User:Essjay/Archives/27

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).


This is an archive page. Please do not leave comments on this page.
Please leave messages on my talk page.

I don't like for outdated discussions to remain on my talk page; I absolutely hate clutter, and frankly, there is no real reason for a week-old discussion to still be sitting on my talk page. I believe old discussions make the page hard to read, both for me and for other users, and they make other users less likely to leave a message. In the spirit of clutter-free talk pages and uncensored archival, I present here all previous discussions, in the order they were removed from my talk page.

Note: Some discussions are archived on separate pages either:

  1. Because I archived them there before I created this archive, or
  2. Because they were too long for this archive.

Those archive pages are listed below as well.

Existing Archive Pages

21 – 22 – 23 – 24 – 25 – 26 – 27 – 28 – 29 – 30 – 31 – 32 – 33 – 34 – 35 – 36 – 37 – 38 – 39 – 40
41 – 42 – 43 – 44 – 45 – 46 – 47 – 48 – 49 – 50

Discussions Archived from My Talk Page

Contents

[edit] Re: Requests for Checkuser Clerkship

Ok, incase you haven't already noticed by me being in the clerk channel, I'm still interested, so I'll go read some help files and the like. ;) Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 04:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Great; if you have questions, you know where to find us! Essjay (Talk) 04:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Requests for Checkuser Clerkship

Much like the people above, I am also very happy to help out by being a Checkuser clerk. Thanks very much. DarthVader 05:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Wonderful! (I'm running out of ways to say that...) Daniel will get you fitted for your waders and issue your box of bandaids for papercuts resulting from excessive filing. ;) Essjay (Talk) 05:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Spelling

Well you'd have to go back 19 years and stop my parents committing the horrible sin of naming me.... wait a minute, I LIKE MY NAME!! Anyway mistake pardoned, I'll share the "secret" of remembering my name: just remember "StrikeIt" (© sean_black) and later drop the initial "t". Too much trouble?? Screw it all and call me eww ;) Cheers --Srikeit 06:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

You know, I'm pretty frequently tempted to do just that! Essjay (Talk) 00:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television)

I was wondering if you could un-delete Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) for the time being. There's a request for arbitration at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Naming Conventions for TV-episodes articles, and some of the links and diffs being used are from the mediation request. -- Ned Scott 09:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Didn't see this here. I'd like to second the request to get the page undeleted. I believe the page itself and the steps leading to mediation being rejected may prove to be important evidence in the ArbCom proceeding. – Anþony  talk  00:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I got it. Thatcher131 00:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
That's fine; generally, we don't allow mediation communications to be used as evidence, but this one never made it to actual mediation, so I'll leave it to the Arbitrators to decide whether it is valid as evidence. Essjay (Talk) 01:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll bear that in mind if I see a similar request in the future. Thanks. Thatcher131 02:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts#Assistance with bureaucrat JS

I've had a go at making this script (see User:ais523/sandbox.js); more details are with the request. Let me know what you think! --ais523 10:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Trying it out now. Essjay (Talk) 00:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you for your kind comments regarding my RfA. While it was a shame that it did not achieve consensus with a final support tally of 51, the huge level of support and the comments made with oppose votes will help me to improve and hopefully be promoted next time. Thanks again. :) Wikiwoohoo 20:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome; it was definately a very hard one to call. Essjay (Talk) 00:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:EssjayBot II

Is there any way you could you set EssjayBot II to archive Wikipedia talk:Reference desk? We have reasonably good consensus that we need an archive bot, only the number of days is up in the air. If possible, please respond here..Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#User:EssjayBot_II. Thank you for your time--VectorPotentialThe Reference Desk 21:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll drop that way shortly. Essjay (Talk) 00:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help Desk Question

Hey Essjay, there is a question over at the help desk that I think you could help with answering. The post is available at this link. Thanks, :-). Cbrown1023 22:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Essjay (Talk) 00:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mountain Meadows Massacre

I got busy with my real life and didn't log in for some time. I've put my "agree" vote on the MMM mediation page. Gwen Gale 23:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Essjay (Talk) 00:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I've responded there; please see my comments and work with the others to determine if there is still desire to proceed. Essjay (Talk) 00:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update

[1] Khoikhoi 02:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Will take a look directly. Essjay (Talk) 00:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Looks like Aphaia has it under control; you might drop an email telling her the background of the matter so she knows exactly what's going on. Essjay (Talk) 00:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can you please mediate the MSN Games conflict?

A user, who does not have an account with Wikipedia, keeps reverting the MSN Games article to a version with his advertisement in it. He does nothing but harass those who delete it out.

Can you please handle him?

TFX 09:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm not entirely sure you understand the nature of mediation at Wikipedia; mediations are not conducted by making requests on mediator's talk pages, but by filing a request at WP:RFM, after having read and understood the nature of mediation. This, however, is not a matter for mediation; simply mention it on WP:AIV and an administrator will look into the matter. Essjay (Talk) 00:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Lost episodes

This mediation case, which I handled while you were hors de combat, has become a peripheral issue in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions. Apparently, one of the participants in the mediation made a suggestion early on, which was not incorporated into the final agreement, but she has allegedly told others that it was, to support her position on the naming of TV episode articles. Given your comments above, I don't know if you want to look in on this or not. Thatcher131 03:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, this is a . The general rule is, communications made in good faith during a mediation may not later be used outside the mediation as evidence. The intent is to prevent a user from making good faith comments in mediation and later having them used against them in Arbitration or other dispute resolution. I think the point here is going to be whether what is being used as evidence is a mediation communication, or if it is just the result of the mediation that is being referenced. At the risk of being pedantic, long-winded, and perhaps legalistic, I think it is fine for them to say "There was a mediation. We came to a decision. The decision can be viewed [[RFM page|here]]." It would not, however, be fine for them to say "S/he has a history of misrepresenting things. S/he did it during the mediation case too. [[RFM page|Here]] are examples of him/her doing so during the mediation." In order for the latter to be admissible, it would have to rise to the level of bad faith intended to disrupt the mediation, which would be very difficult to prove if the mediation was concluded successfully. As long as what is being said remains in the line of "You can see the text of the agreement here" and stays away from "You can see this user's conduct here" it is fine; if it moves into the latter, then the Mediation Committee would need to look into it more carefully and consult with the Arbitration Committee. In the end, however, I trust the Arbitrators to say "You can't use that" when it's inadmissable, so it's really more of an academic exercise about making sure the Mediation Committee's commitment to confidentiality is visibly upheld; I have no doubt that, with regard to the AC, it is always actually upheld. Essjay (Talk) 03:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I think put in its starkest terms the allegation would be that she misrepresented the results of the mediation once it was over, but not that there was any problem during the mediation. So it seems to be allowable for now. Thatcher131 04:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the extremely fast and efficient service at WP:CHU! You're quite the über 'crat! :-) Mikker (...) 04:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You're very welcome. :) Essjay (Talk) 04:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
By the way, make sure you've logged out and back in with your new name, as your session data won't clear until you do. (That is, you're making edits with the old name until you log out.) Essjay (Talk) 04:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Not a prob; and thanks for the advice - I have now logged out & in again. Cheers, Mikker (...) 04:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comment

Thanks. That's my friend who likes to complain about the block of User:NYScholar. pschemp | talk 04:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Mmmmm. Wonder who he really is? Essjay (Talk) 04:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Johnny the vandal

Hi, I saw you add this heading to the bottom of the ANI page. Is there something going on at RC which we should know about? Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it was supposed to have this message attached:

On seeing a report farther up the page on a new Johnny the Vandal sock, I ran a checkuser to determine if there were other accounts, and particularly if there were undetected ones. As a result, I have blocked a fairly large sock farm across three IPs, as well as blocking those IPs for a week each, as thre was nothing but Johnny vandalsim coming off them.

Apparently, my copy/paste didn't take; I'm still waiting to see if it will go through (that is, I keep getting edit-conflicted when I try to post). Essjay Talk • Contact 09:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shameless!

Vandalizing my talk page, too, I see! Will your campaign of chaos never cease? (And what are you doing up at this hour too, huh?) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 09:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Mea maxima culpa! I just can't help myself! (Nor can I sleep, which is why I'm awake vandalizing you!) :-D Essjay Talk • Contact 09:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I even read the edit summary...

...but when I pulled the page up, I still clicked. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 11:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

:-D Sorry, but at least I wasn't *trying* to confuse people, unlike some people.... (Oh, and if you want to see the new screencap, it's Image:Image-EssjayMonobookScreencap1.jpg.) Essjay Talk • Contact 11:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I know! I just can't help myself. :D! I shall go look now. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 11:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Are you around anywhere? I have a question for you. I can ask later if you aren't. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 13:15, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm on AIM, MSN, & Skype; I'm just not in IRC at the moment. I can sign in if you don't have one of those. Essjay Talk • Contact 13:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My apologies

I did not notice that the rfa was closed. I have honestly spent more time in edit and esperanza land than in voting. I will do my best to better familiarize myself with those areas prior to further contribution. Kukini 14:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

No need to apologize; it happens all the time. I tried to use an edit summary that wouldn't sound like I was screaming "ZOMG YOU VANDAL I AM GOING TO BLOCK YOU FOREVER!" ;-); I hope you didn't take it that way. Don't let this keep you from expressing your opinions; you can usually watch for the headers at the top of the page that will point out a closed vote (but there's really no harm even if you miss them; some mean person like me will just come along and revert you with an evil edit summary :-) ).
I'm glad to hear you're working with Esperanza; I served as the Administrator General of Esperanza towards the end of last year. It's a great organization, and I think more people should be involved in those kinds of activities. Essjay Talk • Contact 14:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words. No worries...I wasn't freaking out over your response, just embarrassed that I missed the header. A great deal of my Esperanza work has been welcomes, as I believe that the welcome info is very useful when one is new, as well as effective in letting the new wikipedian know that others notice them and their efforts. I also think it encourages the right type of atmosphere in our wikisociety. On another note, I have not been able to figure out how to change my signature as you and many others have. Where do I go to do that? Peace, Kukini 14:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree about welcoming; I used to do a lot of it, in fact, I wrote {{welcome4}} because I didn't care for the other templates that were available.
You can find information on customizing signatures at WP:SIG#Customizing_your_signature; I actually do it a way that is discouraged, that is, I subst: a user-subpage instead of actually having a signature. When I sign ~~~~, it actually inserts {{subst:User:Essjay/Sig}}, which has my custom signature on it. Really, there's not much wrong with using this method; the result is the same (the signature code being inserted), since I use subst:. Anyhow, if you need help working it all out, let me know. Essjay Talk • Contact 14:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks :)

I shall to my best not to upset the applecart, spill the milk, soil the walls, and various assorted cliches, at least one of which I may have made up. Proto||type 14:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh come now, how are you ever going to to become a rogue admin if you avoid *all* the cliches? ;-) Essjay Talk • Contact 14:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Namechange

Thank you for your expedient action in this matter - I am most impressed and will sacrifice any number of my slaves and/or siblings you may require for your satisfaction. On a different matter entirely, my access to the magical wonderland that is the AutoWikiBrowser has seized to be. Is it perhaps possible you would also change my name on that list so that I may once again be one of the oh so happy few? Regards, Gardar Rurak 14:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, and I can take care of that with little trouble. :-) Essjay Talk • Contact 14:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. It dosn't seem to work though - but I guess there is some kind of lag. Have a good day and thanks again :) Gardar Rurak 15:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem! Essjay Talk • Contact 15:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome aboard!

Hey Essjay! Welcome aboard the J.W.S. Bureaucrat! ;-)

See, I told you not to worry about it. You got in! Good job, and congradulations! Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 16:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Allow me to echo this sentiment! I congratulate you, and I wish you smooth sailing, although we both know the seas are sometimes stormy and fraught with peril. You have been, in thought and action, one of the people I most respect here at WP. Good luck, me ol' trout! Regards, Hamster Sandwich 17:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you both, for your kind words, and your congratulations. :-) Essjay Talk • Contact 06:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:1000000eme.jpg
Another newly produced robot thanks you for your final, friendly push off the end of the conveyor belt, and excuses himself for a few days while he practices his new abilities. Back in action soon! -- Hoary 10:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
And belated congratulations from me, too. (I, erm, have particular reason to notice that you have already got down to work.) I'd have voted for you myself, but as soon as I said yes to my own, humbler invitation I decided I'd refrain from any voting for (or against) anyone till it was through. -- Hoary 10:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much, you're welcome, and congratulations yourself! I know the feeling; I didn't vote for anyone during my RfB, and I'm almost afraid to now! ;-) Essjay Talk • Contact 10:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Aw, you can do anything. Well, almost anything. In the meantime, I hope you don't mind my poking my nose into your B-business (three little edits, already made). -- Hoary 12:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
You're making me look bad for not catching all of the typos :(. NoSeptember talk 12:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem; have at the typos, I type far too fast for my own good... Essjay Talk • Contact 12:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question for you, Obi-Wan...

Pease take a minute to read the posting I left here [2]. I value any advice you could offer, and will look for a response here, or on my own talk page. Thanks in advance Essjay! Best regards, Hamster Sandwich 16:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

As I'm sure you know, I generally avoid commenting on such matters; true to form, I don't have a lot of substantive commentary on the issue. I don't believe I've had any interaction with Prasi90, so I really have little to go on in offering advice on the specific situation. I commend your strongly for taking the initative to undertake a mentorship here, and I wish you the best of luck for it's success. The only advice that springs to mind is to remember that it will not be an easy road, either for you or for Prasi90, but to keep trying as long as the mentorship continues to make progress. Feel free to contact me privately if there are any specific issues you would like to discuss. Essjay Talk • Contact 17:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your revert at Sam Korn's RfC?

You reverted an anon's edits over at Sam's RfC. I could find nothing wrong with them, so I restored them. Why did you remove them? Am I missing something?

If he's a known sockpuppet or something, feel free to revert his edits again, but please do at least include an edit summary explaining why. Thanks :) --Ashenai 19:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

It was the signature that caught me (unless I'm delerious from too much RC patrol); it looked to me like he was adding user signatures to comments, which suggested impersonation. My apologies if I was incorrect. Essjay Talk • Contact 19:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
He did add a user signature to a comment, but it was because the user in question forgot to sign his comment. So no harm, no foul. Happy vandalfighting :) --Ashenai 19:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sprint

The edit to sprint was because of a merger of the sprint for software development and hackathon, which had been up for merger for a real long time and so I went ahead with it. 65.95.124.5 20:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

If the rollback was in error, please feel free to reinstate it. Essjay Talk • Contact 20:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

I like to thank you for closeing my RFA early. I knew I would face great opposition, partly because of my POV name or because of opposing POV. I will now try to foucus on making wikipedia as good as I can without being an Admin. I intend to run again sometime in the future, probably with a better reputation and more edits. The Republican 21:21, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome; it's not something we like to do, but it is better to close early than have feelings hurt further by putting the user through an entire week of similar comments. If you're concerned about your username, you can request a change to something more "vanilla" at WP:CHU. Essjay Talk • Contact 21:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Okay

I am the responsible vandal. I will stop with all this if you agree not to phone anyone. I promise that I won't come back

I'll make you a better deal; I won't call USF if you'll do the following:
  1. Identify any unidentified sockpuppets (saving me the trouble of checkusering them all)
  2. Stop vandalizing permanently.
  3. Register a new account and start making useful contributions. Email me the name of the new account, so I will know you're abiding by the deal, and I'll promise never to reveal your vandal past to anyone as long as you remain a good, productive contributor. (You certainly won't be the first former-vandal I've known.)
Those are the terms, take them or leave them. Email me your answer and I'll unblock your last account ("Alright") so you can identify the sockpuppets per #1. Essjay Talk • Contact 22:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't have an e-mail address, and my misdeeds should be revealed. All of the attacking users on User:Cyde's history are sockpuppets. I have a few at User_talk:Curps, and others. I will list more if I can think of them. I will start making contributions in the near future, and I promise never to vandalize again.

[edit] Wacth out for

the IP adress 144.137.197. His few vandalisms can be found at [3] The Republican 01:39, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Essjay Talk • Contact 03:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can you give me some advice?

I would like to create a bot account for autowiki browser, I use it alot but i dont want it to clog my edits. how should i go about the proses f making one of those accounts/

No big deal; just create a new account (by logging out and selecting the option to create a new account). Make the name obvious that it is not a bot, but is being used for AWB, and then use it when you use AWB. Essjay Talk • Contact 10:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can you help clean up a Gastrich mess?

Jason Gastrich, who is currently serving a one year arbcom imposed ban has been abusively using sockpuppets to further disrupt Wikipedia, despite his ban. Gastrich has been found to farm sockpuppets in the past, and I don't see any reason why he wouldn't be doing so.

I request that the proven post-arbcom socks have a CheckUser run on them to see if any sleeper socks have been created from the IPs used to create the currently blocked disruptive puppets.

The proven puppets whose IPs should be investigated for sleeper accounts are: "Jeffrey Tuttle", "BryanW4C", "Jon Calla", "Angelina Y.", "Shindig Me", "No Jobs", and "Doe, John".

Also, shouldn't Gastrich's ban be reset for use of sockpuppets?


Thanks for the help.Hexagonal 08:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Please make all checkuser requests on RfCU, as requested in the header on this page. The only reliable way to ensure that users make requests on the appropriate pages is to refuse to act on requests that aren't. Essjay Talk • Contact 03:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Early withdraw of RfAs

Since becoming a bureaucrat, you have withdrawn three RfAs early as unlikely to reach consensus. If you would, please read through User:Durin/Withdraw policy. I'm not trying to convince you one direction or another, but I feel you should read this before making any more early withdrawals. Thank you, --Durin 16:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I've closed any early that weren't pretty obvious closures; I tend to use a 4-1 rule on making closures (that is, at least 4 times as many opposes as supports). Are there any in particular where you think the outcome would have been a promotion? Essjay Talk • Contact

Having looked over your page, I would raise the following points:

  1. RfA is not RfC; if you want people to comment on your actions, file an RfC. (I've filed one on myself, and it was quite useful.) Some time ago, it became in vogue for admins to request "reconfirmation RfA's" where they would start a new RfA and promise to abide by the results; these were quickly stamped out, telling the users to either go to RfC (which is designed to provide feedback) or to start a page in thier userspace to request comments. Users who would like to get feedback on why they aren't ready for adminship can do the same thing.
  2. Similar to #1, RfA is a Request for Adminship, not a Request-to-avoid-a-nasty-Request-for-Adminship-in-the-Future. Individuals have begun using RfA as a way to gauge whether they are ready to make a request; "It probably won't pass, but let's see what happens" is all to common. This crowds up RfA, and can potentially come back to haunt the candidate on thier "for real" request, when users pop up opposing due to the previous failed RfA(s) (a couple of such candidates pop to mind, but I'm not the sort that names names).
  3. Failed RfAs cause hurt feelings. Not only is it hurtful to have one fail (I've passed four RfAs and an RfB, but it still hurt to have to withdraw my Wiktionary RfA because nobody wanted to support), but it can ruin relations between contributors. Having a dozen of your closest friends oppose or vote neutral because they know you're not ready doesn't harbor well for your relations with them in the future, nor does it encourage you to continue participating. Even worse, having contributors feel forced to vote for candidates that are clearly not ready causes a breakdown of the RfA system that leads to all sorts of problems.

These are just a few things that pop to me immediately; I'm sure I could come up with more if I sat and pondered on it for a few hours. I believe the most important point, though, is this one: RFA should be about requesting adminship, and nothing more. It should not be viewed as a convenient way to request commentary on your readiness, or to see how many people like you. When we start allowing essential processes to take on unnecessary ancillary functions, we invite the further breakdown of our own systems. If users want to begin a by-request screening process for potential admin cadidates, then they can create Requests for Administrator Candidate Screening.

Closing a request early is not an easy decision; believe me, it isn't. It is, however, intended to prevent the user from going through what could be the beginning of the end of their participation here, and that shouldn't be forgotten. It is extremely unlikely that a vote will come back from 3/16 (84.21% oppose), 5/19 (79.16% oppose), or 11/31 (73.80%) (the counts where I closed early; yep, I check the percentages before I close); I wouldn't close if I felt it was likely that the RfA might have a turnaround. However, in those cases, it would have required 81, 76, and 114 supports, respectively, to cancel out the existing oppose votes, assuming no additional oppose votes were cast; given that, I felt each was highly unlikely to come to a consensus to pass, but was quite likely to accumulate additional oppose votes, making the situation even worse than it already was.

In short, I realize that I'm new to the bureucrat business, but I believe my decisions so far have been sound, and with the screams that the existing staff is totally unable to respond to requests in a reasonably timely manner, I feel a particular responsibility to make the calls I can where I can. (Note: I don't believe we are unable of handling the situation in the slightest; the loss of two bureaucrats, while unfortunate, has not rendered us completely incapable of rallying to fill in the gap.) Essjay Talk • Contact 03:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sock Check

By the way I'm not clear whether the sock check was ever done on me. Thank you for your time. JASpencer 20:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea; the results of checkuser requests are kept in the checkuser archive. Who has or hasn't had a check run is considered private information (hence why the checkuser log is not public). Essjay Talk • Contact 03:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You feeling ok

We've missed your presence, oh great one, (you called Angela that I believe) on IRC :) -- Tawker 04:56, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm fine, I've just been trying to get stuff done. I've found that the more permissions I have, the less likely it is that I will get anything done while on IRC. :-) Essjay Talk • Contact 05:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Heh, well, Fennec has joined into the on IRC 24/7 fray so I guess you're safe on that front :) - Feel free to have some of Tawkerbot2's cake by the way, its an entire month old :) -- Tawker 05:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean "joined into the on IRC 24/7 fray"? Essjay Talk • Contact 05:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I think he meant "joined the "on IRC 24/7" fray". NSLE (T+C) at 05:12 UTC (2006-04-07)
I'm sure that is, but I'm wondering what the fray is; is it simply being on IRC 24/7, or is there some discussion I'm not aware of... Essjay Talk • Contact 05:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
I imagine the multitudinous amount of people who are online 24/7? Jude (talk,contribs,email) 05:17, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
He seems to be on IRC almost 24/7 now, so you don't have to worry about getting 50 million group contact related msgs :) I should probably mention this now before I forget, if you don't feel comfortable closing my RfA, feel free to deffer to someone else, I know it's going to be very very grey (well, barring any major changes either way) so please feel no pressure from me, I really don't want to put you in any situation that you don't feel happy with -- Tawker 05:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see; I'm pretty sure he's always idled 24/7, but hasn't always been available. I could be wrong though. As to the RFA, I wouldn't consider closing it; I have no doubt I could be impartial, but I'd prefer to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Essjay Talk • Contact 05:28, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:64.95.38.193

This IP is fixed and being used by the same sockpuppet, please see Hpuppet and Hipocrite. Therefore, a check user would be appropriate to find what other sp's this editor is using. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 09:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Then make a request at RfCU that lays out a case for this; don't just say "Please tell me all editors using this IP." You need to provide evidence that the IP is static, and that the above users were utilizing that address. Checkuser is a very sensitive issue, and a solid case must be made before it can (or should) be used. Essjay Talk • Contact 09:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:LA

Adding names of promoted admins to WP:LA is something the bureaucrat usually does, although if it's not done, I or someone else will do it (it's no big deal). Thanks for not getting bored with doing bureaucrat tasks yet ;-). NoSeptember talk 15:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Darnit! That should really be mentioned in the sysopping instructions. I'll put it on my mental checklist! Essjay Talk • Contact 17:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I remember that some bureaucrats (can't remember who off the top of my head) asked the promoted admin to add himself to the list... Titoxd(?!? - help us) 19:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Nichalp does that sometimes, but not always. The 3 steps that the crat really should do are 1) set flag, 2) notify person, 3) remove from WP:RFA. The updates of the other pages and closing out the RfA subpage can be missed if necessary and will be caught by those watching - not that we encourage laziness :-). I have a list of other pages that I update when someone gets promoted, although it may take me a few days to do. NoSeptember talk 19:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] edits to User:FireFox

the user's page has a graffiti wall specifically for people to write stupid stuff on. it's his prerogative to have such a thing, and i don't think it's your place to revert edits to it. -- stubblyhead | T/c 19:38, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Fine, he's an admin, he can block you at his pleasure. Doesn't matter that I'm talking to him at the moment or anything... Essjay Talk • Contact 19:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inanna

Just left a message on my talk page. [4] --Khoikhoi 21:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I blocked the range she's using again...I can just keep checkusering and rangeblocking as long as she wants to play this game. Vandals. Never. Win. Essjay Talk • Contact 22:00, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Hahaha, you got that right. Check this out. --Khoikhoi 22:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding the Lindsay Lohan Punk'd dispute

I just wanted to take a moment to notify you that RadioKirk and I have reached an agreement and ended our dispute regarding the Punk'd reference in the Lindsay Lohan article (see my talk page for more info). Before this point, we had filed a RfM that was initally accepted, but then later rejected by you for failure to assume good faith. You stated that you were going to refer the matter to ArbComm, which (to my knowledge) hasn't occured yet. However, since we've now decided to end the dispute, I would like to ask that you do not refer the matter to ArbComm. Please let me know if you have any questions concerning this matter. -- backburner001 20:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I concur with this request. RadioKirk talk to me 21:43, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

In general, when we close something and refer it to Arbitration, we do not actually file the Arbitration case, rather, it is intended to be a note to the parties that they should take the matter to Arbitration. I suppose it would be possible for us to actually file Arbitration cases based on mediation, but I think given the nature of mediation, it would be a bad precedent to set. So, no worries, you won't be getting an arbitration notice from me.

I'm glad to hear the two of you came to an amicable solution! Essjay Talk • Contact 21:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CSS

Hello, Essjay, I've got a question about css. I'm sure you know of the .allpagesredirect { font-style: italic; } in Wikipedia's Common.css. I was wondering whether you knew a code to modify all redirects in the wiki this way, not just on Special:Allpages. Thanks in advance (or if you know anyone else whom I should ask this). Cheers, Vildricianus 20:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I shall have a look and let you know what I find! Essjay Talk • Contact 21:55, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EssjayTest

Ah well, these terrible trigger happy admins will block anything which moves... --pgk(talk) 23:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation Committee

Hi Essjay, I've finished the Russian Language mediation and have now put myself down for nomination onto the Mediation Committee. I note that people have been on that list a little while. What is the usual length of waiting on that list, assuming there are no negative votes/comments? --Wisden17 00:30, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

It can be upto or over a month, if the committee members don't speak up. We generally look for several votes, so if nobody votes, it hangs in limbo until they do. Essjay Talk • Contact 01:03, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] infinity

Hello. I think you should consider unblocking me from the Noticeboard(s) (and blocking infinity0). It's not fair to me that I am not allowed to respond to his (or anyone's) charges there. If an adminstrator falls for his accusations by giving him the benefit of the doubt because he sees I'm on probation I will blocked for no reason. I'm writing because he's posted yet again to get me blocked because he doesn't like my edits. And, what's more, he has been stalking me. And, he admitted to it.[5] I am unable to avoid him wherever I go on Wikipedia. He is clearly harrassing me. I can't complain about this harrassment and admitted stalking because you blocked me from making edits on the Noticeboard. Where can go to complain about him? Please reconsider. Thank you. (I do appreciate you moving his latest charges to the arbitration enforcement Noticeboard though. As far as I know I'm not blocked from that one. So, I made a response there. ) RJII 20:38, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, I can't ban him unless he's on probation, and if I could, I wouldn't because I'm already involved in the situation, and I do my best to keep from making such decisions in cases where I'm involved. However, I think you have a legitimate claim on this issue. So, here's my offer: I'll modify the ban to allow you to respond to posts on the board that involve you. That will maintain the intent of the ban (to eliminate disruptive editing) while allowing you to defend yourself. If that is agreeable, let me know, and I will post a notice of the modification. Essjay Talk • Contact 03:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requests for adminship/Pschemp - comments removed

I had started adding comments to the "Requests for adminship/Pschemp" page before you made the final edit closing it down. We deadlocked so I had to reapply my changes. Obviously I have no way to know that you will close down the page by the time I finish typing. Please reinsert my comments.

Additionally, be aware that editors are trying to influence vote counts by harassing those who vote the contrary position. It should be made clear that this is not encouraged by Wikipedia as was suggested. Lou franklin 04:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

It is entirely appropriate for others to point out that votes may be in bad faith. Given your history of bad faith voting, it is especially appropriate.
Your comments were made after the closing, and therefore do not belong in the nomination. They will not be reinserted. Essjay Talk • Contact 04:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry and Congrats

I have been flat on my back for two weeks in excruciating pain, and therefore unable to sit at the computer. Had I been around, you'd have had my ringing endorsement for bureaucrat -- don't know if that would have cleared the threshold for you, but I like to think it would. :-) Congrats on so thoroughly winning the community's trust--I've rarely seen it so well deserved--and best wishes as always. Jwrosenzweig 04:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much; I thought about dropping you an email to let you know I was running, but decided if you'd managed to slip away, you were having a much-deserved rest. Sorry to hear you were ill, and hoping you're feeling better now. Essjay Talk • Contact 05:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: {{vandal}}

Hi Essjay. When you use this template with people with spaces in their names, don't forget to put underscores instead of spaces. For example:

Sam Korn (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log)
Sam_Korn (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log)

OK, the aesthetics are horrid, but it works! Cheers, Sam Korn (smoddy) 10:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I usually remember; I suppose it has to do with being up all night :-) Essjay Talk • Contact 10:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How did you get the user status thing?

Hi, I am currently in the process of redoing my user page. I have seen multiple versions of the online/offline status displays, and you have the traffic light. How can I get one on my page, and how do they know whether I am online or offline? Wikipeedio 18:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

There are many versions and variations. You can try User:Misza13/Scripts/Status switcher. Not that I'm advertising or anything... ;-p --Misza13 T C 19:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

When you opt for one of the various changers (there are at least two I know of, Topaz's (which I used to use) and Misza13's (which I use now); with each, you pick which icons you want to use. You can find information at WP:STATUS; the specific icons I use are on Commons, and can be found by looking at any of the image pages (look at Image:In Icon.PNG; there is a box there that links to all of them). Essjay Talk • Contact 08:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect link question

Perhaps you can point me the right way: User:Oliver Pereira insists that a Wlink at Emma Watson should be "[[actress]]", while this page redirects (I wrote "disambig", which was wrong) to "[[actor]]". Before the change, the piped link was "[[actor|actress]]", and I thought links to pages that redirect were supposed to be avoided. WP:DAB#Piping doesn't really apply, and I cant find what I thought did. Is my memory failing me? ;) RadioKirk talk to me 00:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of this policy, but Wikipedia:Redirect says "Some editors are tempted, upon finding links using a legitimate redirect target, to edit the page to "fix" the link so that it points "straight" at the "correct" page. Unless the link displays incorrectly—for instance, if the link is to a misspelling or other unprintworthy redirect, or if the hint that appears when you hover over the link is misleading—there is no need to edit the link. Most especially, there should never be a need to replace [[redirect]] with [[direct|redirect]]." --maru (talk) contribs 03:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. :) RadioKirk talk to me 04:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doom127

If was comproved that User:Doom127 created and used sockpuppets he will be block indefinitevely? --Pinoi 04:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

That's not my decision; I left it to uninvolved administrators to decide. However, it's obvious from his comments that there is something very serious going on, and I'm concerned for his mental stability. It worries me that giving in to his desire to be indefblocked may exacerbate whatever condition he is suffering from, and that it might be better to leave him unblocked, and hope that he, or someone close to him, will see that he gets the professional help he quite obviously needs. Schemes like this are not done idly; they are a sign of a deep pathology that needs to be addressed before it moves into the offline world. Essjay Talk • Contact 08:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Ban

I was very unfairly unbanned by Essjay from two IRC Channels. Sahanx 11:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm...Is that why you ran when freenode staff contacted you? Essjay Talk • Contact 11:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] RFCU archiving

Hi, I think you archived a couple of RFCU's a little early, specifically the ones on Eyeonvaughan and Leotardo. The Eyeonvaughan one, specifically, a lot of sock puppets were found from User:VaughanWatch but apparently no one checked on User:Eyeonvaughan despite a further request by Thatcher to do so, but you archived it as "completed." Should I relist them? Mangojuice 14:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

If they still need to be run, yes; generally, anything that isn't run within several days probably isn't going to be, and so it's archived. I assumed the results to be stale, especially given the comment on the one that all the socks had been blocked. Essjay Talk • Contact 14:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, on reviewing the Checkuser policy, I realize now that the data may not be there anymore, because it's only stored for a week. It would still be good to know about these sockpuppet clusters, but I guess the best we can do is request again if they become active, because they haven't been especially active this week. Thanks for your help. Mangojuice 16:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] #wikipedia-en-vandalism

Since you are no longer using the channel, care to hand it over? My bot has been offline a good month now. --Cool CatTalk|@ 22:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

No. Until the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation establishes an official vandalism group and sanctions the use of that channel by said group, it will remain unused. I will ask Freenode to jupe it if necessary. Essjay Talk • Contact 20:37, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Could you please have a look at Wikipedia:Changing username?

Thank you.

I'll take a look in my regular routine. Also, please sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~. Essjay Talk • Contact 20:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Check User

I have posted several sock puppet check users and none of them have ever been looked into. The last one you archived under "Stale Requests" so why are you doing this job if you do nothing ?? SirIsaacBrock 00:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

SirIsaacBrock, may we remind you to be civil and to not form personal attacks or edit wars through your or others' comments; doing so will only cause tension and annoyance. (CJ) - Pureblade | T 00:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I do quite a bit; I've just never found any of your requests particularly compelling. Please do be sure to harass the other checkusers as well, since none of them acted either. Essjay Talk • Contact 20:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Science-grade 8

what are the cons of a pneumatic system?

Please do not ask Wikipedians to do your homework for you. You may want to look at Pneumatic.- Pureblade | T 01:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] That was strange

Sorry about that- I didn't see that my contrib had blanked something?

Anywho, in regards to your prior comment regarding me, Essjay, if you do a Checkuser on Pinoi, you'll see that Pinoi is, in fact Brazil4Linux, who no doubt has been watching my contributions. You are the same individual who did the original checkuser on his first sockpuppets, if I do recall? I've already talked to two of the parties involved (Jedi and CambridgeBay) and explained to both of them what was going on, apologizing for any annoyances caused.

The skinny of it is that the account "suicide" was a controlled blowup, planned well in advance. It involves Brazil4Linux and him utilizing info gained about me offline to a large extent. I'm sure he's monitoring my contributions even now, as he has been doing for over half a year. If you want more info regarding it, feel free to drop a message on AIM. Cheers! Daniel Davis 03:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


This archive is full.
Messages should be archived in the currently active archive.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/s/s/User%7EEssjay_Archives_27_55ed.html"