User talk:Deskana/Archive 19

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] User:Tyar

First of all, User:Tyar has repeatedly attacked me on my own talk page see here and here. He then attacked me a third time under another account, (see here) called DBZROCKS-SUCKS. Though it is a link to that users page the revision history for my talk page clearly shows that his account made the comment. The user also admits to the deed [here. I really don't know exactally what to do here, could you help? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 20:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC) also this user: User:Stopdroproll has reverted the edits I have made and made attacking comments on my talk page, I suspect he may be a sockpuppet of Tyar. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 17:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

This has been handled by other admins, it seems. --Deskana (talk) 22:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
This user has threatened me not too long ago on here about DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! edits on the saga pages. I actually agree and support the change, but I still don't appreciate being threatened. --Ryu-chan (Talk | Contributions) 17:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Permissions request on Commons Image:Delta Goodrem in Concert.jpg

Image:Delta Goodrem in Concert.jpg

I have sent an email, but there has been no response yet. If I do not get one by today, this image will probably be deleted. The author has released it under the GFDL. Here is a link to my talk page if you are interested in reading other stuff pertaining to this image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheKillerAngel

"I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of farm2.static.flickr.com/1220/1122609640_a92e9dc995_o.jpg.

I agree to publish that work under the free license GNU Free Documentation License.

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen.

Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me. I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the image may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[25.10.07], [Shelton Muller]"

If you want a screenshot as proof, that's fine with me. 151.200.40.60 17:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I am afraid I could not find the ticket you were talking about on OTRS. --Deskana (talk) 10:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Resending it. TheKillerAngel 21:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for checkuser

Hey Deskana, would you mind telling me why you reverted here, it was emerely just a note with a brief summary of information for the checkuser, I have yet to see anywhere which says clerks are not allowed to say this, can you point me in the right direction? Cheers, Qst 16:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Apologies, sorry about that, I'm new to checkuser clerking :) Qst 16:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
If you wish to clerk, that's fine. But you should read the procedures. Clerks are really there just to assist us, not to make judgements. In some ways, clerks have less power than normal users since they can't comment on cases. Clerks are there to sort things and move things to make it easier on the checkusers so we can do more cases, and quicker. --Deskana (talk) 16:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, seriously sorry about that though :) Qst 18:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure it's no problem, Qst! So no need to fret ;) just be sure to be careful, especially when clerking, eh? Anthøny 19:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question/help otrs stuff and an editor

Hi Deskana, if you have time and are able to (without too much trouble) could you look into this question I originally asked Riana here. I noticed from the user page he/she might be busy right now, but I would like to contact someone with access to the English otrs. Or. . .if there is somewhere else I should ask this instead, could you let me know that instead? Thanks, R. Baley 18:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I searched for all tickets containing "Lennon" and the earliest one I could find was 46 days old. I don't really trust the search function on OTRS though. --Deskana (talk) 18:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Deskana, I appreciate it. Is this something that eventually will come out in the wash, so to speak. For me, the difference is. . . that if he sent it, as I suggested, I would consider him a temperamental editor, but somewhat trying to edit in good faith, but as of right now, it looks like he was just gaming the system and abusing AGF from the beginning. In the 1st case I might "go to bat" for him and try to get back a knowledgeable editor (and monitor for a while), but for the 2nd, I'll wash my hands of it. Am I wasting my time with this? R. Baley 18:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question with editing

Hi there! Thanks for changing my name. :) Yes it is a Grey Anatomy's reference. A great show.

I'm fairly new on wikipedia, and while trying to edit some pages, I got to 'edit this page' tab at the toolbar on top. Then when I click on it, it says pops up a download, asking me if I want to save a file call "index.php". It says the file is from en.wikipedia.org. If I click no, nothing happens, and I can't edit the page. Do I need to download it to edit pages on wikipedia? McSteamy 19:47, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I jsut logged off my account and try editing a page and everything went smoothly, no file popped up. Then I logged back on and try editing the same page and a file pop up as described above. McSteamy 19:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jimbo Wales

I agree that there isn't much point in this RFC, not mainly because it was already mentioned on the noticeboard, but because of whom the RfC is for. So, out of curiosity, will it get deleted?--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 22:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hopefully. --Deskana (talk) 22:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow! That was fast.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 23:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A fan of yours

[1]. Acalamari 02:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

How ... nice. — Thomas H. Larsen 04:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oversight, now?

I just noticed that you now have oversight privileges. Congratulations ... — Thomas H. Larsen 04:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

How many flags are you going to get man? Kwsn (Ni!) 16:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
He actually has the whole lot - not including bot (obviously) and things like steward and developer which are now depreciated. Majorly (talk) 16:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 43 22 October 2007 About the Signpost
Fundraiser opens, budget released Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos" News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Excuse me I'm new in Wikipedia.., please can you tell me wath's wrong in this page, or if now does it satisfy the notability guideline? [2] Please tell me it with simple words, I'm not very able in Wikipedia. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlons (talk • contribs) 21:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My (KWSN's) RFA

Thank you for supporting my recent (and successful!) RfA. It passed at at 55/17/6. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:15, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] question about IP block

I see that you blocked the IP 66.174.93.0 recently for some sort of username violation. This is the IP assigned to my cell phone, which I use to browse and occasionally edit Wikipedia with, and only then when I'm logged on under Ataricom. What did I do? ataricom 15:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser

Hi Deskana, thanks for offering to mess around with AWB to fix those links. Could you do me a favour and check if User:Jack and User:Jeandré du Toit are the same person? If they are, (without sounding like a dick here), please do not inform Jeandré of his username Jack being requested for usurping, as if he doesn't use it often enough to notice that, then in my opinion, he does not need the username. — jacĸrм (talk) 03:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 44 29 October 2007 About the Signpost
From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Random fun thing

I have to confess: I wanted to re-reply to your oversight reply with "banana" but I figured I'd do it here instead of clogging up both your mailbox and "teh tubes." :P Either way, it looks like that you've changed your signature since the old one, so other people looking at this page are probably going, "huh?" :D Anyway, cheers, and keep up the good work =) --slakr\ talk / 23:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:USURP

Thanks for removing the photo it's dreadful :( Secretlondon 02:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

It's alright, I tend to think we should ask before we post photos of people. :-) --Deskana (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Hm. I wasn't aware it was good form to ask before linking. I shall do so dutifully before posting that picture of Deskana from commons ;) But sorry Secretlondon if it was a problem. i (talk) 03:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I believe my photo has been deleted. --Deskana (talk) 03:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed that. But I'll ask before posting again. Thanks. i (talk) 03:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Closure

Thanks very much for closing out my RfA and making me a sysop. If you ever have any reason to regret your action in the slightest, please feel free to let me know and I promise to do something about it. Accounting4Taste 13:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Thank you for your recent comments and vote at my Request for Adminship. It was not successful. I don't believe this is unfortunate as it leaves me with much to ponder and a fresh slate from which I can better myself as an editor in order to be more compliant with the policies that are expected by Wikipedia.

If you feel that there is anything that was not covered by the RfA that I need improvement in, I would implore your input and feedback as I hope and intend to improve as best I'm guided.

All the best in your own endeavours in the real world, and also when you're not on Wikipedia. lincalinca 14:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My talk page

Do you mind watching my talk page? There is a user who keeps trolling in it. I'm not online that often to keep an eye on it myself so I would really appreciate it if you could help keep an eye on it for me. Thanks.-- bulletproof 3:16 05:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

It is on my watchlist, but I'm missing the vandalism. I'll try to keep my eye out for it. --Deskana (talk) 13:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Your RFA was successful

Hi, Thanks for that!. Just one question; when replying to messages, do you think that it would be better to reply on my page, the other persons talk page or both? Thanks!. --The-G-Unit-Boss 10:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

That's really your choice. I tend to respond here when it's less urgent (like this) or on someone else's talk page when I want them to get the new messages bar so they see my message straight away. --Deskana (talk) 13:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A "hello" from Celestianpower

Hello! As I was looking down the list of ArbCom applicants this year, you were one of only two I recognised. Ho hum. I guess I've not been around much lately ;). Anyway, how is life treating our dearest Deskana? (On closer inspection, you're actually a guy (so much for "knowing you" - I always thought you were a girl :P. Oh well.), which renders that wording socially unacceptable. I'll rephrase it to "How's it goin', mate?") Has anything exciting happened with you recently? It's lovely to see you still live-and-kicking. Regards, —Celestianpower háblame 14:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

PS, Good luck with the voting. You'll ace it, I'm sure, what with being such a great guy and all. I'm rootin' for ya'! —Celestianpower háblame 14:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Wow, they are quite a collection of hats. Should I bow? :P. And Computer Science? Gosh, you really have turned into a geek, haven't you? ;). Are you enjoying it?
I'm not too bad actually. Working hard at my German to get it up to the same standard as the rest of my class (who have studied it for 5 years :P). And I'm 18 in two weeks! Woo! Party! Kind regards, —Celestianpower háblame 20:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and about being back permenantly, probably not, sorry. I love Wikipedia, but I can't stand the way the community is at the moment. —Celestianpower háblame 22:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asking for some advice

Hey, I think we might have a second wave of attacks by sockpuppets of Wiki En Wiki, I know you are not familiar with this case but this user was indef blocked for persistent sockpuppetry and massive inter-wiki spamming, I detailed the case with a new user that appears to be a obvious sock with more detail here, and it appears that there are more socks seeing that Lar has informed me of another account, do you think a checkuser is appropiate here considering that we are dealing with a user that has engaged in sockpuppetry in the past? - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Lar seems to have answered your question. I'm not sure quite sure how I can help you further. --Deskana (talk) 17:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin IRC channel

Hello Deskana! My request for adminship just closed successfully, and I was wondering how I would go about gaining access to the admin channel. I'm already registered on FreeNode; I sit in the #wikipedia, #wikipedia-en, and #wikipedia-en-help channels if you need to find me. Thanks! GlassCobra 03:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:IRC channels/wikipedia-en-admins for details. Mr.Z-man 03:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

I have been told by some admins that applying a consensus in a article does not violate my 1RR parole (like the consensus of WP:PW is to list future PPV matches in the order that they are announced). My question though is how far does this extend? Am I still bound by the normal 3RR rules when it comes to enforcing the consensuses? TJ Spyke 05:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, I know that part of the conditions of my return was that I be put on indefinite 1RR parole, but is it possible that that condition could be reduced in the future or even removed? TJ Spyke 06:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Where are these conditions documented? I would need to see the original discussion before I could offer advice. --Deskana (talk) 17:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Here: Wikipedia:Community sanction noticeboard/Archive12#User:TJ Spyke and not an admin, but the user who helped me get unblocked (Moe Epsilon) User talk:TJ Spyke/Archive 12#Revert parole. TJ Spyke 21:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
If you want my advice, I say limit yourself to 1RR regardless. "A consensus" is sometimes not clear, and if you get the wrong idea, then you could find yourself banned again. I say be on your best behaviour and just limit yourself to 1RR. Secondly, it is possible that eventually you may be able to get your paroles removed, but given that you've not been unbanned for that long, asking to have them removed so soon is probably not a good idea. --Deskana (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ellis Raimbault

Could you confirm here [3] that the abover girl stated her age was below the age of consent. Thanks. Giano 00:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course, sir. Ellis Raimbault did indeed state her age was under the age of consent. For the record, I do not believe that this person was actually a fourteen year old girl, as she evidently had knowledge of setting up anonymising proxies. But that is what she claimed, yes. And we must act on the assumption that that is fact, if it is what she stated. --Deskana (talk) 00:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
This is incorrect. I checked the girl's log, and she stated that she was fourteen. She did not state that she was under the age of consent. Fourteen year old girls with a taste for the polemic are probably among the most adept at using proxies. Why else would every other proxy channel advertise itself with some kind of appeal to unblocking school filters? digitalemotion 11:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me? Since when has 14 not been under the age of consent? And she wasn't using a standard web based open anonymising proxy, it looked more like a closed anonymising one. --Deskana (talk) 12:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I never said that 14 was not under the age of consent. I was just implying that it varies from state to state. I also wonder why you are even considering it, when Czyborra was only requesting photographs. Is this not rather sick and prurient of you?
I have no idea of what you're talking about when it comes to proxies. But I hardly think age comes into play, especially considering that teens need this technology to play as they like. digitalemotion 18:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot flag

Deskana, I recently approved Chris G Bot 3 to run with a bot flag, and it looks like you intended to flag it [4], but it is not showing as flagged [5] yet. Would you please check on this, note that this user name actually has a "3" in it, it is not 'task 3' of Chris_G_Bot. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 02:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC) (For the Bot Approvals Group)

I think I just forgot to flag it. Flagged now :-) --Deskana (talk) 02:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! — xaosflux Talk 00:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Comments

I've already stopped. I've never done anything like this before, and I won't do it again. I'm not sorry, but I have stopped, so please let it die. Thank you, and cheers. The Hybrid T/C 16:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

As long as you don't do it again, there's no problem. --Deskana (talk) 16:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Then we don't have a problem ;). Peace, The Hybrid T/C

[edit] My RfA

I didn't expect it to pass after the first few days. Fortunately, most of the oppose votes were combined with advice for improvement. We'll see what happens over the next few months. Thanks. Michaelbusch 17:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Melefire COBALT sock

Thank you so much for this! - CobaltBlueTony 18:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comedy

That was pure class.... !! Pedro :  Chat  22:43, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CU

Sorry, you're too quick. I was retreating my request, but you already answered. What I would like to know is: how does it work if someone wants to check 2 users on 2 different edtions of wp? Thanks. Snowdog 00:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Well you seem to what to corroborate evidence with the Italian checkusers. Have they requested this data? If they have, ask them to contact me on the checkuser-l mailing list. All checkusers on all projects have access to the list, and I can contact them through that for private collaboration. This is exactly what the mailing list was made for. --Deskana (talk) 00:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFCU

Re: this RFCU [6]

Is the result of a "possible on a technical level" that we assume in good faith that they aren't sockpuppets? I.e., no consequences? This isn't the only page that these two have tag teamed on. Is the issue that they have closely ranged IPs? Anothersliceofhistory stated:

Louisiana politics is not a very big area so I assume Araphel is another individual who desires to have the complete story told about LFF and David Vitter

which means he claims not to know Araphel. Doesn't it seem, therefore, less likely their IPs would be so close? Thanks! ∴ Therefore | talk 01:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible means that by IP comparison, it is entirely possible that the accounts are owned by the same person, but that it is not possible to prove it definitively, nor is it possible to definitiviely prove they are not owned by the same person. That's all it means. --Deskana (talk) 01:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usurpation

Hi. Not carping here, but this piece of advice is a bit vague:

Please do not request usurpation if your user account is less than several months old, or barely used. In order to ensure that usurped usernames be put to good use, we prefer only to grant requests from reasonably well-established users.

I have over 3000 edits in exactly 3 months, most of them in mainspace, while the proposed name has precisely one edit 14 months ago. I hope you'll forgive me if it doesn't quite make sense when I assume that this user doesn't appear to be bothered about using the name. Perhaps the above wording could be a little more specific. Meanwhile, I will come back to this tomorrow as it's late here. Thanks anyway. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 02:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Please peruse WP:CHUG, namely...
Target username has edits. If the target username has good faith edits which were not immediately reverted, and the account owner has not explicitly consented to the rename, then usurping could cause GFDL copyright issues.
Three months is borderline in terms of newness I think, but either way, you cannot have the account you want. Accounts with any edits to the encylopedia cannot be usurped. --Deskana (talk) 02:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I had missed the GFDL issue. My bad. Sleep well. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 02:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration

Don't know if anyone asked you before, but you should think of running in the upcoming Arbcom elections. SashaCall 06:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Look at the nominations page. I am running :-) --Deskana (talk) 12:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Good Luck then. I totally missed your name on that list. SashaCall 19:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration? Could you explain this to me? Atomic Religione 19:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Read this, this and this, if you're interested. --Deskana (talk) 19:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Email

You should have one from me. Thanks, - auburnpilot talk 19:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice

Hi,

This is a suggestion that you may "take or leave", but you may find it helpful. In the course of your ArbCom questioning, you disagreed with the statement "Wikipedia is fair to all users", or some similar wording. I found your answer distressing for the lack of one element: NPOV. NPOV is a core policy, and a type of "fairness"; it is in this sense that WP is policy-bound to be "fair" in the presentation of articles. WP:V and WP:RS, with their demands for accuracy, might also enforce a species of fairness. Fairness in the content of the encyclopedia is a paramount goal of the project; for this reason, actions against users must sometimes be taken that might considered "unfair" from a certain point of view. The encyclopedia simply places its priority in a different kind of fairness.

In short, by policy, Wikipedia is always fair (though, of course, WP is imperfect, and doesn't live up to its ideal in every article.) It just takes some thinking to understand the kind of fairness that is enforced.

I offer this bit of advice because you're a gentle fellow, and you'll take it well. :)

Also, my apologies, but I will be voting against your candidacy, notwithstanding that I like you. As you may recall from various RfBs, I consider concentration of power/wiki-functions a danger to be avoided. As you are a bureaucrat, I do not wish to see you occupy ArbCom as well. I understand that your view on this matter is obviously different (I read your response to a question, also). I wish to convey that my opposition is from principle only, and not a reflection on my regard for you, or on your fitness for ArbCom, even. In my view, holding bureaucratship is simply an automatic disqualification for ArbCom.

I will be regretfully opposing Raul for the same reason, even though I think he is a fine Arbitrator. (In Raul's case, I do think his performance as a bureaucrat has suffered, adding weight to my belief that concentration of power is detrimental.) Best wishes, Xoloz 15:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Xoloz, thank you for your comments. I have amended my answer to the question to note that I only believe that Wikipedia is not intended to be fair in the context of the users that edit, not in the context of your articles. I only hope that I have not confused too many people in my answers. On a side note, were I to resign my bureaucrat rights, would you support the candidacy? Please note that I will not be resigning my bureaucrat rights regardless of your answer to my question... I am simply curious. --Deskana (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
I think you'd be a bit silly to resign them so soon after gaining them... but, I think I would support your candidacy in that case (barring a "shocking revelation" during the election!) I wouldn't expect you to resign, however; ideally, I'd like a candidate to choose only one high office, and to be content in performing it. (This includes CheckUser and Oversight, by the way, although I understand that my desired system is far from reality in that aspect.) With nearly 1400 admins, and approx. 20 ex-ArbCom'ers, I do think it is at this point practically feasible to spread official functions widely. For a wiki, I think diffusion of power is more than a principle of good governance, it's a survival strategy: WP can never rely too much on one individual. As you're aware, Arb-Commers tend to suffer "burn-out" -- why should they have any extra duties to attend to, when one is so taxing? Anyway, you get my point. Best wishes, Xoloz 13:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] closed RfA

ay, thank you for taking care of that. I really appreciate it, enjoy your day : ) Matthew Brandon Yeager 05:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] account on dewiki

Hi, today I blocked a newly created account de:User:Deskana for this edit. I suppose, it was not you ;). If there is anything I can do to help, don't hesitate to ask. --Complex (de) 14:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

DerHexer mentioned it to me. Given that the account used to speak some English, and I think I can vaguely remember making some of the earlier edits, I think that may have been my account at one point. Obviously it's not now... I've changed my password on this account to something I've never used before, so hopefully everything's fine. My password is really secure too. Hmph. Thanks, anyway. --Deskana (talk) 14:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Well - that account was new, the other edits you see here are edits imported from Wikipedia:Five pillars --Complex (de) 14:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Ohh right, that explains why I remember making those edits and seem to have used admin rollback. I guess I'll have to wait for single user login to get that back, I don't feel like pestering a bureaucrat over it :-) --Deskana (talk) 14:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agenda against Pro Wrestling having FA status

Possibly have a look at this. It seems like two users are seriously against professional wrestling and seemingly want to de-list Montreal Screwjob from FA status. Also see the conversation at in WP:PW's talk page. Could you give your opinion at Talk:Montreal Screwjob? Seeing as how you are an admin/bureau/checkuser, your comments would certainly be appreciated. Thank you. -- bulletproof 3:16 17:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the example

I hope the new format for Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Riprowan is suitable. Thanks, Evinatea 19:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

That's perfect, thank you. I will look at it now. Spending those few extra minutes formatting it gets your request answered much easier, and it's much easier on us checkusers. :-) --Deskana (talk) 19:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom question

Hey Deskana. I added another question to my section a few days ago, and as it is unreplied to and everything else is, I think you may have missed it. User:Veesicle 07:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, my bad, I'll be sure to check it out later. --Deskana (talk) 10:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sonicrules sock

User:Jeremy the hedgehog , seems to be a sock of User:Sonicrules. I make this assumption since he went to one of the users ( User:Luigifan ) that Sonicrules is well aqquianted with, and his manner of speaking "I will save Wikipedia" are reminiscent of Sonicrules. I suppose further investigation could be done, but it's in your hands. Atomic Religione 16:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep my eye on it. --Deskana (talk) 17:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, he's been blocked for being disruptive, death threats, and all that rot. You can take him off your wachlist. Atomic Religione (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pallida Mors account --Usurpation rejected.

Greetings, Deskana!

I hope you don't mind for my having requested a reconsideration of the usurp' rejection (Nov 4).

As far as I understand, the conditions for usurpation my case has are, except for account seniority, unbeatable.

As I wrote in the page, in any case it will be just a matter of time.

Thank you in advance for reconsidering it and my apologies for the stolen time. Pallida Mors 76 20:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:24.186.101.182

He has made NUMEROUS attacks, in my opinion, warranting a Indef Block. Please deal with him as soon as possible. Atomic Religione 21:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

"You are incredibly lame" was a rather good way to get the person more angry and be more uncivil. You should really consider what you say to users that are being uncivil to you, as often being uncivil back will just provoke them. That said, Chaser's already blocked the IP. --Deskana (talk) 21:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, we all get hot under the collar, one person can only take so much. Atomic Religione 21:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LbUT

Hello, Deskana! Could you please explain to me what "stale" means? Thanks. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser data is only stored for a limited time. An account is said to be stale when its checkuser data no longer exists. --Deskana (talk) 22:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thanks. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E-mail

You have been sent one. Acalamari 00:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to check it tonight. --Deskana (talk) 11:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser request posted

I notice that you ran a checkuser on user:SqueakBox the last time, and confirmed that he was using sockpuppets. He's at it again, using the user:Pol64 screen name, and trolling on both. I've posted supporting diffs here and here. I recommend a permablock. -HolokittyNX 01:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

He confirmed no such thing, indeed he confirmed Pol was using sockpuppets but none related to me. Please pay attention to the content of the RCU before making inaccurate comments. Thanks, SqueakBox 01:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Confirmed - instead recommend permablocks on both for their own trolling. -HolokittyNX 01:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Well I can see you are here to try to get me blocked but admins won't block without good reason and you aren't even giving a bad reason. Making false claims, such as me using socks on pedophile articles, and trivialising the crime of child sexual abuse, eg here strikes me as the trolling going on around here, and lets face it it is not the first time I have been trolled for daring to oppose pro-pedophile activism supporters on the pedophile articles, and because I get blamed for the multiple blocks of both users and their socks on these articles. Thanks, SqueakBox 02:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Further RFCUs will get rejected. Then both using British spellings is irrelevant. I use British spellings. Is SqueakBox my sock? Oh, and they both occasionally hit the key next to one they want. I've done that about twice so far in this message, I've just corrected it. It'd be nice if you didn't keep making accusations that in the past have been proven to be baseless. I'm sorry you have to put up with this kind of stuff, SqueakBox. --Deskana (talk) 13:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 45 5 November 2007 About the Signpost
Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy"
News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Volume 3, Issue 46 12 November 2007 About the Signpost
Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale"
News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for promoting my first nominee, Nightscream. Bearian 14:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks from me as well. I hope to make all of you proud. Nightscream 15:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userbox

Can you tell me how to get the userbox to show how long i've been on wiki? Please respond on my talk page Ctjf83 00:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)