User talk:Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive VII
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Suspected Socks & PERSONAL ATTACKS
Hello Kilo. You have dealt with two incidence of sockpuppeting by this user before: user:Curandero101...He is at it again as user:Thamarih...Made a formal report with the evidence and the whole bit, but thought to let you know personally since you addressed it both times it happened previously. Keeps removing the link to our Church Aurora Baha under Ayahuasca external links, which having been made aware of the Conflict of Interest policy I have left out until put up by an independent person; although it had been up for quite some time without issue until this user removed it. In a stroke of irony he placed a link to his church under the same external links with his sockpuppeteer user:Curandero101 and keeps adding it back personally against the same Conflict of Interest policy. Doing my best to follow the procedures. Working hard not to have to engage this juvenile behaviour. Hoping you might take the time to independently evaluate our Church Website Aurora Baha at www.aurorabaha.org and if you feel it appropriate add our link back. Thank you in advance.
This is a revise. The same user user:Thamarih has now begun a campaign of blatant personal attacks on one of the members of our society in violation of Wikipedia's Policy to comment on content and not contributors at talk:ayahuasca; as well as violating the 3RR rule on both ayahuasca and talk:ayahuasca. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
Suspected Socks
Well, I'm going to let him say what he wants to. Will (Glaciers melting in the dead of night) 21:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Article Class (Stub, Start...)
When you rate an article on its class, please be sure to capitalize the class name (i.e. {{FilmsWikiProject|class=Start}} instead of {{FilmsWikiProject|class=start}}) or else it will not be removed from the Unassessed category. Thanks, Cbrown1023 00:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Completed the 24 hour block
I completed the block , now user:BhaiSaab is stalking my edits and keeps reverting my homepage putting the sockpuppet tag on it. Could you tell the guy to cut it out. --CltFn 01:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Appears to have died down, and you did commit sockpuppetry. Iolakana•T 16:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 11th.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 37 | 11 September 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
| Carnildo resysopped | Report from the Hungarian Wikipedia |
| News and notes | Features and admins |
| Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
|
|
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | RSS 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 05:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Go raibh maith agat!
 |
Hi there! Thank you so much for supporting my RfA! It ended up passing and I'm rather humbled by the support (and a bit surprised that it was snowballed a day early!). Please let me know if I can help you out and I welcome any comments, questions, or advice you wish to share. Sláinte! hoopydinkConas tá tú? 23:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC) |
American Psycho
The talk page of American Psycho says you are active in improving the article. I suggested many improvements to the article on the talk page, albeit rather hastily. I am interested to know your opinion on these, and whatever other comments you might have. Cheers. Rintrah 16:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Can you track down sources and improve the style of the Themes and Symbolism section? I will try to reorganise the article appropriately, and summarise it when I get my book back. Rintrah 17:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Since I have come to this article, I and others have rooted out original research, cleaned up the sections, made the paragraphs more logically structured and succinct, improved the style of composition (including how easily it can be read), improved the grammar, found possible sources for criticism (which have not yet been used), rewritten the Synopsis (my first attempt was a hasty, very rough job), suggested improvements, appropriately reorganised the sections, deleted a superfluous section, and reviewed it for improvement to GA status. That is, we have improved it enormously and I have played a very large part. Now it is written better than most B-class articles, and is held back unnaturally from GA status because it fails the citations criterion. There are B-class articles written so poorly that this article would seem a great work of literature by comparison. If another editorput in half my effort to the article into finding sources, this article would have easily elevated to GA status. It was rated as B-class before I came upon this article (I think), or a long time ago. So it is frustrating. Even my dilligent attention to many, many tiny details is all in vain. Oh well. Rintrah 14:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/David Justin
Hi there, Following your suggestion on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/David Justin, I asked for a check user. The check user Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/David Justin has shown "that Wright, Creighton, and Wise are sockpuppets". These accounts are Bryant Wright, Ralph Creighton, Stu Wise. Other accounts were too old to be checked. So as an administrator who has shown interest in this case, what are the next steps to be followed? Nunquam Dormio 09:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Barnstar!
 |
The Sockpuppet Star | |
| I, Mr. Lefty, award Kilo-Lima this Sockpuppet Star for doing a great job helping to root out abusive sockpuppets. Keep up the good work! --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 01:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC) |
LiveScience
Greetings, administrator unit.
It appears as if you protected the LiveScience.com page. You may wish to create a protected redirect page to Imaginova, the owner of the Space.com, SpaceNews.com and LiveScience.com web sites. What was the reason for deleting the page instead of upgrading it to something useful? (Ideally, the "PROD" reason code could have been a link to the codes list, which presumably exists somewhere.)
-
- Wikiborg 11:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- I think that it is best to wait until there is consensus to delete these, then protection could come in. Iolakana•T 16:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 18th.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 38 | 18 September 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | RSS 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 05:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Arbitration re: Jessica Lunsford
Unsure if Im supposed to notify you or if the arbitrators are but I listed you as a party of interest in Request for Arbitration: Jessica Lunsford. Cumberbund 07:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
September Esperanza Newsletter
|
|
|
Changes to Socksuspect2 template
I made some changes to the {{socksuspect2}} template to hopefully help investigations in the future by clarifying who is being accused of being sockpuppets and who the suspected sockpuppeteer is. Take a look and let me know if there is any problem with my changes. I was unable to get the sockpuppeteer entry to fill in automatically due to my lack of experience with the nuances of templates, maybe you can figure that part out. Neil916 (Talk) 19:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Re: GreekEconomist
Hi, Kilo-Lima. Just to clarify, you meant it's "unlikely" that GreekEconomist is a sock, correct? Thanks for your time. --Akhilleus (talk) 16:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't rule out that it is possible. I thought that it was unlikely, but you are welcome to add the username to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cretanpride. Iolakana•T 16:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I did that before, actually. I was asking for a new look at the situation; sorry if I didn't make that clear. Thanks for taking a look at it, and I'll now consider the matter overwith. --Akhilleus (talk) 17:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Re: LinkBot
Hi Kilo-Lima,
You left a message on my talk page about 3 months ago asking about LinkBot, and what's up with it. Well, I thought you might like to know that there's now an on-demand web-based tool that does what LinkBot did, without leaving all the messages on talk pages. It's described at User:Nickj/Can We Link It. It's currently only temporary until a longer-term home is found, but if you want to give it a go it's up now and will be at least for the next few days. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 00:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Lefty's RfA thanks
 |
Hi, Kilo-Lima, and thanks for supporting me in my recent request for adminship, which succeeded with a final tally of 70/4/4. I hope I can live up to your expectations, and if there's ever anything you need, you know where to find me! --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 00:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for September 25th.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 39 | 25 September 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | RSS 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 07:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Sending my name to check users.
Sir,
My I request you to explain why name is suggested for WP:RFCU? You must have read the evidence and my defence. I do not see any reason for my name to be either blocked or send to check user.
Please read my comments wherever I have posted. Do u find any of them against wikipedia's policy? Do you think I have ever violated the policies and guidelines Insted if you read the accuser's comments/edits those are more atocratic/hypocritic, intolerant and totally against Wikipidia's policy. (I am not complaining against him as I am not interested in fighting such idiotic "block" war, insted of prooving my point of view which I believe in.)
Please do not block my user name as it is against the freedom of expression for which wikipedia stands for.
Thank you.--Bodhidhamma 19:34, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Need you advise/help, please
User: Pia I'm going to remove your post from this talk page as per Admin User:Redvers because you appear to be giving out personal information about another editor and we don't allow that. WorkingHard 06:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
- Have a great day! Here's a nice coffee for you from Esperanza!! Jam01 01:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Very happy wiki-birthday. --Bhadani 15:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
And the same from me :) -- Cielomobile minor7♭5 20:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Worth a read
Someone's detailing of abuse to you was recently deleted from your talk page. You can read the material here. --Kevin_b_er 07:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
StrangeApples(Autoblocks • block log)
Collateral damage from AOL user block, please help clear --64.12.116.72 20:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 2nd.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 40 | 2 October 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
| New speedy deletion criteria added | News and notes |
| Wikipedia in the news | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
|
|
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | RSS 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 06:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry and User:Ehinger222
You've archived the stuff at Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Ehinger222, but I don't know what the conclusion of the case is. It doesn't indicate whether there is insufficient evidence or whatever the decision is... Am a little confused. Can you enlighten me? Cheers, Dibo 23:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- there's a reoccurrence of the same sort of edits by another IP on the 60.225.*.* range that bear remarkable resemblance to edits by the ip's and logins listed here by an anon user operating from 60.225.216.220 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) as can be seen from his contribs.
What do I do - the page has been archived, the previous sockpuppet tags remain, do i renew the case (and how would i do that), do i wait until the 10 days expire and then renew, do i leave it? I'm confused. Sorry, this is the first time I've involved myself in sockpuppet stuff. Incidentally, Topcattheirrefutable essentially admitted to sockpuppetry as I found out through CattleGirl on my talk page- "You may be interested to see a message posted on my talk page from Topcattheirrefutable. There he admits to having sockpuppets. I replied on his talk page. Thought you'd be interested, especially considering i noticed that there hasn't been a conclusion yet on the sockpuppetry evidence page. CattleGirl 07:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)"
The exchange went as follows:
"== RE: Dear CattleGirl ==
Thankyou for your concern in the dispute. I essentially use no rules on wikipedia except the general convention of being wikipedian and attempting to improve the encyclopedia. I am the Ehinger but I am not Ehinger222 which is a different character. I have literally hundreds of created sockpuppets, but most of them are only used to create pages and are used once. I have literally contributed thousands of valid edits to wikipedia and have improved the enc yclopedia n areas very varied from Atlantis to the Basque language.
If I want to have a little fun at the expense of an i.d. that devotes its time almost exclusively to compiling"evidence" against me(most of it wrong for that matter), than is it really such a bad thing? Have a geeze at Dibo's account fr the month leading up to October 1st. The dude only came on looking for me. Oh ... and I am 90% sure that he is Tancred. They both eroneously assert tha soccer should be referred to as football which is stupid and wrong and thay continually troll by insisting on it in articles that they have done nothing to create or contribute to.
Comrade
13:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Topcattheirrefutable
- You're welcome for my concern in the dispute. I want Wikipedia to be as peaceful as possible- and that, to me, means that if we follow all the rules and protocols then there will be non reason for that peace to be disturbed. If you are the Ehinger, you ARE a sockpuppet, and actually, i would not be the least bit surprised if Ehinger222 was you as well, considering the usernames are so similar. However, if you only use them once, then what is the point of creating them? Really, it is 'taking up' usernames that other people can't use in the future.
- Even though there are some types of sockpuppetry that is fine on wikipedia, you do not fall under those headings. From what i can see, Dibo has gone to a fair bit of work to outline this sockpuppetry, and i have had to revert your userpage a number of times as well. And also, Dibo can come on whenever he wants- if it was the month leading up to this, him signing on probably led him to see you and your sockpuppets.
- I know this defence is sounding a lot like i am taking sides, but i personally do not see the similarities between Dibo and Tancred. I've looked at their edits on that page a number of times, and can't see the resemblance. Also, even though they might agree on the same thing, doesn't necessarily mean that they are the same person. And if you don't mind me saying, i haven't come across an edit where either of them troll. However, if you are going to accuse them of sockpuppetry, you may want to pay attention to the rules, as the case won't be considered if you are not following protocol and entering it in properly.
- You said before: If I want to have a little fun at the expense of an i.d. that devotes its time almost exclusively to compiling"evidence" against me(most of it wrong for that matter), than is it really such a bad thing? Well, firstly if it is wrong, you can comment on why it is wrong on the evidence page against you, however i think the case may have been closed, you may have to check the archive. CattleGirl 07:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Cattlegirl, I can remove the SP tag because I follow no rules and in 99% of cases I am entirely wikipedian. Protocol does not apply for me. 01:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Topcattheirrefutable
- Remove it if you want, however i am going to revert it back, because i do follow the rules. It applies to the rest of us, and i for one do not see how you can be an exception if the rest of us make an effort to keep the peace and abide by the rules. However, i am going to check if you can remove it from your page yet, if the case is still open. However, last time i checked you had to keep it on your page for about another 8 days, 7 now. CattleGirl 07:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)"
JonStamos
Hi. I noticed that after posting the evidence page against User:JonStamos and his sockpuppets you replied in the Conclusions section Obvious. I was wondering what would happen next- are they going to be blocked, or what other action against them would you take? Thanks, CattleGirl 07:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Jsmorse47's back with a new puppet
Hi. Sorry to bother you but you were the closing admin on this sockpuppetry case. I was sort of happy that this whole thing had been sorted but he's back with a vengeance [1] under the username Judgenot77 (talk · contribs). By the way, what's the correct procedure in this case? Should I open a new case, even if this happens less than 24h after the initial block? Thanks for your help. Pascal.Tesson 18:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Xenomorph (Alien)
You should consider nominating that aricle for Good Article status (through Wikipedia:Good article candidates) because it looks really good. Cbrown1023 01:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Block
I've undone your block on 165.228.129.12; its a major IP in Australia and that particular address is used by Parliment House and other addresses in Canberra and has affected good, registered contributors. --Peta 00:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- Wow. Australian federal politicians vandalise wikipedia in their spare time? Such would explain the raucous behaviour in Question Time during parliamentary sittings. This is a good laugh for my day. Rintrah 06:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Vandal
Hi Kilo-Lima, User talk:80.58.205.39 has struck again this time at Opus Dei. For your information. Thomas 02:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
User talk:124.2.76.130
Page needs semi-protecting I think. --Alex (Talk) 16:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
question about you stripping my article
Hi, I'm Raidon and I am the one that did the research and wrote the article about the artist Adeyto.
I have noticed that you stripped a large amount of my writing. My sources were IMDB data, the artists official site and artists official blog (that's if you can read Japanese). You mention "please see WP:NPOV, WP:CITE and WP:RS" but I consider your stripping was overzealous.
At least you could have refrained from stripping her "Photographer" information and the information about TV CF because this information is available and verifiable on artists official profile.
Besides you, I have noticed users 70.128.102.13 and 67.183.24.157 that are aggressively slamming this artist but are not doing ANY other contributions to Wikipedia. How about banning this trolls?
Numata raidon 22:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, I re-inserted the Photographer data and added various verifiable links..... Numata raidon 23:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
QuasiKraMuc (talk · contribs)
Hi, I mentioned this at WP:AN/I but nothing has been done. User:QuasiKraMuc is an obvious sockpuppet of permabanned user KraMuc (talk · contribs · block log) and as such should (as I understand it) be blocked on sight. He has left an insulting message in my user talk page, and also vandalized Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/KraMuc (2nd) continued KraMuc's edit war in User talk:KraMuc and Louis Essen. Can you help? ---CH 19:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Kilo! ---CH 22:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
sockpuppet resolution
Thank you for not blocking my account. I am somewhat confused by what you wrote on my userpage. Does this mean I cannot edit any articles previously edited by PStrait? (I don't intend to start an argument; I just want clarification so that I don't violate any WP rules). Herbertmarcuse 01:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppet
Ha ha- that would require a lot of free time that I don't have. Please take me off of your list. Thanks Joe 15:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 9th.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 41 | 9 October 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | 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 16:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for blocking the socks!! Addhoc 18:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Re: No reason given for requested protection.
The reason for semi-protection was noted under Paradise Lost (band), and also spoke for all the articles above it (Tiamat (band), Rotting Christ, Crematory, Moonspell, Diabolique (band)). Perm-banned editor User:Leyasu has been using a sequence of IPs beginning with 81... and 86... to incorrectly change music genres and intentionally insert spelling and typos in articles. I would like for you to please reconsider semi-protecting these pages - the long history on each one speaks for itself, and it's becoming day-to-day thing for me (and several others) to remove this banned user's abusive sockpuppet edits. --Danteferno 22:28, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppet
Hello, the use from Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Curandero101 (2nd), has evaded his block by using an IP, User:58.164.210.64. Regards, -- Jeff3000 02:33, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Blocked. Thanks, Kilo•T 12:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- User is also using User:203.3.65.10. All of these appear to be from Queensland. Thanks for the protection on the article. Ciao, MARussellPESE 12:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 16th.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 42 | 16 October 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | 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 18:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Curious blocks
I see that you've blocked Cogito ergo sumo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) and Ex post factoid (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log), apparently on the basis of this report, and I'm rather curious as to why you decided to block them.
Even assuming that they are all operated by the same individual, E Pluribus Anthony (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) is not banned, so there's no inherent limitation on his ability to create new accounts. The three accounts in question can't even really be considered sockpuppets, as have entirely non-overlapping editing periods:
- E Pluribus Anthony (talk · contribs) - prior to August 18
- Cogito ergo sumo (talk · contribs) - August 27–October 15
- Ex post factoid (talk · contribs) - October 17
There's no policy, as far as I know, that generally forbids the abandonment of old accounts for new ones (announced or otherwise); and the sole blockable action that could have occurred here—evasion of the block on Cogito ergo sumo (talk · contribs)—didn't actually take place, as Ex post factoid (talk · contribs) first edited after that block had elapsed.
So, why the blocks? Kirill Lokshin 18:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm... You make a good point. I was only seeing it from the report's view. However, I still feel that the similarities in usernames seem to indicate otherwise. I'll unblock. Kilo•T 19:16, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well, yes, I wouldn't be particularly surprised if all three accounts were the same person, but that's not, in of itself, something that requires blocking. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oh God... :( I understand the techicallity about the "non-overlapping editing periods"... but what about his edits using anonimous IPs [2] Look IP of last edit instead of his registered account? He claimed to be two different persons, in order to give the impression of "consensus" on the Talk page of North America. What can be done? I already filed a request for investigation... AlexCovarrubias 19:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, do you have anything more specific on that last point? Skimming the conversation, I can't see anywhere that the IPs actually claim to be two different people. There's nothing wrong with editing from different IPs, and the participants in the discussion seem to be aware of the fact that it's the same editor behind both. (The fact that he's argumentative isn't really unacceptable per se; many people are. You may want to request opinions from outside editors to determine where consensus lies in terms of the actual content issue in question.) Kirill Lokshin 19:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know what can be done when a registered user uses a anonimous IP to edit. It is clear that he edited anonimously to prevet his "main" account from being blocked. Cogito ergo sum and his anonimous aliases has been editing the same articles in the same period of time e.g. North America, Central America, Oceania, Borg Star Trek. 142.150.134.55 contributions, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/142.150.134.52 contributions, 142.150.134.53 contributions, 142.150.134.50 contributions, 142.150.134.49 contributions, 142.150.134.56 contributions, 142.150.134.57 contributions, 142.150.134.60 contributions, 142.150.134.61 contributions, etc. His IP range varies from 142.150.134.49 to 142.150.134.79. In the same period of time, check Cogito's and E Pluribus Anthony. He edited using anonimous IP when using those accounts to avoid complaints and blocks. AlexCovarrubias 20:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hmm, do you have anything more specific on that last point? Skimming the conversation, I can't see anywhere that the IPs actually claim to be two different people. There's nothing wrong with editing from different IPs, and the participants in the discussion seem to be aware of the fact that it's the same editor behind both. (The fact that he's argumentative isn't really unacceptable per se; many people are. You may want to request opinions from outside editors to determine where consensus lies in terms of the actual content issue in question.) Kirill Lokshin 19:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oh God... :( I understand the techicallity about the "non-overlapping editing periods"... but what about his edits using anonimous IPs [2] Look IP of last edit instead of his registered account? He claimed to be two different persons, in order to give the impression of "consensus" on the Talk page of North America. What can be done? I already filed a request for investigation... AlexCovarrubias 19:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well, yes, I wouldn't be particularly surprised if all three accounts were the same person, but that's not, in of itself, something that requires blocking. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:25, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
If evasion of 3RR or blocking by using IPs occours that is a matter for investigation at the time. But as it stands the 3 accounts allthaugh quite likely the same person do not constitute a violation of WP:SOCK. Can the report and the tags on the users pages be updated accourdingly? Agathoclea 21:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Mediators needed!
Hiya! I'm contacting you because you're listed on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal as "willing to accept assigned cases" if you find it interesting. Well, we've got a bit of a backlog, and I was wondering if you'd look over the current list of new cases (I've copied it here for convenience) and tell me if you'd take any of them? I'd really appreciate it! :D
- 2006-10-07 Advocates for Children in Therapy
- 2006-10-07 Joe Sharkey
- 2006-10-08 BSA
- 2006-10-08 Nicole Kidman
- 2006-10-09 Hinduism
- 2006-10-09 Vittorio Emanuele, Prince of Naples
- 2006-10-10 Udit Raj
- 2006-10-12 Sweetest Day
- 2006-10-13 Scott Davis and Miami,Queensland
- 2006-10-13 Unification Church
- 2006-10-14 Personal attacks
- 2006-10-14 U.S. Roads naming fallout
- 2006-10-16 Deletions by user Kdbuffalo
- 2006-10-16 Turkmenistan
- 2006-10-16 Vigile.net as a source
I think you might be interested in the Joe Sharkey or Nicole Kidman cases, if you like to work with biographical cases. If you want something challenging, you may want to give Hinduism or U.S. Roads naming fallout a try. Thanks again! ~Kylu (u|t) 21:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
informal request for comment
User:Jayjg has indef blocked me (again). I posted the whole story to user:Centrx, because I have been in contact with him before. Thought you might like to know. 87.78.178.9 (user:Subversive_element) 18:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- I figure there's no personal attack any more. Is it because I'm blocked? So blocked users may be personally attacked according to WP policy, is that correct? 87.78.158.224 18:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Sarner Sockpuppet issue
- I'm very confused about your sockpuppet decision related to user Sarner and myself. I'm not a sockpuppet of Sarner and have in fact disagreed with him on certain issues. And I don't seem to be blocked. Can you explain to me what is going on? Thanks. StokerAce 23:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Like StokerAce, I'm confused. The case seems to be archived (by you), does that mean it's closed? The message on the case page is very unclear. What does it mean to "take this to WP:RFCU"? If indeed the case is closed, does this mean I can remove the "sockpuppet" entry on my user page? Thank you. Larry Sarner 13:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 23rd.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 43 | 23 October 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
| Report from the Finnish Wikipedia | News and notes: Donation currencies added, milestones |
| Wikipedia in the news | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | 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 06:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Vincent Margera
Just wanted to say that when you reverse someones edit you might want to check if the edit is correct or not. I made an edit to the Vincent Margera page where someone earlier had said that the finnish word "vittu" means "David Bussy" when it actually means "cunt". That was changed by an antivandalbot, but when I contacted the person in charge of the bot and he changed it back to my version. Anyway, the teenageboy (which I guess it is) changed it back to David Bussy, and then I changed it to pussy which wouldn´t get caught by the bot, but then you changed it back to David Bussy, thereby perhaps contributing to harassing someone. So, make sure your edits are correct or just don´t do them! /Maria —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.253.25.54 (talk • contribs) 13:15, October 24, 2006.
- I'll check this out. Kilo•T 17:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- I apologise. Perhaps you should include a minor summary of why you did change it, so that it never looked like vanadlism, in the edit summary? Thanks, Kilo•T 17:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Hungry girl troll
As you may know the "Hungrygirl" troll has been stalking me/trolling me so far four of his/her usernames have been blocked: User:Hungrygirl, User:Twentyboy, User:The Gayboy and User:Cutiepie guy — I believe a checkuser may now be in order to determine if there are any socks lying in wait? What do you think? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Sock Puppet issue
I know I had to fix it but have chosen not to. With the issues i have with Cryogenic it makes it look to petty. Ill let others concern themselves with this. Thanks.Quode 19:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- But I don't see why you blanked the page that was auto-filled from the template. Kilo•T 17:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kilz
I can't follow your reasoning on this one. Firstly, you've blocked the IP address for being "used to avoid 3RR detection." The user in question acknowledged responsibility for the edit 6 minutes later, without any prompting that I can see, so it hardly counts as attempting to avoid 3RR detection, or even using a sockpuppet. Surely some good faith can be assumed here. Secondly, it was that user's first edit to that page for more than 24 hours, so I cannot see how 3RR comes into it at all. If there's something I'm missing here I'd be glad to hear of it, but otherwise I cannot understand why you have issued this block. You appear to be offline, so I'll also make a note at WP:ANI. --Cherry blossom tree 20:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I have been looking on ANI for the section - could I have the link? Agathoclea 15:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets.2FKilz, though there's no real thread there. --Cherry blossom tree 16:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have been looking on ANI for the section - could I have the link? Agathoclea 15:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- I agree with Cherry blossom tree - he should not be banned for this, it is unfair. His error rate for logging in is non-negligible (admittedly I did not check well enough). I therefore have subsequently assumed good faith.
- A separate issue is why he was making this edit - it is a circumvention of the consensus building process. This is the only outstanding issue in my book, but being as he reverted his IP edit, that issue does not relate to the IP edit, but more the edits afterwards, and his breaking the 3RR afterwards, which again does not involve the IP edit. Widefox 15:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not disputing that this edit (and subsequent ones) were bad. I haven't looked at the whole issue. This block seems to have been issued for using a sockpuppet, though, which I cannot agree with. I think we seem to agree here. --Cherry blossom tree 16:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, we agree. Widefox 17:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- No, I don't. That's wrong. I have responded at the noticeboard. Kilo•T 17:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Do you have anything to say with regard to my initial comment? If you made a mistake then that's fine but if you think you're right and I missed something then I really would like to know. Thanks. --Cherry blossom tree 22:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not disputing that this edit (and subsequent ones) were bad. I haven't looked at the whole issue. This block seems to have been issued for using a sockpuppet, though, which I cannot agree with. I think we seem to agree here. --Cherry blossom tree 16:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Backlog at WP:SSP
I am not an admin, but do you think I could help? Agathoclea 21:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Question for ya
I just now posted a request for clarification re:Fwdixon case at Wikipedia talk:Suspected sock puppets--posted there as your response might assist others unclear on similar matters. SD Doxmyth 16:59, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
You helped choose Coffee as this week's WP:AID winner
– ClockworkSoul 04:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 30th.
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 44 | 30 October 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Vegetarianism
Hello Kilo-Lima - I saw that you had made some edits to the article on Vegetarianism in the past and was wondering if you were interesting in helping out with a discussion on the talk page? - Talk:Vegetarianism. I'm all for the article being NPOV, but am not sure about some of the recent comments? Regards, GourangaUK 19:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Barnstar
| Image:Original barnstar.png | The Original Barnstar | |
| For your hard work and dedication to improving Wikipedia (and an Admin, no less!), I, Sharkface217, hereby award you this Original Barnstar. Good job! Sharkface217 19:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC) |
Blondie peer review
Hi, I'm glad you nominated Blondie for peer review. I hope it gets a good response. I don't know what I can add as I did a lot of work in the article and pretty well ran out of ideas. I think it needs to be fleshed out and go into a little more detail but I don't know exactly how. If I can think of anything that I think may be useful I'll address it on the peer review page. I just wanted to acknowledge your message and let you know that I don't know what to suggest. Cheers Rossrs 11:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Utzchips
Hi, I saw that you tagged this case with:
- "This should be taken to WP:RFCU. Kilo•T 12:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)"
I looked at WP:RFCU, (never filed before) and under the section Does your request belong here? is says
- Obvious, disruptive sock puppet Block. No checkuser is necessary.
- Disruptive "throwaway" account used only for a few edits Block. No checkuser is necessary.
I will take this case to checkuser if you think that is the right thing to do, but I think the part about "does your case belong here" suggests that the request does not belong there, because the evidence is obvious.
Perhaps I used too much evidence, so I will highlight the points that make the case fall under the "obvious" bit.
- AvinSanjih (talk · contribs), Funnimilk (talk · contribs), MonMonstah (talk · contribs), SBruz10 (talk · contribs), 24.91.163.230 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) are all single use accounts created during the Afd discussion and used to vote, delete other editors' votes and or change other editors' votes.
- Both Utzchips (talk · contribs) and 24.203.42.57 (talk · contribs) have signed comments with Utz [3], [4]
Please advise me if there is really a reason to take this to RFCU. Thanks --BostonMA talk 13:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
November Esperanza Newsletter
|
|
|
Signpost updated for November 6th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 45 | 6 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
RfC on Mattisse/Timmy12
Hello. Just letting you know that an RfC has been opened on Mattisse, here. As it provides strong circumstantial evidence that Timmy12 is a sockpuppet of Mattisse intentionally using two computers to evade checkuser, I thought you might want to comment. I don't really care what side you weigh in on, but I know you've been in a position to observe at least part of the situation and any view would be helpful. —Hanuman Das 11:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 13th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 46 | 13 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Need Help Tag
I like your need help tag. Do you have a problem if i use it on my page to offer help to people viewing my page as well? Thanks! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:USA PATRIOT Act
You placed a notice a while back on Talk:USA PATRIOT Act which now states, in part, In particular, it is not for discussion about whether or not the USA PATRIOT Act is a "good" or "bad" act; or finding out what unnecessary information this does not help in improving Wikipedia. I'm not sure what the second part of the sentence, after the semicolon, means. --Metropolitan90 19:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there. It just means that the talk page of the article is not a forum for discussing the act. The talk page is not for discussing the subject of the article. If it is used as a forum, then it does not help in improving Wikipedia. Is that fine? Thanks :) Kilo•T 19:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 20th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 47 | 20 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
have a happy Turkey-Day!!!!
 |
 |
I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandiziŋ! --Randfan please talk talk to me! |
- Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Randfan!!
Cheers! :) —Randfan!! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
Signpost updated for November 27th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 48 | 27 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 01:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
MedCabal
Hi, we have a heavy backload of cases at WP:MEDCAB and since you are on the mediator list I thought I would request your help. Thanks! --Ideogram 10:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Award
 |
The GoldenWiki Award | |
| I, Dfrg.msc on the 4th of December 2006, award you Kilo-Lima, the GoldenWiki award for achieving the amazing total of over 10,000 edits, for your civility and kindness, your wise actions, and getting little or no recognition for it. You are truly a shining example a perfect Wikipedian. Bear this award proudly, you have worked hard for it. Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . Editor Review 08:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC) |
Signpost updated for December 4th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 49 | 4 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Philanthropist
I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Philanthropist, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Philanthropist. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. — Sebastian (talk) 03:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
User:Panairjdde is back
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#The_return_of_User:Panairjdde.2FUser:Kwame_Nkrumah_etc. if you wish to comment. Jayjg (talk) 02:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 11th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 50 | 11 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
WP:SOCK
Hi Kilo-Lima;
For a while, you have been the only admin patrolling the suspected sockpuppets page, but I haven't seen you over there in a while. Are you on wikibreak, or are you taking a break from that page? It's getting pretty backlogged. Neil916 (Talk) 16:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. I suppose you could call it a wikibreak, but I haven't been editing in a while (overall). I will plan to return soon, hopefully! :) Thanks, Kilo•T 21:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 18th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 51 | 18 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
question
Why did you block LiftWaffen on September 7 indefinately? [5]? I'm just trying to figure things out and would appreciate a reply. Thanks! Sincerely, Mattisse 01:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 2, Issue 52 | 26 December 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 07:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
vegan userbox
I am looking for a good home for the vegan userbox which is currently in my userspace at [[User:Michael Slone/Userbox/User vegan]]. Are you willing to move it to your userspace? I'll fix "what links here" and all that. Thanks for your time. Michael Slone (talk) 00:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, sure! Feel free just to move it to anything like User:Kilo-Lima/Vegan or something along those line. Sorry for the belated reply. Thanks, Kilo•T 17:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Okay, I'll start this process "soon". Thanks! Michael Slone (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I've moved the userbox to User:Kilo-Lima/Vegan. I'm pretty sure I've updated all the necessary links. See you later. Michael Slone (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Century-21-logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Century-21-logo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 07:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 1 | 2 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 07:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
You have been invited to join a WikiProject
Tenacious D Fans 11:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 2 | 8 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Tenacious D
Thanks so much for signing up to the project.
I don't think the numbers are going to be so good for a while.
Here are the things I am going to be working when I have time: [6]
I'm glad to see you on board.
Tenacious D Fans 07:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- I changed the userbox for the Tenacious D WikiProject dude. Why not add it?
Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 3 | 15 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
 |
The Wikipedia Birthday Committee wishes you a very happy birthday! Enjoy your special day. |
Save us all a piece of cake! Regards, •The RSJ• Talk | Sign Here 00:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Happy Birthday from Kamope
Happy Bithday 3!
 |
Hungry? Here's a little snack for you on your birthday, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day, Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive VII! |
That cookie sure looks good....You gonna finish that? --♥Tohru Honda13♥ 02:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
It's your Birthday!
Have a good day Kilo Lima, and many happy returns. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 1 . 2 . Editor Review 08:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Happy B-dae!
 |
Just a happy Birthday message to you, Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive VII, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! |
Gosh, looks like I'm late =P Well, have fun for your birthday~! --GravityTalk 13:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 4 | 22 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
| Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag | WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness" |
| News and notes: Talk page template, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
| Features and admins | 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 06:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Tenacious D
I need your help. I have been working hard on the D page but would like assistance with adding (cited) content for under the title Genre.
Tenacious D Fans (talk) 11:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Snow Cake (Sigourney).jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Snow Cake (Sigourney).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 04:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 17:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
ASUE
 |
Hello, Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive VII and thank you for your contributions on articles related to A Series of Unfortunate Events. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject A Series of Unfortunate Events, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of A Series of Unfortunate Events and related articles on Wikipedia.
If you would like to help out and participate, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! <3Clamster 20:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC) |
Tenacious D
Thanks for joining the Tenacious D WikiProject. The main article was recently rated good, but I think it can get Featured status. The to-do list on the Tenacious D talk page details everything that needs done in order for the D page to be suitable for Featured article status. Please help out. If you complete a task, please score it out by putting it in between the tags: <s></s>. Please help. Thanks. Tenacious D Fans (talk) 17:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 5th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 6 | 5 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Tenacious D WikiProject
I reworked the Wikipedia:WikiProject Tenacious D and now hope you guys will help out finishing the tasks. Thanks. Tenacious D Fans (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 12th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 7 | 12 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 19th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 8 | 19 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 07:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Fuzzy Zoeller edit controversy
Hello, there. As you may or may not know, the Miami Herald recently revealed that professional golfer Fuzzy Zoeller has filed a lawsuit against Josef Silny & Associates, Inc. for adding false statements to his Wikipedia biography.
For data gathering purposes, an SRS of 20 administrators has been created, you being one of them. I would like you to comment on this situation and its possible implications to Wikipedia, the accused company, and the general welfare of the community in general. (To what extent will this impact Wikipedia? To what extent will this impact those who use Wikipedia often? To what extent is the company guilty? Who do you believe is at fault?) Feel free to comment however you wish. I ask that you email me your responses via my emailuser page so as to reduce bias in your responses. (Again, don't post your responses on my talk page.)
The following are articles from various news agencies that you may use to inform yourself about the situation: Miami Herald, Herald Tribune, Web Pro News, The Smoking Gun.
I thank you for taking your time to express your opinion. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at any time. └Jared┘┌talk┐ 18:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 9 | 26 February 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 08:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 10 | 5 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 11 | 12 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Aviation Newsletter delivery
The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 18:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 12 | 20 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
| WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" | News and notes: Bad sin, milestones |
| 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 07:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 13 | 26 March 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 14:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 14 | 2 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 15 | 9 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -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 08:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I think my account was hacked.
i never even entered this republican page, or africa in fact. the only ones i believe ive been in myself is HAlO (and other related material like that)
Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 16 | 16 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 17 | 23 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 30th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 18 | 30 April 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 7th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 19 | 7 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Arms of Trinity College, Dublin.png
Hello, Kilo-Lima. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Arms of Trinity College, Dublin.png) was found at the following location: User talk:Kilo-Lima. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 04:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 14th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 20 | 14 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 08:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
User:AlexNewArtBot
Hi Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive VII, as a WikiProject Scotland participant, please check out this this thread and consider adding the bot results page to your watchlist so we can manually update the New Articles page. There are some false results for the first batch, but I'm sure we can collectively tune the rules to improve the output.
If we get enough people watching the results page, we'll be cooking with gas as they say :) This looks like a great helper in finding new Scotland related material. Cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 01:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 21st, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 21 | 21 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 05:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
GAC backlog elimination drive
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :{{GAReview}} underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 28th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 22 | 28 May 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 06:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 4th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 23 | 4 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 07:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 02:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 25 | 18 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 08:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 26 | 25 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 07:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Image:Glasgow International Airport Terminal.jpg
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Glasgow International Airport Terminal.jpg, by Remember the dot (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Glasgow International Airport Terminal.jpg fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Glasgow International Airport Terminal.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Image:Glasgow International Airport Terminal.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 00:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 3, Issue 27 | 2 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| 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 07:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (Image:Hershey's logo.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Hershey's logo.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 03:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
