began - and that's not because Croydon's been getting them blocked almost continuously. They were unblocked for many weeks while Clive Bull was full-protected and Croydon was limited to venting the occasional spleen on the talk page. Even so, there were no non-Croydon-related edits.

So far I'm not aware of anyone complaining of being blocked at the same time as ZoeCroydon. --Sam Blanning 22:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Haditha incident

other half of this conversation is at User talk:217.235.215.177
Please help me get Aiden to discuss the matter instead of throwing around template warnings. See Talk:Haditha_incident#Possible_Speculative_Reported_Statements. Also, see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#Haditha_incident. --217.235.215.177

Sock?

If it matters, I believe FruitsAndVegetables133 (talk · contribs) is now FreshFruitsRule (talk · contribs) Ardenn 19:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde 06:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Saladin1970 appeal

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Saladin1970 appeal. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Saladin1970 appeal/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Saladin1970 appeal/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 14:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Just a heads-up

Considering your mediation edit "removing a spurious accusation of vandalism from an uninvolved, anonymous party - sorry for delay, will give a full response later today".

I'd just like to point out this edit, which includes the same IP.

RandomP 16:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll ask it about him about it on his talk page and restore it if he confirms that it was him. Not that I particularly want to, as it's not a productive comment, but it will have to be dealt with instead of hidden. --Sam Blanning 16:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

ACME Auto Thanker

LoL. Did you make the ACME Auto Thanker or did someone else make it? It's really hilarious! G.He 00:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I did make it :-) --Sam Blanning 08:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Man, you ROCK!

Thanks a whale, dude! Now I can edit!

PS. I'm probably going to be a sysop someday. In fact, I'm nominating myself for RfA right now :)

User:Flameviper12/sig 15:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries

As I mentioned before, I'm running (or considering running) for sysop. THus, I have to push down my vandalism and move forward into a new age, one of reverts, admin-notifications, and helpfulness. You're an admin...I was prowling Recent Changes recently (to beef up my edits and to prove that I AM not just a useless crap), and I chose to hide logged-in yusers and only main namespace. I discovered something rather bothersome; IPs never bothered to summarize their edits. I can understand not pputting an edit summary on vandalism, but I don't get not summarizing anything. It isn't really that hard to add the summary "fix grammar" or "new section". So, I was wondering...could you notify people of that somehow? It's a lot easier to weed out vandals when it's obvious that they're vandals. Perhaps on the Main Page (if only ffor a few seconds)...? I understand that vandals would realize to make misleading summaries, but there could be a person who checks the summaried edits. Not it! Anyway...thanks for your help and consideration... Flame-viper12 19:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I think if edit summaries were advertised, you'd get as many vandals using them as regular editors. And vandal edits with misleading summaries are, in my view, more bothersome than good-faith edits with no edit summaries. But that's just my opinion - it might be worth making a suggestion on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals).

By the way, you need to subst your sig, not transclude it. See WP:SIG#Transclusion/template. Part of the reason is unnecessary server drain, but the biggest is that anyone could go to the page where your sig is and edit it to whatever they wanted (for the sake of WP:BEANS I won't mention any possibilities here). --Sam Blanning 20:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I want it transcluded. The reason is that I sometimes make a joke in my sig (e.g. Flameviper12 on Wheels! or Flameviper12 is Communism) and it looks a lot better if all my sigs are changed. Thus, if I decide to change my sig, all my signatures on all the talk pages I sign will be consistent. Thus, perfection. Flame-viper12 13:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

PS. And... {{User:Flameviper12/sig}} takes up a LOT less space than the entire thing, especiall if I make it complex. Flame-viper12 13:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

You could also easily find that every page you post a comment on suddenly becomes 500 full-width images of Image:Autofellatio_2.jpg. (I said I wasn't going to WP:BEANS, but apparently you don't appreciate how open to abuse transcluded sigs are. I have substed every one of your signatures on my own page just in case.) Every time you leave a message on someone's page, you leave a link to an extremely tempting target - especially if you were warning them about vandalism or something similarly confrontational. I strongly urge you to subst your sig. --Sam Blanning 13:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sam you are!

Netscott loved that little poem you shared with us re: censorship sham! Thanks for the day brightener. :-) Netscott 20:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Tekkin58 request for unblock

His IP address is 156.63.113.55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - Glen _C (Stollery) 18:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, good catch. --Sam Blanning 19:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

NP :) - Glen _C (Stollery) 19:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

If smaping is a blocvkable offense this should apply

(not the wikipdia edit but the e-mail campaign. It is not his first. In the past he e-malied admins to block me (several of them mailed me the e-mail) Zeq 20:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to take any action against him for off-wiki activities that I can't even confirm actually take place. Try the admins he emailed or WP:ANI. I have asked Homey to respond to allegations on his talk page instead of removing them. --Sam Blanning 20:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Response to Sam

Sam - check Moshe's talk page. I responded to him there prior to removing his offensive allegation from my page. Homey 21:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sam, here are the responses I posted to Moshe's page regarding his allegations. I did so prior to removing them from my page. Do you have a problem if I remove his personal attack from my page now?Homey 21:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

SmartCode Corp.

Hi Samuel, Regarding SmartCode Corp. - there are many articles about them and they Notable according to WP:CORP

RFID Journal (a crediable source in the industry):

http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/2296/ https://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/2295/1/2/ http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/2250/1/1/ http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/670/1/1/ http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/1869/1/1/

CNN http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/05/22/rfid.retail.ap/index.html

Information week http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=54201330

Network World http://www.networkworld.com/weblogs/applications/011968.html

DC Velocity http://www.dcvelocity.com/articles/rfidww/rfidww20060503/rfid_5centtags.cfm

RFID Gazzete: http://www.rfidgazette.org/2004/11/index.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SC Web (talk • contribs) .

The consensus at AfD was that this was not the case. If it seemed to me that the cleanup job had changed people's minds, I might have given less weight to those editors that argued for deletion before the cleanup. However, in this case several editors argued for deletion even after the cleanup, two of whom explictly showed that they had taken it into account (Savidan and Zaxem). There was a clear consensus for deletion and I had no reason to disregard it. --Sam Blanning 21:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

There were also the ones that have changed their vote after the Cleanup - one of them OnPatrol is acctually the one that put the advert tag and he had requested to Keep the page.

Since it's a Notable entry what is the problem to keep it? SC Web 22:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

At the end, the nominator carries no more weight than the other people who contributed to the discussion. To disregard the supermajority for deletion, I would need to believe that almost everyone who argued for deletion did not read the article after it was cleaned up, and if they had, they would have almost certainly changed their opinion. The editors who came in after the cleanup gave me no reason to believe that this was the case.

The consensus was that the company was not notable enough to merit an entry in an encyclopaedia. --Sam Blanning 22:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

for unblocking me! TorenC 23:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

NP. --Sam Blanning 23:08, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

AIV blocking

Thanks for responding to 196.xx.xx.xx; he's been warned before for inserting links to (presumably) his site (see for example, coming form a different host in the same subnet), so I reasoned that test4 would be appropriate. I hope that's in order. dewet|✉ 23:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. In that case I wouldn't even have bothered with a warning myself. --Sam Blanning 08:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Lithpiperpilot

Works now. Thank you Danl 19:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

NP. --Sam Blanning 19:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock

Thank you for unblocking 204.8.195.187, the school district's IP address. Now I'll be able to edit Misplaced Pages when I have access to a computer! The end of term is coming up anyways (around June 16), so after that you don't really have to worry about vandalism. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 22:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

NP. Ah, end of term... almost as much of a holiday for us as it is for the kids :-) --Sam Blanning 22:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Clever rebuttle on User_talk:WoodDaver. Props. --mboverload@ 23:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Much deeper than you thought --mboverload@ 23:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, seen it :-) --Sam Blanning 23:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

In fact, I would recommend leaving the troll alone at this point. --Sam Blanning 23:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it's all done now. This is the first time I've encountered somethign like this. Wow, Wikipedians are as freaky as the people I meet in real life! =D --mboverload@ 23:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, nice working with you. I'm on IRC alot and hope to see you in the future. --mboverload@ 23:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

transwiki - who does it?

Question about the slating procedure transwiki - who is responsible for doing it? Is it an admin thing, or should I do it (as I nominated it for AfD transwiki)? Thanks. Girolamo Savonarola 13:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

You can certainly do it. See m:Transwiki for instructions on the process. The only thing you can't do is delete the original page - to get that done, once you've moved the page to Wikibooks, add {{Db-transwiki}} to the original article at Misplaced Pages. --Sam Blanning 13:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

Thanks for your vote in overturning and undeleting my recently removed Heinen's article. I don't mean to repeat myself, but I just feel as if very few people have considered what I said fairly or carefully and I thank you for doing so. As a new Misplaced Pages user (we all have to start somewhere), I did not feel welcomed to the community and this was the reason for my anger (and therefore SHOUTING); I had put so much time into defending something that became somewhat precious to me and it was taken away quickly and unreasonably (something a bit confusing and stressful for a new Wiki user.) But anyways, in regard to the article itself, I left out quite a bit of information that I will be able to fit in correctly if I am given the time. I had some questions about copyrighted images and how to get copyright information/ get the right to use these images in my article, etc (which I can probably find in Misplaced Pages I guess), but it seems rather complicated. Any help would be great. Thank you again for your suppport. Bluebul1989 15:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

comment on Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Statement_by_User:Raphael1

You claim, that I recreated the Wikiethics proposal in my user space is wrong. I copied User:Rgulerdem/Wikiethics to User:Raphael1/Wikiethics before User:Rgulerdem/Wikiethics got removed. Raphael1 15:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

The second time something gets created, it's been recreated. I never said anything about the deletion of the version in Rgulerdem's space, only the deletion of the version in your space. --Sam Blanning 16:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Samuel Blanning, while your commentary is relative to Wikiethics is essentially true, the proxy behavior demonstrated by User:Raphael1 applies moreso to his creation of Misplaced Pages:OURS on behalf of the banned User:Rgulerdem. Netscott 17:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)