User talk:Alison

O HAI !	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Email

My user and talk pages attract a lot of vandals - it kinda goes with the job. If you have reverted vandalism here, please understand that while I really appreciate you doing this, I'll probably not be able to reply to you for a whole bunch of reasons. But I do appreciate it! Local time is currently 10:02 (PST)

Start a new talk topic.

Archives

2004

Entire year

2005

Jan • Jun

Jul • Dec

2006

Jan • Jun

Jul • Dec

2007

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2008

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2009

Jan • Jun

Jul • Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2010

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2011

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Is this anyone we know?

[[Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of John Daker]] My guess is JtV. Happy New Year! NawlinWiki (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Dunno who it is - it's not JtV - but there's plenty of sockses. Here's the list of Confirmed;

• Hans Daker (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)
• Sean Daker (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)
• PremierClass (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)
• John Daker (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)
• Ron Daker (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)
• Sh*tbucks (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)
• PlaystationTwo (talk⁺ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser)

Happy New Year to you, too :) - Alison ^❤ 00:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Amanda Lindhout

Hi. I have left a comment on the Talk page, I'd very much appreciate it if you'd join me in discussion. THanks. Twafotfs (talk) 20:38, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Archive 10

Hi, just a minor clean-up issue. Could you please remove or deactivate the {{reqscreenshot}} template in User talk:Alison/Archive 10. Thanks --Traveler100 (talk) 20:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Ok - Y Done - thanks for that :) - Alison ^❤ 23:51, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Another Mrpontiac1 sock

I just blocked Sourabholland (talk · contribs) as an obvious sock, but maybe I should have raised an SPI to make this better known. He'd quickly edited and reverted himself on another article so he could get past semi-protection. I see you tried a range block but it didn't take him long to get past it. Of course, I could be all wrong. I haven't tagged him yet. Any suggestions as to how to progress (or a trout if I've made a mistake)? Dougweller (talk) 12:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

That's Confirmed, yes. Two socks, plus two open proxies - Alison ^❤ 19:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 10:50, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

ScottyBerg

What's going on with ScottyBerg? Are you sure this was a sock? AFAIK, Scotty has been editing productively on Wikipedia for quite some time. I'd be very surprised if he was a sock. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

HI there. Yes, I'm sure he is. I've been involved in dealing with MMs sock accounts over the years and, yes, this is another - Alison ^❤ 18:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Since you're already familiar with this Mantanmoreland, can you tell me what they did that led to an indefinite ban? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Mantanmoreland was an editor who abused multiple accounts - both on WP and following through in email (Mantanmoreland / Samiharris) - for quite a long period of time. He completely gamed the system here and pulled the wool over a large number of other editors' eyes, and did so for years. He was eventually subject to an Arbcom case which led to sanctions and article bans, etc. He went on to circumvent this repeatedly, was eventually caught and banned by the community. That's the seriously short version, but there's quite a history to this editor - Alison ^❤ 19:11, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Mantanmoreland. That was before my time. But even if they are this Mantanmoreland, Scotty has been editing Wikipedia productively and without any major issues AFAIK. Other than the sockpuppetry, are there any other allegations of miscoduct by Scotty? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Isn't that like asking "Other than the minor issue regarding all those murders, Charles Manson doesn't have any reason to be in Jail. Shouldn't we just let him out?" Unless and until someone is willing to follow the rules, I don't see any reason not to continue to block their sockpuppet accounts. The sockpuppetry is, itself, enough for me. If it is important enough for Mantmoreland to edit Wikipedia productively, he'll go away for 6 months, and then ask at his main account for terms to return. Just a talk page stalker--Jayron32 19:52, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I would't equate WP socking to Charles Manson! xD But either way, I suspect he'll be back again soon. He always has done - Alison ^❤ 19:57, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

There are other issues relating to COI. I don't wish to discuss the details here as it's privacy-related - Alison ^❤ 19:49, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

@Jayron32: Not really. I'm not crazy about following rules for rule's sake. If someone is productively editing Wikipedia without any issues, then what's the problem? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

If someone wishes to edit productively, they will follow the rules. MM was not banned without cause, so he needs to establish the trust of the community by having the community overturn the ban. That needs to be done first. After that has been done, he can edit productively. --Jayron32 20:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Scotty and me may not always agree, but I've never had the feeling that he was editing in bad faith or causing any problems. I don't know anything about sock poppet investigations or what sort of evidence is required to confirm a sockpuppet case, but it looks like there wasn't a confirmation of using the same IP. It looks like it's based on editing overlap. But some of those pages, such as User talk:Cla68, User talk:Jimbo Wales, User talk:MONGO, User talk:William M. Connolley, and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, I've edited as well. I'm sure lots of editors have. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:22, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Wait - I must be losing my mind or something. This report is from September of last year.[1] Am I looking at the wrong one? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

HelloAnnoying closed it as a bad faith report.[2] This is all so weird. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 21:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I started a discussion at ANI.[3] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 21:48, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Alison, you can safely ignore the ANI discussion. It was quickly closed because I posted it in the wrong venue. Please pardon my ignorance, but I don't know much about SPIs. I'm not really sure how to respond if you can't discuss the details here because it's privacy-related. How can the community review this block to make sure that it's valid? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 01:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Mantmoreland can appeal his block using the instructions at WP:BASC. It requires him to send an email to ArbCom. --Jayron32 03:19, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Jayron32, what makes you think SB is MM? Have you seen the secret evidence? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 16:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Alison said that he was. I have no reason to think that Alison would lie about that. --Jayron32 17:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Lying != mistaken. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

If that is the case, then I trust ArbCom to correct the mistake in due time, and don't see the utility in hounding Alison over the matter. --Jayron32 17:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Nobody is hounding Alison and I find that accusation to be counter-productive. I'm just trying to figure out what's going on. Relax. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Jesus. I'm a little blown away. I kind of thought of SB as a tool, but not never a malignant sock of MM. I guess the proverb is true: ""Stand by the river long enough and you'll see all the bodies of your enemies float by."

What was the tell that alerted you to his identity? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 04:50, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

This looks dubious to me. I would urge you to re-examine your evidence and (if still convinced) make clearer in public what your basis is William M. Connolley (talk) 09:35, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi everyone. Just to say that I'm currently working with the Arbitration Committee to resolve this issue one way or another. Yes, there is evidence that I cannot share here and to be honest, I don't like "secret" evidence any more than the next person, but for reasons of privacy I'd rather not share it here. That wouldn't be fair either. Checkuser is not perfect either and I would never claim 100% infallibility in anything. While I'm quite certain here that the block is justified, if ArbCom decides otherwise on review of the evidence, I will not hesitate to undo the block and apologize. It's happened before. In short, I'm working with ArbCom and I understand that ScottyBerg is also - Alison ^❤ 18:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Scotty Berg - Wikimedia Commons

Alison,

ScottyBerg is currently involved in a lengthy deletion discussion in Wikimedia Commons. [4] The "length" of the discussion is due to ScottyBerg, since he is the only complaining editor.

I believe this block should apply to ScottyBerg in Commons as well. If it does not, is there any way to recuse him from the discussion and pending decision? Thank you for your time. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

• Hmmm. Well, the projects tend to be separate and WP bans don't generally extend to other projects such as SEWIKI or Commons, so it would be a local matter, really. Note also that the original 'Mantanmoreland' account was never blocked on Commons; he just stopped editing / moved to another account - Alison ^❤ 19:56, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Nelsondenis248 (talk) 20:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Edison and the WR

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=472379034&oldid=472378836

Can you please tell User:Edison on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Tarc_reported_by_User:WR_Reader_.28Result:_.29 that http://184.172.174.94/~wikipede/ is the Wikipedia Review, not a successor or a replacement. The domain name (wikipediareview.com) is the only thing that expired. The forum, its threads, and the accounts are still there. Tell him that you can still log in to your account. See http://184.172.174.94/~wikipede/index.php?showtopic=36278 for some background. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Laura Wilson prot

You previously protected Laura Wilson (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) about three years ago for what I assume are oversight-related BLP reasons. I'm giving you a message to remind you of the state of the article :) Sceptre ^(talk) 21:28, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey Sceptre. Yeah, thanks for the note :) Right now, though, I'm not going to unprot as it's been targeted in the past by a banned editors and has been linked to certain RL problems. Emailing .... - Alison ^❤ 04:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Just for anyone who wants to chase this up in the future: correspondence has been done, and I'm perfectly fine with your reasoning. Sceptre ^(talk) 06:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Your request on my talk page

I will certainly abide by it, but I would like to note that I was not speculating (the User himself acknowledged on the other site that he had posted the material here) and neither was I identifying a real life identity (merely a message board handle). That said, I filed the report and am done with the matter. Thank you.AceD (talk) 00:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

User:BarkingMoon

I appreciate you protecting the page (as you noted, I suggested the same at WP:AN), but the edit-warring happened mostly five or more hours ago, so your edit summary may have been a touch out of date. Lame edit wars happen, but editors are not always lame about it. Geometry guy 01:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty certain that when their shift ends, another crew would soon be along to play similar games. 24 hours of time-out will give the community enough time to iron out what's going on (I hope!) without pointless battles going on. I mean, seriously - tagging a page is not a life-or-death situation, it smacks of retribution and is being used as some sort of badge of shame. Nothing is achieved other than the drama-pot getting stirred - Alison ^❤ 02:13, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I broadly agree with you after the first sentence, and am glad you protected the page. However, given that the dispute has died down, such protection should be viewed as a precaution against, not an expectation of, further edit warring.

Beyond the next 24 hours, though, the issue remains confused and unsettled and it will take the community time to iron out what has been going on. Understanding what stirs (or does not stir) the drama-pot is worthy PhD topic in itself! Geometry guy 02:29, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Zhand38

Hey Alison, could you take a look at User talk:208.102.209.78? It's User:Zhand38 who has been globally blocked for some time and is again threatening self harm, both there and on my talk page at commons. Thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yikes! I tried following through the thread of what's going on there, and can't make much sense of it. He's been socking to edit articles on Cincinnati Zoo and that there's some RL aspect to this? Per Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm, it's probably best to take this seriously - send an email to emergency wikimedia.org and tell them that this is going on. It's clear that they're not behaving rationally and may need help - Alison ^❤ 03:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

In fact, I'm emailing them now and CCing you - Alison ^❤ 03:31, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Done (sounds like we sent emails off at about the same time). Thanks and yes, it goes back many months and is awful. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Alison,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 06:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey

Hope everything is fine with you. :) Quit coming online on Skype? --Highway Hitchhiker (talk) 08:25, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Hiyya. Dunno who you are, but I'm actually on there now :) First time in about three weeks, I think - Alison ^❤ 08:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Suppressed revision

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/F%C3%A6&diff=475795227 – Can you please Email me a copy of my revision. I don't have any copies, and I don't want to forget what I've said. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 21:06, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

email

Hi Alison. Did you see my email ? Please let me know any reply or if I should redirect the query, thanks - Youreallycan 13:28, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

This seems important

Note. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 19:00, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! It's okay - the diff linked is pointing to the one after the suppressed one, so I think we're good! - Alison ^❤ 19:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Glad to see

Someone reads what I write. Rich Farmbrough, 23:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC).

I'll admit that I was in work when I saw that comment, and laughed out loud! How appropriate for Commons! - Alison ^❤ 00:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CTC logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:CTC logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:55, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Alison, I actually have a feeling that User:Takabeg is also a sock puppet of User:Ledenierhomme (or vise versa). The reason I think this is because, historically, when I have forgetten to sign in, they have accussed me of being a "troll" just as User:AbdolRezaCCIH has been doing in the last few days towards User:OzofAvrupa. Furthermore, Takabeg used to be seen on the Iraqi Turkmens article as well as at Turks in Europe. Could you look into it? I have not listed it under the sockpuppet investigations just in case I'm wrong on this one, I don't want to start reporting innocent users. Turco85 (Talk) 13:50, 18 February 2012 (UTC)