Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sarah (talk | contribs) at 01:05, 29 November 2008 (→Kogan Creek power Station Edit by phanly / dinghy: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Werdnabot

Misplaced Pages ads	file info – #46

Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Another Gerald Gonzalez sockpuppet

Hi! I have added User:Wynchard Bloom to the list of suspected sock puppets of Gerald Gonzalez. I have notice similarities in the two accounts:

• Both claim to be "cousins" of Angel Locsin.
• Both post images of Angel Locsin with questionable licenses on Commons.
• Both harass other Wikipedians, including myself.

I do hope you could check it out if my hunch is true. Thanks! Starczamora (talk) 10:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but Starczamora (talk, how many times i told you that I'm a sock puppet of that user. Even how many admins you tell about this, still they will not believe on you because im not what you think. - Wynchard Bloom _{My work} 10:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me but Its really just normal to improved many articles including Filipino related articles including actors, film, tv series ect. About Angel Locsin, well she's famous and many loves her, well theres no doubt that many wikipedians are interested to make her article good, but only you is against her, well i dont care. If my works are the same or related to your boyfriend, i mean to a sock you suspect that its me, well i dont really dont know about that. It just only happened because i'm a celebrity fanatic who wants to edit showbiz related articles. And dont tell to everybody that my uploaded images were copybio because its really my own work and you have no right to say it because you have no proff. Excuse me Starczamora but i never harassed you? huh! And I'm not that wikipedian to harrased to a fanboy and a desperate wikipedian who hate my cousin, Angel Locsin too much. I've mensioned that Im a cousin of Locsin which is true and why are you complaining, are you only just insecure or envious with me? I also put sock tag on your userpage because you deserve it, you almost put sock tags 7 times on my userpage. Because you're blaming me as a sock which is not true. And last I'm not totally immature, im just immature to the animal i mean person who's most immature wikipedian. Ive ever known. Wynchard Bloom _{My work} 01:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

See also Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Starczamora--Tikiwont (talk) 10:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Starczamora, I concur that account is a very obvious sockpuppet of Gonzalez. I was going to ask User:NrDg for a second opinion as he/she has dealt with his socks more recently than I have. But once I opened his contribs in a browser window next to the contribs of a couple of random Gonzalez socks it was so bleeding obvious it was the same person. So he is now blocked. Sarah 16:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Sarah, go ahead and compile that list of diffs, and post them straight on Wynchard Bloom's talk page. It doesn't need to be more than 3-4 from each account for comparison's sake, but it would REALLY help to have the evidence directly in front of everybody. Thanks a bunch, and Toodles! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, the CU has been confirmed. I was willing to compile evidence if it had been necessary but I was very reluctant to post it on-site because he is currently very easy to spot for anyone who compares behaviour and I don't want to educate him on how to become better at socking and thus become harder to identify. Sarah 05:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, good deal on the CU. I certainly understand not wanting to serve this guy a plate of beans. Good call. Anyoo, matter closed. Later. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

User:I Love Philippines

OK, so while browsing my watchlist, I saw something peculiar in one of the pages that I'm watching; the user seems to be quite suspicious, based on his user page (similar to Wynchard Bloom's) which leads to the conclusion that he's Gerald. Can you like give him the stick? Blake Gripling (talk) 07:52, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for that. I'll have a look into it now and maybe add it to the checkuser request. Cheers, Sarah 08:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree, that's either Gerald or a very good impersonator but another admin has already blocked it. If he does what he has done in the past, he will just keep creating socks so if you notice more Gerald-looking accounts on your travels, it might be worth adding them to the checkuser request. Sarah 08:28, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

See also the list of further socks on the talk page of that account - . Sarah 08:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Yep, seen 'em. Blake Gripling (talk) 08:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Page Protect

There is an ongoing editwar on List of television stations in North America by media market. It is currently on request for page protection, would you mind pushing that through please? *begs* - NeutralHomer • Talk • November 22, 2008 @ 08:41

Thank You...NeutralHomer • Talk • November 22, 2008 @ 08:52

No worries, but please note that I only did it because you begged! LOL I made it indefinite because it's been protected twice recently over the same dispute it seems, but I will try to keep an eye on it and remove the protection once it looks like things have calmed down. Cheers, Sarah 08:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Land Down Under (2008 film)

OK, so you deleted it, since it was made by a banned user. The movie is in fact confirmed (although I'm not really a fan of Angel Locsin) and to be shown maybe in 2009. Protecting it from recreation might work, but it would mean collateral damage as good-faith users might not be able to edit it again. Any thoughts on this? Blake Gripling (talk) 09:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm trying to be very careful about what I revert or delete but I feel we need to remove at least some to try to get the message across that what he's doing isn't acceptable and that he's wasting his time. So I have left a few articles that otherwise looked okay. This film seemed kind of borderline to me but I would provide a copy of it via email if a non-sock wanted to use it to write a new article. Does the film meet the notability guidelines for films? Misplaced Pages:Notability (films). If not, then it might be best to protect from recreation for the time being otherwise it's probably best to leave it unprotected so a non-sock can write a new page. Sarah 09:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, just to tell you: You're right about deleting it; there's a similar page. But you can still keep the old version. Blake Gripling (talk) 09:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yes, sorry about that. I was confused and I thought you were asking me about another article that I deleted. Yeah, that "Land Down Under (2008 film)" that I deleted was just a redirect. It's pretty harmless but it also seems useless because I can't imagine anyone ever typing "Land Down Under (2008 film)" into the search feature. They would type "Land Down Under" (or possibly "Land Down Under film") which would take them to the redirect page which then links to the film's article. Sarah 09:49, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Wynchard Bloom

Hi Sarah

I am writing to you about Wynchard Bloom and how he has been a big nuisance in my Misplaced Pages history which all have basically started last week. I was banned for 4-5 days because of his false assumptions and silly complaints that he had filed against me. You could also view my talk page (if you haven't already) to further enhance your idea of the situation and how he has been depriving all of us including the Administrators from the truth. My main concern now, which has been the reason why i got into wikipedia, is several Filipino celebrity articles in which (in my opinion) he has been vandalizing although according to him, he has been contributing. One of the main celebrities that i have been justifying is Sam Concepcion and the article on this person has been severely affected by Wynchard's edits. I don't see any positives as to how he has improved his article and indeed has depleted the article from useful information. I am currently consulting Master Of puppets (administrator) on why should his revision be reverted back to the original however have been put on hold and therefore i am consulting you for your opinion. My edits (the one im trying to justify which was the original one) is said to be "questionably NPOV" I have reviewed your history and have seen that you are aware of Wynchard's edits and you are reverting his edit just like on Jay-R Siaboc. I have raised a suggestion to bring back the original edit however, i have been denied of this and have been told that i should just work from Wynchard's edits. I just don't see how any of his contributions could still be valid and i don't also think he'll have a strong valid reason regarding his concern on that article. Please read my talk page as i have raised lots of issues there in regards to Wynchard as i couldn't make other comments elsewhere except my page due to all the false accusations he has filed against me. I also want to thank you for your investigation against Wynchard and how you have proved who really is guilty. Anyway please investigate on this matter about reverting Wynchard's edits on Sam Concepcion's Page. Thank you. You are my hero on wikipedia for catching Wynchard's wrong-doings and blocking him.  :) Slemcal (talk) 01:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Slemcal. I removed some of Gerald's edits per the banning policy - Misplaced Pages:BAN#Enforcement by reverting edits. I looked at the Sam Concepcion article that you mention but I'm not comfortable restoring your version because I don't think language like "Multimedia Heartthrob", "has steadily risen towards stardom" and "young and famous" is NPOV or encyclopedic language. Also, it lists out unsourced information about not notable minors and other relatives which I don't think is appropriate and WP:BLP has a specific presumption in favour of privacy especially for not notable people. I feel that a lot of that material about award nominations and percentage of votes is unnecessary (and all unsourced). So I'm not going to restore that material and I don't think you should either. When you add material to biographies, it's really, really important that you cite sources to comply with BLP and verifiability policies. Sarah 06:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, if you restore it back to before wynchard blooms edit, and add an {{POV-check}} tag, hopefully that it will induce its major contributors to re-edit the page and reconsider. It wasn't really me who gathered and added those information on the page. Furthermore, those people are not really regular users and only want to contribute to that page so more likely they won't be aware of those rules. Would it be possible though, if you restore that revision and perhaps give us time to edit the page so that it will satisfy, Misplaced Pages's criteria. I'll try and get it across to that page's major contributor to follow the rules. if we compare his revision to the old one, its just degrading to see that kind of set back, even though i wasn't even the one who put all those information up. however, i will contribute and try meet wikipedia's standard, although i was hoping to work back from the original. would you be able to consider that? thanks Slemcal (talk) 07:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't revert it back because I believe some of the material in "your" version, especially the personal information about not notable relatives is a violation of the policy on Biographies of living people. I'm in favour of removing banned editor's edit but not when I think doing so would violate BLP or degrade the quality of articles. I think it would be better if you just started working on the article as it is now, leaving out information about not notable relatives and being careful to use neutral language and citing verifiable, reliable sources for any information you add to it. Sarah 07:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

ok then, so would it be possible for me to edit the page even with semi-protection? i just don't want to be blocked again. thanks Slemcal (talk) 07:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

in regards to deleting, and editing, Would i still be able to do that? i just want your confirmation as i don't to be banned later on. thanksSlemcal (talk) 07:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

with the picture that has been uploaded, i thought you asked for the picture to be deleted so i asked if i can delete however i have checked it and that uploader stated that it is self made. "I don't believe the editor who added it really owns the copyright. It looks like a professional image." it could be perhaps the photographer is the uploader and from the pic and there is no water marks to prove it is copyrighted. So yeah, what do you think? Slemcal (talk) 07:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

In regards to this, http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Samster101#Image:SamConcepcion-2.jpg, perhaps this user is the photographer and at the same time being quite careless because they are probably not familiar with the rules and is only there for the sole reason of contributing to Sam Concepcion's Page. Plus, the person probably doesn't go on that much and does not know of the rules in Misplaced Pages. In fact, their picture could still be legible, as if it was a professional picture, and i was the photographer, i wouldn't really let any one have the original without Watermarks to identify its copyrighted. Nor would i let people have copies, and so perhaps the person who has probably have been accused of so many things is just someone clueless like me. If i was a photographer and had a job, i wouldn't be spending my time on wikipedia reviewing all the rules. And now a days, with the technology we have, we could actually get a picture with that kind of finish. It does really add to wikipedia's reputation having that kind of picture as if we put normal fan pics, taken by fans, it'll end up in a "Fannish" finnish and look more like a blog regardless of whether the information are NPOV. :) just in case this will make you change your mind. Slemcal (talk) 08:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

thanks for explaining to me why you don't allow these images and just like how the saying goes, we do learn something new everyday :) regardless of your decision, i would just like to thank you for everything especially with what you have done to Gerald/wynchard. "I hope you don't have any further problems from Gerald and his socks", i hope so too and im pretty sure as long as you're around, he won't be much of a problem anymore. Thanks! Have a good night Slemcal (talk) 09:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you please provide me with a copy of my deleted article Kairos Foundation

I have no idea why it was removed by Jimfbleak, the log said it was 'blatant advertising' but I am in no way associated with them, I am actually personally quite hostile to them and wrote some criticisms of them, I'm really angry and dissapointed it was removed, and I can't edit it according to any guidance as I don't have a copy of the original article I wrote, as I had no idea this could happen. Thanks. SteveDavey (talk) 13:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Sent via email. Sarah 03:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Current AN/I

Hi Sarah, there is an ANI thread currently on Simulation12 in case you are interested. Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 03:54, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks, I'll have a look in a minute. I've already blocked her. Initially I was just going to give her a final warning but then I thought there's no point in dragging this out further. And she's had plenty of warnings and opportunities to change her behaviour but continues being a pest. So I went ahead and blocked her. Sarah 04:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Your name has been inscribed for all eternity on my List of Friends and Benefactors. (Well, if I had one, it would be.) Seriously, I canNOT thank you enough for making that move. Had I not been so "involved", I would have done it myself a few hours ago, so I am THRILLED that you took care of the block. I hereby award you all the pictures of cookies, cute kitty-cats, bunnies, barnstars, and smiles that Misplaced Pages has to offer. GJC 06:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Twice as much thank-you then Gladys! For 3 months she pested me and when i told her the truth about her editing she insulted me and Gladys on her page, it was like she was some cyber-stalker. Elbutler (talk) 12:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure, people. I must say I feel a bit bad that I didn't do this earlier. A few weeks back I put her pages on my watchlist with the intention of stepping and blocking if she continued being a pest but I haven't been on Misplaced Pages a lot recently and so wasn't able to keep a close eye on the situation. My apologies for letting it drag on as long as it has. Sarah 22:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Also, I've blocked that IP you (Gladys) mentioned on ANI. It's blocked for one month with account creation disabled, so hopefully that'll give y'all a nice, peaceful Christmas at least.:) Sarah 22:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that. We can hope. Cheers :)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 23:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm tryin to create an article about Jesus Youth. But as i submit the article it just got deleted. Can you please help me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samantony (talk • contribs) 03:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Help please

Hi Sarah - can you please do something about Image:Hornsbydockplatform.jpg. Damiens.rf nominated this for deletion on the grounds that it was only licensed for Misplaced Pages (which it wasn't). The IfD was speedy closed. Now he is trying to blot out the advertising in the image on the grounds that it is copyrighted. The picture is not of the advertising, it is of the platform below it: there is no way I could have taken that photo to exclude the advertising because the only publicly accessible place to take it from was the station platform, and in any event the platform has now been demolished. I thought freedom of panorama laws in the US protected images like this from being copyrighted because the image is not of the ad board and is not a copy of it, my picture just happens to have an ad board on it. In any case I think Damiens.rf is still trying to harass me because he couldn't get his image deleted any other way. Is there some way to protect the picture or something? Any help would be much appreciated - I don't know what to do. INTGAFW (talk) 05:32, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving Sarah! Elbutler (talk) 23:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! We don't actually celebrate Thanksgiving here in Australia but I do appreciate the thought and I hope you have a good time and enjoy your Thanksgiving dinner! Sarah 00:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Kogan Creek power Station Edit by phanly / dinghy

Hi Sarah, As you were involved in the fracas of my making re edits re CARMA estimates for an Australian Coal Fired Power Station I wanted to give you the opportunity to consider the edits I intend to make: Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Kogan_Creek_Power_Station,_Queensland A similar edit to that intended there will also be relevant to each other article on coal fired power stations in Australia As CARMA is the best available and a reliable source for an estimate using the specific page on their web site which deals with the specific power station as a reference under Misplaced Pages guidelines is not link spamming. Kind regards dinghy (talk) 20:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't involved in "the fracas of (your) making re edits re CARMA estimates". I was simply the administrator who cleared the unblock requests, reviewed your sock's unblock request and discovered your abusive sockpuppetry. I have no real interest in this beyond the fact that I believe you use socks to try to keep your primary account clean and distant from your spamming (and yes, going from article to article inserting lobby group links is spamming). I think you would do well to forget about trying to spam your link into articles and go do something else. Sarah 01:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)