User talk:Pschemp/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any comments to the current talk page.

Contents

seize hope

Hello, I want to become a seize hope like you. What are the special skills required? Thanks. (PS: please, don't have a look at my impressive list of edits, you might be shocked) Kipmaster 11:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Kip, its so nice to see you here! I think you already know what you need to do. :) And don't worry, my list of edits at wiktionary is just as impressive ;) . pschemp | talk 13:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

external links

Hi Pschemp, I am new to wikipedia, so not sure if I am posting my message in the appropriate place, if not give me a sign;) I am contacting you in concern to an external link being removed that I added to the bellydance page bellydancevideos.blogspot.com. I feel it is extremely appropriate for this page, it gives people an opportunity to watch good bellydance clips without having to spend too much time downloading, and makes it easy for them if they don't have the right software to do so. Could you please get back to me with an explanation of why it has been removed. Thanks 86.29.61.232 12:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Gflores

What happened? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, I can't find any kind of explanation written anywhere and no one else seems to know either. It seems he just quit June 13 and hasn't come back. :( pschemp | talk 14:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tango singers

Have you considered opening an RfC on Tobias Conradi with regard to the internal spamming? ViridaeTalk 02:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

No. This seems to be his first offense. pschemp | talk 02:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. Vote stacking annoys me. But I'll leave it at a comment on the talk page. ViridaeTalk 02:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
If he continues the behaviour that will be a different story :) pschemp | talk 02:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Okey doke. ViridaeTalk 02:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

People leaving places?

Just something that was brought to my attention, but if either of us end up finding interests elsewhere, you'd best at least keep in close contact with me! *hugs* I'll see you on irc tomorrow okay? Don't let it all get to you, or the other side wins. ~Kylu (u|t) 03:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I haven't left yet. :) pschemp | talk 03:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Good! I'm under enough stress, you leaving would make kylu cry. :( ~Kylu (u|t) 03:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Don't cry. Really, I just had a little temper tantrum. I'm better now. </fit> pschemp | talk 03:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thanks for the extraordinary support! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

neat frogs :) pschemp | talk 17:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, I would like to express my gratitude for your participation at my recent RfA. The final vote was 68/21/3 and resulted in me becoming an admin!

For those of you who supported my RfA, I highly appreciate your kind words and your trust in me. For those who opposed - many of you expressed valid concerns regarding my activity here; I will make an effort in addressing them as time goes on while at the same time using my admin tools appropriately. So, salamat, gracias, merci, ありがとう, спасибо, धन्यवाद, 多謝, agyamanak unay, شكرًا, cảm ơn, 감사합니다, mahalo, ขอบคุณครับ, go raibh maith agat, dziękuję, ευχαριστώ, Danke, תודה, mulţumesc, გმადლობთ, etc.! If you need any help, feel free to contact me.

PS: I took the company car (pictured left) out for a spin, and well... it's not quite how I pictured it. --Chris S. 23:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Fletcher (musician)

A user called Jason Emole attempted to register under this name. You placed an indefinite block on him. Could you please advise of the reason for the block on this name? He has tried contacting the unblock list seeking an unblock. I have deferred his efforts to post to the list while I seek your advice. Thanks for your help. Capitalistroadster 08:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Specifically what username are you referring to? I checked my block logs and have never blocked either an Andrew Fletcher or a Jason Emole. Without knowing the username, I can't help. pschemp | talk 13:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Tobias Conradi from User_Talk:Lar

Pschemp, Your quotes from WP policy are spot on and very precise. One thing I have to object to, and that is your assumption that my block reversal will come without prior discussions. Given the fact that I haven't yet reversed a block, you are coming to conclussions a little fast. I know is in good faith, though, but I wanted to say it.

Thanks.

PS: As I said to Lar, I do have an issue with this block but I'm not planning to revert it. Posting it in WP:ANI would be generating unncessary controversy. PPS: I am not upset about the Tango article, I stopped taking WP personally a long time ago. :) I do think that deleting the article will hurt the encyclopedia, though.

Sebastian Kessel Talk 15:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The advantage of taking this to AN/I (where there is already a thread about Tobias) is that it would keep the talk less fragmented, and another, bigger, advantage is that it would get additional opinions. I am always open to review of my actions. I did not comment on what pschemp said in reply to you on my talk page because pschemp said precisely what I would have, but perhaps a bit more succinctly. I think you may be coming to this a bit late, Sebastian, as Tobias has a pretty checkered history already, and has been given a number of chances to do the right thing. I find his constant accusations that everyone he encounters is a bad admin rather tiresome. I would happily put my words up for review on AN/I because, frankly, I don't think there was any sarcasm whatever in what I said. I seriously think he's earned a week, not 48 hours, but I don't overturn or shorten the blocks of others without discussion and I deferred to pschemp's leniency. Further, if the repeated warnings aren't sinking in, perhaps he DOES need to edit elsewhere. (not .de, rumor has it that his disruptive behaviour there has got him a permanent ban) Anyone reading this is welcome to refactor everything I said here to AN/I or point to it from there. ++Lar: t/c 16:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Q?

COuld you explain this? "absolutely not. comments on other RfA's show complete lack of understanding of the sysop duties" Thanks Nookdog 22:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello?
I was talking about your comments on Kylu's RFA. Kylu has been around longer than you and has shown herself to be a worthwhile and useful editor. You didn't seem to realize this. Nominating yourself then, when you are *less* qualified, shows very poor judgement, not the kind I can trust for an admin. pschemp | talk 00:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio

Through following his contribs, I found two other copyvios that he hadn't even committed! [1] - Samsara (talk • contribs) 23:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Wow. :) pschemp | talk 23:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Azmoc

Hello Pschemp, I'm about 99% sure that user wanted to show that he'd get blocked for the vulgarities "because he wasn't an admin"... so blocking him likely fulfilled his wish. Not sure if that make a difference but I thought it needed saying. (→Netscott) 23:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Understood, but that was not acceptable behavior regardless. I block admins who do that too. pschemp | talk 23:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Which passages?

Please, exactly on which passages are you accusing me of violating the copyright? BenB4 23:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I had nothing to do with the text. Please discuss that with User:Samsara. pschemp | talk 23:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I have asked, and Samsara hasn't specified any passages, either. BenB4 00:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Look, all I ask is that you tell me which passages you think are copyright violations. If you believe there are copyright violations, then you ought to be able to do that, right? If there are any copyvios in there, then they were there before I got to the article. If you are unable to specify which passages you believe are in violation, then would you please replace my work? BenB4 00:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
You have a reply on Talk:Speciation. pschemp | talk 00:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

User talk:CarlosTheDwarf

Just wondering why that one is a username block... Sasquatch t|c 00:07, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Because it isn't very nice to people who actually suffer from Dwarfism. They tend to consider that term perjorative. pschemp | talk 00:09, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
As the blocking administrator, would you please leave a message for CarlosTheDwarf providing the rationale for your block? Can't sleep, clown will eat me 18:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to undo this block. I think avoiding "dwarf" in usernames is a bad policy, it's too sensitive, and it's damaging to WP: this guy wants to be a contributor, and this is his first experience here. Plus, I am the fourth person questioning this block at this point. Mangojuicetalk 16:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Quick note

Hi--just thought I'd tell you that the categories referenced in your userpage (Women neuroscientists, Women botanists, etc) have been nominated for speedy renaming here, since "women" is not an adjective. Just thought I'd tell you so you can make the appropriate changes on your userpage. Regards, AdamBiswanger1 02:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Three-Revert Rule Warning

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/PoolGuy. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. Stifle (talk) 09:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

3RR does not apply for socks of banned editors who are not allowed to edit. That's another Poolguy sock. Please see the chcurrent checkuser, the arbitration case banning him from editing and the discussion on WP:ANI. PoolGuy is specifically banned from editing with socks, and those are sock edits that were removed. Take the issue up with the arbcom if you have a problem. pschemp | talk 12:30, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I see. I don't have a problem, but I also don't automatically know that someone is a Poolguy sock. Stifle (talk) 12:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't take much checking to figure it out. Reading the pages he contributed to, and my first edit summary would have set you far on that path. pschemp | talk 12:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Special First Support Hugs & Thanks!

Thanks for contributing to my successful RfA!
To the people who have supported my request: I appreciate the show of confidence in me and I hope I live up to your expectations!
To the people who opposed the request: I'm certainly not ignoring the constructive criticism and advice you've offered. I thank you as well!
♥! ~Kylu (u|t) 19:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • You get a special hug for super-first-support and off-Wikipedia support, too. *hugstight!* ~Kylu (u|t) 19:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Coffee

He admits that he couldn't find strong evidence one way or the other, and ended up citing a spurious source, the abstract of a paper about diabetes'. No way is that reliable, I know how abstracts get massaged to make the paper more interesting. Science is marketing. Wikipedia would do very badly not to see through that. Grrr. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the funny box. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:21, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll try to pull that paper.pschemp | talk 12:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for semiprotecting RNA interference

That was getting kind of boring to fix every day. Opabinia regalis 04:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

no problem. pschemp | talk 03:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

User:陈少举

Block LogHey! You Why Block Me? I Not Do EVIL! My IP Address Now is:58.20.67.51 ,Please Unblock Me, Thank you! You Can See My In Chinese Wikipedia Info: zh:user:陈少举 .(Sorry, My English is Very poor, I Now Use Proxy Server.) 66.98.192.5 03:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Usernames not using latin characters are prohibited, please change your name to one that uses latin characters. Our policy states this at WP:Username. pschemp | talk 03:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Rangeblock from July 6

I have redone you 206.149.148.0/24 rangeblock after it caught User talk:Charlie Rrose Selavy. I redid it with the "block anon users only" option on as well as the "prevent account creation" option on. I also reduced it to 6 months as I don't think we really should indef block a dialup pool. Thanks. Sasquatch t|c 20:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Request for block

Hi: I note you blocked two "Pelican Shit" accounts (User:SiIly Dan eats Pelican Shit and User:Silly Dan still eats Pelican Shit. Could you do the same for User:SiIly Dan? In addition to impersonating me, he vandalized my userpage. He seems to be motivated by a dispute over at Wookieepedia, where I'm one of the admins. And by dispute, I mean the user is probably a serial vandal who I blocked over there earlier this week.

Sorry to bother you about this, but I had trouble finding the correct page on Wikipedia to report impersonation accounts. I apologize in advance if I'm not following proper procedure. Thanks, —Silly Dan (talk) 19:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. pschemp | talk 20:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! Only now there's a User:Dan MacQueen. —Silly Dan (talk) 21:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Blocked. --JoanneB 21:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again! If I notice this sort of thing again, where am I supposed to report it? —Silly Dan (talk) 22:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism is a good place! :) KOS | talk 22:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
That page, and ones like it, kept on saying that the user in question had to be warned first. However, I've seen blocks for attempted impersonation or other inappropriate usernames before, and didn't see any warnings on their talk pages other than the inappropriate username template — and {{tl:usernameblock}}, the only example on Template:TestTemplates I can see, seems to be meant only for use by admins who have blocked a user already. So I was a bit confused. I'll report it on the intervention against vandalism if I see it again, though. Thanks! —Silly Dan (talk) 22:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ever going to say hello? :P

Hey Pschemp, I've been back nearly two days and you've yet to say hello, so I'll beat you to the punch! ;) KOS | talk 22:18, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes KOS, you win :P  :) pschemp | talk 19:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
w00t!! I hope you are feeling better now, right? KOS | talk 19:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Siberian Cat page

You're listed as having "merged a subbreed" into the Siberian Cat page. Many of us Siberian breeders do not acknowledge color point siberians as a separate breed, since they are only different in coloration. Therefore it is not objective to say that it is a separate breed. It would be more accurate to say something to the effect of "Color Point Siberians are also accepted by some as a separate breed, which they call the Neva Masquerade. However, there is a great deal of disagreement amongst Siberian breeders concerning whether they are actually a separate breed, or just another coloration." I think that would be more in keeping in line with the objective nature of Wikipedia, but I didn't want to make the edit without consulting with you first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbilad (talk • contribs)

Yes, correct that is exactly what I meant by subbreed, that they are just a different coloration. If you read the article you will see that all that was added was this line "The Neva Masquerade is the colourpointed equivalent of the Siberian Longhair cat. Although previously thought of a separate breed, it is now considered a colour division of the Siberian. It is now bred worldwide." I think that agrees perfectly with what you are saying. Don't get too hung up on the text of edit summaries, it is important to look at the diff and see what was actually done to the article.pschemp | talk 19:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Sneak sneak sneak sneak...

...sneak, ooh, target! *tacklehug!* *cackles, runs away before Pschemp knows what happened!* ~Kylu (u|t) 18:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks Kylu :) pschemp | talk 19:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America Newsletter - July '06

Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Newsletter

Collateral damage from rangeblock

Hey; this block you did [2] now appears to have some collateral damage: User talk:Charlie Rrose Selavy. Figured you'd want to know. Mangojuicetalk 16:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that's actually another sockpuppet, but Sasquatch redid the block anyway. Also, i unblocked that particular IP. pschemp | talk 19:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Bad Nenndorf

I did make a comment on the talk page. I saw the conflict, that's why I stepped in. The term should be whatever the sources use, though I understand your not wanting to reward the 3rr violator. If someone produces a source calling it "concentration" camp I have no problem with it being called that. HGB 21:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hydrogen is the science collaboration for August 2006

Okay guys, now let's make this an FA!

As a regular contributor to Science Collaboration of the Month, we thought you might like to know that the current collaboration is Carbon.
You are receiving this message because your username is listed on our list of regulars. To stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name!

Samsara (talk • contribs) 08:38, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Alert!

Mark ritzchkin has been blocked indefinitely, but can still edit. Please block him. He has been vandalising. He has already been warned twice. El gRiNgO 21:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)Crisspy

This was already take care of by another admin. pschemp | talk 22:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Semen

So you know, I agree with your removal of that picture now that I see the rationale. I was just uncomfortable with it being removed without comment. Thanks for making so many great contributions to the wiki. Interestingstuffadder 05:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Please let me point out ..

Hello Pschemp, I answered at my talk page. If theres no explicit duty to archive I would prefer to do not. Please have a look at the history of Bad Nenndorf, I can feel theres more trouble quite soon to come. I like Burke's Peerage 07:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

  1. I'v got the impression you are doing review-jobs of my edits. I can't but appreciate that, I really fell more sure if you do. Hold on!
  2. I tried to move "harbor" to "harbour" but couldn't. The software told me, I wasn't allowed. So I decided to use a solution ad interim, namely "harbour (haven)"
  3. I regret we do have a new case of 3RR-violation in Bad Nenndorf
  4. And even worse: I saw trouble makers sneaking up to IDGR I like Burke's Peerage 09:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Kind regards I like Burke's Peerage 09:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Replied on user's talk page.pschemp | talk 12:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Pschemp, the user got a partial reply from me (he didn't raise all these points on my talk). Regards, Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks.pschemp | talk 12:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

KarlV

Hi Pschemp,

I gather you've blocked User:KarlV indefinitely for disruption. Could you please reverse this, as it's not appropriate on two grounds. First, it's grossly disproportionate - WP:BLOCK#Expiry times and application specifies a 24 hour block for first-time offenders and specifically rules out indefinite blocks for user accounts that make a mixture of disruptive and useful edits. Second, it's not appropriate for you to block a user with whom you've been in a content dispute (as evinced by [3]). If you really feel that he should be blocked, I suggest that you take the matter to another admin, but I strongly recommend that you unblock him in the meantime. -- ChrisO 18:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Karl was not blocked for disruption. Karl was blocked for using the English Wikipedia as an experiment to make a point in direct violation of WP:POINT. The English wikipedia is not here for him to test social theories about neo-nazis and right wing extrmemists, and any content dispute I had with him was resolved before that block. Indeed, another admin has already backed me up on this, so I don't see why he should be allowed to edit here. pschemp | talk 20:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I've posted this issue on WP:ANI to make sure everything is completely transparent. pschemp | talk 21:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Just to have mentioned it here, too – the block is now in Lar's name, in response to the calls for a neutral admin to block if they agree with the original decision. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Please calm down. I’m fairly sure there is no witch hunt, only a couple of people who need to exchange points of view and to arrive at some kind of consensus. And, as you know, that works best when the exchange is as calm as possible, so relax and assume the others mean you no (great) harm. —xyzzyn 00:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, i've seen it before, been burned. I just want to be perfectly clear on my motives. That being said, thank you for your clam, logical statements. I think they are helpful to the whole issue. pschemp | talk 00:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Pschemp, this is a very strange situation, and hard to fathom, but you seem to be personally involved and upset by it. If there's something else going on (e.g. if you're being harassed by this person or anything similar), please say, so that we can get to the bottom of it. I don't want to see an indefinite block undone if the user really was being disruptive (I'm not a "policy wonk" at all when it comes to disruption; far from it); on the other hand, the evidence as currently presented really doesn't seem to amount to much, which is why I'm wondering if there are issues going on elsewhere. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I understand that you are frustrated about the length of the discussion of this case, but please have just a bit more patience. Calling your colleagues blinded etc. is unhelpful in the matter and unlikely to achieve anything positive. I would appreciate it if you toned down your ‘sad truth’ post to deal with facts on the matter rather than opinions on fellow editors, even if you feel strongly about some of those opinions. —xyzzyn 16:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry but that is what I beleive. I won't tone it down because its the truth. If the edits had been made in an opposite manner to test the same thing, no one would be complaining about the block. pschemp | talk 16:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
It’s your decision to make and I won’t insist, but be aware that stands like that are not good diplomacy. —xyzzyn 17:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your concern over how the statement appears, and in a less important situation, I wouldn't use such strong words. However, at this time that is exactly what I want to say. Again, thank you for your reasoned comments, and for bringing your concerns to my attention, I highly respect your efforts and edits. pschemp | talk 19:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Quick note

Just a quick note to remind you of WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I don't think User:I like Burke's Peerage meant deliberate harm. I left a more extensive note on his talk page. Se you around --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 21:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I did assume good faith the first three times I asked him politely to learn our policies before making large edits. Still, your efforts are appreciated. pschemp | talk 21:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
No problem, I didnt say you hadn't just to bear it in mind in the continuation :D I will try and give him the tour at some point - but it's late tonight and I need sleep! --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 21:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah thank you, I was thinking he could use a mentor, but didn't know where to find a nice neutral one. pschemp | talk 21:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Nuetral! Who said that? hehe, yeah no problem alot of people don't seem to want to mentor new users. It's a shame because it can be quite rewarding. I will smile nicely at him tomorrow. Catch you later --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 21:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Harbor-Harbour

Hello- I applaud your move from Harbour (Haven). However, the original title was Harbor. (See history.) Could you please change it back (so as not to violate WP guidelines on national spelling differences). Thanks!

("You wrote: "moved Harbour (Haven) to Harbour: new title unneeded. this is the main definition in English, and understood. Since there is no disambig page, or need for one, topic shouls stay at normal English title)"). --Cultural Freedom 2006-08-3 22:42

oops, sorry, thought it was at Harbor. pschemp | talk 23:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
No prob! Thanks for the quick response. --Cultural Freedom 2006-08-04 02:45 (UTC)

Let me tell u something nice

All in all I didn't mean any harm. Plus: I think you're quite good in using sysop. Best regards. I like Burke's Peerage 07:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Good luck today, and on Monday....

Not that you will need it, you apple polisher! Knock em dead! (er, is that OK to say for a biology test?) Enclosed please find a partial tree of life and a lucky member of the plant family ++Lar: t/c 13:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

You've got a Thank you card!

Open your card!

I must be missing something

I'm probably coming in in the middle of things, but how is User:The Aardvark an inappropriate username? User:Zoe|(talk) 00:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

It was in the middle of a zoo animal vandalname spree or something similar on the vandalism channel so it could be collateral. If you want to unblock, go ahead. pschemp | talk 00:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure it's a good idea, I figured there was some reasoning behind it. Thanks. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

user:EnthusiastFRANCE was evading his block using socks again.

I noticed that user:EnthusiastFRANCE was editing before his block expired as user:EnthusiastFR and reported it here, but this seems to have been ignored, so I'm going directly to you for this because you have helped me in the past. --Aknorals 00:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Please note he used this account to personaly attack me here --Aknorals 00:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
banned as per WP:SOCK pschemp | talk 02:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, your my heroine. =D --Aknorals 02:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I blocked and reverted one of the sockpuppets yesterday.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 15:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
You have reverted his/her edits on the Candy Candy article (airing on Antenne 2 in France), but I don't think it was vandalism. He/She probably got the info from the French Candy Candy article. If you reverted the edit only because of the user and not the content, is it ok if I put the content in? Ninja neko 17:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
You are welcome to put the content in under your name. pschemp | talk 19:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems to me you are doing an abusive use of sock puppets templates. Could you please explain what are your criteria for charging, an user attacking you, of being none else than a sock of EnthusiastFRANCE? ËnthusiastFRANCE 09:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

User:BigKahuna has been systematically removing my edits, and his edit notes are personal attacks. --Aknorals 16:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Bus Driver Matthew R

Brookie here - your talk page has been copied to the above - I'm not sure why - but the user is a known vandal! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 15:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks for letting me know.pschemp | talk 15:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Kinkeshi deletion review

Please see Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_August_7#Kinkeshi_article, as an anon user (no idea if it's the same as the banned user) has requested undeletion. -- nae'blis 18:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks. i put an explanation there.pschemp | talk 20:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Poolguys

The same message that was on User talk:Veranda-in-Spain (also check out the edits to the RFCU talk page, the sprot message reads a little different now). I'll look around for more socks. Kevin_b_er 03:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Also User:HereIsTwelve exists, but without edits. Kevin_b_er 03:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
both blockedpschemp | talk 03:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, please note User:SixWallRoom and User:RoomWithSixWalls. The former has been blocked, but not all of its edits have been properly reverted; the latter has neither been blocked nor reverted at last check. Editor88 03:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

blocked. thanks. pschemp | talk 03:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I think you accidentally copied the checkuser socktags to paste into the userpages rather than the normal sockpuppet tags. Kevin_b_er 04:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't matter. he's obvious. We've checkusered over 30 of those socks, they are come from the same range. As long as it puts him in the correct cat, I don't care. pschemp | talk 04:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Tobias Conradi

Dear Pschemp,

From the talkpage and blocklog of Tobias Conradi, I understand that you have been busy telling him off. Well, I request your help. I have recently gotten in a dispute with him and with every remark he throws at me he's getting inpoliter. Could you keep an eye while I try to resolve the debate? In case it goes out of hand, I wouldn't be able to ban him myself because I consider myself "to involved in the situation".—♦♦ SʘʘTHING(Я) 21:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it. pschemp | talk 00:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
he got a block, see WP:AN/I specifically Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Tobias_Conradi_.28_again_.29 ++Lar: t/c 10:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Simon Hall

I noticed that Simon Hall is keeping you busy. Thanks for reverting his mistakes Skapur 01:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

User:KarlV

Hey -- the user has apologized and promised not to continue misbehaving, and is requested unblocking. I'm inclined to WP:AGF and do so, but I figure it's more your call as the one who blocked him indefinitely. Mangojuicetalk 15:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

First, it concerns me that you think I'm still the blocking admin since that tells me you didn't read the whole thread on ANI, nor did you check the block log. As such, I question your judgement in thinking about unblocking. How can you make an informed decision if you don't know all the facts? pschemp | talk 16:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
You need to talk to Lar. He's the one whom the block is under. Still, I completely oppose unblocking him as his actions led to good editors being accused of being neo-nazis, an offense that is not forgivable under any circumstances. His claim that imperfect English is the cause of the misunderstanding is utterly false, I read his notes in Geramn. Also, he still isn't admitting that what he did was wrong, just that we misunderstood it. I'm sorry, but that's hardly an apology. At the very least he needs to remain blocked for a significant amount of time. Also, the community consensus so far is that he remain blocked, I can't advise going against that. pschemp | talk 16:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Lar is on wikibreak (as am I, kind of). Please see the note I left at User talk:Lar and see if you can review your opinion on this one. Blocks are meant to be preventative, not punitive. Thanks --Guinnog 18:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Where is the right place to discuss this? I'd prefer AN/I to any particular user talk page. That said (and feel free to refactor as needed) my thinking is that if someone does not acknowledge they did something wrong, it's preventative not to lift the block rather than punitive, because there is no reason to believe they won't do it again, regardless of assurances. Acknowledgement of fault and some remorse are what convince me that people mean what they say, not bland reassurances that "it was your fault but I will comply". I see no reason to lift as of yet. ++Lar: t/c 20:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


User:EnthusiastFRANCE with another sockpuppet

He's back, and also made a personal attack on you, calling you a lesbian - his latest sockpuppet was EnthusiastFRANCEbot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) - he's blocked, but watch out for more. --TheM62Manchester 10:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

See also: User_talk:Aknorals#User:Aknophobiac -Aknorals 12:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Not harming anyone yet, but Squirrel Jam (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) seems to be editing the same articles that socks of user:EnthusiastFRANCE was. Also, check out his creation date. -Aknorals 13:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
see Petit_Tonnerre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) particularly this edit. Also, I'm kinda suspicious about User:Dinosaur_puppy's creation date but have no other reason to suspect anything, so can a checkuser be run on him/her? Thanks. -Aknorals 10:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Also: Running Potatoe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) ... actually Suez Canal is a honey pot right now for euFR's socks... -Aknorals 10:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
All taken care of. pschemp | talk 17:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the block. JoshuaZ 20:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

np, that's our old friend EnthusiastFRANCE again. pschemp | talk 20:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

?

  1. First step: they defame you
  2. Second step: an ip fakes a signature
  3. Third step: they try to hide it by shifting the lemma talk [4]

Regards 172.158.237.68 08:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


user:Light current

Would you care to unprotect my page now that I have been let out of the cooler?--Light current 09:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

done. pschemp | talk 15:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

THanks. There was to need to protect it in the first place. I have never heard of such an extreme measure for such a piddling minor offence. Can you point me to any other similar cases?--Light current 18:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

From WP:PP Protecting the talk page of a blocked user: "However, if a user abuses this feature, and continues with vandalism or disruption such as excessive personal attacks on his own User Talk page, the page can be protected from editing." Since you continued to make personal attacks on me, your page was protected. pschemp | talk 18:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

So you actually cant say you or anyone else has done this before? Is that right?--Light current 23:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Escarbot

Hello, I am sorry but I cannot answser on your page since my IP address is blocked because of the blocking of my bot. This means I cannot revert the changes either. Sorry. I am using the latest official version of pywikipedia interwiki.py and I do not understand why it removes links to valid pages. It says the page does not exist. I have submitted the problem to the pywikipedia mailing list. I am really sorry for having broken some links. But I also think my bot has done some good work. Best regards, Vargenau 14 août 2006 à 18:23 (CEST)

Hello again, It was a bug in the configuration files for languages ay: and mk: in the interwiki robot software. It is now fixed. Would you please unblock my block User:Escarbot? That would allow me to repair the damage done. Regards,Vargenau 18:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Your bot was removing links to more than just those two languages. I have fixed the damage, but are you sure the bot is fixed? It was removing more than ay and mk links. pschemp | talk 19:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Yes, the robot is really fixed. I have run it on other languages and it put back the ay: and mk: links it deleted. See all interwikis of Peru for example. Can you give me an example of an article on en: where it deleted something else than ay: and mk:? Best regards, Vargenau 06:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This diff right here shows it removing 4 links, none of which are ay or mk. Check its contributions for more, it is fairly obvious. How can I be assured it won't do this again? pschemp | talk 16:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello,Thank you for your answer. Of course I did check the log of the bot, but I did not find incorrect removals except ay: and mk:.The removals are correct when the destination page does not exist or when the interwikis are inconsistant. In the Formula case the removals were correct since there were links between encyclopedic pages and disambiguation pages. Now, thanks to my bot, we have 2 consistent sets of interwikis, Formula and Formula (disambiguation).Best regards, Vargenau 18:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've unblocked the bot. pschemp | talk 18:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Vargenau 18:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocking instructions

(from WP:BLOCK)

Personal attacks which place users in danger — Sysops applying such sanctions should confidentially notify the members of the Arbitration Committee and Jimbo Wales of what they have done and why.

my itals Did my attacks place you or anyone else in danger? and did you confidentially notify the members of the Arbitration Committee and Jimbo Wales of what they have done and why. If not why not?--Light current 19:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

You were blocked for being uncivil and the resulting personal attacks. The relevent portion of WP:BLOCK is: "Sysops may block IP addresses or usernames that disrupt the normal functioning of Wikipedia, or pose any kind of threat to it. Such disruption may include (but is not limited to) changing other users' signed comments, making deliberately misleading edits, harassment, excessive personal attacks, and inserting material that may be defamatory." Your behaviour fit this quite nicely. pschemp | talk

You should only block on grounds of excessive personal attacks if they place other useres in danger. The policy is quite clear on this. My responses were

  • not excessive
  • did not place anyone in danger.

Therefore you exceeded your authority.--Light current 19:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

They were excessive and continuing. I'm sorry you don't agree, but that won't change the facts of your behaviour. pschemp | talk 19:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Im not arguing about facts. Im arguing about your erroneous and paranoid interpretation of them. What is wrong with You?--Light current 22:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Did not place anyone in danger. Who did I place in danger? Please list them.-- No, you exceeded your authority Its that simple!!.--Light current 22:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Pschemp

I heard you were an admin, so could you please tell me how to upload a file onto wikipedia? The page on it does not help me at all and is very confusing. Please respond on My talk page. Nerdchomper 20:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)Fat Lui

There are many wikipedians who, since they have high status, think they can criticize those below them and get away with it. Then, the users below them would retaliate, and thus say things they shouldn't. This lower user would then get blocked. I know you may be trying to find some reason to block me, but let me remind you, that is not what makes a good admin, much less wikipedian. Maybe that is the reason why so many people make hate accounts towards you. You have no right to delete any of my images I chose to post on my userpage, because they were already on wikipedia as liscensed images. Sure, they are perverted, but it's my space to do what I want. Nerdchomper 00:08, 16 August 2006

They were fair use images. Fair use rationale does not apply to your userspace, or anybody else's for that matter. Thanks for your understanding. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 00:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I will not request desysoppery, but please keep in mind what I said, and let me re-post my images on my user space. Thank you. Nerdchomper 17:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)Fat Lui

I've replied to Lui. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 18:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. pschemp | talk

I heard album covers from music Cds were all right to post on wikipedia. Could you please show me how to do that? I want to post an image of wordl-famous Salvadoran rap duo Pescozada. The original image is here. Nerdchomper 01:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Fat Lui

Note: I also posted this message on Samsara's page, so they might have taken care of it already. You can check if they did on my talk page. If they didn't, please tell me how.

Ah sorry, since you've been discovered to be a sockpuppet of Crisspy I won't be helping you. Enjoy. pschemp | talk 16:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Your userpage

Hiya Pschemp!

I semi'd your userpage, your fans have been hitting it quite hard today, it seems. Have a nice evening! :) ~Kylu (u|t) 03:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

thank you Kylu! that's a good idea I hadn't thought of. pschemp | talk 15:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

YAY!!! I'm un-Blocked

Guess what, when I went to find the reason why I was blocked, now I can edit again, I guess that autoblock is gone now. Alastor Moody (talk) 21:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Great. Autoblocks only last 24 hours, so it did probably expire. pschemp | talk 21:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

PG/GTM redux

As TurnedAroundAgain (talk · contribs). He has apparently declared that he "will move on", but I don't know whether that statement is trustworthy or not, and I also believe he's evading the ban he's still subject to. Editor88 05:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, he's evading his block. Thanks. pschemp | talk 16:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)