Misplaced Pages

User talk:Alison

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alison (talk | contribs) at 23:06, 5 August 2008 (ummm - check your mail). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:06, 5 August 2008 by Alison (talk | contribs) (ummm - check your mail)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archives
2004 Entire year  
2005 Jan • Jun Jul • Dec
2006 Jan • Jun Jul • Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan • Jun Jul • Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Entire year  
2013 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2014 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep • Dec  
2015 Entire year  
2016 Entire year  
2017 Entire year  
2018 Entire year  
2019 Entire year  
2020 Entire year  
2021 Entire year  
2022 Entire year  
2023 Entire year  
2024 Entire year  


Doireann

I think I've finally reached the end of the road as far as her article goes, and I am more than happy to proclaim it finished. Whenever you have a free few moments, you can start translating Doireann Ni Bhriain to Irish. :) Mike H. Fierce! 22:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Ignored again! :( :( :( Mike H. Fierce! 05:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not ignoring you, Mike :( I'm just crazy-busy right now and I'm just popping in here whenever I get a chance. I will work on the DNíB article in the morning!! - Alison 06:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Leaving you another note; saw you were on ga and wondered when you would have time to do the translation. Mike H. Fierce! 05:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Feel better

Best wishes from moi and the gang! El_C 06:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Since u have all the purdy pictures...

...here's a few questions:
  • I am starting to accumulate some GA and FA articles, and have seen folk line them up all nice an purdy along the top of their user page. I am not sure how to do this and would like to learn.
  • There are several Wikipedians who I admire, and some of them have apparently retired from WP. I know there is an image of a 'retired' stamp out there that I could shrink down and put by their name. Have you seen such?
  • I am unsure how to size pictures down, as they never seem to obey my input lowering their dpi. Could I trouble you to explain how to do this? I promise to pass on the learnin' once I possess it.  :) - Arcayne () 06:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I will, honest!! I'll get to it over the weekend sometime. Still at the day-job here and it's midnight. I'll get to it (and the above stuff) soon - promise! - Alison 06:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

"Age on Userpage Patrol"

Hey Allie (is it okay if I call you that?) I was randomly broswing userpages, saw this, and I think it's time to pull out oversight or whatever the hell you used on my userpage. Thanks! Shapiros10 My work 22:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Link redacted, don't want to call attention to it. Shapiros, I've put in a request via email for oversight of that page. Allie is a bit overwhelemed at the moment, but we'll get it taken care of :) SirFozzie (talk) 00:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't really see just saying one's age as a huge problem (birthdate a little bit, but even still). It's when you release age, real name, exact location (i.e. school, town), appearance details... any combination of that and is when it becomes an issue. –xenocidic (talk) 00:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I got to concur with xenocidic here. Oversight is for truly private information such as telephone #'s and addresses. Using Oversight for edits like this is a bit abusive. I understand the desire to protect, but wouldn't it be better to discuss it with the user in question? I'm afraid that you and SF might be caught up in the whole moral panic that Peter Damian is trying to cause. I find it pretty helpful since it reminds me to put in extra WP:AGF and avoid WP:NPA at all costs. --Dragon695 (talk) 23:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
my age was oversighted. So I think this should be too. Or does everyone just have something against me? Shapiros10 My work 00:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Your age was oversighted along with a whole bunch of other very specific information. I think Alison just took it all out in one fell swoop. It's the combination of several pieces of personal information (allowing someone to piece together a profile) that presents a problem. I'm sure she wouldn't mind you putting just your age back on there (though you should wait for her to weigh in on this). –xenocidic (talk) 00:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't know, as I saw his previous page as boarder-line. I still think that as long as address and telephone aren't given (along with other id numbers), it is generally fine. However, talking about your school and what's going on there isn't really needed on Misplaced Pages, unless you are giving a reason for being on wiki-break. What seems to be the norm for most editors is to create a short intro with name, age, city, state, country, e-mail/pm contact info (not really needed due to Special:EmailUser and IRC), and personal website. They usually then add more general things about themselves, such as likes, dislikes, reasons for editing, etc. Beyond that, you are really treading in myspace territory. Like xenocidic, I'll leave Alison to comment further. I do think that we must avoid paranoia and be careful not to be drawn into rash action due to excessive drama-mongering, though (*cough* tar pit threads *cough*). --Dragon695 (talk) 20:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The block on Counter-revolutionary

I'm afraid that I still cannot understand the reasoning behind this block. Please can you explain in more detail why the two accounts are 'likely' to be the same. Am I correct if I say that the only evidence linking the two is the result of a check-user enquiry? If that is so, that requires us to over-rule the empirical evidence, which Counter-revolutionary refers to, that the two accounts edit in different ways.

Please be assured that this isn't a criticism, it's just that I don't understand how this conclusion has been arrived at. Thank you for your help. Major Bonkers (talk) 13:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The block was made by User:WJBscribe. Perhaps you should ask him instead of Alison. Risker (talk) 00:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Very well, although it's a question about the check-user evidence, which was provided by Alison, rather than the reason for the block. Major Bonkers (talk) 07:51, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Based on my independent review of Counter-revolutionary's contributions and checkuser evidence, an indefinite block is warranted. While initially observe and defer until later made sense, the evidence of abuse of this account is now too strong to ignore, so I agree with the block. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
The technical evidence has shown that the account was  Likely to be User:Counter-revolutionary and this has been corroborated by a number of independent checkusers now. I have also discussed the matter with ArbCom and a number of Arbitrators have upheld the block. Unfortunately, the "edit in different ways", is exactly what good-hand/bad-hand accounts do and the circumstantial evidence tends to support the technical here, given the article he'd just edited - Alison 18:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for yours. I am in the process of replying at greater length on FloNight's Talk page. I point out that you haven't actually answered my question; what you've stated is that a number of independent checkusers have simply replicated the original result, just as anyone would have expected. I'm afraid that my response is still 'So what?'; frankly the preponderance of evidence, so far as I can see, is that these two accounts are not linked. Is there some reason why secret discussions are taking place on this? Is it really desirable, given the suspicions that it raises? Major Bonkers (talk) 13:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser evidence, per the privacy policy, must be discussed only among those who are privileged to view it, which does not include me or you, much less any passing reader of the encyclopedia or its mirrors. So yes, there absolutely is reason the discussion must not be in public. GRBerry 13:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
That may be correct, but it has nothing to do with the posts that I have made on this subject. Major Bonkers (talk) 13:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Major, you cannot actually make a determination whether the accounts are linked or not as you're not privy to all the details. It's that simple. The 'preponderance of evidence' is definitely not in their favour, whatever about the evidence that you may be aware of. Secret discussions are, of course, taking place - mostly between the Lauder person, Counter-rev, myself and the Arbitration Committee. A number of arbitrators have been involved for quite some time in all of this; FloNight being just one of them. The reason they're secret is that the data is a matter of privacy. Trust me, I'd dearly love to blab the technical evidence from February's checks all over the Wiki, especially from the 24th of January - it's irrefutable and would get me completely off the hook here. But I can't.
I can show you this, though:
  • This unblock request was made by Sussexman at 7:37am and this edit was made by Counter-revolutionary at 7:44am.
  • This edit to Sussexman's talk page was made by Chelsea Tory at 12:10pm, and this edit was made by Counter-rev less than a minute later.
  • All of the above edits were made from the exact same computer on the exact same IP address. Over that few days, this would happen again and again and again, swapping and changing within minutes of each other. Even Immanuel can't got a look-in at times.
This is just one tiny example. There are many, many more - some even relating to a certain UK university where a number of accounts shared a common gateway IP. See what I mean? - Alison 20:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
I see what you mean. Rockpocket 20:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
The independent checkuser that I did in April showed similar patterns to the one Alison describes. Another arbitrator reviewed account contributions on specific dates and saw obvious links WITHOUT checkuser evidence. These accounts have been looked at independently repeatedly and every time the same conclusion, these accounts are linked and have been used abusively. With each review the evidence of a link gets stronger. FloNight♥♥♥ 21:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I've finally arrived in Poland and I had hoped that this matter might have been resolved, at least to some extent, by now. It is quite right to say that I cannot make a determination as to whether the accounts are linked or not because I do not have the evidence; that is why I have asked you, FloNight, and WJBscribe, to explain it to me. Frankly, a week later, I'm none the wiser: WJBscribe's response is a fob-off, and FloNight's responses raise more questions than they answer; both have archived their discusions. Given that two editors, yourself and Thatcher, decided that the evidence was not strong enough to warrant a block (let alone the de facto ban that we are actually talking about), I still do not understand why the block has been imposed.

What I do have to go on is the public evidence, which you have provided. That consists of a single check-user report, which no-one has tagged as being more than 'likely', coupled with the circumstantial evidence of his 'contribution history'. Unfortunately, I draw entirely the opposite conclusions to you from the same evidence; I have kept a weather eye on Counter-revolutionary's contributions for two years or so, since the beginning of 'the Troubles' on Misplaced Pages, and what he writes in his defense is quite correct: he has no history of behaving abusively, even through 'sock-puppets'. Whilst I don't defend his playing silly buggers through sock-puppets, it is indisputable that the accounts that you have linked to him have behaved entirely differently to the vandal account.

Instead of dealing with the specific issue of the vandal account, which he was blocked for, the arguments are now ranging over various other accounts, including Isabela84, BScar23625, on the one hand, and David Lauder and Sussexman, on the other. The 'evidence' for widening the issue in this manner contradicts some of the previous evidence given for banning C-r initially: he is said to edit from a generic British Telecom IP address with no other users on it - widely reported as extremely easy to hack into, incidentally - whilst some of the other accounts relat to a certain UK university where a number of accounts shared a common gateway IP.

The more I look at this episode, the more disturbing I find it. It's based on loose forensic evidence which directly contradicts what we know of C-r's editing; any evidence supporting C-r's position is wished away. This is the same mind-set which assured itself that there were WMDs in Iraq and that the Guildford Four were guilty; you are persuading yourself, not me. I do not think that anyone could look objectively at the circumstances surrounding his blocking and say that C-r has been treated fairly.

Finally, if petitioning various others is intended to mean that C-r has been contacting me to lobby on his behalf, I'm afraid that's wrong. I don't link my e-mail address to my Misplaced Pages account: W. Frank's experience put me off that idea, and in any case, I have been driving across Europe for three days and I do not have the ability to pick up my e-mails from someone else's computer. Major Bonkers (talk) 10:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Major B, let me just update you. While I'm not a Checkuser myself, I can say this. Multiple Checkusers and ArbCom members, (FloNight, Thatcher, as well as Alison) have repeatedly pointed to an identifying feature amongst the accounts that made these accounts a match (or to be precise,  Likely if not quite the level of  Confirmed that the Lauder/Sussexman/C-r trio was matched earlier (where it was vote/log out one account/log in with other account/vote).
Again, I'm not a checkuser, so I don't have access to the "fingerprint" that clued them off to this, but for them to independently point out that there IS a fingerprint that convinced all of them separately that they were a match, says to me the level of strength involved is rather high.
As for the "Someone's impersonating C-r", I find that highly dubious, because while I do not know EVERYTHING that gets recorded for the checkuser to capture, I do happen to know it tracks some rather esoteric stuff, such as browser type, certain settings , etcetera (I learned a lot from Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Mantanmoreland. Talk about dry, mind you!). For someone to impersonate C-R, not only would they have to "hack" the same IP data range that C-r uses (and to the best of my knowledge, that's not publicly known), but they would have to install the same browser, with all the same tweaks that C-r uses to get it to match. THAT is the foresnic evidence that CheckUsers go on, not just the surface stuff.
I Appreciate your feeling that this needs to be investigated and open to the fullest, but I'm afraid we're at the stonewall here. Even if Flo, Thatcher, and Alison wanted to show us the gory details that led to MULTIPLE checkusers concurring that they're a match, their hands are tied by the Misplaced Pages privacy policy. At some point, you have to trust that there's no great conspiracy at work here, but that multiple people, from a variety of backgrounds and locations, have independently reviewed the evidence and found that these are a match. SirFozzie (talk) 09:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I hate to be blunt about this, Major, but you're not getting the technical evidence - it's that simple. I am forbidden from revealing it per the privacy policy. In the paragraph above that you've not acknowledged, I've come as close as I possibly can re. the Sussexman technical evidence, and I may have even overstepped it a bit then. BTW - where did I comment that I "decided that the evidence was not strong enough to warrant a block" - I can't seem to find that. Also, the decision behind this block lies with User:WJBscribe and the Arbitration Committee - Alison 11:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sheikh Ahmad Jami

hi there.I had created a wrong page many months ago about Sheiks Ahmad Jami and now i am going to repair the whole article.they have tagged a sppedy deletion on it.please help me.Bbadree (talk) 15:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit to CR talkpage

How do you interpret this? Avruch 16:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

That is useful for background, I think nobody has a clue who is who when it comes to the Sussexman sockfarm any more..... One Night In Hackney303 16:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Bob needs to be careful with the personalised comments, as he's already implicated in a lot of the shenanigans which have been going on here. ArbCom are already aware of his role in all this - Alison 17:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

93.107.68.59 / User:Gold_heart?

Re your block of 93.107.68.59 . This editor appears to have a good deal of overlap with User:Bardcom. Do you have an opinion? Also, if you could point me to something explaining the User:Gold_heart connection, I'd be grateful William M. Connolley (talk) 18:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Gold heart has admitted it on WikipediaReview this morning. See here (account required as it's "tarpitted") - Alison 19:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, the rotters won't accept gmail for some weird reason. GH has admitted what? Being the admin? I'm not questionning that. Being Bardcom? That would be of interest: he denies being the anon. Could you quote whats on WR? Or email it to me, if you don't want to pollute wiki with it William M. Connolley (talk) 19:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok, Gold heart is the anon editor, and is not Bardcom. Bardcom is Red X Unrelated to the Gold heart accounts Quote below from WR];
And Alison, you are targeting me again! Why don't you just ignore?

You would make a great police-person, or border-guard. Just obeying orders. Eh?

Read some Utilitarianism, not Rand!

You should be putting TharkumColl in his place. - Gold heart
- Alison 20:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that, which very helpfully clarifies things William M. Connolley (talk)
Looking for reasons to justify your block, after the fact, makes the block seem even more churlish. Ali, it would have been nice if you had responded and taken a closer look - but I understand why not. --Bardcom (talk) 21:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Bardcom - I'm on-and-off-line all day here. RL stuff is simply getting in the way, so I don't have time for Misplaced Pages. I'd like to state again for the record though that your account is Red X Unrelated to the IP address. It's just Gold heart trying to get people into trouble again. He did the same with Domer48 two weeks back. Sorry for not replying sooner - Alison 21:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Ali, I could do with a little help though, if you could advise. (or is it worth it?) If you could quickly review the "block" I was given. It's important to me - it was an abuse by the admin, and I very much feel that this is exactly the behaviour that Sarah777 refers to. --Bardcom (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I need about an hour, though, as I'm away right now (on my phone here). I'll check it over ASAP - Alison 21:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Ali. The ANI has been closed, but I'd appreciate an impartial look by you. --Bardcom (talk) 22:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Bard, you had your block reviewed with the unblock template, then you went to WP:ANI and had it reviewed there, now Alison too? How many reviews do you want? 1 != 2 21:28, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Bard, I just got back here. You've been unblocked and the thread is closed right now. I've taken a look over it and it appears that WMC blocked you for disruption and not for socking re. Gold heart's IP. Is this correct? I notice you both have the same "British Isles" POV, so there may have been a bit of confusion, too. Did I miss anything else here? - Alison 05:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Ali, yes you've missed a fair bit. Without me putting words or ideas in your head, just take a look at the circumstances surrounding the block. Note the following points:
  • William claimed he blocked me for vandalism. Which edit?
  • You claim it was for disruption. What sequence of events is regarded as disruption?
  • William was an involved editor. Should he have blocked?
  • I claim I did not receive a warning. I didn't acknowledge it, I didn't see it.
Thank you --Bardcom (talk) 11:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alison. 93.107.xxx is back but only in a minor way, so I haven't bothered block. But I'm assuming this is more trouble-making by GH William M. Connolley (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's Gold heart again, evading his ban. Checkuser certainly isn't required here as he's admitted to it himself and I can tell you that nobody else edits from that entire range right now. In fact, I rangeblocked it two months back and while he claimed I had "rangeblocked Ireland", we didn't have one single complaint the whole time - Alison 20:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I blocked that one (93.107.72.250) for 24h as it kept editing, but I suppose it will come back William M. Connolley (talk) 20:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Cool! If he comes back to cause more trouble, feel free to block the range /16, as there's nobody else in there. He's just constantly getting other editors like Domer48 and Bardcom into trouble - Alison 20:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

A talk page deleted for all the wrong reasons

Would you mind looking into the deletion of Talk:John Train Salon? I think there has been some foul play. --Terrawatt (talk) 05:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me get back to you on this one. It looks like the deletion was done okay, but could be problematic nonetheless. I'll restore it no problem if there's a reasonably good reason why it needs to be. ArbCom evidence? - Alison 20:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I know there's an ArbCom case, but I'm not a party to it. Let me ask this: doesn't there have to be a damn good reason provided to delete an article and talk page without the usual debate? Was there a suitable reason, that can stand up to scrutiny, provided in this case? May I ask what the reason was? --Terrawatt (talk) 13:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Prom3th3an

Hello there Alison, I see you gave back Prom3th3an the ACC flag. The initial removal was for the wrong reasons - he shouldn't have lost rollback or the flag because of what happened, he didn't abuse them. But the reason why I didn't give the ACC flag back is because current practice is to remove the flag if it isn't used within a month, so we can easily keep a monitor on who's doing what with the tool. A few admins are currently going through the logs and removing the flag from people that don't create accounts. Prom3th3an has created 6 accounts, the last one being at the start of June and he's never broken the limit set by the MediaWiki software, so per standard practive, he shouldn't have the tool. Please can you look into that for me? Ryan Postlethwaite 13:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm, it looks like his rollback was taken away again and I don't have a clue why. I'll go and find out. Ryan Postlethwaite 13:31, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
lol rollback was given back, however it's yours and Ryan's decision in regards to ACC. I know i asked for it back earlier but whatever makes you guys happy cause in light of new info don't really need it. Also, Im taking an Enforced wiki break untill the 22 or 23rd. Kudos   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Stalker, part 2 (or is it 3?)

It seems clear to me that this is the same guy, up to his tricks again. He is now a multiple block-evading vandal with no constructive edits. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 18:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Republicanjacobite started this entire mess by vandalizing articles that I edited with his opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.146.79.202 (talk) 18:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

e-mail

Hi Alison, you've got mail! Now back to the grind... ergh. <3 --Kyoko 00:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

From me as well. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Big Dunc and Domer38

Can you ask these editors to stop wikistalking me and undoing my edits? I am working up the Royalty articles on Lady Sarah Chatto and they keep reverting my edits. Thanks Astrotrain (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

That's because her sons were merged to the Lady Sarah Chatto article back in April per AfD, and Astrotrain keeps undoing the redirect. Astrotrain has been blocked 72 hours for disruptive editing on this and other articles, see WP:AE for more. Sorry Allie to have this dragged to your page :) SirFozzie (talk) 20:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
(make that a week, placed by another admin, for adding personal attacks into the bundle) SirFozzie (talk) 21:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Have fun with the house moving

When the moving van didn't show up, Alison knew just what to do

Hate that job - and I have only ever had kitchen and bedroom stuff (student)! Viridae 05:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Good luck with the move :). Hope you all settle in well in the new place. WJBscribe (talk) 05:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


The move didn't quite go according to plan




Hope your move goes well, Alison. And that your car looks better than this one. Risker (talk) 05:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Good luck! 15 cans of Stella303 09:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)



lol - thanks, guys. Nearly all done now. We've moved into the new place now since yesterday and I've just got to clean out the old place and move a bunch of boxes and stuff (as well as do a day's work!) Should be all sorted by next weekend as the new tenants are ready to move in - Alison 16:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Ahhhh!!

I just wanted to personally let you know I didn't appreciate your needless and condescending input on Lar's talk page. You had to have made more than one assumption to make such a statement, all of them wrong. But I do hope it made you feel better though. Beam 21:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

You know, you sound awfully familiar.. maybe it's just the message that's rehashed... SirFozzie (talk) 21:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
But I wasn't being condescending!! :o You never did take that advice about the tea, neither. Where I'm from, we drink more tea per capita than anywhere else so we know a thing or two ;) - Alison 21:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually you've been overtaken by Iraq now apparently. Must be all those British soldiers there pushing the average up....also this is the only reason Ireland were top for so long! 2 lines of K303 21:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
lol - her powers of persuasion are second-to-none. Thanks goodness she doesn't edit the wiki :) - Alison 22:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC) (Go on go on go on go on go ON!!)
Go on go on go on go on go ON? 2 lines of K303 22:14, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
*sigh* - dealt with :/ - Alison 22:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
I'll thank you on behalf of Bastun and co. You have mail by the way. 2 lines of K303 22:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Tea isn't really...well..my cup of tea. I prefer coffee and drugs. I mean coffee, just coffee.... Beam 14:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

talkpage fun

Left a note for ya. Maybe an OP, but it's worth a look? Kylu (talk) 03:55, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Nada, sorry :/ - Alison 04:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Another request for intervention at Views of Lyndon LaRouche

It has recently been pointed out on the talk page that the article contains a completely unsourced accusation that LaRouche is a holocaust denier. Under BLP this should be removed instantly. CBerlet claims there are sources but has yet to provide any. I have a feeling that he is eventually going to propose himself or his buddy DKing as a source, which I would oppose. An accusation of such gravity demands a mainstream source. I am asking you to take a look at this because the only admin around is Will Beback -- he knows the rules, but he overlooks them because of his alliance with Cberlet. --Terrawatt (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to look at this and the other issue later today. I need a bunch of contiguous time to deal with it, and that's something I've not got much of right now and am only popping into WP for a few mins at a time. Just to say that I'm not ignoring this but am rather busy in RL. Thanks for being patient - Alison 16:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:91.108.206.183

Requesting unblock - you once checkuserblocked this range. The Evil Spartan (talk) 18:26, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Declined. Looks like the vandal we are trying to stop, or a reasonable facsimile. Thatcher 18:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
I concur. See this rangeblock for further details - Alison 18:43, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Buon giorno

Hey Johnny. Gmail message 4u - Alison 22:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

While you're about

72.146.76.95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) *sigh* 2 lines of K303 16:50, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

 Sorted! - I owe you some emails, too :) - Alison 16:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you both for this... I keep hoping this fellow will find some other hobby, but, alas, no. Your efforts, though, are appreciated, and reaffirm my faith in what we (well, most of us) are doing here. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 17:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, and you do indeed! I wonder what Sussexman will say this time.... 2 lines of K303 20:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

A follow-up discussion

You were outspoken at the previous discussion; you may wish to comment. Durova 23:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Durova. Unlike the last time, I've endorsed. This is well overdue, I'm afraid - Alison 00:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Astrotrain

Support your requests, see / — Rlevse • Talk • 01:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Rlevse. I just want to hold off until Astrotrain gets back to us, or not. I'm willing to support a conditional unblock, so let's see what happens here - Alison 04:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
No problem. — Rlevse • Talk • 07:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

NisarKand

Is the 199 range NisarKand? Kingturtle (talk) 04:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep, and disclosed per policy here - Alison 04:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Email

Please check...

this user -- fits a known pattern pretty exactly. I took action -- let me know if I should reverse myself. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 18:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Gold heart

Hello Alison. Gold heart is shifting into high-gear, I believe. Would it be alright for editors to delete his posting on discussion pages (by his numerious IP accounts)? GoodDay (talk) 23:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Ping!

You might want to comment on the discussion here regarding you know who and a possible rangeblock. SirFozzie (talk) 23:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Dyinghappy

You confirmed that this account is linked to User:Internodeuser by checkuser. Dyinghappy is protesting the block, demanding to see evidence, et cetera. You marked this as "confirmed" -- is there any reason to doubt the conclusion? Dyinghappy has said he doesn't care about the privacy issue: I think, no need to reveal much, he might be trying to learn how to better evade next time. Mangojuice 14:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/SlimVirgin-Lar

A request for arbitration which you commented on has been opened, and is located here. Any evidence you wish to provide should be emailed directly to any sitting Arbitrator for circulation among the rest of the committee. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 14:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Gah

Bummer about the RMS unblock. There really is no path of redemption for banned users, especially unpopular ones. Seriously, how was Vintagekits any different, other than having friends? The glimmer of hope I gleaned from the discussion is that Robert can still prove himself by both restraining from editing Misplaced Pages for a while AND apologizing for his actions thus far. (Robert, I know you're reading this, and I hope you're taking this to heart.) So we talked about before that the community ban and the indef block are different. Does the discussion have any bearing on the community ban? ~Eliz81 18:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

RMS

Talk to him some more and consider advising him to ask ArbCom for a review with voluntary but enforceable restrictions, maybe in a month or two. I think you probably know him well enough by now to be better informed than the average denizen of AN whether he has really learned. Or maybe he's proxying his sock edits to troubles articles and pulling the wool over all our eyes... Guy (Help!) 18:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Vodafone

So, after I blocked the range, I received an email from a user with no contributions ever. Coincidence?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Ryulong, ummm - GH is the only anon editor on that range. There are a small few editors who are registered. Right now, I recommend you reduce that rangeblock to softblock only. Hardblock is going to have some fallout and it's not fair to the good editors that GH has to interfere with their editing here - Alison 23:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Woops :D—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Admin John

Ali, would you please ask John to recuse himself from the Irish/British dispute if he cannot even feign some semblance of neutrality? Thanks. Sarah777 (talk) 21:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Astro 2

When can we get input from Astro? How long do you need? More comments on that AE thread. It needs to be resolved. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rlevse. I've left a comment over on AE. It doesn't look like Astrotrain is interested in addressing my questions, sorry. I think maybe it's time to go for close. Sorry about the delay but I was holding out for an answer from him - Alison 05:42, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Meda-Stemma-New.jpg

Hello! Can you confirm the OTRS status of this image? Regards, Sdrtirs (talk) 01:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. The image is approved for use both on the Italian and English Wikipedias. Authorization was granted by the mayor of Meda for itwiki, and this was later extended to enwiki. However, no license whatsoever has been stipulated, so that's a bit problematic. I'm probably not the best person to deal with this as the ticket is in Italian but yes, it's been authorized and no, the license wasn't specified. I'm sure the latter can be fixed. For the original itwiki authorization, you can quote OTRS ticket #2007102510010866 - Alison 05:51, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

For future reference

Thank you for your speedy response to the deletion of the sensitive personal information. I originally looked at various oversight users to see if they were active and would be around. I noticed your wikibreak notice at the top and thought better. So, for future reference, I wanted to know if you normally watch AN/I, or if I should attempt to contact you via your talk page, among others, in such situations? Its one of those strange situations that I doubt many people have had enough experience with to know the proper decorum. :) Once again, thanks. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help :) In future, if you have something like that, you can email me here and I'll get it pretty quickly. If it's an oversight issue, I tend to deal with it straight away whether I'm on-wiki or not. Or you can send requests to the oversight team email address. Either is good! - Alison 05:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ping

Since I see you are active, I've got an outstanding RFCU that is rather complicated: Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/QualityControl3533. -MBK004 05:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok,  Done - Alison 06:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Wfgh66

Hi Alison, Wfgh66 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who was blocked for personal attacks, has been caught by this hardblock of an IP you made a little while ago. Do you have any thoughts about this? Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 18:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

He's been emailing me, too. See Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/IP check under 'Tile join' - Alison 18:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, saw it while I was waiting for you to answer, thanks Alison. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Our young friend...

Please see Image:001.jpeg, especially what links to it. While no license plates are visible, I continue to be concerned about our young friend's privacy.

All in all, I think his participation in Misplaced Pages is destructive to the project and possibly a danger to himself, but I don't really feel great about asking for a block (yet). Still, I just don't see any good coming from this... :/ --Jaysweet (talk) 19:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

someone revealed their IP

On and the diff by the same IP, my young adoptee accidentally revealed his IP, could you possibly get someone to oversight it please? Sticky Parkin 20:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi SP. It's already been done by someone else :) Next time can you possibly email either myself or the Oversight mailing list if it happens again. Not only will I get it quicker, the diffs won't appear on my somewhat busy talk page! Thanks again, and sorry for not being quick enough :) - Alison 07:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for checkuser assistance

I know you're busy, but please take a look at this if you can spare a few minutes. Permanent AN/I link. I'm convinced this is a sockpuppet. As nasty and disruptive as they come. Vicious personal attacks on two different users, accused multiple established users of vandalism, and made veiled threats. Please see if a check turns anything up. Thanks a lot for your time, Enigma 07:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

For ease of reference, the relevant users are Papercup47 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and Notepad47 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Both have been active recently, and are adamant/combative in fairly similar ways, plus the obvious similarity in usernames. Could well be linked in some way. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
They are  Confirmed as being the same. More to follow as I dig through the case. Thanks for letting me know, guys - Alison 07:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! Appreciate the timely response. Enigma 07:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok, also the following accounts, already blocked. All of these are coming from a corporate range and if vandalism persists, it could possibly be blocked with a very narrow /24 or /25 hard rangeblock.
  1. Lronhubbard234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  2. Abnodfashcefdarf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Alison 07:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

My stalker (again)

I know that this is tiresome, but I wanted to bring this message from my stalker to your attention. Is there such a user as NobodyLikesRepJacobite? Has said user been blocked? If so, then he is, obviously, evading the block---shocking!---and stalking my edits again. Can you please protect my user and talk pages again? I will be away for the next week to nine days, and would prefer they not be vandalized. Thank you very much. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The user does exist, but he's been blocked. I'll protect your user and talk pages, RepublicanJacobite. Oops, NawlinWiki beat me to it. GlassCobra 16:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Please check your mail

--it's important. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 20:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


Brian Peck

The sex offender BLP concern you assisted on at WP:ANI#Brian Peck just got a little more complex. The allegations of the offenses have been replaced, but are now cited. I think AfD is probably the easiest way to solve this, as the subject of the article is of questionable notability. Your thoughts? caknuck ° is back from his wikisiesta 18:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I have deleted the article. The only sourcing was with relation to the conviction, but there was no sourcing indicating that this person is notable. Misplaced Pages is not the place to house reports of non-notable sex offenders. There are plenty of other places to do that. Risker (talk) 19:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Risker :) - Alison 04:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Freudian slip?

You said one thing but meant your mother another. Thanks for the support with this anyway :) Sceptre 23:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Duh! Corrected :) - Alison 03:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Email

Ping. —Giggy 03:13, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Not wanting to be overshadowed, I have sent you one as well. Risker (talk) 05:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
But mine was cooler. —Giggy 07:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps. But mine was grammatically correct. Well, actually, no it wasn't, since I used some wiki-speak. Oh wait, that might make mine cooler. Risker (talk) 07:55, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

wikistalking or cooincidence

Seeing as how you blocked Sarah777's wikistalker recently, could you possible have a word with user:TharkunColl who is trying the same with me? Cooincidence? --HighKing (talk) 11:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, wich was successful with 73 support, 6 oppose, and 5 neutral.

I'll try to be as clear as I can in my communication and to clear some of the admin backlog on images.

If there is anything I can help you with, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page!

Cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Need checkuser input

Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Large_amount_of_Rangeblocks_by_Raul654 and comment. The Evil Spartan (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Review

Ali, as Fozzie has noticed I only discovered this site a few days ago when someone emailed me that I was a topic of conversation there. I've been reading a lot of stuff there but what caught my attention just now was a section that said "if you join here don't use your Wiki name" (too late for me!!). They said that folk were banned from Wiki for posting there. Is this true? I took the fact that you are there as meaning it was totally acceptable, but the site says that only Wiki Admins should use their Wiki names 'cos (I assume) they are there to defend Wiki and are part of the Wiki "club". So - in summary: can being a member of WR and/or making comments there get you into trouble here? Please reply to this - (you sometimes ignore my messages). Regards, Sarah777 (talk) 01:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, let me put it this way; it's a "bad site", per the failed policy WP:BADSITES. People tend to be vilified for posting there and, for that reason, many folks post under a pseudonym. I don't, nor do I have any issues with Misplaced Pages editors posting over there. That's my personal opinion. And yes, an admin was desysopped for being associated with the site and having made a statement there which was taken badly. My personal rule, as an admin/cu/oversighter is that I never discuss privacy-related matters off-Misplaced Pages. If someone causes problems for you as a result of your posting there, please let me know immediately. There is nothing inherently wrong with posting there but be careful, mm-kay? - Alison 04:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Enjoy the New House

Change the locks. <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 04:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Urgh! Don't worry - we've all the usual stuff done, and more. We take no chances - Alison 04:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Haha good. Who knows what angry vandals would come in and use your account when your gone. Hope all goes well :).<3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 05:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeesh! It's not the vandals that I have to be concerned about. Thanks for the good wishes, though :) - Alison 05:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Email

Ohai there Alison. Your about to be sent an email. :) Kthnxbai! -- RyRy (talk) 09:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

re: checkuser

Thanks for your help. Can I ask a few questions on the side? You mentioned that my request was malformed (which I suspected). What is the preferred format for such a request? Second, what is ACB in this context? Thanks.

By the way, in the past, a user with the identical pattern of vandalism was using 68.198.247.186 and 69.121.114.17. Rossami (talk) 05:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

"account creation blocked"... I should learn to read sometime. Rossami (talk) 06:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
lol - yep! That's it. As for formatting, you can take a look at some of the other cases. Using templates to list the accounts - esp {{checkuser|Example}} and bullet-listing the editors to be checked really, really helps clarify things. Also, including diffs like this, as evidence makes it a whole lot easier to read. Don't worry though - all the necessary data and stuff was there. Well, mostly! Either way, it gets easier the more you do and if you run into trouble, one of the awesome, hard-working clerks over there will likely help sort it all out. Thanks again - Alison 06:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointers. I do hope, however, not to get enough practice to ever be good at that process. That level of vandalism patrolling is not my preferred work on the project. Thank you for taking it on. Rossami (talk) 20:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You know what to do

Tiptoety 06:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

And  Confirmed. No rest, eh? You're even clerking on ANI now :) - Alison 06:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Commons imposter

I just discovered that there's a user on commons with my name, and although it only uploaded one image (since deleted) last year, I don't want an imposter account to exist at all. Since you're an admin on commons, could you block this user and leave a note that it's an imposter? Everyking (talk) 08:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. on Commons now. I'll see if I can find a Commons bureaucrat to rename it so you can claim your own account using SUL (you have activated SUL, right?) - Alison 09:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Tomorrow, though! It's 2am here - Alison 09:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
That isn't necessary; I'm not interested in participating on Commons. I just want it to be clear that that account isn't mine. Thanks for making the block. Everyking (talk) 09:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
My talk page is open if you need help with a rename (I'm a 'crat there). You might not really care about it now but it'll need to be done if you ever want to use an SUL. —Giggy 02:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

RfB Thank You spam

Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

What does this log entry mean?

With regard to a recent CU, what does "created automatically" mean (in place of the usual "New user account"). Is this individual now creating accounts elsewhere and coming here through SUL? Or is something else going on? If it is SUL, how should we manage - involve other project CUs? GRBerry 17:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Right, created automatically means someone created an SUL account on another wiki and then logged in here. You can use the SUL tool to find their home wiki. If you need the IP where the account was created checked or blocked, you need a local CU or a steward. Thatcher 17:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Sigh. It is a new tactic for this vandal. I see two other accounts, already blocked here, based on checking the two other wikis visible via the latest CU results and that tool. Hopefully they are covered in Alison's comment of "... and a bunch of other accounts, already blocked." GRBerry 17:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Check user request . . . User:House1090 again?

Alison: Can you or another person do a check user on User:MountCan as a possible sockpuppet of User:House1090? MountCan's edits at Chino Hills, California are very similar to those of House's sockpuppet User:Ie909: This one today compared to this one on November 7, 2007. The pattern of edits try to change things about the San Bernardino, California area. His edits seem fairly consistently involving that geographical area and have the same poor grammar, like his entry on my talk page here, just like House. Judging by the user page, he may have moved. I would appreciate your help. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 04:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Never mind . . . I now see you already did a check user for an alert User:Amerique on 9 July. Thanks anyway, Alanraywiki (talk) 23:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
That's  Confirmed and now blocked - see the ANI thread - Alison 04:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Alison, Gogo dodo blocked another apparent account of his, User:SBHouse1090, today: . Would a range block would be effective? Thanks for your time, Amerique 00:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
It's  Confirmed again, but it's way too early for anything like a rangeblock, IMO. The range he uses, BTW, is very busy - Alison 00:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alison,

Another suspect. Maybe he's trying to impress us with his sincerity as he edits with one sock while requesting to be unblocked with another: Neillty (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Thanks again, Amerique 02:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter (July 2008)

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter!
Issue XVI: July 23, 2008

Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! Updates about our latest happenings in the gayest corner of Misplaced Pages.

Project News
Homosexuality at Good Article Review!

An unfortunate effect of a group less active than in the past is that our articles lose integrity. This one is at Good Article Review for that reason. The talk page is quite active as a result. You have the opportunity to help. This is the corest of our core articles, and it needs some attention because it gets a lot of controversial input from many sides. If you can spare any time to edit the article, please do what you can.

Paragraph 175 is at Featured Article Review!

Soon after we were informed that Homosexuality is being scrutinized, we heard the same for one of our few Featured Articles. As a participant of the Featured Article process, I think this is actually a good thing. The standards for Featured Articles are getting higher with time. But as a member of this project, that means that a few of ours may be de-listed unless someone can swoop in and save them. This one has to do with the designation of homosexuality as a crime in Germany. Most of this article's sources are in German. If anyone has any particular skill in this area, please lend a hand!

Gay bathhouse is at Good Article Review! Wtf is going on?

I know you folks think I have much experience in a gay bathhouse, and I hate to disappoint you, but I actually do not. I seem like the sort of person who likes to stroll about in a towel. Shocking, no? It appears that Ashleyvh is single-handedly addressing all the problems with this article at its GA Review. While that's pretty impressive, it's also no doubt exhausting. Can anyone help out there?

Two GAs and a nominee!

In what I hope will counter the jolt of re-evaluating three Good or Featured Articles, José Sarria and Janet Jackson as gay icon passed as Good Articles, and Black Cat Bar (famous San Francisco oft-raided gay bar) is nominated, all by Otto4711. Rock on, man. You're a machine. Good luck with your nominations. What is it about women that make them gay icons? And are there lesbian icons that aren't lesbians? How about bisexual icons? Am I the only lesbian who reacts with soul-trembling fear at the sight of Angelina Jolie?

LGBT articles for deletion

New WP:LGBT studies member Pinkkeith has done this cool thing. If you click on that link, you'll see all the articles, categories, templates, and miscellany up for deletion. They're usually there because they're not considered to be not notable. That can be a relative concept, and sometimes it has to be argued that topics pertaining to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender issues are notable.


Completely naked women!

Ha! Made you look! Even the guys are looking. Gay pioneers Kay Lahusen's and Barbara Gittings' collection of photographs are up at the New York Public Library. Want to see images of the first Pride march in 1970 in New York City? How about Sylvia Rivera, drag queen extraordinaire, and Stonewall Riots participant? Or the contact sheet for The Ladder that showed full-face lesbians in print for the first time in US history? Ok I did mention naked women, and it's true. I found naked pictures of Barbara Gittings. But I scrolled through all of them and you'll have to as well. I'm not that mean, though. Here she is in the shower. How cute is she?

Tagging articles

It seems a recurring issue which articles to tag, and what to say about a topic that's tagged. Certainly, because an article falls under our scope doesn't necessarily make the person gay. Florida Governor Charlie Crist has been rumored to be gay in some newspaper accounts. Although we all know Fred Phelps is supergay, he won't admit it so instead he does the absolutely awfulest anti-gay things on the planet to deflect suspicion. NAMBLA, the red headed stepchild of the LGBT world, is tagged with an explanation we have yet to decide if we'll keep.


Member Spotlight: Benjiboi

In the lurking I do around and about on Wiki, I've long been astounded at the forbearance Benjiboi has for the utterly insane. Perhaps not so much, since the message on Benji's talk page notes frequent absences due to homophobia and transphobia. But it takes some kind of ... something that I don't have to face the constant anti-gay POV Benji does.

Benjiboi is a a bit of a WikiFaerie, a WikiGnome and also a member of the Article Rescue Squadron in addition to being a LGBT project member. A few of Benjiboi's favorite links for making the wikiverse more fab are:

  1. Manual of style, a must for anyone redecorating an article.
  2. Reliable sources in content review processes, a wonderful and fully linked essay about sourcing and why we need more and better sources.
  3. Google scholar, which also searches Google books, is a great help in finding reliable sources.
Member Spotlight: Becksguy

Becksguy didn’t start actively editing until May 2007. His most frequent tasks on Wiki include reverting vandalism to LGBT articles and creating new project-related articles. He comes from New York state, and to prove not all of us are teenagers (ha! I am so totally 15!) he's in his 60s and retired.

Becksguy considers his biggest triumph on Misplaced Pages so far was a DYK in December 2007 for the first-ever newspaper report on what became AIDS, in the New York Native. He's also helped save several project-related articles from deletion. His lowest moment here was getting involved in the discussion on a particular terrorism related article, thinking he could help calm the roiled waters on an extremely contentious subject with multiple edit wars and passionate editors.

Here at WP:LGBT, he creates and improves articles that present notable LGBT related subjects in a fair and balanced way, and tries to include more of the significant alternative sexuality related subjects without being an activist, and works to better source project-related articles.

On Misplaced Pages as a whole, he says, "I think we need to learn better what processes work for a massive collaborative project. Some of what worked well for a more informal small project doesn’t scale up well. Process is not as important when the participants know each other. We need to get more of the current members to be more active. If more members were energized, the project would be able to accomplish more. We should be, in effect, the smaller and included Misplaced Pages for LGBT related subjects. Overall, I wish we could focus more on content creation and improvement, and less on vandal fighting."

Fresh faces to brighten our pages

Welcome to all of our new members!: Balin42632003, supposedlydisposable, Axiomdragon, antcjone, Jamesgregg76, Taulapapa, Mushii, Pinkkeith, Gr8lyknow, EricV89, Varnent, Ged_UK, Richie wright1980, Auriel If you have a question about anything, drop your question on our talk page. We'll do our best to answer.

"A Supreme Court decision in 1958 reversed a 1956 ruling by a federal district court that U.S. postal authorities were correct in prohibiting the mailing of the Mattachine Society's ONE magazine. The lower court had ruled that ONE was not protected by the First Amendment because the magazine's contents 'may be vulgar, offensive, and indecent even though not regarded as such by a particular group ... because their own social or moral standards are far below those of the general community ... Social standards are fixed by and for the great majority and not by and for a hardened or weakened minority.'" - Michael Bronski in Pulp Friction, 2003

Thanks for being weak and having lowered standards with me. --Moni3 (talk) 00:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here.
If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.

OHAI

Hi Alison. You have an email from me. Steve Crossin (talk) (contact page) 03:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

More disruptive socks at RfA :(

linky. Enigma 03:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Now at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/JeanLatore. Enigma 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Guys, that  Confirmed - JeanLatore again - Alison 04:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks again. Will tag and someone will block shortly. :) Enigma 04:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you Alison. Unrelated, just noticed your user page: good luck with the move, and associated hassles: it's always a surprisingly big deal. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks :) It's taken nearly two weeks, all told. Final moveout day is tomorrow, though we've been in the new place over a week now. It's all go :) - Alison 05:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Radioinfoguy

Hi Alison, I've added one more to Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Radioinfoguy. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Just replied over there. The account is Red X Unrelated to your editor, but is still socking it up to the max - Alison 23:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh crap, I think I made a boo-boo. I blocked and tagged all of those accounts as Radioinfoguy and extended his block because of it... just to clarify one more time, they are not socks of Radioinfoguy? Tiptoety 07:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Although the IPs may not be related I think they are alternate (or proxy) accounts of User:Radioinfoguy one way or another, I'd like to hear what Alison thinks. Gwen Gale (talk) 07:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Not, I'm afraid. They're geographically quite different and it's not via proxy - Alison 07:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean via IP proxy, I meant human proxy, a meatpuppet. Gwen Gale (talk) 07:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, thanks Ali. I am going to leave Radioinfoguy indef blocked anyways. Cheers, Tiptoety 16:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I never thanked you for helping with the Richard Hell issue on Commons. Thank you, Alison. --David Shankbone 23:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help, David :) Welcome back to Misplaced Pages, BTW - Alison 00:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
It's good to be back, and it's good to see you here. You're this place's "Phaedriel" until she returns ;-) --David Shankbone 02:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Just let you know...

That I've stolen your monobook.css. It's a nice look. Maxim(talk) 00:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Cool :) Glad you like it - Alison 00:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

A break from your break please?

A merger proposal was made two months ago by someone that Celtic tribes of the British Isles be merged to List of Celtic tribes . The latter is a much more comprehensive article and includes most of the information in the former. There has been no objections to the proposal when I came across it a few days ago; I went to considerable effort to merge both without loosing any information. Almost immediately Tharkuncall, who is obviously watching my edits, reverted all I'd done without any rationale other than "I don't agree" I have defended this guy repeatedly but really we need an Admin warning to stop warring (ie demerging) on List of Celtic tribes . Sarah777 (talk) 01:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. I think you make a very fair point indeed, Sarah. Let's not have anyone go to war on this one - Alison 01:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks but still need help.

Thanks for your help with the IFA Championship and IFA Interim Intermediate League articles. Unfortunately, however, they are are still not quite right. I had rewritten both to update them, make them accurate and provide more information. What we have now is the old articles under the new names. We need the new articles under the new names. I can't find the updated version in the article history. A lot of genuine work that I have put into these appears to be lost, and the articles are now inaccurate. Can you help again? Mooretwin (talk) 22:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hey Alison I have something I need to talk to you about could we possibly talk in private? DHMichaels 23:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure. You can email me in confidence, if you like, or you can contact me on AIM or Skype. Just let me know - Alison 00:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Well.my e-mail is not accepted on Misplaced Pages (I never got the email) and I don't have AIM or anything like that what do you suggest? DHMichaels 00:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Ummm. Can you get an email address that works - even a temporary one - and post it here? I'm not going to give my phone numbers to anyone due to previous issues, but can let you have my Skype ID. This work okay? - Alison 00:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah totally I wouldn't een think of you giving your phone number out. It's Zac1194@gmail.com DHMichaels 13:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Just incase you were wondering the above^^ is my email. I would like to talk soon please :). DHMichaels 20:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Please don't ignore me I have something very important to talk to you about!! DHMichaels 23:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Ummm - check your mail - I just emailed you 30 mins ago! - Alison 23:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

email

It's reasonably important.Traditional unionist (talk) 20:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Replied! But you know that already :) - Alison 14:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedist and Depression

Hi, Alison. I saw a recent edit by an editor here who I was familiar with and his concerns that a vandal assuming my old name was actually me.

I would like to verify that, yes, I am Encyclopedist...as you can see my contributions have been productive on this account and I have absolutely no intention to vandalize.

As a further note, I believe clinical depression is a serious problem and one I would not dare make fun of, seeing as how I wonder if I have it at times too (yes I read your note about it and comment that "WikiStalkers like Encyclopedist love to make fun of...")

You are a brave, wonderful woman and I only wish you the best in your future...keep going to check yourself up, I personally support you...

Thanks for all of your contributions and work here...I am on my way to Georgetown U. in a few weeks so I don't have time to edit, let alone vandalize. I acted as "CIyde" mostly as a joke...after reading about your personally plight I feel really bad about that now.

I hope this account isn't blocked or banned, but these are the rules so I can see how this would happen. Thank you for bringing light to the fact that many have assumed my name in the attempt to vandalize while disparaging me... In just two years I have seen how stupid that really was.

Keep up the fight, and Go Hoyas!Ulises Heureaux (talk) 02:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

A Message From The Innocent Sockpuppet

Hi Alison, I think I may have messed up by posting another message at http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/GDD1000. I wasn't aware when I was writing the reply that the page was being closed. I thank you for your comments and intervention and ask that you read my reply at that page. I have grave concerns.The Thunderer (talk) 19:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

BigDunc has reopened this twice. I closed it the first time per User:Scarian's reasoning. I closed it the second time per your reasoning. I think the case should be closed, but BigDunc won't give up, apparently. Enigma 20:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
All I want is a definitive answer as to whether this editor should be treated as a new editor or as an obvious reincarnation of GDD1000, for the next step in dispute resolution. Also who is Scarian this user has not edited the sock report.BigDunc 21:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Complaint lodged at WP:WQA. I've posted the info here because I think it's relevant.The Thunderer (talk) 20:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries, Alison Balison! I hope you had a nice moving house transitional period! :-) Scarian 23:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks!

Thank you...

...for participating in my RfA, which closed with 119 in support, 4 neutral and 5 opposes. I'm honestly overwhelmed at the level of support that I've received from the community, and will do my best to maintain the trust placed in me. I 'm also thankful to those who opposed or expressed a neutral position, for providing clear rationales and superb feedback for me to build on. I've set up a space for you to provide any further feedback or thoughts, should you feel inclined to. However you voted, thanks for taking the time out to contribute to the process, it's much appreciated. Kind regards, Gazimoff 22:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Your comments

Mine and Domer's behaviour is disruptive? You seem to have it back to front, we are trying to prevent a disruptive editor from abusing this encyclopedia as will become clear in the next few days. Here is the situation as I see it;

A disruptive editor with a history of biased POV editing, adding of original research, use of unreliable sources, adding of copyvios and so on, was repeatedly warned about his conduct.

A "new" editor (or editors) suddenly appear with the same biased POV editing, adding of original research, use of unreliable sources, adding of copyvios and so on, and cause the same disruption.

Now it is clear to me that if the latter is in fact a new editor, then they need to be educated as to Misplaced Pages policy and fast. However if it is the same editor, then their treatment is very different would you not agree, hypothetically speaking?

Also It only took two admins and a checkuser to close it is incorrect. Enigmaman is not an admin, and he claims he closed it per User:Scarian's reasoning. Maybe I'm blind, but I see no reasoning or any post from Scarian at all prior to that talk page message in this history. So I think I'm more than justified in objecting to a non-admin initially closing it based on a non-existent reasoning, don't you? BigDunc 17:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Not particularly, actually. Enigmaman and I work on admin things together via MSN actually. I did the work for all the SSP cases. He merely closed them. So... yeah... thanks. Case closed... as they say. Scarian 22:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)