User talk:Deskana/Archive 30

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mickey Darwin

Hi, is it possible for you to perform the CU at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mickey Darwin as they seem to have recieved a lot of attacks in the past two hours? Thanks. Kevin Dorwin (talk) 11:18, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010

58.8.212.211

Hopefully a quick question - I know I have seen a name associated with the sockmaster who does the edits I saw at 58.8.212.211 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), but I cannot recall who. Does it come easily to mind? I've been blocking the IPs as they emerge (as have others, I'm sure) but its bugging me that I cannot place the editing pattern. I don't want to waste your time if you don't recognize it offhand, though. Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 13:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I have no idea. --Deskana (talk) 00:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks. Syrthiss (talk) 11:28, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help

It seems checkuser is in need in this situation here 189.8.52.186 (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look like it to me. Besides, we don't normally link IPs to accounts anyway. --Deskana (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The solution was so simple....

If you remember from my previous post about the checkuser templates, there was a problem with the link. Apparently, all that was needed was to make the c lowercase to [[Special:ListUsers/checkuser|Checkuser]] :(. wiooiw (talk) 11:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi Deskana, I emailed you regarding a possible socking issue. Bejinhan talks 12:30, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

Talkback

Hello, Deskana. You have new messages at Dave1185's talk page.
Message added 10:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Re Mal Case etc

I have explained already what is happening with that.

AFL-Cool is needed to be kept seperate due to the size of the watchlist. Same is the case for Metro Footy.

The others are there with the intent of protecting Australian based wrestling articles. IPW is related to Australia due to a Brisbane based promotion. It is representative of a volatile scene where there has been trouble in the past.

I am acting honourably in all respects to make Wikipedia as accurate as possible within the rules (WP:SOCK aside). Matters have been ignored up until now, and thanks to this accurate attention is being drawn. If this results in a ban, Wikipedia will cease to be accurate in important Australian areas. Thank you. !! Justa Punk !! 22:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note - as an act of good faith, I'll be shutting down the other accounts on the user page and talk pages. I've already withdrawn the AfD at the centre of the dispute, but I would appreciate other advice because the title is definitely not notable. !! Justa Punk !! 22:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"WP:SOCK aside"? Did you really just say that? Oh my. --Deskana (talk) 22:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I did say that, and you have destroyed the accuracy of Wikipedia with your actions. I'm leaving for good. Get lost and stay lost. I will be promoting WP as inaccurate as far and wide as I can off site. Goodbye and good riddance. !! Justa Punk !! 01:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bye. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 08:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blablaaa

Has this editor made substantial improvements to any article? I have seen no evidence that this situation is a good place to invest our scarce mentorship resources. Jehochman Talk 13:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you're asking me this. I'm not advocating for him. --Deskana (talk) 15:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Harassed by anon IP

Hello Desk... Per this edit, if this anon IP editor → 218.186.8.233 (talk · contribs) ← isn't harassing the Admin User:PMDrive1061 or this "Desmond Ying" (as he had mentioned several times), he comes at me instead (see this "threat" dated months ago). Might I suggest an indef range block to solve this problem once and for all? Thoughts? --Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 17:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't look into this right now. I'll do it tomorrow. Feel free to remind me if I forget. --Deskana (talk) 21:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scibaby

Maybe I'm being dense, but could you clarify the meaning of "clear"? Is it "clear that they are Scibaby" or that they're "cleared of any relation to Scibaby"? Thanks - Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to do a sleeper check, so my response was in regards to the fact that I did not find any sleepers. --Deskana (talk) 21:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


About Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mac

Hello Deskana, I’m been suspected of Sockpuppet, I presented what I think are, real proves that I’m not User:Mac. Probes are in [here]. Or in history of same page if someone undo my edit. Thanks for reading this and hope you will read my defense. Would you send a feedback please. Thanks--Bsea (talk) 03:25, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Thabishop1#Help request

Is it possible you can run a CU and prove that he's User:Thabishop? Duck to me, and I'm leaning toward revoking talk access as he's not asking for unblock anymore. —fetch·comms 19:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no obvious technical tie between Thabishop and Thabishop1, but their IPs geolocate to within about 25 miles of each other in the USA. They are clearly geographically close. I'll leave that up to you to decide. Either way, you may wish to block a confirmed sockpuppet of Thabishop, Dapub12. --Deskana (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 07:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IP address: 178.108.156.50

Thanks for blocking the (what I call freaking) IP address. (Seems to be a middle-of-the-night attacker there!) I know you blocked it for a long time (six months!) - at first it was 31 hours, but I wanted it a long one, so you delivered it. Also, I hope you added that penis image used for vandalism into the bad image list. I even added the file "restricted use" tag on it.

Without any administrators here, Wikipedia would be "dirty"! I was doing in the middle of vandalism until what I saw was quite objectionable (that penis image); I was using Huggle counter-vandalism tool and reverted it, even before I saw the image.

I think I'm going to call it a day of fighting vandals. That was quite interesting, especially when my current stint started with a bit of WP:BLP dispute that seems to be in favor of me, not the other guy (also another anonymous IP user). Bigtop みんな空の下 (トーク) 00:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I just happened across some random IP's vandalizing and making personal attacks via fraudulent talk pages, and you just recently dealt with them. And it made me think, sometimes being an awesome Wikipedian must be a tiring and thankless task. Here's to you, for preserving the integrity of this fantastic project. --Hojimachongtalk 00:29, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! This is the first barnstar I've had in about three years now. :-) --Deskana (talk) 00:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Little Request

Hello! I am treated unfairly on Wikipedia, and I need some help from an administrator. Do you think that you will be able to talk with me? Thanks and sorry for any inconvenience caused. Scania N113 (talk) 06:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please take a look at Talk:Airbus A340 as a third party? I would really like someone to support my reasonable view. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scania N113 (talk • contribs) 08:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For reference, this was my response. --Deskana (talk) 11:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed my last sentence there. Anyway, thanks. Scania N113 (talk) 11:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should we block him?

Hello Desk, per his earlier edits №1, №2, №3, №4, №5, №6, №7, №8, together with his latest edit today, should I report him to ANI or WQA? Note also that he has yet to apologise to us for his previous misdemeanor. --Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 11:49, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of those were quite some time ago. I've warned him for civility, and if he carries on being incivil, I will block him. As it stands, a block isn't appropriate yet. --Deskana (talk) 13:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drake&Ciara Fan

Hi there Deskana, you were recently involved in this sockpuppetry case involving Drake&Ciara Fan (talk · contribs). I have to ask, if Drake&Ciara Fan were a sockpuppet of another user that was not named in the case, would that have come up in the CheckUser? I ask this because, after reviewing the user's contributions, they more closely resemble edits by banned user TrEeMaNsHoE (talk · contribs) than they do of CiaraFan4Ever. The fact that the user knows their ways with discographies, columns lengths, etc., in addition to working with the same discographies is fishy. — ξxplicit 19:30, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To quote Gabriel Tosh: "Maybe yes, maybe no". It may show up, or it may not. You may wish to file another SPI case. --Deskana (talk) 22:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

undeleting

Hi.. thanks for undeleting, there's some pages missing though, esp my css and .js pages.. →ROUX ₪ 17:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and undeleted them for you. —fetch·comms 03:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:56, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a minute for IRC?

Hi,

Can you come on IRC - I need to discuss a couple of things with you.

Thanks,

The Helpful One 12:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No need?

[1] Sorry, my mistake...! ╟─TreasuryTag►constabulary─╢ 23:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't make a mistake, so no apology is necessary. In fact, I should probably apologise for being a bit too terse. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 23:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I haven't done anything

What is wrong with people. TT is pathetic and is always trying to get me banned. So don't even bother doing anything. That would be appricated. KnowIG (talk) 23:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get angry at the person breaking up the fight. :-) --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 23:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you broke it up :) Cause his always doing that then reporting me. But I see on his talkback him asking you to report me and you apparently agreeing. Explain please. :) KnowIG (talk) 23:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not agreeing with anything. I'm just making sure that if he does decide to make an RFC on you, he knows that he shouldn't be the one to send you the obligatory "You've had an RFC filed against you" message. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 23:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok Understood Cheers! :) KnowIG (talk) 23:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Robert Clotworthy

— Rlevse • Talk • 18:10, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings

Unprotection of Cuteness

Was it worth it? --78.34.202.185 (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not in this case, no. Semi-protection was better. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 14:38, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind re-semiprotecting it? --87.79.181.170 (talk) 16:20, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Sorry for the delay. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 07:00, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

np, thanks a bunch. --87.78.37.76 (talk) 09:19, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I think I'm OK. An editor is sort of riding me (I feel if I was a horse somebody wudda called the APCA by now--JOKING!) but I think I'm OK. It's all part of collaborating to the best of our ability on Wikipedia. Thanks so much for your excellent response & helpfulness. Ciao!--Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden (talk) 13:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:54, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock: Soniah

Please see User talk:Soniah (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs) about a checkuserblock. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 15:02, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI ~ Comment about CU Block

User:Wolfnix/toolbox/reflink2 I have left a note on MuZemike's regarding a CU Block that came up on WP:ACC Req #: 53669, which you commented on. Your input is welcome, the comment can be found at User_talk:MuZemike
--Wolfnix • Talk • 19:15, 8 October 2010 (UTC) User:Wolfnix/toolbox/tb[reply]

Happy 10/10/10

Double Ten Day is, really, unrelated—but we don't appear to have a cool pic for this one

I suppose I should've timed this message at 10:10:10 too, but frankly, I can't be arsed. You know how it is.

Did you know... that tenten in Japaense writing are a little wiggly thing, a bit like a quotation-mark, which makes e.g. "ka" (か) into "ga" (が) or "fu" (ふ) into "bu" (ぶ) ?

So, take time out to have a bit of a giggle.

All the best, and 10-10 'till we do it again.  Chzz  ►  08:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:20, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Banned user back

I think a banned user has returned and been active for a few months here on Wikipedia and although I had interacted this new user, I didn't really notice until someone reported him on a WikiProject talk page for some editing issue. I don't know what to do because there probably isn't any solid evidence and its been a year since he was banned so I don't know if CheckUser can prove anything (his IP has probably been renewed- or the man could probably have even moved). What are we supposed to do?


P.S. I post it on your talk page because you were the one who blocked User:Hornetman16 and I thought you would be of more help than just any other admin. Feedback ☎ 21:28, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can look into this, but I need some evidence (diffs, for example) that show there's reasonable suspicion that he's been evading his ban. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 00:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Other than CheckUser, what evidence is there? Surely, minor editing disputes can't just cut it. I've dealt with HM16 in the past and I just feel as if this user, User:Nascarking, is too similar in speech and behavior to not be him. Do I have solid evidence? Not a slight of it. But the truth is that I don't know what constitutes as solid evidence... if there is such a thing in cases like these. Feedback ☎ 00:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:12, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Re: User:Nascarking

The user in question has agreed to a CheckUser at User talk:Feedback after a discussion about him between other users and I at User talk:3bulletproof16. Could you administer the check? Feedback ☎ 02:14, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid not. We pretty much never check people when they ask us to check them. Regarding the evidence needed for a check, it's normally a few diffs from both the suspected account and the old account that show that there are behavioural ties between the accounts. We can't just check every time someone has a suspicion or we'd be checking accounts constantly. Try having a look at a few of the cases on WP:SPI for what sort of evidence is required. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 03:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, there's no checkuser evidence stored for Hornetman16 (or whatever his more recent name is) because he's not edited from the account for so long. So checkuser wouldn't be able to tell you anything anyway. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 03:14, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So what you're saying is that a banned user can come back and we can't do anything about it? Feedback ☎ 04:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser data is only kept for a few months. And anyway, no, that's not what I'm saying. You can still find diffs and try to gather enough evidence to prove it's him. Again, I'd recommend looking at WP:SPI. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 11:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The editor in question has just been blocked 72 hours for edit warring on a professional wrestling article, something the banned user did a lot before being banned. I think a CheckUser test is very appropriate. Feedback ☎ 01:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've already said that there's no checkuser data there for Hornetman16 because he's not edited for so long. Nothing can change that as it's a technical restriction enforced by the checkuser tool. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 02:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry I haven't cleared up a few things. If he is in fact Hornetman, I don't suspect he has only used the Nascarking name. And if he is not, I suspect he must be a sockpuppet of User:Deely. I know that's a lot of if's, but you should see my discussion with User:3bulletproof16 and another editor at User talk:3bulletproof16 which I also linked above. Feedback ☎ 04:19, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above, you need evidence for these accusations before we can use checkuser. "I suspect he might be a sockpuppet of X" is far from being a good enough basis for a check. Once again, I'm going to encourage you to look at WP:SPI. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 17:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What does WP:SPI have that you keep "encouraging me to look at"? If you find it pretty, then good for you, but it really doesn't help at all as all you're requesting from me is to "provide diffs". Yeah, provide diffs that show what? The user hasn't confessed to anything nor has he inferred it. What are you asking for? You're waiving the words "evidence", "SPI" and "diffs" telling me I should go find them, but I would like to know what you're looking for. The user is BLOCKED for edit warring. That's all I know. I could provide those diffs to you if you want, but what are those going to prove? Do you want me to show you diffs of User:Hornetman16 edit warring? Sure, I could do that. But what else is that going to prove? I come here asking for you to perform a CheckUser test so we can HAVE proof and yet you're asking me to get you proof beforehand. Hell, if I had proof in the form of confessions or anything like that, why would I need CheckUser? Tell me exactly what you want and I'll come up with it for you. Feedback ☎ 23:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you're going to take that kind of attitude with me, then I'm not going to spend my time explaining to you exactly what you need. It's all written at WP:SPI anyway. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 12:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


"Most SPI cases are decided based uponbehavioral evidence, that is, the behavior of the accounts or IPs concerned. This evidence needs to be explicit; that is, use verifiable evidence in the form of diffs, links to the pages in which the sock puppetry is occurring, and reasonable deductions and impressions drawn from said evidence. - WP:SPI"


That's all SPI says. Provide diffs and links where the guy is editing. Yeah, you already told me that's what you wanted, but what are those specific diffs supposed to have? Evidence? Okay, then. What type of evidence? WP:SPI doesn't say anything other than "behavioral evidence". The guy is blocked for edit warring for the THIRD time and has had many issues with other editors. If I provide those diffs, will that suffice? You misconceive my tone if you believe I have an attitude, I apologize for it, but I just don't UNDERSTAND what you want. If you could help me have a better understanding, I would happily oblige and give you what you want. WP:SPI is too vague and isn't helping at all. Feedback ☎ 19:38, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest asking an SPI clerk this question. I'm happy to answer it but I'm so busy at the minute that it might be a while before I can get back to you. The SPI clerks can definitely give you what you need. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 18:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:17, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:00, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Deskana/Archive_30&oldid=1150991660"