User talk:Alison/Archive 63

Archive 60

Archive 61

Archive 62

Archive 63

Archive 64

Archive 65

→

Archive 70

Re: Email

I don't know what's going on. Hoping that you're not thinking I'm Colton Cosmic? I wonder if it might be a restaurant IP address? I was at a Burger King some hours ago when I made those edits, and the only other time that I've visited Burger King recently (perhaps all year?) was around 16:59 on the 30th of March. I don't mind saying that I normally have a static IP address from Comcast; every edit in the history of Special:Contributions/98.223.199.119 was made by me, as you can see especially easily if you look at the next few edits after the ones it made to WP:AN in February. Sorry to keep piling on the comments, but...overall this makes a lot more sense. I download my Gmail with Windows Mail, and I had a bad connection a few nights ago; that must be responsible for what made the system think I had a hacker. It also explains why the IP's most recent edit is to Bedford, Indiana — I wonder if the address has been with Burger Kings in the area for a while, since Bedford is less than half an hour's drive away from where I am currently. Nyttend (talk) 07:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Let's take this to email - Alison ^❤ 18:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Your userpage lock's message

Hi Alison, I think I would like to inform you out of courtesy that I have changed the lock message from "...semi-protected from editing" to "...fully-protected from editing". The lock is the one at the topicons. Cheers. :) Arctic Kangaroo 14:48, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

• Hi there. Thanks for that :) I've actually gone ahead and unprot'd my talk page now - let's see how it goes - Alison ^❤ 18:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

TB

Hello, Alison. You have new messages at Talk:FEMEN#While_in_France_FEMEN_key_activist_Inna_Shevchenko_had_bought_shoes_for_.E2.82.AC800....
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 13:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Child protection policy

I can give you a lot of reasons for why your alteration of the policy would be a serious problem. Personally, I think that page shouldn't even be subject to bold changes as the potential consequences are severe since it is such a solid policy page with such strict enforcement. Explicit allowance for off-wiki evidence of any comment that could be construed as advocacy just creates an opening for abuse. To say nothing of joe jobs, it would be easy enough for someone to take an innocent comment or two out of context. Keeping the review of such evidence to a very small number of careful deliberators as is currently expected would minimize the potential harm, but if it involves public spectacles like those that have been gracing Jimbo's page then you create the very serious risk of people being maliciously defamed and blocked indefinitely for false or dubious charges.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 23:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for this. Here's the updated list of his socks & blocks over the past day (that we know of): 99.104.185.17 (primary account), 200.233.70.48, 64.75.159.129, 196.12.59.12, 202.88.225.150, 46.209.250.1. Have a nice week. :) --76.189.111.2 (talk) 06:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the report! These are all open proxies, from what I can see, and they all trace back to the one IP address that a particular anon editor is using. This is actually unrelate to the IP I blocked (different case), but nonetheless, all the above are the same IP editor. Thanks again :) - Alison ^❤ 06:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome. :) I'm not sure which IP you're saying is unrelated, but if it's 46.209.250.1, that's a proxy server from the same person using all the other ones. 99.104.185.17 is the original/primary account (located in Stockbridge, Georgia); it's not a proxy unless I'm missing something. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 06:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

?

[1] meaning what? Are you emailing? am I supposed to? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 06:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

alright. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 06:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

[2] Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 07:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Informal request for editor review by an administrator

Hi Alison,

Not wanting to start a formal RfC, I was wondering if you could review Administrator John's recent edit summaries on the Margaret Thatcher article and monitor our current discussion?

To summarise, regardless of the edit itself, his language was inappropriate and could discourage editors such as Radiohist from making contributions (especially after John used a level 3 template warning). I pointed this out on both his and my talk page, but he has not been very forthcoming. I should concede that when I first pointed it out, I used a template message, which is not advised by Wikipedia. However, recipients should still assume good faith.

Again, I'm not trying to worsen the situation. I was just concerned, especially considering he is an admin.

Regards

--Forward Unto Dawn 11:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

The issue now appears to be resolved. I apologise for bothering you with this.--Forward Unto Dawn 11:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

Twice in the last couple of days, I've had to request oversight of edits I've found while vandal patrolling. I'm not sure if you personally oversighted them, or if you replied to the RfO emails on someone elses' behalf, but either way, I wish to give you this barnstar to award the work it takes to preserve safety of others. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 02:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

• D'awww - thank you!! Yes, it was me those times :) Thanks for being diligent and reporting them! - Alison ^❤ 02:05, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

109.173.98.64

Please see admin Boing's talk page regarding IP 109, who's on yet another proxy server. Thanks. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:29, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Black Kite has been playing Whac-A-Mole with the troll. Zzzzzzz. Have a nice week. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 20:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know. I've run some checks and hardblocked the underlying IP. No accounts that I can see, though. Thanks again :) - Alison ^❤ 00:37, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I dunno

You seem pretty focused on me. Bow chicka wow wow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.36.194.92 (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

• You mean Bow chicka bow wow - Alison ^❤ 02:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Indeed you beat me, ima go cry. I'll leave ya be now. You may block this one too, see my admin friends another time. - Your God — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.78.82.242 (talk) 02:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
    • • • • • • • • • • • Hello, did you guy miss me?(I know ya did) Lets play find the racial slurs I hid in several articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.48.110.17 (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Fagovian your outclassed here.

Lmao you coward Boing, you lock your page out of fear. I face you all and do not give an inch.

I'd love to play an' all, but I'm busy IRL right now. One of my kids is in hospital. Go have fun elsewhere - Alison ^❤ 20:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

BenjiBoi

Since you are familiar with BB, Im asking here instead of at SPI. User:Lightspeedx has caught my attention as a possible sock of BB.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  05:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for the message. Certainly, the behaviour is very similar, but this isn't a sock of Benjiboi - Alison ^❤ 05:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks. If I my toolserver account gets approved I've got some scripts that I think will catch some of the more prolific sockers.  little green rosetta(talk)
    central scrutinizer  05:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

SilkRoad

I see that you have hidden 52 revisions on SilkRoad, all seem to be relating to a certain link being added. On the talkpage, there is an RfC going on regarding this link. Does the official hiding of the links render the discussion whether it should be included moot, and should further attempts to include the link (or any way around it) be considered an action which violates the OTRS ticket? I think a bit of guidance might be needed there (for as far possible with private OTRS data), as other editors will come in to try and include a link. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• It's a tricky one, Dirk. The matter was reported to Oversight and, while it's borderline suppressible, IMO, I revdel'd the existing links. I did this for a number of reasons; 1) it's almost certainly illegal in many jurisdictions, 2) the link itself is fraught with issues - phishing has already been mentioned. My primary concern, however, was the legal issue. Many people will point to WP:OUTSIDE and WP:NOTCENSORED, etc but on balance, I believe they should not be allowed stand. Having said that, IANAL and am just another volunteer on the project. I do not represent the WMF in any way, and all I can do is respond to the ticket to the best of my knowledge and ability - Alison ^❤ 07:02, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• • Ah, I thought it was an official OTRS decision. But it seems you mean that this is a sort of a pre-emptive action based on the request. Thanks for that clarification.
  • I agree with the point 1, if it is determined to be illegal, then it should be erased, oversighted, and editors who try nonetheless, even in good faith, should be told in not-to-be-misunderstood wording that it should not be re-tried, no questions asked. The second point is not the problem of the official link - the problem is that the link gets being replaced with phishing-type links, and that the official site seems to change regularly, which in itself is difficult to check. All those attempts (in combination with the same problem on another .onion site) have recently resulted in .onion to be blanket blacklisted.
  • But if it is determined, that point 1 is not the problem, then there is no issue linking to the proper, official site. Point is, that that is not going to be solved by a consensus in an RfC .. People will try to add the link, and the discussion will be reopened to try to include the link. Whatever. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Your input is requested

Greetings, Alison/Archive 63! If we have not met, I'm AutomaticStrikeout. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 01:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject U2 invitation

Hello! This message is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please, join this discussion on this talk page!

You may add yourself to our member list below by clicking here!

Project U2 member list

Melicans (talk · contribs) 14:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC) Dream out loud (talk · contribs) 16:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC) Pjoef (talk · contribs) 16:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC) The 80s, from Boy to Rattle and Hum plus the ONE Campaign Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk · contribs) 03:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC) Lemurbaby (talk · contribs) 03:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC) Difop (talk · contribs) 20:26, 19 October 2012 (WEST) Miss Bono (talk · contribs) 11:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC) The entire career of the band plus Bono and Ali Hewson. Cullen328 (talk · contribs) 22:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC) Teancum (talk · contribs) 14:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC) PBASH607 (talk · contribs) 03:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC) Mayast (talk · contribs) 19:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC) Upcoming songs and album (2014) c_meindl (talk · contribs) 10:45, 6 February 2014 Taking a WikiPedia class and had to join a WikiProject. I am interested in supplementing song stubs and articles! atuldeshmukh1 (talk · contribs) Calidum (talk · contribs) Wish I had seen this sooner. 01:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC) Fylbecatulous (talk · contribs) returning to active status; just based on a feeling... Fylbecatulous talk 15:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC) [[User:<Pushandturn>|<Pushandturn>]] ([[User talk:<Pushandturn>|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/<Pushandturn>|contribs]]) 00:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC) optional: Im a longtime U2 fan and I went to the U2 360 tour and love sharing their music!

 Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Any thoughts, please contact me on my talk page.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

• Hi there. I'm not really a massive fan of U2, though I did grow up in their neighborhood and remember seeing them play in the Dandelion market, back in the 80s. I was only ickle :) Most of my U2 stuff is anecdotal. Hey, I saw them play in the Phoenix Park in 1984. Thanks for the invite! :) - Alison ^❤ 19:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Can I turn to you for any help at some point???  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course! :) - Alison ^❤ 19:43, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I've taken my Hat Off To You

Just for the fact you are Irish. I am a huge admirer of Irish people and culture... It's always a pleasure meeting Irish people  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:49, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

LOL, well I'm glad you're happy :) Mind you, I didn't get much choice as to where I was born and raised - Alison ^❤ 19:59, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

i would like being born there, so I would have the chance to steal Bono from Alison(Not you, Hewson) lol. People who has seen her pictures says I look a lot like her, so Who knows.... But unfortunally/fortunally I wasn't born there, so I have to be happy with where I am from... and proud  Miss Bono (zootalk) 20:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

As the deleter of AMS Sourcing B.V.,

I'd like you to restore it and move it to User:Launchballer/AMS Sourcing B.V.. Thank you.--Launchballer 18:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

• Ok,  Done, thanks - Alison ^❤ 19:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Good grief, they made articles that badly back then?!? You'd think they'd've attached some references whilst at it. But thank you anyway.--Launchballer 19:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Revision Deletion Request

Hi Allie! I have a request to redact the two edits to my talk page from the only anonymous user who made an edit(with the IP address beginning with 98). The edit was made unintentionally (the user didn't intend on revealing their IP address) and -- as you can see --removing it removes nothing of substance to the conversation. It's just a matter of not revealing anyone's identity. (Thus, it falls under the "Non-contentious Housekeeping" Criterion for Redaction. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steeletrap&action=history) Steeletrap (talk) 19:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. I've suppressed the edits, per policy. Thanks for letting me know :) - Alison ^❤ 19:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

You are beyond wonderful! I am sure you gathered this from the cryptic phrasing of the previous post, but you just did me a personal favor! Steeletrap (talk) 19:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Figured they were your own :) Anyways - gone now, and even admins here can't see them! - Alison ^❤ 19:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Nice. I really appreciate you helping me so quickly! Steeletrap (talk) 19:31, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you please help with a socking situation?

Hi Alison. I'm the editor who wrote you a few days ago, here and here - about the blocked editor who was using numerous proxy accounts to evade the block. :) The reason I am writing now is because there are two accounts, User:Alondrav and User:BetsyR00, that I'm almost certain are the same editor. Both have edited only one BLP article, Lazaro Arbos, in which they were adding unsourced, embellished, or out-of-context content; look at the edit history for April 15, 16, and 17 to see all their edits. You'll also notice that BetsyR00 edited immediately after Alondrav on both the first and second day, which caused my initial suspicion of socking. But the thing that finally convinced me that they're both the same person is that they replied in a very similar manner on their talk page to comments I left them; not only are the comments very similar, but even the atypical section heading (month/day/year) is identical (Alondrav's talk page, BetsyR00's talk page). Also, neither signed their comments. I didn't discover their talk page similarities until after I had already replied to Alondrav; it wasn't until I then went to Betsy's talk page that I immediately realized, "Wow, this has to be the same person." ;) So based on all this evidence, I'm confident that the two accounts are the same editor. As you'll see from the replies on the talk pages, the editor is apparently new, friendly, and open to help, but they are indeed socking (I assume). I went to SPI to file a report, but it would not allow me (an IP) to do it. I even used the box that is instructed for IPs to report, but it doesn't allow me to submit anything. Therefore, I was hoping you could please handle matter in whatever way is most appropriate. Thank you very much, Alison. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, and thanks for letting me know. Umm - there's something quite odd going on behind these accounts (and others). I need to ask another checkuser for a second opinion right now, but I'll get back to you soon! Thanks again - Alison ^❤ 19:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Alison, quick update. Both of the accounts have edited again within a very short time of each other. First, these edits in the Arbos article by BetsyR00, and then this post by Alondrav on their talk page. Btw, you said something is "quite odd" with these and other accounts. Can you elaborate? :) --76.189.111.2 (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

We're discussing this amongst the CU team right now, but there's a question as to whether these accounts may be some sort of collaborative/school effort or something. They're very obviously connected, CU evidence aside but rather than just blocking them all (and there are quite a few), I'd like an idea as to what's going on - Alison ^❤ 22:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the great update. :) I noticed that BetsyR00 made the edits to the Arbos article just a few minutes after you commented on Alondrav's talk page. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC) 22:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Alison, there's now a third registered sock, User:Alejandranavarrete. They just added this content which is the exact same content added by Alondrav that was reverted and explained in a prior edit summary and on their talk page. BetsyR00 also added related content and was educated about it on their talk page. You can also see in Alejandranavarrete's edit that s/he mistakenly (I assume) put the improper content inside an existing cite template. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 00:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay - oo-kay. They've had enough time to explain and haven't so far. I'm going to block the accounts now - there are a few. If there's an explanation forthcoming, and there hasn't been to-date, we can review. But three linked accounts posting the same stuff to the same article? Nope - Alison ^❤ 00:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Haha, they're mulitplying by the day. I guess you saw that I posted a few minutes ago to the third account, following my revert at the Arbos article. Thanks, Alison. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 00:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I had no idea of the extent of the socking. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 00:40, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I know, right? That's why I was kinda freaking out when I checked first. But three editors from the same IP on the same article inserting the same weirdness? Nope. Might be an idea to check their previous edits as there may be some sort of weird misinformation campaign going on or something - Alison ^❤ 00:43, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was honestly shocked when I saw all those socks. I was fairly certain there had to be others, but I never thought it would be that many. Haha. Thank goodness we have great admins and checkusers like you who have the passion and patience to investigate and stop problems like this. You're the best. Thank you, Alison. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 00:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, lemme just followup here with one of them, as they started editing their talk page in the midst of all this. See User talk:Alondrav. I don't really like blocking accounts, especially new editors, so I'm just going to see what's happening here. If there's a decent explanation, I might unblock. It's just really irregular but maybe they just don't know the rules around socking - Alison ^❤ 01:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the update. I am very confident that User:Alondrav, User:BetsyR00, and User:Alejandranavarrete are all the same person. The strong evidence is that Alondrav and Betsy posted extremely similar, detailed replies to me on their talk pages, and they even used the exact same heading. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that it must be the same person. And Alejandra and Betsy added the exact same content to Lazaro Arbos. There's no chance of that being a coincidence. ;) If I am wrong, and they're not the same person, then they are surely classmates or close friends who are working very closely together to edit the Arbos article. But even if that is the case, all of them have been ignoring reverts, edit summaries, or talk page warnings, by repeatedly adding the same or similar content to the article. Since the other 19 accounts have not edited the Arbos article (assuming they are not the same person), perhaps they are different classmates who have been assigned different articles to edit. Finally, if it turns out that this in fact a group of students editing for a school project, doesn't Wikpedia have some sort of program available to teachers to coordinate editing projects (to prevent disruptive or other improper editing)? I'm fairly certain that I read a help page discussion a while back where an admin was explaining something like this to an editor who was a college professor, and provided them a wikilink to the information. Just my thoughts. :) --76.189.111.2 (talk) 01:55, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

[Redacted, sorry] --76.189.111.2 (talk) 04:43, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there. Yes, it looks like a classroom of students who aren't really clued in on the rules about socking and having your friends make edits for you. I'm going to unblock them but I'm just going to ensure they know the basics so they don't get into trouble again. I'd also like their teacher to contact me via oversight to get some lessons themselves about privacy and safety on-line :) Thanks for the help on this one - it's been messy. Also, I've redacted some stuff above and will oversight it in a second as I'm uncomfortable with some of the information there as it's clearly geolocating (yes, I know - they released it themselves. Not the best idea!) - thanks again - Alison ^❤ 18:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Alison. I think an important part of the "deal" you referred to with Alondrav should be that you need to talk to (email with) the teacher before unblocking anyone. Great idea, huh? ;) The geoloate link I included was from the bottom of the IP's contributions page. Haha. So of course none of that is personal info or secret at all, nor meant to be. And of course there are many talk pages with the school IP template (and general IP templates) that admins add a lot when there are editing problems with an account. As far as dealing with the students... Beyond the socking rules, can you please tell these kids, and especially their teacher, a few important things about editing articles that have been ongoing problems?: (1) do not add unsourced content (epecially to BLPs) without solid sources (RELIABLE) (2) do not embellish or exaggerate what sources say, or present them in an out-of-context manner (PEACOCK, WEASEL, etc.), (3) do not add their own interpretations, assumptions, or things they "just know" or heard (OR), and (4) don't keep adding back content after other editors have removed it and clearly explained why it's inappropriate (stubbornness more than EDITWAR lol). As I said, these are the typical types of editing problems that were repeatedly happening. Thanks. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:22, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course :) I'll try deal with some adult associated with all this and ensure they know what's what. As to the IP, I really don't want to draw any attention to that for a number of reasons; privacy and per WP:CHECKUSER. We're not at a point where this need be revealed or dealt with in any way and, IMO as an oversighter, privacy of minors trumps socking issues, especially as we're getting this resolved - Alison ^❤ 19:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I understand. :) Thanks for you great help on this. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 20:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow, what an adventure today. :) I'm the teacher in question (the 'adult associated with all of this'). I have been following this conversation but unable to contribute from work (you know, autoblock and everything). I e-mailed Alison around 2:45pm Central with the subject "Att: Alison re: school project". The theory above is correct: the three accounts editing the Lazaro Arbos are three girls who have been composing the same rough draft via Google Docs. In fact, when 76.189.111.2 initially wrote to AlondraV, I advised her to take his advice and I told that group to stop re-submitting content that had been deleted. This afternoon, I have e-mailed the whole class with 76.189.111.2's recommendations (1, 2, 3, and 4), as well as links to the "Younger editors" document. I just want to point out, however, that in spite of their inexperience, these girls have been working in good faith with lots of guidance, preparation time, and revision. For the curious, their instructions can be viewed here and here (links go to Google Docs). Unfortunately, these are not all tech-savvy teenagers. Some of them think that Wikipedia just magically appears. I am embarrassed that our project caused the two of you so much work. Jeff.zimmm (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jeff, nice to get in touch with you here now. Ok, I've checked through the queues here and can't find your message at all. Can you possibly register an email address with your Wikipedia account here - click Special:Preferences and fill it in? Then send me a message on here. Once we're in touch over email, I can explain in more detail. Sorry about all the hassle this is causing. I will get you guys up and running really soon - I just want to put some things in place, is all, to ensure this is a success for you - Alison ^❤ 23:38, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Jeff, I'll leave you in Alison's capable hands. She's a really great administrator. She has a lot of patience and a true passion for assisting other editors in need of help. Best of luck to you and your students! --76.189.111.2 (talk) 01:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Alison, here we go again. Ugh. There is yet another account from the student group (User:Asrt123) editing Lazaro Arbos and adding the same type of content that has been repeatedly removed and clearly explained. I'm sorry, but if someone tells me that it's a completely new editor/student, I won't believe it. These editors are not only adding non-encylopedic content, but again are violating WP:POV, WP:DUE, and WP:OR. And perhaps WP:SOCK. As well, they need to understand that just because something can be reliably sourced does not necessarily mean that it is worthy of inclusion in an encylopedia article. Alison, I'd like to request a topic ban for these students with the Arbos article. The disruptive editing in that article - whether intentional or not - has not stopped, and we are now up to five or six accounts from the group who have edited it. Thanks. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 02:31, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm on it. Jeff.zimmm (talk) 02:48, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Alison, at John Thorbjarnarson it looks like three accounts from the group are editing that one. They're inexplicably adding pics of a snake and crocodile, removing the correct formatting of the dates of birth/death in the lead, adding duplicate cites, improper grammar/spelling/usage, etc. Feel like doing some cleanup there? --76.189.111.2 (talk) 03:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I e-mailed the students. Here's the scoop. They were never "socking" before, as stated, these are three students who are working closely on a project. They are not attempting to be dishonest, circumvent a ban, create a false impression of support for one side of a controversy. They are JUST three students who are badly in need of some lessons in WP:POV, WP:DUE, and WP:OR. I myself advised some of them to create new user accounts, not for deception, but for improved security. I also sternly warned them that they MUST read and obey remarks made by experienced editors who know what they are doing. For your part, 76.189.111.2, you've done nothing but good by holding these users accountable for ensuring the quality of their contributions. I have spent hours poring over rough drafts and making many corrections. But I also ask that you treat these users as new Wiki editors finding their feet, rather than nefarious conspirators. If their bad behavior continued, I personally think a topic ban would be appropriate (an object lesson if nothing else). But I do ask that you give them one more chance. Jeff.zimmm (talk) 03:15, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Also, I e-mailed the students editing John Thorbjarnarson with the following text: "Please be more careful with your Wikipedia edits. I am getting complaints that you are adding "irrelevant images" and text with numbers spelling / grammatical mistakes. Make sure you use the "Style Guide", linked at the beginning of your notes, to make sure you're not creating more work for other people." Jeff.zimmm (talk) 03:22, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I tried cleaning up some of John Thorbjarnarson myself. Jeff.zimmm (talk) 03:51, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Brittany Griner

Changed source to the one featuring the actual article mentioned by ESPN and it contains the line: "'It was hard. Just being picked on for being different. Just being bigger, my sexuality, everything,' said the 6-foot-8 Griner, who acknowledged she is a lesbian."--Rockchalk717 21:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Rockchalk, the content you added to Brittney Griner says, "In an interview with SI.com on April 17, 2013, Griner announced that she is gay."[3] I feel that the word "announced" is inappropriate. It makes it sound as if she made some sort of formal announcement about her sexuality, when in fact it was merely a comment within an interview about bullying. The word "acknowledged", as used in the source, would be much more accurate. Finally, you might want to consider adding a little bit of content about her connection with bullying, per the source. It is apparently an important part of her life.

Here's my suggested text for the entire paragraph, including the sentence you added:

In an interview with SI.com on April 17, 2013, Griner acknowledged that she is gay. She also revealed in the interview that she was bullied as a child, explaining, "It was hard. Just being picked on for being different. Just being bigger, my sexuality, everything". She said she is very passionate about working with children in order to bring attention to the issue of bullying, particularly in the LGBT community.

I completed the cite formatting for mulitiple use and to add the writer's name. You can just copy and paste the whole paragraph from here. ;) Thanks, --76.189.111.2 (talk) 23:32, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done FYI Alison... Rockchalk replied on my talk page. He made all the suggested text changes with this edit. :) --76.189.111.2 (talk) 03:27, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that! It reads a whole lot better and is a way more positive statement, IMO :) Mentioning bullying and her opinion on it is important to those who read it. Well done! - Alison ^❤ 19:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome. :) I just wasn't happy with the way it was originally presented, plus it completely ignored the entire topic of the sourced story (bullying). 76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Good to hear. I often use the 'find and replace' function on Microsoft Word to remove all uses of a string on a page. Does that count as automated?--Launchballer 21:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Reply!

(Reply to [[4]])

Ha! For better or for worse,I actually created that modular synth userbox, and the image is a photo of my own MOTM system. I sure do love it - though I've been really enjoying my portable Harmonium recently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Overand (talk • contribs) 21:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Socks

Hi Alison. Just in case you hadn't noticed, there's a bunch of accounts you blocked as socks of User:Kyna Thigpen claiming they're all on a school project using the same IP address. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for that! You're absolutely right. I'm going to try to sort out the mess here now and see that they're okay with the rules, etc, then go for unblock. Thanks! - Alison ^❤ 18:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

BLP Robert R Clewis

Hello, Alison. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

regarding this. --Otheus (talk) 17:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

User:The Deadly TV series

You ran a checkuser on several socks: did you make an SPI? If not, I think I shall make one as a point of reference, because this is a continuing and rather serious infestation: there was another one today, and with a little searching I have found a lot more, going back to 15 March - see list.

I doubt if it's worth CU-ing them all, the evidence is absolutely clear.

It also seems clear that this is an (extraordinarily precocious) seven-year-old. He has repeatedly given his date of birth, and improbable though it seems, it seems even more improbable that a child with fantasies of being a film star would understate his age. He has given his full name and d.o.b. (and the name of the hospital, as child autobiographers so oddly often do), and the numerous IPs he has used tend to geolocate in a cluster round one northern city.

I have tried to frighten him off with this warning on his latest user page. That worked once before in a similar case: if it doesn't work this time, what are the prospects for tracking down his parents? Do we ever do that? The situation is undesirable, not only because he is vandalising real articles as well as making fantasy userpages, but also because his fantasies include the names of his friends and information about them.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

They are still coming in at one or two a day, so I have started Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The Deadly TV series to keep track. JohnCD (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey Girl

I need a favour in order to correct a vandalism at my talk page: here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Miss_Bono&diff=551917006&oldid=551915697

the part of She is an idiot. Thanks!  Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

• Hi Miss Bono :) I went ahead and revdel'd them as a courtesy. People generally leave petty vandalism, and just remove it from the current page - we get a lot - but since it was bothering you, I zapped it! - Alison ^❤ 18:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks friend! :) Hope you are doing well.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for your time, Ali. Best wishes. greetings from Cuba Miss Bono (zootalk) 15:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The vandal is stil annoying me. He post some userbox at my talk.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:10, 25 April 2013 (UTC)