User talk:Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive IV

This page is an archive. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. Please direct comments to the current and active talk page.

Help please! - Sock puppetry[edit]

Hi, I'm writing about a case of sock puppetry I seem to be constantly up against. You were kind enough (and very much in the right) to block User:Praesepe913 as a sock puppet of banned user User:Argol136.

I'm being targetted by a new sock puppet (a 5th one within just 2 days) - User:Filmfan1971 - clearly due to my zero-tollerance stance on his behaviour (I've dealt with him for some three months now).

What I'm writing to yourself about is how to better deal with this user; Do I have to go through the vandalism/sock puppet process every time (which is at the moment around two sock-puppet accounts a day!!) I find his edit pattern?

As I'm sure you can appreciate, I'd much rather be adding content to Wikipedia than deal with this user every day!

I've documented all his quotes, IPs, accounts and behaviour, and could present the findings to yourself or whoever at any time.

I hope you can point me in the right direction about this! Thanks very much for your time, hope to hear from you. Jhamez84 19:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it seems you read the evidence on the appropriate sock puppet report page, and blocked User:Filmfan1971 - however, somehow, he's been able to circumvent this and is still targetting me (even got me blocked for 10 minutes!). If possible, could you review how this has happened? Jhamez 23:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SSP[edit]

Thanks for your help.--MikeJ9919 15:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A short Esperanzial update[edit]

As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Wikipedia:Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, —Cel es tianpower ^háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:SSP[edit]

Thanks, I've gotten more experienced in dealing w/ sockpuppets since then, and I want to thank you for doing that. It was too kind. Yanksox ^(talk) 17:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help :-D[edit]

Many thanks for sorting out the sock puppet problem so quickly! -- Sakurambo 21:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock someone[edit]

Can you please unblock User:Pravi Gusinjez? Turns out that his account was hacked by someone, so he had to change the password, that's why those edit were vandalism. Also, the report I made turned out to be unreal that he was an impersonater of User:BaCK2EssEnce because the guy who hacked him had saw my edits and decided to see if he can find something to piss me off, which he did find but copy-edited the words. So can you please unblock Plavi Gusinjez? Thanks. --Crna Gora 03:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tenebrae[edit]

Thanks for your help. I have to admit, the procedure on that page is daunting. Aside from Chowbok, the suspected sock/meat puppets are User:68.198.52.124 and User:Mtn.

I'd like to note that while Chowbok was being sarcastic and uncivil (with one edit summary reading "How many legs does a dog have...."), I found and inserted a compromise solution. -- Tenebrae 17:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks again for getting in touch (on July 5, 2006). I guess there was some miscommunication; you'd mentioned on June 23 that "If you do not know how to, I will do it tomorrow", and I posted here thanking you for that help (above) since I went to the CheckUser page and found the procedure daunting. The suspected sock/meat-puppet reversions stopped after the compromise solution I inserted, and two users noted above admitted to being the same person and stopped, so I'm not sure there's need to pursue it at this point. I'll accede to your judgment on that.

Thank you so much again. Without your intervention, and his knowing that an admin was watching, who knows how long the insulting, sarcastic comments by Chowbok would have gone on? -- Tenebrae 12:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My original edit summary was neither sarcastic or uncivil; Tenebrae simply didn't understand it. Is there any recourse open to me for editors who open completely unfounded sockpuppet cases just to harass people who have made edits they disagree with? —Chowbok 14:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Typo[edit]

Would you like me to fix a typo on your user page? Stephen B Streater 17:39, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AOL vandal[edit]

I see that you've come across the UK -> England AOL vandal. Not much we can do apart from reverting. He sometimes uses their proxies and at other times uses non-proxy IPs. I've been blocking the non-proxy ones for 24 hours and just reverting the vandalism from the proxies to avoid collateral dammage. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:39, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: LinkBot[edit]

Hi Kilo-Lima, I've been caught up in bug-hunting in MediaWiki and haven't given the LinkBot the TLC that it requires; However it's on my 2006 to-do list, so if all goes to plan it should be active again suggesting links before the year is out. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 11:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:GWB[edit]

Your gift is much appreciated. A very sincere thank you, Rama's Arrow 20:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for June 26th.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 26	26 June 2006	About the Signpost

Quicker deletion of non-compliant images proposed	News and Notes: 100 x 1,000, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

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.

Message delivered by Ralbot 23:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vanessa Feltz[edit]

Thanks for the

The Original Barnstar

For expanding Vanessa Feltz when nobody else could be bothered!

I just felt that the article needed some clarification and qualification to some of the statements. About 100 other edits have been made to the article before me so there is some interest there. Of course, some of those were vandals, and reversions, etc. My opinion is that she is an interesting radio personality, who through her call-in show provides a service to Londoners. Three hours, six days a week of fielding callers both irate and adoring is a daunting task. Her other media appearances and contributions, in my view, just add seasoning to the view that a lot of Londoners have of her as a knowledgeable "cousin" or even a youngish "aunt" who they feel impelled to confide their feelings, experinces, desires and fears to. You would have to listen to her -- which can be arranged over the internet for up to seven days after her Mon - Sat broadcasts at [1] At any rate, your taking the time to nail the barnstar on my page is appreciated. --TGC55 03:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Period[edit]

I've removed the period you added to MediaWiki:Blockedtext. The problem is that existing block summaries may already end with a period or other punctuation, or may contain block templates such as {{blocked proxy}}. The duplicate or dangling period would look silly in those cases. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW[edit]

Thank you for my barnstar award! :-) Mr Christopher 17:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No original research[edit]

Please don't change the original research redirect without first gaining consensus to do so on the redirect's talk page. The redirect has been around for more than two years and is linked to by well over 1000 talk pages. Of course, if consensus forms to change it then that is fine but we shouldn't be unilaterally doing that without discussion. Any discussion should also include no original research, which also links to Wikipedia:No original research. Also, I'm not sure what reason you used to originally delete the article b/c it doesn't appear to have had a vote for deletion and wouldn't have been a candidate for speedy delete. Anyway, I have started a vote/discussion on this at Talk:Original research. Please join in with your thoughts and vote. Best,--Alabamaboy 13:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks[edit]

Thank you very much for your support for my recent RfA, which I'm quite happy to announce has passed with a consensus of 67 supporting, 0 opposed and 0 neutral. I'm glad I meet your criteria. Most of all, I'm glad you took the time to evaluate my candidacy, as I believe that's what keeps RfA running smoothly, and I'll be working hard to justify the vote of confidence you've placed in me. Please let me know at my talk page if you have any comments on my performance as an admin. Thanks! TheProject 02:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks[edit]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you very much for that, I don't know if you know why i've been depressed lately but that qoute and what you said really helped me out, thank you. ILovePlankton 01:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts to my edits[edit]

Hi. I got your message accusing me of adding links to commercial sites. As far as I know, there is nothing for sale on those sites and not commercial. Furthermore, it isn't my site and it is directly related to the article in question. Please clarify why those links are not allowed. Solar22 17:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your reply. However the reason you give is not valid. Because of their age, those shows are now considered public domain. You and I are free to copy and distribute them to our hearts content. If you would like links to authorative websites to prove so, let me know. Solar22 17:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links[edit]

http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm http://www22.brinkster.com/paradio/pages/lawj.htm http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/swish.html http://www.oldtimeradioprograms.com/copyrite.htm

Also, if I point out links that direct users to OTR sites would you be prepared to remove each and every one as you did the links I added? Solar22 18:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain[edit]

While I am now convinced that your pride will not allow you to admit that you were wrong and you will fight tooth and nail to get your way, I'll simply ask you another question: What about those links are NOT "benefit the article in anyway"? Also, why do you keep changing your reasoning for the deletions? Nobody will think less of you if you admit you were wrong, you are human and do make mistakes. You keep changing the goalposts, which makes it very difficult to discuss this issue with you. You simply did a blanket revert on all my edits without any individual consideration. I noted that you also didn't answer my question regarding if I can remove all other links to OTR websites using your justification as the reason? Solar22 18:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Catherine Tate Show article[edit]

It wasn't original research, but from an obscure source. Hope this helps. -- Sunholm (talk) 21:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 3rd.[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 26	26 June 2006	About the Signpost

Angela Beesley resigns as Wikimedia Foundation trustee	Requiring confirmed email suggested for uploads
Wikipedia cited by the England and Wales High Court	Unblock requests directed to new mailing list
News and Notes: Wiktionary milestone, privacy policy update	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

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.

RfA Thank you[edit]

Thank you!

Thank you, lolakana, for your support in my RfA. I appreciate your trust and support, and I will do my best to further help this great encyclopædia and community of ours. If there is anything that you feel I can do to help, please let me know. -- Avi 03:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WinXP locking[edit]

thanx for your input, but thats because you use Fast User Switching (welcome screen). i am on a corporate computer where you have to type in user names. when locked, it explicitly says who can unlock the computer: the Username (of whoever locked it) and administrator. In you case, still the fact that is says X programs running indicates you are logged in. I am searching for a way such that if some one comes.. they have no idea who locked the computer and have no choice but to power it off if they want to login themselves.

Tots vandal[edit]

Thanks a ton for the headsup. I saw your msg. on the anon's talkpage and wondered for a second who lola-kana was! Then I found that it was none other than you but was wondering why you didn't give him a test4 or bv. Now it makes sense!! --Gurubrahma 16:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA[edit]

Thank you for your vote in my RFA, which succeeded with a final tally of 66-0-4. If there's anything I can help you with now that I'm an admin, please let me know on my talk page. Again, thanks! Mango juice^talk 21:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Pantheism[edit]

Glad you found the answers helpful! Grutness...wha? 23:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hurricane Devon[edit]

Thank you for alerting me. I have decided that I am not comfortable unblocking this user; extensive conversation with him has not been efficacious, though I know he means well. You may pursue whatever channels you feel appropriate. Thanks! — Knowledge Seeker দ 05:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Starbucks' logo[edit]

Hello. Could you please supply a fair use rationale for Image:Starbucks Coffee Logo.svg, as described on the image description page; stating why the image qualifies as fair use. Thanks and regards, Iola k ana|^T 15:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done.--Keeleysam 18:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Title[edit]

Since Template:Title is on TFD and there is an overwhelming consensus for deletion, I've moved everything to User:SushiGeek/Title. I've fixed the title for you on your user page. SushiGeek 14:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...or not. Apparently, you don't use the template; Would you like to use User:SushiGeek/Title anyway? SushiGeek 14:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref Desk[edit]

Thanks. Note to self: Edit RD more often when pissed & shagged out. --Howard Train 16:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza Elections[edit]

Kilo-Lima

Thank you for your vote in the Esperanza Elections. Your support is much appreciated, and it means that I am now in the Council. I will continue to try my best, and if you have any questions or queries, please don't hesistate to leave me a message. Thanks again, — Fire Fox 15:38, 10 July '06

Lots of thanks[edit]

Hey Iolakana, thank you so much for your support in the Esperanza Elections! I am very glad, and truly honored to have your support, so thanks again. -- Nataly a 02:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 10th[edit]


Volume 2, Issue 28	10 July 2006	About the Signpost

Reuters tracks evolution of Ken Lay's death on Wikipedia	Creating stable versions using existing software proposed
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Blocking changes, privacy policy update
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line

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.

Signpost delivered by: Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deleting my site link[edit]

I just wanted to know why my link to my fansite keeps being deleted...I've had my fansite link on here for a LONG time and it wasn't ever deleted until recently...

well I looked at the Link spam page, and my actions don't fall under any one of those categories. Also, WP:EL says, "including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such." so what's the problem? --EXXC3L 22:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 17th[edit]


Volume 2, Issue 29	17 July 2006	About the Signpost

Library of Congress, Holocaust Museum negotiate with Wikimedia	Issue of article subjects requesting deletion taken up
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages	News and Notes: Blocking changes, single login
Wikipedia in the News	Features and admins
The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

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. --Michael Snow 05:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet - Mayor Westfall[edit]

Hi Kilo-Lima,True BVW doesn't explicitly state that he is MW but his reply on the reference desk doesn't show any surprise that there was another user with the name Westfall or correct my strong suggestion that they are the same person. Apart from that the only things which seem to confirm this are the similarity in BVW and MW's styles & nature/location of edits (mostly on reference desk) and the fact that BVW didn't appear till after MW was blocked. I've just checked BVW's contributions and I see his comments to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Community block on User:Mayor Westfall which clearly indicate he is MW. AllanHainey 15:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kilo,

Obviously I cannot use the user:Mayor Westfall, because it has been blocked (unjustly IMO, as I never vandalized Wikpedia, and really don't think I am in volitation of any of the established Wikipedia rules.) Some people have claimed that I like to ask provocitive questions, which is true, and I have more questions, that are problablly even more provocitive, but I do not feel as though provocitive questions shouldn't be asked, or that asking them, no matter what they are, should be considered trolling. Many Wikipedians are all to eager to call someone a troll, which in my opinion damages Wikipedia.

As to being accused of being a "non-contributing member", 1) that's not a violation of any rule Im aware of, an d 2) I have made contributions. My contributions may be small, but that is because Wikipedia is already so expansive and complete, I rarely find an instance when I have information Wikipedia doesnt already have. Baron Von Westfall 02:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA thanks[edit]

Hello Kilo-Lima/Archives/Archive IV, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grand master ka 07:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Misza13's pile![edit]

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page.
Misza 13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing!

NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm.
Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.

Blacktooth et al[edit]

Thanks for your response regarding the Drosenbe sockpuppet case. I appreciate your taking the time to look into this. --G0zer 17:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]