User talk:Alison/Archive 22

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Foreign 2 Thank you from Horologium 3 William Gaillard 4 Dan689 5 Chandrasekhar limit 6 Newmarket, County Cork 7 Jacob Peters 8 NTWW 12 9 Sockpuppet 10 CU Assistance ASAP 11 Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dmurawski 12 House1090 sock? 13 Quick request 14 You've got mail! 15 VK's proposed return 16 Usercheck please 17 Are we having fun yet? 18 Wiktionary rename 19 (redacted article) 20 St John Bosco College Year 12 2007 21 User:Jonathan Howarth 22 Nothing444 23 Super Giano 24 Talkback 25 3D-Palace notability 26 Alexander Z. Rivkin M.D. 27 Help or just a pat on the head? 28 Hello 29 You've got mail 30 ban evading sock-puppets advice on collateral damage if blocked 31 Admin Coaching 32 Talkback 33 Checkuser 34 Unblock help needed 35 An invitation to the NotTheWikipediaWeekly 36 Talkback 37 Unblock 38 G'day alison 39 A Big Thank you! 40 Please 41 Could checkuser be used in this way? 42 Ha! 43 Enigmanman/Scarian 44 Quick question 45 OTRS ticket 46 For you! 46.1 A gift of flowers : ) 47 Rollback 48 You have email... 49 Email 50 Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam 51 User: Toomiasy vs. User: Tomeasy 52 Hello 53 Rfb participation thanks 54 TougHHead 55 Peeking out from behind the flowers 56 machinedrum.jpg 57 Yet another random editor bothering you 58 User:Who ordered 137? 59 Hey 60 "nice try" 61 Congrats 62 Encyclopædia Dramatica 63 VK 64 e-mail 65 Favour... 66 confirmation requested 67 Checkuser results 68 Email 69 Thank you 70 The supplicant comes grovelling 71 Rollback 72 You Raok! 73 You might want to also take a look at... 74 An invitation to the NotTheWikipediaWeekly 75 Sussexman sock 76 RFA Thanks 77 User:PatPeter 78 Speedy Deletion 79 Check for potential range block 80 Law Suit 81 mail 82 3RR block of Major Bonkers 83 Delicate sockpuppet situation 84 Quick Favour 85 Email 86 Speaking of socking... 87 Peter zhou 88 Vandalism and Edit Warring by User:CarterBar 89 RE: Email (Archive 22) 90 Sockpuppet of User:Bennet556 91 hello again 92 Padraig 93 User talk:DianeFinn 94 Thanks 95 disappearing messages 96 Re: Peter zhou 97 Administration Assistance 98 Not quite paying enough attention 99 Checkuser 100 My Recent Rfa 101 Question 102 Another Dereks1x sock? 103 Email 104 protection request 105 Unblock request 106 194.81.151.68 107 Fromos 108 Re. Public Information Research 109 Admin coaching? 110 With thanks 111 Another sockpuppet of User:Bennet556? 112 my RfA - Ta! 113 CowboyCaleb1 114 Yoshi525 115 Thanks... 116 Your wonderful CU skills are needed...... 117 Code B 118 Oy 119 Rollback 120 Trioblóid le hathainmniú 121 Moving Article without agreement 122 Pentyrch 123 Another sockpuppet of User:Bennet556 124 Possible sock? 125 Flowerpotman ex machina 126 Yet another sockpuppet of User:Bennet556? 127 you have e-mail 128 User talk:71.187.164.93 129 Latest Checkuser 130 Please talk to Traditional Unionist (if you haven't already done so) 131 Need impartial admin input 132 *Ping* 133 Thank you! 134 NTWW 135 Request for assistance 136 I liked the old pic! 137 Anna polly

Foreign

What does "Ar deis Dé go raibh a anam dílis" (which you wrote here) mean? What language is it? Interactive Fiction Expert/Talk to me 09:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It's in the Irish language and is basically a short blessing. Sadly, User:Dalf passed away - Alison ^❤ 09:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you from Horologium

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed unanimously with the support of 100 editors. Your kindness is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Wizardman, Black Falcon and jc37 for nominating me. — Horologium

William Gaillard

You recently placed a block on the William Gaillard page, which has now ended. no consenus has been reached and it is close to becoming another edit war. i have tried to use the articles talk page to reach a consensus but have not been able to so far.could you help? Dead-or-Red (talk) 17:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I have adopted a conciliatory tone and attitude towards gaining a consensus. However it does appear that an edit war 3rr, situation is the likely outcome, obviously a position I would not want to place myself in.Londo06 17:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

And protected again. Since the edit-war started up immediately the prot was lifted, indefinite full protection at an arbitrary revision is now in place. Guys - please try to resolve it here on the talk page. When you're both ready, feel free to let me know or post an unprot request at WP:RFPP - Alison ^❤ 19:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

somebody else needs to look at the article, i have tried to gain consensus through the talk page, however the other editor has limited reading comprehension or has delibritly mis-quoted me in order to justify his unfounded reverts. Dead-or-Red (talk) 19:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Dan689

Apparently the range you blocked didn't manage to stop this one from slipping through:

proof (timestamp shows 15:09 April 30, several hours after your block)

James265 (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser).

Can you sniff this one out as well? Thanks...¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 19:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep. I didn't report that one as the edits looked fine and I had some doubts. It's the only one that did make it through, though and hopefully that'll be it now ... - Alison ^❤ 19:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Chandrasekhar limit

Hi Alison, I have been doing some rewriting of this article (just the intro, really), and I was hoping to get another opinion if my changes have made it easier to understand:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chandrasekhar_limit&diff=209487675&oldid=208595439

Thanks. --Kyoko 19:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow - that's excellent, actually. I have to say, I'm clueless about astrophysics and am only really familiar with the term, but what you've done is a vast improvement. The original paragraph was rather off-putting in its weightiness. Waayyy better :) - Alison ^❤ 21:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC) (I owe you mail!)

Thank you! Astronomy is one of my many interests, and when I saw that introduction, I thought I cold do better. I've done a little more work on the article. I don't know if I'll do any more on that article, because I have other things to do, but thank you for the compliment! --Kyoko 16:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Newmarket, County Cork

As it's your neck-of-the-woods you should take a peep at a rather persistent IP vandal. Zap 'im! Sarah777 (talk) 20:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

• I just dropped a note on their talk page. Ahem, someone in a place on the banks should be studying for the exams; they can't be far off :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 21:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks me 'oul Flower - I was getting repetitive strain injury reverting him. Sarah777 (talk) 21:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you :) His attack image is now baleeted and UCC gets a 31-hour break from North Cork (or is it the other way around?) - Alison ^❤ 21:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Jacob Peters

I'm not so sure about "unncessary". Peters is a prolific sockpuppeteer of the manic-obsessive type. Please take the IP out of play or we'll have a pile more socks to deal with. Besides, I would like absolute confirmation I didn't just block a chap indef for no good reason, even though I am pretty darn sure. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 21:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so. Will do - Alison ^❤ 21:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

NTWW 12

See this discussion: [1]--Filll (talk) 14:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Signed! - Alison ^❤ 17:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

Re this block, I'm interested in the sequence of events. (I am not an administrator, so I don't know necessarily where to look, and I'm not sure what to look for either.) I followed this drama for a day. I was one of several people who warned the user that a block was likely forthcoming, which happened. The block was appealed several times until an admin unblocked (too soon, in my view but again, I'm not an admin). So shortly after the unblock, you identified the user as a sockpuppet. (Well, probably you blocked because of it.) So my question is this, as a relative newcomer - some time and effort could have been saved here - and maybe it was but I just don't know it. Can you shed a little light on the sequence of events after the unblock, or that were occurring elsewhere while the block/unblock was going on? (I'll watch your page or you can email me from mine.) I don't mind a pointer to generic information if you are unable or disinclined to get into specifics. Thanks!  Frank  |  talk  01:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

CU Assistance ASAP

See this, this, and this please. Thank you. (Note: This message has been sent to Thatcher as well.)¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - thanks for that. Followed up over at WP:RFCU - Alison ^❤ 03:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dmurawski

Hi there, I have submitted a checkuser case which does not appear to be showing up on the main checkuser list. Is there something else I need to do to ensure that it shows up? --Deadly∀ssassin 09:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• It appears that one of the clerks has sorted it out. Thanks anyway. --Deadly∀ssassin 19:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Is there any chance you could conduct the CU please? --Deadly∀ssassin 22:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi there. I'd rather not, as another checkuser has Declined the case and, on examination, I concur with them - Alison ^❤ 16:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

• • • Thanks anyway - just for the record you'll notice I made my request before Thatcher had made a call so I wasn't asking you to overturn him/her. :) --Deadly∀ssassin 18:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

House1090 sock?

User:Rdrgz93 has an editing style very similar to banned user User:House1090, but up until now he was concentrating his efforts on a different part of California so I thought it was coincidental. Now, however, he is making comments on talk pages about San Bernardino County, House's area. Could you please do a CU to see if he is a House1090 sock? Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 03:03, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, this one is Unlikely to be House1090. Next time, can you provide some more detailed evidence, diffs etc before asking? Thanks - Alison ^❤ 03:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. I will review some of your other requests so I will have a better idea of what information to give you. You have been very helpful and I appreciate your work. Alanraywiki (talk) 03:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! :) - Alison ^❤ 03:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick request

Could you delete this for me? Always best to cover up my own poor spelling!Traditional unionist (talk) 22:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - I won't tell :) - Alison ^❤ 16:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you kindly.Traditional unionist (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hey there - just sent you semi-urgent email...... Tvoz/talk 01:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for writing, Tvoz! Read it through (phew!) I have to think on it to figure out what to do. More later .... - Alison ^❤ 16:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I know! That's fine. I have another, very possibly related, matter which will be coming your way shortly as soon as I have a second to get to email. Tvoz/talk 21:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

OK- another email waiting..... Tvoz/talk 00:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

VK's proposed return

Your input and comments are welcome on the talk page here User:Giano/Terms for VK's return. Giano (talk) 08:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Giano. I've just commented on the talk page and will also provide feedback on the terms. Thanks again - Alison ^❤ 16:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Usercheck please

Ali, could you check IP User:86.27.162.213 against the list of editors involved in the British Isles naming dispute? The IP is used solely to edit-war on these articles and I strongly suspect a "regular". Include the relevant Admins in the check please. Regards Sarah777 (talk) 11:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sarah. It's just a not-so-well-known editor who edits there. They've been forgetting to log in, far as I can see. And no - not an admin :) - Alison ^❤ 16:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alison, Did your use of CheckUser tool in this case fit with the policy? I've been looking at that policy and I don't think it did on this occasion. You're right in your assumption. There is no malicious intent in any of my edits. In the light of this check I'm considering changing my IP and moving to a new user account, unless you can guarantee that my privacy has not been compromised, for a very weak case from Sarah77. 86.27.162.213 (talk) 17:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Your privacy has not been compromised. Nobody has any clue who you are apart from Alison. --Deskana (talk) 17:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Basically, what Deskana said. Unfortunately, the articles you are editing come under the auspices of the Troubles ArbCom case. It's been one of the most heavily socked issues right now and people who drop in and out of their account while remaining editing the same articles are bound to arouse suspicion, as you have. Under the checkuser policy, checking your IP is clearly within the rules as I had reasonable suspicion of disruptive socking. Remember that before I checked, I had no idea as to the account behind it. Also, as Deskana pointed out, per privacy policy, I'm forbidden from revealing identifying information, so your account is safe! - Alison ^❤ 17:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I think if you had looked at the edits reported by the complainant you would have come to a different conclusion: there was no 3 reverts, there was explanation on the Talk page and that explanation would be considered reasonable by many people. Furthermore, it seems the complainant has a history of antagonism in this area; she was angry and requested no less than three admins to look at it. Now, as a result of your comments, she can rule out a large number of editors at the British Isles talk page and really narrow down my user ID. It seems to me that carrying out CheckUser can be done at the drop of hat. "Disruptive socks" - from what I read that would seem to be something about users setting up multiple accounts. Anyway, I'm changing my IP now, but I'll stick with my user name. There appear to be really serious issues at BI. 86.27.162.213 (talk) 18:35, 5 May 2008

If you are not using the IP solely for the purpose of engaging in edit-warring on the BI issue then why the secrecy? IMHO there should be no IPs allowed edit controversial articles as they are impossible to distinguish from socks. And btw; I said you were edit-warring, I didn't say you breached 3RR. Had you done so you'd not be talking here right now. Plus, I'll go to as many Admins as I think the situation requires. Sarah777 (talk) 20:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Ali, please see Talk:Great Britain and Ireland; this IP is now canvassing for assistance in his edit-warring efforts. Isn't there a policy prohibiting that? Sarah777 (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Allie, I've semi-protected British Isles because an IP there is causing Trouble and I have strong evidence based on contributions he is a banned editor we both happen to know. Not much point blocking for long due to the fact he moved IPs (I blocked the one he jumped to briefly, since he was agitating on the Vk issue). Just wanted to let you know. Rockpocket 04:10, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Rockpocket. Good call! To 86.27, this is why checkuser was necessary as socking is rampant on Troubles-related articles. What I was originally suspicious of was not just edit-warring but logging out to evade scrutiny which is against policy. It's best to avoid controversy if you can and stay logged in at all times. As regards Sarah; yes, she does have a rather strong opinion on matters and has a pretty extreme POV of her own but I have to say that socking was never in her own repertoire. I had not been aware she'd approached others on this matter, though, and took the case at face value and found merit in the request - Alison ^❤ 04:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear! you lot really are missing the plot here. In the interests of you admins not wasting any more time on this sort of thing (maybe you might even contribute to actual material instead, who knows (joke!)) here's the situation. Yes, I was canvassing for support at that stupid article using the IP. What else was I to do, given that User Alison went a long way down the road to identifing me. If I'd used my user ID then the likes of Sarah777 would have identified my IP address. If you care to look at my user ID (since you know it) you'll note that I haven't used my user ID at any time that I was using the IP, and yes, it was an oversight that I made those edits using an IP in the first place. Rockpuppet - if you think I'm the IP causing trouble on the VK(what's that?) issue, you're wrong. I'm not a previous banned editor, nor has my IP ever been banned. There are several IPs causing trouble at Talk:British Isles, along with several other users including Sarah777, so what's new? So this is not a good call. Incidentally, I didn't see any record of a checkuser request. Sarah777 just did it informally and got some information - bad policy. For the record, I am (or was) and established editor with 1000s of edits. I gave up well over a year ago but now I'm back with my new ID (old one never to be used again). Good editing! 86.27.162.213 (talk) 17:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Please note that firstly, checkuser requests do not have to be done via WP:RFCU, nor do they even have to be public. The policy is quite clear on that. Also, as you say, that article is already riddled with socking and shenanigans so evade scrutiny at your peril. What you were doing is against policy. And yes, I agree that you're not the banned editor that Rockpocket is referring to above - Alison ^❤ 17:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Are we having fun yet?

Did you get my email? Been staying out of trouble(s), I hope? :) SirFozzie (talk) 03:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey Foz :) Y'know, it's absolutely lovely to see you back again. We missed ya! Bummer, though, that it's head-first back into you-know-where again!! Will we ever find peace, I wonder? :) Either way, super that you're back here again! Yay! - Alison ^❤ 03:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course. SOMEONE has to be the sand in the gears right? Can't have things functioning too efficiently *Grins* SirFozzie (talk) 03:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Wiktionary rename

Ok. The other Alison is now named something else. If you need your en-wikt account renamed too, please bug me again on my en:wikt talk page. I'm afraid that when this stuff all runs together after the 20th or so rename inside of a month or two, so please speak slowly and clearly. :-) (I might even check the rename requests page again this week, but not tonight.) --Dvortygirl (talk) 05:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for sorting this out :) I really appreciate it and I know you've been run off your feet with the SUL nonsense. Your talk page is replete with requests. Thank you!! - Alison ^❤ 05:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

(redacted article)

You are an oversighter! And I have been told you are out and about at the moment. This above article got deleted recently, was an attack page containing the mobile number of the target. The mobile number is still in the history, and just thought I would check with you as to whether the history needs to be deleted to keep the number completely hidden (the deleting admin did point out only admins can see it, which I had forgotten, so I said I would just ask but not expect it to be necessary). Regards, SGGH ^speak! 12:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I took a look at the deleted article and have dealt with it. Thanks again - Alison ^❤ 17:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

St John Bosco College Year 12 2007

Is currently at MFD - as you're the one who originally userified it, you might want to argue for it. — iridescent 15:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Iridescent. That article was userfied last November in good faith and was never meant to hang around. It had already failed an AfD. I've weighed in over on the DRV now. Thanks again - Alison ^❤ 17:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Jonathan Howarth

Hey Alison, I was wondering if you knew who the this user is a sock of? Tiptoety ^talk 16:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Dunno who the sockmaster his, but he's had dozens of abusive accounts, all under one IP address. He's the "Thousands of socks" guy who pops up all the time - it was on ANI yesterday - Alison ^❤ 16:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. He left me a little message on my talk letting me know, I was just curios if we ever found out who the sockmaster is. Oh well, thanks anyways. Tiptoety ^talk 16:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Nothing444

Regarding this, I seriously apologise. I felt it was sock puppetry there. I realise I jumped the gun, so to speak, and I will personally apologise to Nothing444 for that block. Should I resign? Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 18:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you should, no, but you're wayyy too twitchy with the block button. WP:AGF applies over there, too and at the very least, you should have held off until the checkuser was completed. Better still, you could have discussed it with a checkuser discretely instead of publicly airing it and thus jeopardizing the poor guy's RfA. I think you need to apologize in a big way and maybe look before you leap next time!! :) - Alison ^❤ 18:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)q

✓ Done I've written him a public apology on his talk page. I'll also reverse my oppose to neutral, as I want to try to counteract any damage I've done. I feel really bad now :( Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 18:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, good call. Let's see what the response is, as that's quite an indication of how his adminship would be handled - Alison ^❤ 19:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Super Giano

Thanks. God, semi-protection isn't enough to stave off these wankers :/ Sceptre ^(talk) 18:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's JtV/Italian Vandal. Must be a boring day at the office again - Alison ^❤ 19:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

These sorts of edits are really driving me off Wikipedia. :/ Sceptre ^(talk) 19:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Contrary to a couple of emails, I have just received, can I prove this "super" Giano is still able to edit. Giano (talk) 19:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll bet. They're a regular on it.wikipedia. Be sure to tell them thanks for impersonating you on Sean's testwiki, as well as creating "Giano bifronte" (tsk) - Alison ^❤ 19:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

3D-Palace notability

Hi. I wrote an article about a website that is a pioneer in the 3d application video tutorials. It is considered spam, even if it was the first company to produce end to end video tutorials. I consider that being pretty important. If this matter isn't worthy to be in an encyclopedia, I ask you why is the 3D Buzz article still online? I followed that article as an example, and so far 3 of the articles I wrote were considered spam. I've read the guidelines, but they are very ambiguous. I await your response on my talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by InProgress (talk • contribs) 10:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Z. Rivkin M.D.

im editing rhinoplasty at the moment. but im very new to it all. just started last week. u can see my contribution to the talk. i think this section on Alexander Z. Rivkin M.D. should be removed. or at least greatly mondified by addition of many other surgeons. not including me. although im a surgeon, im not of international stature! im an ENT surgeon from toronto. what is the least irriating and kindest way to proceed? do we need some type of concensus process?Oakleysmith (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Help or just a pat on the head?

Hihi...I don't know if you remember me....I was one of the instigators in the Tedious Z stuff. Anyway...I stumbled on an AfD that was closed, I felt incorrectly...so I took it to review [[2]]. I am getting completely frustrated with this process. It seems that just because no one likes the guy (heck, not even ME!) that no one will admit that there is enough there to show notability...Could you take a look and give me a reality check? I may be way off, but I just feel like there is enough there. I appreciate your time and help or kick in the pants...whichever you decide to give :) (oh, btw, did you see TZ's blog, he's been kicked offa ANOTHER forum for the same thing!!) LegoTech·(t)·(c) 07:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I've recently been prodded toward adminship, but I'm nervous about taking it on and I feel I need coaching. I have it on very good authority that you are an exceptional admin coach, so I thought it best to make your acquaintance and ask for your help. Please, can you help? Serendi^podous 14:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

You've got mail

I've cordially invited you to help open a fresh can of worms... — iridescent 16:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

ban evading sock-puppets advice on collateral damage if blocked

Hi Alison I'm sorry to bother you with this but Jehochman recommends I contact to you about a banned user who is ban evading using University of California Santa Barbara library and IT dept IPs. (See my post to Jehochman for details).

User:Anacapa was banned for using multiple IPs (24 from UCSB) to avoid scrutiny while povpushing and trolling on Shunning, Menonite, Gender, Project Gender studies, Feminism, Rape, Incest and other articles. A full history of his disruption is here in this report. An archive of the ban discussion is here

Anacapa was also found to be likely using sock-puppet accounts (see RFCU case here). One of the IPs he used in the last few days was previously blocked by Coelacan for this same reason[3].

Jehochman recommended that I contact you in order to asses "how many unrelated users are in this range, and if there would not be too much collateral damage, could we have a range block". The range in question includes these IPs: 128.111.97.148, |128.111.95.110, 128.111.95.171, 128.111.95.38 (I think the range is 128.111.0.0/16 but I'm no expert in this area) other IPs used by Anacapa can be seen here but the 4 listed here are the 'live' ones.

Thanks for taking the time to go through this and sorry if this is a really complex issue but Anacapa is quite a complex troll--Cailil ^talk 14:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Admin Coaching

Hey there Alison, I'm looking through the admin coachee requests trying to find people who are A) qualified to run for adminship right now and B) people who need some help, but could be a candidate in the future. I found a candidate whom I think could be an admin, but needs help. According to the coaching status page, you are willing to take on a coachee, so I was wondering if you could take a look at Realist2? That link will take you to the section of his talk page where I vetted him some.Balloonman (talk) 17:30, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. Can I get back on the whole admin coaching thing? I've let a few requests slide so far (to my shame!) and, to be honest, I'm not sure how I feel about coaching right now. I'm a little wikifrazzled and could use a break and am unsure if I can give a candidate the attention that they need and deserve ... - Alison ^❤ 03:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

Checkuser

You did a check on Sumerophile (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) which resulted in a block, currently active. In the meantime we have Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) who has today introduced a dozen or so cfds such as this one, relating to categories and redirects heavily edited by Sumerophile. Moreover Blueberrybuttermilkpancakes opened the account on 26 April (S was blocked for 72 hours on 25 Apr). So I think these 2 are related and checkuser might confirm this. -- roundhouse0 (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

This one's been sorted now! - Alison ^❤ 06:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Unblock help needed

Hey, Alison. Someone's requesting an unblock of one of the IP addresses you recently CU-blocked. Would you mind taking a quick look if you've got the time? Thanks... User talk:Exxolon#Here we go again... Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Hersfold. I addressed this one yesterday & everything's all sorted now. Thanks for letting me know - Alison ^❤ 22:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

An invitation to the NotTheWikipediaWeekly

Greetings! You have expressed an interest in joining in with the next NotTheWikipediaWeekly episode. We now have a confirmed date and time: the episode will take place at Friday, 9 May 2008, at 00.30 (UTC). For that episode in various local times, see here. If you'd like to attend, please "enroll" at Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Confirmed participants. Please also feel free to browse the suggested topics for this epsiode. We look forward to seeing you on Friday at 00.30!

All the best, Anthøny 22:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

You just signed up as being there, but it already is over. You missed it. Sorry.--Filll (talk) 02:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

.... ah no!! I must have got my times wrong as I was sure it was at 5:30pm tomorrow :( - Alison ^❤ 06:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

Unblock

Please see: User talk:AaronSw. Thanks! Tiptoety ^talk 02:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Sorted now - thanks for that! - Alison ^❤ 06:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No, thank you! Tiptoety ^talk 22:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

G'day alison

...and I was sorry to miss you at the podcast recording earlier - it was quite an interesting one, and the audio is all online now over at WP:NTWW - hopefully you can make another one before too long (in fact, p'raps I'll look for you on skype next week sometime to try and discuss an idea I've got....)

In other news - I also wanted your advice about something..... I've created a 'long term straw poll' for the ideas at WP:OPTOUT, which is located at Wikipedia:OPTOUT/Long_Term_Straw_Poll (I don't think the current deletion discussion is going to delete it, which is good, and I'm not really worried about that aspect) - but what I was wanting some advice about is where the community draws its lines in regard to 'canvassing' - I'm obviously notifying you about it here - and I'd like to drop a note in the talk pages of the other folk who commented at the proposal talk page to hear their views (both in support, and 'against' the proposal) - any thoughts you've got on whether or not that's a good idea would be welcomed.

cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 06:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

A Big Thank you!

Hello Alison! Just wanted to send you my sincere thanks for sorting out the infuriating situation, that was the IP block fiasco. I do hope that the vandal is either caught or stopped. I feel extremely honoured at being allowed this unblock, and you can be sure that I shall continue to fight my relatively new war in improving articles and fighting vandalism! Whilst I acknowledge I'm a newbie, I really want to learn as much as I can, its just Wikipedia can and is at times, very confusing! Regards, δ²_(Talk) 07:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm absolutely delighted to have helped and that you're back in action again. This is the best resolution we could have hoped for; you back editing and the vandals being stopped :) Thank you for everything you do for the project, too - Alison ^❤ 19:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Please

If you could i would like you to rename me from iordanis_athanasiadis to iordanis_777.Thanks in advance and have a nice day.--Iordanis777^listening 08:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

(knocks on door—hi Alison :) Hi there, I'm afraid only bureaucrats can rename users. Alison has checkuser and oversight rights, but she's not a bureaucrat. You may post your request over at Wikipedia:Changing username, or ask one of the helpful folks on this list for assistance. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Fvasconcellos :) Yes, you'll need a Bureaucrat to do the job. Fortunately, it's pretty straightforward. Just follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username and so long as the name you want isn't taken, it'll be easy! If you need a hand filing the request, just let me know - Alison ^❤ 18:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

And don't worry if you inadvertently make a mistake - I clerk there and will be more than happy to fix it up :) -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 18:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the immediate reply.Have anice day!--Iordanis777^listening 06:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Could checkuser be used in this way?

Hi Alison,

Flo suggested that you might be able to help resolve the viability of an idea relating to the use of checkuser in wiping VK's slate clean, so if you have moment do you think you could take a look at User talk:Giano/Terms for VK's return#Forgotten_socks? Any guidance would welcome :)

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, BHG, I've replied here. This sounds like it could be workable and I'd certainly be amenable to help - Alison ^❤ 18:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Ha!

You beat me to the bisexual revert!Good job! Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 17:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Fast on the draw ;) - Alison ^❤ 18:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Enigmanman/Scarian

Hi Alison, I was following the discussion at AN/I, and sorry if I'm missing something here, but are Scarian and Enigmaman one and the same? Forgive me if I've overlooked something. Best, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

They're not, no. But they're obviously in contact. I wouldn't worry about it ... - Alison ^❤ 21:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks. I was a bit confused, that's all :-) AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I sent it to him because I was unable to edit at the time. :) Enigma ^message 17:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick question

Are these accounts confirmed as socks of User:NisarKand or User:Beh-nam, I was a bit confused by your comment. Also, I was unable to locate the IP that reported it in the page history to block them, do you happen to have that? Tiptoety ^talk 22:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

heh - well the fact is that Afghan-related articles are replete with socks, and RFCU cases are no different. The anon who filed that case was User:Beh-nam and the checkuser-proven socks were indeed User:NisarKand. I've updated the case now to clarify that but I seriously don't blame you for not knowing. Both of those sockers and constantly reporting each other!! :) - Alison ^❤ 22:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, just wanted to make sure I was tagging their userpages correctly. Thank you. Tiptoety ^talk 22:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

OTRS ticket

Could you please verify that ticket #2008041110026206 verifies that Image:Machinedrum.jpg is released under the GFDL, and if so let me know on my talk page? A user has claimed this and I just want to be sure it's all in order. Stifle (talk) 22:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I can confirm that the subject/owner has given "express permission" for the above image to be used on Wikipedia. License was not specified but the ticket was closed as successful - Alison ^❤ 23:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

For you!

Hello Alison! I've decided to give you some flowers in an attempt to prevent you from finding dreadful every time I drop by at your talk page with a checkuser request for Polscience. Hope you like them! :-)

And now (when you least expect it) here comes the dreadful checkuser request for User:Polscience, bwahaha. :-P New suspected socks: User:Fitzier, User:Selma Kaufmann, User:Abdel Cader and User:Monica Arria. Could you please have a look at them when/if you have time? Thank you. PS- I hope you liked the flowers, they were not meant to be just a shameless bribe but a nice gesture towards a user who truly deserves them. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 03:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Ohhh, so the trick is flowers. (snaps fingers) If I'd have only known...

(Guess I better go look for some : ) - jc37 03:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You guys!! Oh and Husond, I guess you think you can bribe me with flowers, huh? HUH?? Well okay, maybe :-D

Confirmed - the following accounts as socks of Polscience (talk · contribs)

1. Selma Kaufmann (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
2. Scholt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
3. Alexuss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
4. Briggitte (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
5. Ardholt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
6. Annuitcoeptis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
7. NoSoclorum (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
8. Fitzier (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
9. Abdel Cader (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
10. Monica Arria (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
11. Hussond (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) - doing the impersonate/redirect thing. Blocked this one myself :(
12. Jk69696969696969 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
13. Natalia Vodianova (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)

- Alison ^❤ 05:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much Alison, great work! This guy surely has a lot of free time. Egad. Best regards, Húsönd 14:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

A gift of flowers : )

A present from Kilkenny : )

Ooooh - more bribery, and this time from Ireland :) Thank you so much! - Alison ^❤ 05:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks for granting me rollback! I'll use it responsibly. Sleepaholic (talk) 05:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Glad to help :) - Alison ^❤ 05:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You have email...

...and you will do in a few days. Ta, --1qx (talk) 18:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Email

Not to bother you, but I really need a reply on that email that I sent you. Thanks! Mww113 (talk) 18:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Since flowers seem to work....

Just kidding! You Deserve them! But I still need an answer! Thanks! < The reason for the bribe Mww113 (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Awwww - thank you! :) I really need to think re. that email. Can I send it on in confidence to the c/u community? - Alison ^❤ 04:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, :) Mww113 (talk) 14:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, sent. I'll get back to you when I've any information - Alison ^❤ 00:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Mww113 (talk) 01:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam

Allison, on the checkuser, User:Litrboxr, who I suspect to be NisarKand, slipped in the accounts Duvarngreen and KyleSmithX as being confirmed sockpuppets and then uses this page to revert several edits by them. Can you correct this? Vinh1313 (talk) 19:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood Litrbox's edit although I'm skeptical about Duvarngreen and KyleSmithX being Benham. Vinh1313 (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

User: Toomiasy vs. User: Tomeasy

There is a new user with a handle very similar to mine editing articles that I used to edit. What makes me most suspicious is that their user page redirects to mine. Since I had a similar experience not too long ago with an avatar of mine stemming from an IP originally used by User: Polscience I would like to ask you to check, whether again I am facing a kind of fraud. Tomeasy (talk) 03:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed as Polscience, as well as another five sleeper socks (and a Husond impersonator). All blocked now :) - Alison ^❤ 04:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Isn't it possible to block the related IP, instead of tracking again and again Polscience's reincarnations? Tomeasy (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Not really. He uses a different IP nearly every time - Alison ^❤ 04:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Please can you drop in on David Lauder's Talk page. --Major Bonkers (talk) 13:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Bonkers. Things seem to have quieted down again, so we'll see how things go. If it gets out of hand again, I'll likely full-prot for a day or two to allow everyone to back down - Alison ^❤ 00:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. The mere threat of you putting in an appearance seems to have resolved the situation! --Major Bonkers (talk) 09:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL - I doubt it, somehow. Giano quaking in fear at my mere presence? Nahh :D - Alison ^❤ 22:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you have made a wise and brave decision. It can't be very nice for all the very worthy and hard working people of Essex, many of then Wikipedia editors, no doubt, to be so wantonly maligned. Giano (talk) 20:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Rfb participation thanks

Hello, Alison.

I wanted to personally thank you for taking part in the project-wide discussions regarding my candidacy for bureaucratship. After bureaucratic discussion, the bureaucrats decided that there was sufficient significant and varied opposition to my candidacy, and thus no consensus to promote. Although personally disappointed, I both understand and respect their decision, especially in light of historical conservatism the project has had when selecting its bureaucrats. For now, I think I'm going to take a bit of a wikibreak, as this experience was somewhat draining. Hopefully, I'll be able to put more energy back into OTRS now as well. If you have any further suggestions or comments as to how you think I could help the project, please let me know. Once again, thank you for your support. -- Avi (talk) 19:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

TougHHead

TougHHead is back with Master Ned (talk · contribs). Any IP work you can do here? Thanks, Metros (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

IP blocked ;) - Alison ^❤ 20:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Peeking out from behind the flowers

Hi : )

I left a question further up, if you have a moment : ) - jc37 00:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Finally got to it! - Alison ^❤ 00:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

machinedrum.jpg

Express permission was given by the artist to use the image freely on wikipedia. Do I need to contact him again to have him specify that the license is "free" in order for the image to be undeleted? How many hoops do I have to jump through to get the image approved? See below for your response to the person who nominated the image for deletion. Please let me know the necessary next step. Thanks. Wanglechangle8 (talk) 12:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

OTRS Ticket Could you please verify that ticket #2008041110026206 verifies that Image:Machinedrum.jpg is released under the GFDL, and if so let me know on my talk page? A user has claimed this and I just want to be sure it's all in order. Stifle (talk) 22:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I can confirm that the subject/owner has given "express permission" for the above image to be used on Wikipedia. License was not specified but the ticket was closed as successful - Alison ❤ 23:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, please explain to me why this image was deleted, and if it was because it had the wrong license category, please tell me what license category that would allow "use for wikipedia only." Thanks again. Wanglechangle8 (talk) 12:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. The image was deleted for "I3: Improper license: OTRS ticket confirms that permission is granted for use on Wikipedia only. This is not sufficiently free. Therefore this image is being deleted." Note that though non-free images are frowned on, images which are used under Fair Use may be uploaded, especially if they're used with explicit permission, as yours was. The ultimate best thing to do would be to ask the owner/subject to release it under a free license, like the GNU Free Documentation License or Creative Commons licenses (or even both!). You can probably re-upload it, but will need to claim proper fair use in the meantime - Alison ^❤ 22:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yet another random editor bothering you

Sorry about that. This AfD was withdrawn to let an improvement effort proceed. I'd close it as speedy keep, but I've already left a comment on the page and it would be good form if someone else did it at her own discretion. Could you have a look, please? --Kizor 19:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay! It's been closed already as speedy keep - Alison ^❤ 04:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Who ordered 137?

• User:Who ordered 137? has started an email discussion with me trying to persuade me to unblock him. He claimed that "Yes, I vandalized once under that account. I apologize for that; I really only intended to make the first move, which seemed funny, then got carried away.". That email discussion has had 4 messages from him to me and 2 messages from me to him. I have not unblocked him. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, he was an obvious Grawp wannabe, with his HAGGER? page moves. Before that, he'd a clean history. However, Lucasbfr did the block, so maybe check with him. I've no problem with whatever decision you make on this one. I'm inclined to believe he was trying it on and got a bit carried away all right - Alison ^❤ 05:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Before anyone does anything, this guy has a big lack of understanding of the sock policy. He is not only User:Who ordered 137? but also User:The Mind is my country and User:The way, the truth, and the light - the former of those two created specifically to evade his email block, and the latter was editing for some time after the block of the original account, and also has an extensive block log. If he gets unblocked, he needs to choose one of these accounts and not keep hopping from account to account. I can forward the emails I've received if anyone wants, I've got a couple. All my replies were posted to the account's various talk pages. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

While I personally can't care less about User:The Mind is my country, the fact that this user was also operating User:The way, the truth, and the light is much more worrisome. That being said, while I don't think unblocking him is the best idea in the world, I don't mind if you take the risk of unblocking him. -- lucasbfr ^talk 17:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Got an off-wiki question for you. Your email still good? (nothing important, just following up on something you offered a while back :)) SirFozzie (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, go for it :) - Alison ^❤ 05:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Email sent. Thanks again! SirFozzie (talk) 05:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

"nice try"

It was a recreation of a deleted article for a wiki full of trolls. Ipso facto...I deleted it again. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, but there was that DRV. And it was certainly cited, and looks notable. I'm not pushed either way, not being much of a fan (I'm "featured" there :( ), but this really is starting to look out-of-process. At the very best, there's going to be Drahma Extraordinaire™ over this. *sigh* - Alison ^❤ 08:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh boo, people worry about process and drama too much. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

		The Original Barnstar
		I have come to wish you a Happy Happy Birthday and hope all wishes come true. well done. Thank You! Buddha24 (talk) 08:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy birthday Ali - assuming that Buddha has the date right. Viridae^Talk 08:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Huh?? :O - Alison ^❤ 08:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Had no-one told you? Checkusers have an Official birthday, and yours (it seems) is today. Many happy returns of the day! Bencherlite^Talk 08:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, so! Paaarrtty! - Alison ^❤ 08:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Lol! Viridae^Talk 08:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopædia Dramatica

Could you please unprotect this and create it as a redirect? Thanks.--AnonymousUser12345 (talk) 09:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - Alison ^❤ 09:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

And Encyclopediadramatica, thanks!--I LIVE IN A HAT (talk) 10:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - for the lulz - Alison ^❤ 12:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

VK

I have posted the conditions on VK's page, but I don't know how to do collapse, or know how long they have to remain in full before collapse, so can I leave that to you or BHG? Giano (talk) 12:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Giano. I'll sort it out in a min here. Looks like he's unblocked, BTW - Alison ^❤ 12:22, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it it is good news - I have ammended the rules page accordingly - hopefully this can be the start of something good, and a way of getting other former editors back to writing. Giano (talk) 12:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - I've moved it off to a separate page and transcluded it for prettiness and inobtrusiveness. Feel free to play about with the headings and stuff until it's the way you like, but the mechanics of it are in place - Alison ^❤ 12:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Once any presentational tweaks are done, I think it would be best for everyone if User:Vintagekits/terms is protected so that only admins can edit it. There could be inflammatory consequences if anyone vandalised it, and I think we all want to avoid more drama.

I had one minor issue with the way it was presented: it was all in small print, so I did a tweak to the CSS to make it appear in standard-sized text. Hope that's OK. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

PS Now that the discussion have been closed, I suggest that the "please discuss here" notices at the top of VK's talk page should be removed. It might be a good idea to transclude {{User:Vintagekits/terms}} there as well, but I'll leave it to you to decide whether that's appropriate. My guess is that editors are more likely to visit his talk page than his user page, so the terms are more visible on his talk, and that may be useful to Vk if any admin is tempted to jump in with a block rather than take it to WP:ANI; however there may be concerns that this would be rubbing his nose in it. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

e-mail

Hi Alison, could you please check your e-mail? I need your opinion about something. Thanks. --Kyoko 12:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok - will do. I owe you a response to the other day's ... - Alison ^❤ 12:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Favour...

Hey Ali, hope you're doing okay. I hate to just pop by and request a favour but.... can I request a favour? Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Grant.Alpaugh‎ is causing a few established editors a bit of a headache, there's also a RCU dealing the same thing. Can you push it through? I highly suspect only the IP will match Mr Alpaugh... Cheers, no problems if you're too busy... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I owe you (at least) one...! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all :) - Alison ^❤ 17:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

confirmation requested

Thatcher confirmed it for me but I would like you to confirm the confirmation. (Run a checkuser on my IP).

I am a doctor. I do not want people to think that I am an angry patient, a convict, or work for a pharmaceutical company as a marketing representative. Based on my IP, one can make this conclusion.

Would you confirm that I am a doctor based on my IP. Once I get some sort of indication that I am a legitimate person, I want to start writing articles. I didn't want to start before because I was afraid someone may think I have a hidden agenda or conflict of interest. By stating my profession, everyone knows it and disclosure eliminates any possible conflict of interest (or at least let's people know so that they can form their own opinion).

Possible conclusions

Doctor Wikipedian is or is likely to be a doctor based on IP. He is not editing from a prison, home, or pharmaceutical company.

Doctor Wikipedian is editing from a prison and may be a convict.

Doctor Wikipedian is editing from an IP assigned to a pharmaceutical company.

Doctor Wikipedian is editing from a school and may be a student or teacher.

Doctor Wikipedian (talk) 16:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• I did no such thing. Thatcher 16:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• Hi there. While, I'd really like to help you here, it's not an appropriate use of checkuser nor is it within policy. Checkuser cannot verify the person behind the IP address not determine who or what they are. Nor would I like to personally make a statement regarding you as a person and especially not say anything related to how you could be qualified medically. I'm really going to have to decline your request here and point out that I have not and likely will not run a check on your account without due reason - Alison ^❤ 17:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser results

Thanks for all the results for the checkuser on Grant. Kingjeff (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help. I'm not sure what was going on over at the SSP request, but I'm glad it worked out as it did - Alison ^❤ 17:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you explain the result to me. Confirmed means that the IP was a sock. Is this right? Kingjeff (talk) 18:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed means that someone used his computer to make those edits. He claims that it was a roommate and that he was unaware of policy. Checkuser, once again, cannot identify the human behind the wire - Alison ^❤ 18:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Kingjeff (talk) 18:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

If assuming good faith was mean for every situation then nobody would ever get blocked in Wikipedia. I did assume good faith at the begining. Assuming good faith doesn't mean turning a blind eye to how he has acted with me. Kingjeff (talk) 19:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Followed up on your talk page and on the SSP case - Alison ^❤ 21:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Email

Alison, you has email :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 17:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done, thanks :) - Alison ^❤ 18:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Erm, out of interest, was it Johnny? Cos, we should probably block the IP's if it is. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 18:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope. Both were the same open proxy - now blocked - Alison ^❤ 18:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

 :O (is surprised it wasn't JTV.) Well, thanks for letting me know. :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 18:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your message. To be honest now it is less anger and more frustration and a little sadness that Kingjeff refuses to take responsibility for his own actions and continues to blame Grant for the sockpuppet case saying that he was sorry that Grant forced him to do it, which with all due respect is quite clearly not true. We are all responsible for our own actions, no-one forced him to do it. Also he has apologised to everyone else involved now (after being suggested strongly that he should do so) saying, "Sorry for the Sock case. This was more about Grant then it was about you" yet on my talk page he offers no such apology just the general "sorry Grant made me do it" message. That now I just find funny though. I realise that perhaps I should have just ignored all this, but I would never even have known about the accusation (nor would anyone else) had Rambling Man not informed me, yet Kingjeff still seems unwilling to see how his actions affect others.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Just a heads up about Kingjeff that he has now added a userbox on his userpage saying he has decided to leave wikipedia. Whilst I have not appreciated being drawn into all of this, the last thing I would want is for him to leave and wondered if it might be worth your trying to persuade him to stick around? I would do so but doubt he would pay much attention.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The supplicant comes grovelling

Alison, so sorry to pester you my dear, but could you possibly slide by this Checkuser. There are some reasons I'd like it looked at fairly promptly. Sorry to bother you! Pedro :  Chat  21:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done ;) - Alison ^❤ 21:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Pedro :  Chat  21:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

I guess this was a mistake? Acalamari 22:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Gah!! :-D - Alison ^❤ 22:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC) (I feel another rangeblock coming on ...)

No worries. :) Acalamari 22:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and great minds think alike. :) Acalamari 22:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

By the way, there's another category which contains suspected sockpuppets. Maybe one cat should reference the other? The evidence on the suspected ones is pretty clear, even if it's not checkuser-based. Enigma ^message 22:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

You Raok!

Yet another Wikipedian who raoks. I didn't think anyone would be kind enough to do this, and I didn't even have to ask anyone and people have helped. I'm appreciating how o.k. people have been, when I've been a bit two-faced or mocking, I suppose.:)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I appreciate your help so much, and was not expecting it from anyone one bit. Thank you for this lovely surprise. Merkin's mum 23:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)}

Thank you! Glad to have been able to help :) - Alison ^❤ 00:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You might want to also take a look at...

[4]. Perhaps you can get rid of that as well? ATren (talk) 00:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Ugh! Let's see how things progress. I've warned David and have stepped back myself to allow him a little space - Alison ^❤ 06:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

An invitation to the NotTheWikipediaWeekly

G'day NotTheWikipediaWeeklian (p'raps we need a catchier nom de plume?) - it's terribly short notice but I'm going to be hosting a discussion tomorrow, Thursday 15th May at 23.00 UTC (head to the 'NotTheWikipediaWeekly' page for full info, and a date and time convertor) - that's about 21 hours from now....... There could well be an additional conversation 24 hours later - so take your pick! - I will likely cover the topics which I nominated, and am aiming for a snappy 40minute conversation - do come along if you can! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 02:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Sussexman sock

Could you be so kind as to restore comments of mine to the Sussexman Sock, D Lauder's talk page. He has removed parts of comments and left others, changed a heading and removed an important statement of wikipedia rules, these edits combined have quita altered the meaning and point of the section. I note Sussexman is keen to return to editing, it needs to be pointed out, that this is not the way to go about it. I am reluctant to enter into an edit war with an established and proven sockpuppet of a blocked and banned user. \If this is not possible perhaps it would be best it the page is blanked and redirected to Sussexman Thanks. Giano (talk) 06:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Giano, the page is currently unprotected so you should be free to make these changes yourself - Alison ^❤ 06:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

No, no, that would only be called edit warring - by some. I have already had to re-insert the heading once, besides which I always think talking to a sock is rather like a child talking to an imaginary friend. I suppose this is one of the problems of allowing blocked and banned users to edit. Giano (talk) 06:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You have a way of putting things, Giano, that gets right to the heart of the problem :) Unfortuately, I cannot restore them as that would be inappropriate. However, I did just provide diffs, so people can judge accordingly - Alison ^❤ 09:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thanks for your support at my recent Request for adminship. And, ummm, yeah, definitely a member of the female sex. I hope you find I live up to your expectations – admin-wise that is! Best, Risker (talk) 16:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

User:PatPeter

User:PatPeter

Hi.

I've a concern, and I would like your thoughts.

The user above has been a sock puppeteer for some time now.

As I recall, he was banned due to an inordinate amount of time in user space, coupled with a fake suicide threat. It was determined that he wasn't here to build the encyclopedia.

Since then, I've encountered him using several IPs. (172.164 172.165 172.167 172.168 and some in other ranges as well 6x. 7x. ) And using several accounts. (See: User talk:The Big X and User talk:Sox207 in particular. And here's a checkUser)

So now I'm in a quandry. In looking over his multitude of edits, they're mostly involving userboxes (Note the name User:Babelious) or harassing other editors when they revert him. (See this lengthy tirade.) The few exceptions mostly include animated television.

I think I've now discovered a "sleeper" account (which has several other sock and IP probabilities with it), and may do a checkUser, but first I wanted to ask:

Is it worth it?

Does it matter if I'm reverting him as an IP or as an account.

I'd love to say he's a well-meaning editor, but the way he attacks people on talk pages and his past actions suggest that this is rather not likely, and besides the want to play with userboxes, he sees Wikipedia mostly as a game.

So here's my quandry. I'm finding myself tempted to unblock him and just say "skip it." His forays in mainspace, rare though they are, are typically non-disruptive minor edits (while often reverted half the time for various reasons related to the edits themselves).

Am I being too forgiving? Probably. (And probably due to the fact that other than him and another indef blocked editor, I don't do much vandalism patrol or blocking.) But anyway, I'd like your thoughts on this.

(I'm honestly wondering if you even remember being involved in the ban discussion at the admin's noticeboard. If I didn't encounter him periodically. I wonder if I would.) - jc37 01:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Urgh! I remember PatPeter very well indeed. His homophobic userboxes, the fake suicide and the police calls, his wikilawyering and his attacks on me and others. I have to say I checked his main account and yes, he's socking again. ROWikian (talk · contribs) is Confirmed as being PatPeter. Just look at the contribs. Personally, I think you may be being a bit lenient, given the way he has treated others. To be honest, he's largely worn out the goodwill of the community, IMO - Alison ^❤ 05:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right (of course), I guess it's more likely me tired of chasing sock after sock. (Though I'll have to say that I've gotten fairly experienced with his typical contributions.) Any suggestions? - jc37 05:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

ROWikian is now blocked.

Do I ask you here about User:Wolfdog1 or write up a checkuser?

(After looking over the contribs of several PatPeter IPs, and looking at Wolfdog1's contribs, and noting his similar subpages, and a lot of the same userboxes on his userpage (compared to PatPeter's). Needless to say, I sincerely hope I'm wrong.) - jc37 06:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Guessing that I'm now hidden behind the flowers : ) - jc37 20:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

← Guess I'd better answer this before I get into trouble :) Without checking, I can see that this editor acts a whole lot like PatPeter did; the homophobic userboxes, the obsession with templates and the talk page organization weirdness thing. However, it was okay for me to directly check PatPeter's IP address last time and catch the other sock - that's fine - but the problem is that I have a history with this editor and that he once made a complaint about me (and another admin. Deskana??) to ANI last year so I may be said to have a conflict of interests or a bias. Could you possibly file a request at WP:RFCU and reference what evidence you have, as well as this conversation, and another checkuser will take a fresh look at it and act accordingly. That's probably the best course of action and, IMO, you have enough evidence to at least present a case. Hope this helps (and thank you for being so patient!!) - Alison ^❤ 00:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

(Looks at my feet sheepishly.) Patient, I wasn't. My apologies. I saw you were active, and thought that perhaps you hadn't noticed.

And certainly, I'm fine with requesting a checkuser.

Thank you very much for the clarification. - jc37 03:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it's listed. - jc37 21:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

These are my thoughts: even after having seen the discussion, I don't think that it is necessarily fair to characterize any suicide threat as "fake." I also do not think it right to use suicide threats as grounds for a disciplinary action, or even (as was done in this case) to count them against somebody when deciding to block them for other valid reasons. As somebody else said, "Anything that involves human life falls under WP:IAR. Human life is more important than encyclopaedias . . . . And for that matter, there is less difference between a seriously suicidal person and someone just making a 'cry for help' than you might think. Many people are caught on the edge, unsure if they want to kill themselves or not. Unfortunately, death is irreversible, and 100 decisions to live can be overridden by one decision to die." So in conclusion, yes I know that sometimes suicide threats are fake, but other times there is some uncertainty even in the mind of the one making the threat, and I don't think we should be the ones to make that judgment. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 09:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Noticed this in passing...the block of that editor wasn't a disciplinary action. See my other posts on the subject. Durova^Charge! 10:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

My use of the word "fake" was based on the results of previous discussions. That said, I'll strikeout the word. - jc37 10:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hi, one of my pages was deleted, entitled Chapel School '08, and I was wondering if I could get a copy sent to my e-mail? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaytimdres (talk • contribs) 21:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I'd love to, but you've no email address set in your preferences, so I can't :( - Alison ^❤ 22:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Check for potential range block

Alison,

Due to a long-ago blocked user who persists in using IP accounts to vandalize my user and talk pages, as well as those of others, almost nightly, I am considering a range block of some addresses connected with the University of Maryland. These would be in the 129.2.17.XX and 129.2.18.XX ranges.

Per the policy page, I am asking you as someone with checkuser access how much collateral damage might be caused if it were a hard block (it would be for the remainder of their academic year, which ends May 25 or so). Can you let me know? And soon. Daniel Case (talk) 02:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• steals this thread to request some help at WP:RCU/IP as well*¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• Looks like Thatcher and Dmcdevit got there before me :) - Alison ^❤ 04:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear. Please block Esprit de corps (talk · contribs). They're Seancarlin84. Also feel free to block both ranges AO/ACB. There will be no collateral damage other than to your vandal. I've also hardblocked a domestic IP which was shared by Seancarlin84 and Esprit de corps - Alison ^❤ 04:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The usual pattern of vandalizing the userpages of a small group of editors shows up once again. It'd be great to finally be rid of the seancarlin socks. Enigma ^message 04:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a nuisance. Let me know if they return and I'll see what can be done - Alison ^❤ 04:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked Espirit indef. for being a sock as per the above discussion. Also, I didn't like his edits to Bugs' user page. Hope this helps! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 14:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming the latest one was also using the U of Maryland IP range. Enigma ^message 16:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Law Suit

I will personally be speaking to wikipedia's lawyer, this checkuser business you have no right to access my IP infromation and will be taking wikipedia to court for invasion of privacy. If you have any objections to this then plese take it up with my office. Peterpipper (talk) 21:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

As you have now been identified as having been involved in abusive sock-puppetry and have compounded the matter by making legal threats, your account has now been indefinitely blocked by another administrator. You may refer the matter to our legal counsel, Mike Godwin, if you wish, but before doing, please read our checkuser policy and privacy policy to understand the issues involved - Alison ^❤ 22:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. Sorry Alison, to drag you in to this waste of our time. Pedro :  Chat  22:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

mail

You have mail- don't know if you've seen it or not, as not sure if one of your addys is working. Hope you are doing well.:) Merkin's mum 20:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

3RR block of Major Bonkers

Oh, come on, Alison, please don't block him for that. Please. Look at the history and recollect that it's not the case that you must block—you may block, that's all. I wouldn't it I were you. (Especially not for 31 hours). Bishonen | talk 22:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC).

Hmmm. Well, I went ahead and prot'd the page so I guess the disruption will have stopped anyways. I'll pop over and see ... - Alison ^❤ 22:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Bishonen | talk 22:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC).

I took your advice to heart and unblocked him. I also warned the two other tag-teamers - Alison ^❤ 00:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw. Good call, Alison. Bishonen | talk 07:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC).

Working again! Thank you both. --Major Bonkers (talk) 09:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Delicate sockpuppet situation

Greetings, Alison. Thanks for your speedy checkuser action helping to shut down this sockpuppet & puppetmaster. There's some ongoing difficulty on the project page that exposed this particular case, and I'm not quite sure how to handle it properly. Several of us, including at least two editors much more heavily involved in the project than I, strongly suspect that the user responsible for the 842U/BMWR1200C puppets is in fact also responsible for Vbclerate, Amarapura, Jingpho, and possibly Dddike. I can't speak for the others who suspect, but my own suspicions are based on the content, tone, style, and timing of these users' contributions to the discussion linked above, as well as certain of my suspects' having created their accounts very shortly after 842U's sockpuppetry was discovered and exposed, and/or having contributed only to this discussion. However, all of this is circumstantial, and I'm not clear on the standard of evidence required to initiate a checkuser investigation. I don't want to make extra work for anyone by filing an accusation that'll have to be tossed out as improper or frivolous. Is there some quick and easy way to check for more 842U puppets?

Two further notes:

1. I do not regard disagreement with my opinions, interpretations, preferences, or actions as prima facie evidence of sock puppetry. I believe it is possible for reasonable people given the same situation to disagree, and I bear no ill will caused by disagreement (though I do take a dim view of those who behave badly and/or refuse to comply with the letter and/or spirit of Wikipedia policy, protocol, and rules).

2. It looks as if Jingpho and Amarapura are already categorised as suspected sock puppets of 842U. Does it mean they're under active investigation, or just that someone suspects them?

Any assistance or advice you can give will be much appreciated. Please respond here or on my own talk page, as you prefer. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 23:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick Favour

Could you please archive the Talk:Club Penguin page? --Vinni3 (talk) 06:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - Alison ^❤ 07:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Email

Dear Alison, I have sent you an email. Anyway, I remember you from Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Boomgaylove and my question partly concerns this thread as I am not sure how we list suspected IPs at RfCU or if I should just wait for a checkuser to comment on that thread or what. I do also have another question I am curious about that I included in the email. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: Actually a formal checkuser request has been made by another editor at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eyrian that goes beyond the IP identified. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of socking...

Can you take a look into this, this, this, and this for me? I'm pretty sure that qualifies as an attempt to manipulate polling and create the appearance of consensus, which means Kingjeff should be warned/blocked and the IP should be banned, right? I never had my roommate vote in the poll or weigh in on the discussion. All I asked him to do was keep the templates at the status quo until after the discussion had taken place. This is also pretty silly as the discussion had been resolved in his favor already. -- Grant.Alpaugh 20:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

That anon editor is Unrelated to Kingjeff - Alison ^❤ 00:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look into it. It appears it was nothing more than someone copying his post in order to vote. Thanks anyway. -- Grant.Alpaugh 06:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Peter zhou

Hey Alison, Our favourite sockmaster is back. China and Names of China are once again clogged up with Peter zhou's sockpuppet edits. Could you track down his sleepers? Thanks, nat.utoronto 05:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Nat. I'll get to it in the morning. In bed now :) - Alison ^❤ 06:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed again, the usual drawerful:

1. Suakrau (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
2. Cleakie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
3. Kraiyoi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
4. Kokrauwrie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
5. Bofee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
6. Liuwrilia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
7. Wruazuezoa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
8. Singaga (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
9. Hiutroayoi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
10. Vuoflilia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
11. Zoixatlua (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
12. Moecraucria (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
13. Druitrebra (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
14. Loeslee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
15. Mahadio (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
16. Gaiproiflio (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
17. Bluofoe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
18. Gloatuplae (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
19. Gowiju (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
20. Gluiquipu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
21. Dlikleklion (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
22. Glaopreasuo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
23. Weopleo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
24. Seeprie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
25. Wasui (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
26. Zuograo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
27. Griehiu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
28. Dindong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
29. Fleo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
30. Flau (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
31. Wrepion (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
32. Cluaboiblo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
33. Sliasliu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
34. Preislae (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
35. Yuecliucleo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)

Phew! I think that's them all for the moment - Alison ^❤ 18:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

All blocked now :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 08:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism and Edit Warring by User:CarterBar

Ali, pl note that this British editor has moved the article while discussion is ongoing. Are you going to do anything?????? Sarah777 (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Email (Archive 22)

Hey Alison, any word yet? The user who asked me to send you the email is getting slightly impatent :P Thanks, Mww113 (talk) 21:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I hate to do this but...

Whack.

I have waited over a week for a response, I'm sure your busy but this is giving me a lot of WikiStress. Thanks Mww113 (talk) 01:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Nah, I'm not really that mean. But I do need a response, thanks! :P Mww113 (talk) 01:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of User:Bennet556

User:Hurlfordkillie has done a number of problematic edits per [5]. In addition, the editor has vandalized a totally unrelated article at Huntington Beach, California here [6]. In addition, User:Hurlfordkillie opened the account on May 2[7], two days after User:Nimbley66 was blocked[8]. Because the only user making edits like this to these totally unrelated two articles in the past is banned User:Bennet556, could you see if User:Hurlfordkillie is a sockpuppet? Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 22:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed - Alison ^❤ 16:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that. What is the best way to go about having User:Hurlfordkillie blocked as a sockpuppet because they are back at it. Would you be doing that or would I request another admin to do it? Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 22:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Taking care of what I can. SirFozzie (talk) 00:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you both. Alanraywiki (talk) 00:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

hello again

Email sent to you just now.... cheers Tvoz/talk 01:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied - thanks for that! Done and sorted now ... - Alison ^❤ 16:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Padraig

Alison, thank you for letting us know about the sad news about Padraig. Although I never communicated with him, it was sad to hear he had died. I hope that as a friend of his your pain will ease. Autarch (talk) 11:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a bit of a shock, all right. Padraig was one of the more easy-going "Troubles" editors, tho' I did block him for edit-warring once. The wiki will be a lot poorer without him - Alison ^❤ 16:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:DianeFinn

You have added a checkuser block tag, as a sockpuppet of Dereks1x. He is claiming that he is not a sockpuppet. Just looking for you to confirm the findings of the checkuser. If you could reply on his talk page, that would be great. Thanks, Rjd0060 (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done, thanks - Alison ^❤ 16:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Your evident lack of ethics, not to mention your conflict of interest, are much appreciated. Keep up the good work! SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 19:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. You may wish to meet and greet another user Vios1Per (talk · contribs) in much the same fashion. Thanks much. UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 19:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) And yeah, blocked an open proxy as well as two other sockies - Alison ^❤ 20:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Very good work you did with that situation. -OberRanks (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Another indication of Allie's greatness compared to Dmcdevit. :) —Dark ^talk 09:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Now, now!! - Alison ^❤ 08:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

disappearing messages

Could you tell me what happened here? I left two messages for Awadewit and they both disappeared (from history and contribution lists) --RelHistBuff (talk) 22:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I've emailed you about this. Sorry about all the trouble - Alison ^❤ 23:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Peter zhou

Could you take out his IP ranges for 24-48 hours? I know there's a lot of collateral but he's simply not getting the message and responses on ANI have not been helpful. If you can't or don't want to, then that's fine. Regards, nat.utoronto 05:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm a bit uncomfortable doing that right now, especially a hardblock. Let's see how the ANI discussion continues before doing anything as extreme as this. At the least, we'll need to checkuser the range to figure out collateral damage - Alison ^❤ 05:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Administration Assistance

Hello, I would like to become an admin. I saw your name on the list of coaches, and was wondering if you could help me. Thank you if you do, and thank you for your time if you don't. You can see some of my work here, Deadwood Bonsai Techniques, here John Kiggins, and here Uaru. Remilo (talk) 12:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm really sorry, but I'm not doing any tutoring for the near future. I'm so busy on-and-off Wiki. Really sorry about that - Alison ^❤ 22:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

That's okay. Remilo (talk) 16:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Not quite paying enough attention

Okay, so I've been marginally out to lunch the past week and ruined an entire long weekend doing paperwork from the office, not even getting to edit anything fun (let alone plant the garden). But it took me to this morning to realise that you'd done a bit of drive-by "vandalism" to my userpage! I promise to be more attentive to guests in the future. Thanks, I wondered where those came from! Risker (talk) 13:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, EVula - obviously still out to lunch! Risker (talk) 14:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sneaky. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

lol - glad to help :) - Alison ^❤ 21:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser

Hello!

First of all, I want to apologize if I'm bothering you since I can tell that you are more than just fairly busy.

I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look at a RFCU I put in a few days ago at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Girl Get it. This was only the second RFCU I've ever submitted and the first one was for the same case of a suspected block evading sockpuppeteer. I had some issues in trying to get the case to display properly so I'm wondering if it's still not listed the way it should be. I'm only asking because I listed it on May 16 and, so far, there's been no results. I understand that there is a possibility that there is a CU backlog so, if that's the case, please ignore me and accept my apologies. I just want to make sure that my case is listed properly so that it can be confirmed as related or unrelated accordingly.

Thank you very much for your time!

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - sorry about the delay! Things can get busy around here :) - Alison ^❤ 21:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

My Recent Rfa

I would just like to say thanks for the neutral vote in my recent RFA. I will still say thanks as from your comments and the other users comments that opposed me and gave me a neutral vote have made me make a todo list for before my next RFA. I hope I will have resolved all of the issues before then and I hope that you would be able to support me in the future. If you would like to reply to this message or have any more suggestions for me then please message me on my talk page as I will not be checking back here. Thanks again. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 16:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

Alison, if I am in and edit war with editor with Sally, and on the verge of 3RR, and I openly invite another editor Jane (who is elsewhere ostensibly moderating a discussion about the to develop consensus on the very subject on which Sally and I disagree) to intercede on my behalf, make an edit to keep me from violating 3RR... have I broken the Wikipedia rules, if so, which? Is this "punishable?" Also, lets say the other editor Jane complies with my request and makes exactly the edit I request... what are the ramifications to that editor? Pleaseread (talk) 17:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Another Dereks1x sock?

Caught this one escaping the dryer. Enigma ^message 20:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed - yup - Alison ^❤ 21:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Email

You've got mail. Trust me, you'll want to see it ;).¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, not sure you want to see mine as much as the one above but I sent you one as well :) SirFozzie (talk) 02:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

*Pokes Alison* :P¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 14:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

*Pokes again*...were you able to receive it :)?¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 07:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Did, yeah, PPG ;) Thanks for the note. Needless to say, I'm doing exactly what you suggested. Take a look ;) - Alison ^❤ 08:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

protection request

Hi Alison, could you please semi-protect User:Kyoko/Genesis Apocryphon for the usual reasons? Thanks. --Kyoko 05:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - Alison ^❤ 05:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Unblock request

Hi Alison, BusinessLawyer (talk · contribs) is asking for an unblock. I have to say, I can't see any threats in the contrib history, is this a checkuser block? Thought I would ask. Thanks and warm regards. Woody (talk) 12:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done and unblock declined. Thanks for letting me know - Alison ^❤ 14:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

194.81.151.68

I changed your soft block into a hard block. There haven't been any legit edits from that IP in a long time. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

So I notice. And yes, I'm perfectly fine with that. Good call, indeed - Alison ^❤ 08:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Fromos

Alison, can you check to see if Fromos (talk · contribs) is a reincarnation of Jmfangio (talk · contribs)? (Please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Tecmobowl if you need a refresher on the case.) Fromos, who did not edit for a year, has filed an arbitration request out of the blue against Chrisjnelson, the user whom Jmfangio regularly harassed. Thanks. --B (talk) 20:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm really sorry, but I've no history to go on here, and it's a little bit fishingy. Can you run this request past User:Voice of All or User:Morven as both of them have worked on the Tecmobowl case in the past. Also, note that the Fromos account dates from early 2006, so it's somewhat unlikely ... - Alison ^❤ 08:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Re. Public Information Research

Is the next step to remove the string "Daniel Brandt" from the references in the PIR article? I fail to see how mentioning Brandt, the only person who seems to have anything to do with the intelligence-agent-personal-information database, four or five times instead of once or twice violates BLP. 'Lowering the quality and Google rank of articles' doesn't seem to be stated in the policy yet. John Nevard (talk) 07:57, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

No it's not, John. However, I did receive a complaint from the subject - and coincidentally, same subject threatened me with Hivemind no less than 30 minutes ago. He's no friend of mine. However, standards are standards and I evaluated his complaint and edited accordingly as I felt his concern had merit - Alison ^❤ 08:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching?

Hello, Alison. :) I know you're very busy, but you're one of the few admin coaches available at this time, and I was wondering whether or not you'd be able to coach me; I'm currently looking for a coach to help me out. Would you be interested?

Cheers, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 04:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC).

Kinda like the last chicken at Sainsbury's, hm? :) Actually, I'm really sorry but I'm not actually mentoring right now due to being busy in RL, amongst other things. Really sorry - Alison ^❤ 04:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Lol. :P Well, thanks anyway. :)

Take care, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 05:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC).

Chickens at Sainsbury, Allie? I'm having a hard time imagining... :P —Dark ^talk 09:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a Billy Connolly expression :) - Alison ^❤ 11:43, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

With thanks

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For consistent work dealing with issues regarding cross wiki vandalism - many thanks Herby talk thyme 11:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you so much, Herby :) - Alison ^❤ 22:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of User:Bennet556?

User:Jimmycrackcorn44 has done the same kind of edits as User:Hurlfordkillie, namely numerous edits to Kilmarnock (see [9]), inserting new populations and town names (like [10] compared to [11] and [12]), vandalism of Huntington Beach, California (see [13]), and the new user account was set up the day after User:Kilmarnockscotlandsteel was blocked([14]). I believe it is a sockpuppet of User:Bennet556. In addition, Kilmarnock may need a semi-protect. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 22:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed - Alison ^❤ 22:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

my RfA - Ta!

CowboyCaleb1

Looks like he is back and back to annoying D.M.N. Is there any chance you can look at the underlying ips again and do something to stop him? Cheers Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

See my talkpage history for more information. Thanks, D.M.N. (talk) 07:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Also see User talk:Tiptoety#Thank you, and.... Cheers, -The Hybrid- 08:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

IP blocked - hope that helps, but we'll have to see. Can't see any other accounts under there ... - Alison ^❤ 11:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Spartaz ^Humbug! 11:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, he seems to be hopping from IP to IP. Cowboycaleb2009 was created this morning, although he's now blocked by LAX. D.M.N. (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Yoshi525

This banned user has many sockpuppets, and plans to vandalise various football and mathematics articles. Be warned!! 86.141.15.129 (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

very much for your kind words and support at my RFA. It means a lot to have the confidence of one's peers and perhaps particularly of editors as well respected as you! I hope to live up to the trust and not to mess up to badly or too quickly! --Slp1 (talk) 13:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Your wonderful CU skills are needed......

Hey, would you mind taking a look at this please. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 20:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, it has been Y Done by Thatcher. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 04:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Code B

Code B...check my logs :P, CU entries 01:04, 27 May 2008 & 01:05, 27 May 2008. Thanks!¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done ;) - Alison ^❤ 19:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

*Ping* more, check if you like throughout the next few hours. You can ask me why the entries are confirmed via email.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Ugh! - that was kinda nasty, esp. the IBM one :( Blocked a bunch of stuff ... - Alison ^❤ 04:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Oy

Go into your page history and run an IP check on the first redlinked name you see as of this writing. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Jéské. All done, tks :) I've also followed up on PPG's stuff too - Alison ^❤ 19:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks for this. Kevin (talk) 07:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Trioblóid le hathainmniú

An féidir leat súil a chur arís ar Wikipedia:RFCU#Here.27s_some_fun? Chonacthas gur choisc thú níos mó ná deichniúr aréir agus tá grúpa nua curtha síos ag MER-C. Stifle (talk) 13:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Blargh :b Ar ais arís? Beidh mé timpeall I gceann tamaillín - táim sa leaba fós! :) - Alison ^❤ 15:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Moving Article without agreement

Ali, pl check Great Britain and Ireland asap; some e-warriors are trying to merge it despite an active discussion which is not concluded. Sarah777 (talk) 23:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sarah. Everything seems fine for the moment; nothing's moved and the discussion seems to be ongoing ... - Alison ^❤ 06:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Only 'cos I moved it back twice and was running out of reverts! Sarah777 (talk) 14:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Deacon of Pndapetzim has joined the edit-warring tag-team. I thought you Admins were opposed to this type of behavior? Or does that not apply to British editors with a British pov agenda? Sarah777 (talk) 04:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Lack of action noted and contrasted with the block I got for alleged incivility under provocation by an warring Admin. Thanks a bunch Ali. Sarah777 (talk) 08:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Pentyrch

We had a request over at WP:EAR for someone to check out this article. I wouldn't know the first thing about the place, but figured you either would know or would know who to ask about it. If you have a minute, please check it out. Thanks. And great to hear from you, too. Pastordavid (talk) 15:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of User:Bennet556

User:Kilmarnockscotlandsteel has done the same kind of edits as User:Hurlfordkillie, namely numerous edits to Kilmarnock (see [15], including copyvios (gave a warning on that), vandalism of Huntington Beach, California (see [16]), and the new user account was set up two days [17] after User:Hurlfordkillie was blocked. I believe it is a sockpuppet of User:Bennet556. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 21:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Confirmed - Alison ^❤ 21:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey. After another user turned up with similar edits to both the above (User:Letsstopsockpuppets) and then got blocked for the inappropriate username, another user (User:Falkirkwheelbush5123) has today arrived and restored all their edits ([18]). I think it's beyond doubt it's just another sockpuppet. Any chance of a block? Thanks. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 17:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

← Confirmed - the following -

1. Hurlfordkillie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
2. Letsstopsockpuppets (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
3. Falkirkwheelbush5123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
4. Culkin32 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
5. Kristophern66 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)

Someone else can block or deal accordingly - Alison ^❤ 21:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

As always, thank you for your help! Alanraywiki (talk) 21:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 21:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

←Agus ceann eile, IP an t-am seo: User:78.144.156.65. Faoi Vicífhoclóir, caithfidh mé a rá nach bhfaca mé é riamh, ach b'fhéidir go ndéanfaidh mé é i bpointe sa todhchaí!! I haven't really the time at the moment, and when I do have the time I'd like to start contributing to the Irish language wiki first, but then maybe I'll have a look. Thanks! --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 20:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Agus Confirmed arís, na cuntasaí seo a leanas:

1. Kristopher Nimbley (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
2. Kristopher12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)

Coiscthe go léir anois, agus an seoladh IP. Maith agat :) Oh, and you'd be very welcome at gawikipedia, too. Show up whenever you like, agus má bhfuil aon rud ag teastail uait, cur glaoch dom. Táim im' riarthóir taobh ansin freisin :) - Alison ^❤ 02:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Ceann eile. Go raibh maith agat. ;) --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 13:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Possible sock?

Hi Alison, you may find Special:Contributions/Cherry rose interesting. I don't care about this enough to file a SSP or RFCU request, but I know you are watching several people who edit on these topics as several of them are on probation. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Yes, it's pretty obvious who that is. I guess they had to create a sock account due to their ISP being rangeblocked recently - Alison ^❤ 17:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Flowerpotman ex machina

You have mail.....; just a thought. :O) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Good plan, and the followup one. I say yeah, go for it, by all means - Alison ^❤ 04:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yet another sockpuppet of User:Bennet556?

I suspect User:Kristophern66 is a sockpuppet of User:Bennet556 because all these edits [19] were done within minutes of the new user account being set up [20], the edits are mainly for Kilmarnock, and the sockpuppeteer has already been identified as Kristopher Nimbley User:Nimbley66. Alanraywiki (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Plus see what I said above, in relation to User:Falkirkwheelbush5123. Thanks! --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 19:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Just if you need any more proof, one of the socks has created a page entitled Hlton Hotel Glasgow, while the other has created one at Glasgow Hilton Hotel. Thanks again. --Schcambo^{aon scéal?} 19:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

All Confirmed, and more. See this section above - Alison ^❤ 21:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

you have e-mail

The title pretty much says it all. - Revolving Bugbear 01:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Reading now ... thanks! :) - Alison ^❤ 04:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

And now you have one from me too. Risker (talk) 16:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Risker. I'm on it :) - Alison ^❤ 17:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

No worries, it has already been addressed by others. Thanks! Risker (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:71.187.164.93

Someone at the above IP address (which you blocked for two weeks as Grawp) has filed an unblock request claiming collateral damage. Can you take a look? Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 02:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - I can't unblock at this time, sorry. It's a softblock, though, so they should be able to edit through it with an account - Alison ^❤ 04:24, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Latest Checkuser

Hello, just wondering what the situation is with regards to the latest Checkuser case put forward by ONiH. Thanks, Counter-revolutionary (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Counter-rev, I have issues regarding the privacy of the individuals mentioned in the case and, given the history of the sock-puppeteer, need to be sensitive and careful. The whole issue right now has been both discussed in private amongst checkusers and is now actively being handled by the Arbitration Committee. The reason I put it on hold was to ensure other enwiki checkusers didn't encounter it and run the case without being aware of the background. I know you're more than aware of the circumstances, and of the background to both accounts - Alison ^❤ 18:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea of the background to either, which is why I'd like any aspersions to be displaced by a checkuser! I do hope one takes place, thanks, Counter-revolutionary (talk) 23:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The point here is that nobody should be casting any Cistercians at this point in time. While it's filed under the Sussexman moniker, I strongly doubt this is Sussexman (as do you!) because both of us already know who it is. In deference to their privacy, I recommend both of us not speculate until ArbCom have dealt with this. Last time you were this insistent regarding a sock, you 'outted' one of your colleagues who was doing the RtV/Clean Break thing - Alison ^❤ 05:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I outted Kitty in full awareness of what I was doing, as I am in this case. I imagine you are correct in assuming this is not (directly) concerned with Sussexman. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 23:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Please talk to Traditional Unionist (if you haven't already done so)

Traditional Unionist is annoyed that you blocked him for 3RR but didn't block the other party to that dispute. Please read this section of his talk page and explain to him your thought process. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 14:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Traditional unionist is in no way annoyed.Traditional unionist (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, TU. Shalom, both myself and TU have discussed this matter by email and we're both clear on where things are at right now - Alison ^❤ 18:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Need impartial admin input

Can you cast your eye over the discussion on this edit conflict issue, and see if you can't help resolve. Otherwise I'm going to have to open an RfC (again) and I'd rather avoid the waste of everyone's time. Guliolopez (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I've weighed in over there on the talk page, as well as yours. As you say, it's a rather classic case of POV and OR - Alison ^❤ 17:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Ho...hum.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 07:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed - Alison ^❤ 07:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

"Impartial" being just as important a qualification as "admin", I should hope.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 07:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

As ever. However, some people have difficulty in accepting that fact - Alison ^❤ 08:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC) (fact, yes)

I'm going to reserve judgment on the first part of that. I would have agreed with the second part but for the last word.

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 08:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

If you get to use that word at whim, then so should I ;) - Alison ^❤ 08:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I do?

Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 09:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

*Ping*

One checks out, see if any others are beating the sheets.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 16:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - keep at it :) - Alison ^❤ 18:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

What about this one? It fits the pattern of a weird username showing up, making 10 innocuous edits, and then 4 days later - bam. If I'm right, maybe we can nip this in the bud. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

And also this one. Same pattern. The user appears to look for links to the sample image and remove those. That's a pattern that also happened last night. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Plenty more where they came from, and blocked now! Also, PPG, all dealt with too ;) - Alison ^❤ 05:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Found a couple made on the same days as the latest confirmed socks but didn't block (didn't have a clear enough link)...I think they're still worth checking however. Take a look at this, this, this, this, this, this. This one I blocked because of the username but check if it needs a hardblock.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Ha, well what do you know, check this, obvious confirm, blocked it.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

And this one, too. What does "Account created automatically" mean on the user creation log? They all seem to have that notation rather than "New user account". NawlinWiki (talk) 00:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Please check: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. I have a theory... NawlinWiki (talk) 00:58, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

←Guys - I have a theory on this, too. I'd say hold off blocking until something bad happens. Don't want to talk about it on here for reasons obvious but yeah, hold off. PPG - your first set of accounts checks out okay, so don't block! - Alison ^❤ 01:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Alison, please check this, this, and this -- suspicious names. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 04:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

I really don't mean to be a pest, I'm just trying to let the other well meaning souls get on with their work without this guy's disruption. Thank you very much! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I understand your frustration. And thank you, BTW, for taking the time to file that case and get it all sorted out for the other folks on there :) - Alison ^❤ 19:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

NTWW

We're starting; would you like to join us? :) Anthøny 21:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Missed it :( I was out walking in the park ... - Alison ^❤ 00:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for assistance

Hello Alison. You may remember that I once asked you to oversight my userpage. The reason for it was because the page history contained my IP address. I am now at RfA, and the deletion of the userpage's history is being used as a reason to oppose at my RfA. "People should also be wondering why his userpage was deleted. I believe I remember the reason, but can't prove it without seeing the deleted revisions." I was wondering if there's anything you could do to help? Thank you, Enigma ^message 22:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• I've removed the comment made by me and related discussion to reduce visibility. I'm sorry this issue came up. There was no intention on my part to expose Enigma in any way. I agree it should be oversighted. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
• The matter's become more urgent, as my attempt at reducing visibility of the situation was highlighted by another editor of the RfA. I've asked him to remove his comments and my response to his comments on that point. Still, an oversight is needed here (just the edit by the IP on Enigma's userpage, not the stuff on the RfA). --Hammersoft (talk) 22:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi there. Right now, it looks like everything's okay, and that I don't need to make a statement there as to the deleted revisions. Is this right? Can either of you provide diffs to the edits which need to be oversighted? Thanks - Alison ^❤ 00:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    • My request was more along the lines of whether you could comment on the reason for my request. I believe I stated it in the e-mail, but Hammersoft doesn't appear to believe me. No matter. Enigma ^message 00:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

←Enigmaman - I have the original email from May 1 right here and it clearly states that you needed your userpage deleted/oversighted due to genuine and serious concerns regarding your privacy. I evaluated this, saw a genuine, valid concern and acted accordingly - Alison ^❤ 00:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming. The reason that it doesn't matter now is because the RfA has already successfully tanked thanks to successive pile-on opposes. Thank you for going back and looking, anyway. :) Enigma ^message 01:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

• It was not clear to me earlier what sequence of events transpired. I was under the impression that Enigmaman's userpage had been deleted to avoid having the IP address that edited that page showing, but that no oversight was done to remove the edit made by the IP. I was thus acting under the impression that Enigmaman's privacy was at stake in making my earlier comments on this page to get the edit by the IP oversighted. From what I'm reading above now, it appears that the page was deleted and the edit by the IP was oversighted. From my chair, no action required then. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, that's what it was. Also, I don't want to sully Alison's talk with an argument, but I really wish you'd think things through before making allegations. It reflects badly on both you and me. Enigma ^message 23:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

• I have no idea what you are referring to. All I was trying to do was help you. If you want to continue this conversation, you can do so on my talk page. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I liked the old pic!

But you baleeted it! Viridae^Talk 11:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It had to go. Too much bewb. If you *really* have to see it, it's on ED now (meh!) - Alison ^❤ 18:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Anna polly

Hi Alison. I see that User:Anna polly made a checkuser request to you above and actually helped find quite a few socks at RCU. However, I suspect that Anna polly herself (or himself) might be a sock of User:Polscience. Could you check that for me? Regards, Húsönd 17:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, Husond. Can you provide me a little evidence for your suspicions, though? Tks ;) - Alison ^❤ 17:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Allie :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 18:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Stalking my edits? :-) Yeah, Anna polly is Confirmed as being a Polscience sock. Also Allbm (talk · contribs) - Alison ^❤ 18:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Worse, I was looking at the newuser/userblocks channel on IRC :D -- lucasbfr ^talk 18:12, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Kesälauantait sent me an email message complaining about User:Anna polly, and noting that the IP in question was a public IP. He asserts that only a few of the socks listed in the RFCU are his. If you wish, I'll forward the email. Meanwhile I'll ask him to make a statement on his own Talk page, which he should still be able to edit while blocked. EdJohnston (talk) 18:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

← I also got that email and am working through it at the moment. I'll followup with the checkuser who ran the original case in a while here. Busy ... :) - Alison ^❤ 18:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Alison. :-) I will send you an e-mail shortly. Regards, Húsönd 18:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I also have User:Kesälauantait's email, or a similar one. He admits to using a dozen throwaway accounts for various reasons, and to having the three named accounts at the top of the list. As a general comment, it would be a matter for admin discretionary evaluation to look over the edits of the accounts and decide whether they are acceptable alternate accounts, disruptive socks, or something in between. I was struck by the fact that many of the accounts I flagged only have edits on one day, but I did not take the time to check to see if this was in order to avoid scrutiny for repeated bad behavior or if the accounts were just abandoned for no apparent reason. (Doing that kind of analysis would make the CU job an order of magnitude more time consuming, and would make me judge, jury and executioner.) Having made the technical finding I prefer to leave such judgement calls for an independent review. Whether all 40-some accounts I flagged are him, or only a dozen, is something Allie and I can think about, and recheck the technical findings. Thatcher 19:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

• Although I am struck by just how few of those accounts don't have edits related to human hair color or Asian geography. Several of them have posted to User talk:Husond, and this edit seems at least deceptive. Thatcher 19:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I've received the e-mail as well. Kesälauantait (whom until now I knew as Kotlyarov) explains that most of the accounts were not his (he uses a public IP), and that those that he recognizes as his were not meant to serve as socks, instead alternative accounts to be used in different topics. Maybe he should be given the choice to have one of the accounts unblocked and use that one only in the future. He certainly deserves a second chance not just per his explanation, but also per WP:AGF. And let's not forget that sockpuppeteer Polscience has proven in many occasions to be a particularly shameless liar so his claims about Kesälauantait's death threats at RCU are most likely false. Húsönd 20:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It would be tedious to go through all the contributions of the various Kesälauantait socks, but if it were up to me I'd consider an unblock after some passage of time, at least a month. There is enough smoke here. Even in his email, K. admits that he edited the Asia article from three alternate accounts in a matter of a few days. This is not an innocent usage of multiple accounts. If K. is allowed to resume editing, he should first affirm on his Talk page that he is willing to limit himself to editing with a single account. EdJohnston (talk) 22:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The email Allie forearded to me is the same as the one I received directly. I will post a reply on User talk:Kesälauantait. Thatcher 23:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

← Out of fairness, User:Anna polly sent an email to unblock-en with a screen capture of an email she claims to have received from User:Kesälauantait. (Could be fake, or not) -- lucasbfr ^talk 12:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)