Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jasper99 (talk | contribs) at 05:29, 21 March 2005 (Autofellatio). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"Pelican shit"

Hello, Gentlemen
It pains me to throw away a perfectly good username by posting here, but I cannot allow your inaccurate comments above to go unchallenged.

I am "pelican shit" guy, and yes, I am "bugger" guy, but I am not Willy on Wheels. Nor did I do the stunt mentioned above. I have no idea who appended "covered in..." to titles, though I saw it and was suitably impressed. My style is, as you first surmised, to Google bomb with repetitions of the phrase. So now you can ban yet another username. Oh, ye Pharisees, ye know not the FREQUENCY! How preach ye the Llangollwyen, yet believe it not? Yea, verily I say unto you, ye shall not inherit the Kingdom of the Llangollwyen unless ye bugger the pelican shit.

The above posted by Doombumper (talk · contribs)

You didn't throw away that perfectly good user name by posting here, you threw it away by your other vandalism with that username. Anyway I've unblocked again for now, if you want to try to explain what you're up to. -- Curps 02:28, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It sure looks blocked to me. No matter. The Frequency will not remain hidden, nor will it be silent, though walls of the finest stone be constructed to contain it within. I say, old chap, don't you see that your blocking is like pouring a cup of water into the ocean? You can certainly do it, but the ocean doesn't care very much, and eventually people who might need a cup of water will find it in short supply. Do be a sensible chap and stop filling up the blocklist. It's just bloody silly, don't you know.

Well, I blocked it and then unblocked it after I saw your post here. But if you prefer your current username of Dungbuster (talk · contribs) I'll block Doombumper again and you can use the current name.

Don't you see that your posting is like writing a line of text in the wet sand next to the ocean. If one wave doesn't wipe it away, a dozen others will. Why not make more useful and permanent contributions? -- Curps 03:45, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oh, my! Bravo, old chap! Your analogy is more appropriate than even you realize. You see, the writing washed away by the waves leaves traces, and that's exactly the point. The writing requires only to remain until noticed by the Great Google, and then the task is done, the traces graven in stone, fossilized for all to see and marvel over. It matters not in the slightest whether the traces lead to a concrete structure, but only that they exist, however briefly. I am encouraged, dear Curps. Perhaps it may yet be that the Pharisees will come to see the error of allowance; that is, of letting the pelicans alter the scriptures. For the end of a pelican is naught but pelican shit, and it falleth upon the mean and the noble alike. Wagwoody 06:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dear, oh dear. I just penned a perfectly rational response to Messr. Curps, and RickK saw fit to vandalize our discussion by removing the post in some manner that prevents the reversion of it. How, dear Rick, did you remove it from the history?

I had complimented Messr. Curps upon the brilliant analogy he added above. It is indeed appropriate, because the writing in the sand leaves traces. It requires only for the writing to remain until noticed by the Great Google, and then the task is done, the traces graven in stone, fossilized evermore for all to see. It matters not in the slightest whether the traces lead to a concrete structure, but only that they exist, however briefly. Perhaps the Pharisees will yet come to see the error of bending the scriptures upon their whim. For the end of a pelican is naught but pelican shit, and the same falleth upon the mean and the noble alike. Malcolm of Kent 06:46, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The traces aren't graven in stone. Stone is permanent; Google is a palimpsest. It seems like a Sisyphean endeavour. For what it's worth, I've checked Google to see if any of your contributions made it to some pages we missed (nothing personal), so the very act of temporarily accomplishing your goal would leave a trace leading to its nullification. You write well... write something that won't get removed. -- Curps 18:10, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sollog

This is the full version of the post regarding Sollog from Long term alerts, including posts deleted from that page:

Misplaced Pages is currently the target of vandalism by the followers of a self-styled god and resident of Philadelphia named Sollog who are unhappy with the Misplaced Pages article on their object of worship. They have set up a site called wikipediasucks.com (please don't link to it to boost their google rank) and on the forums there they are actively discussing ways to vandalize wikipedia. Targeted articles include God, Jesus, Devil, Jim Wales, George W. Bush, Britney Spears, Nostradamus, Adolf Hitler, Einstein, Sollog, Misplaced Pages, and articles linked on the main page. This is not an idle threat as they've already been actively vandalizing over the past week. Any admin seeing such vandalism from a Sollog puppet (who will usually make themselves known by invoking the name of Sollog or linking to http://wwwDOTwikipediasucksDOTcom or http://wwwDOT247newsDOTnet/2004/20041211-wikipediaDOTshtml) should - in my opinion - block them immediately without warning as they are persistent vandals who cannot be made into good wikipedians. See Talk:Sollog for information on their past behavior. Gamaliel 22:16, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

user:64.191.63.213 is a known anon open proxy which has been used by Sollog sockpuppets as well as others to vandalize wiki pages. Wyss 22:34, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In the past, Sollogites appear to have operated from Kinko's (e.g. 63.164.145.85, which is currently blocked); Starbucks using T-Mobile addresses (e.g. 208.54.95.129, also blocked at the moment); and anonymous proxies (e.g. 64.191.63.213, which belongs to http://www.surffreedom.com/ ). In addition to evidence from past behavior, a forum on the wikipediasucks.com website also encourages Sollog supporters to continue vandalism using those previously employed tactics, as well as public libraries, public wifi networks, and open proxies. Most of the attacks appear to have originated from Atlanta, Georgia and from northeastern Broward county in southern Florida, possibly Pompano Beach, Florida and/or Lighthouse Point, Florida. Sollogites share a similar writing style, using UPPER case for emphasis. The Sollog article has an interesting past, having been created by 65.34.173.202, vigorously defended by Sollogites during a vote for deletion which resulted in a consensus to keep, vandalized, protected, unprotected, and ultimately opposed by the user who created it, resulting in a streak of vandalism today. --MarkSweep 22:44, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Might I also suggest that we stop linking Sollog in our user pages? I'd rather Google didn't pick up on all the controversy...Mackensen (talk) 01:26, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sollog is repeatedly attacking both the article and the talk page through a variety of IP addresses, which I suspect are those of unsecured proxy servers. I suggest that sysops should block these proxies indefinitely, as permitted and encouraged by Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy. -- ChrisO 00:35, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Anyone who doesn't know how to spot open proxies might want to look over User:Mirv/Open proxies. —No-One Jones 00:44, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Frontpage was just replaced with a Sollog article. Suggest that more thorough action be taken. Report these actions to the ISPs? Sockatume 00:06, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Huh, it's gone now, and no trace in the revision history. It was the Sollog article with a yellow background. Anyone else catch it? Sockatume 00:08, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The article is currently under heavy attack from Sollog via open proxy servers around the world. Could fellow sysops please keep an eye on it and block the proxies as they appear? -- ChrisO 16:26, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The latest on the Sollog front (posted through an open proxy as usual): "his site has a list of over 100,000 proxies that they are passing out to fans to post anonymously here and they are giving out instructions on how to hit the busiest pages, you guys are in for a war, look at his paypal info almost 1000 buyers wiki is only 2400, dozens or hundreds of people using 100,000 proxies will crush this site if you ask me" (sic)

While Sollog/Ennis may not have 100,000 proxies at his disposal, he certainly has a lot which are now blocked. Please be aware that he is mounting revenge attacks on multiple Misplaced Pages articles, including those linked from the main page. -- ChrisO 23:41, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Isn't he almost certainly breaching the T&Cs of his ISP contract? Couldn't the Wikimedia Foundation therefore register an abuse complaint with his ISP? Given that they're interfering deliberately, in an organised, focussed manner with a website run at non-insignificant cost leave them open to some sort of legal action? Sockatume 01:29, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yes it likely would if you can find who is the cause. Basically what it takes to win a civil suit in the US is damages. Bandwidth, time, and other damages could be raised in this case. The next piece would be being able to prove that a given person or organization caused the damages. Check the pattern of edits to 'Sollog', that same text is repeatedly replacing the text on 'Sollog' and other pages. I have been blocking each one I see. They all seem to come from different netblocks, but I for one have a hard time believing there are that many people behind it. Mostly just one really determined person. In any case please block the IP addresses of those you see making similar edits. I don't see the value in range blocks, as the edits to the same article never seem to come from other IP's in the same range.- Taxman 23:30, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)

Autofellatio

I am a newbie and within a couple of hours of creating my account someone added the "autofellatio" redirect to my User Talk page. It looks like it has been deleted but for some reason there is still a link to it on my page. I am not easily shocked but that image is really disgusting, and has kind of spoiled my first impressions of this site. It seems strange that anyone at all can modify any page on this site, including my profile page. Surely there must be a better way to stop people vandalising the site? Maybe banning anonymous edits, or making it harder to create new accounts? --Jasper99 05:29, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)