Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:32, 21 August 2007

Add new messages at end please

SSP

I don't know if Kephera975 is using sockpuppets, or not.

That said, I have entered comments on that SSP report as well as the one at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Frater FiatLux (2nd). My comments were not directly about Kephera975 though, they were about User:C00483033 and User:Rondus the other two user names who are listed in both of those reports, and who are almost certainly both the same person.

One thing that makes me wonder what's really going on is that User:C00483033 and User:Rondus do seem to be socks of User:Frater FiatLux, but in the contribs I thought I saw an argument between FiatLux and Kephra. I can't find that diff now though, so maybe I misread it.

Since I'm not certain I feel I should be conservative in my comments on this unless more evidence appears, though the SPA issue is clear anyway. --Parsifal _Hello 00:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about his new "bad faith" SSP report. I've entered comments there. Hopefully when the remaining one or two AfDs are completed this will settle down. If he continues his disruptive editing on the article pages after the AfD, please let me know, since I don't usually watch those pages. --Parsifal _Hello 04:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Parfisal. I think it's pretty obvious that User:C00483033 and User:Rondus are the same individuals, but the SSP report for Kephera975 came back negative last time. Maybe you could post to checkuser? I don't know, but I don't think these three are Kephera975. Btw, thanks for clarification on yours and GlassFETs edits: I have reaffirmed my original comment on the case re that you're not the same individuals. Since the case was raised as an accusation of sockpuppetry, and nothing else, it should be easy enough for admins to conclude. Coldmachine^Talk 22:38, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Hi... Just a heads up on some recent comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. - you might want to take a look. --Parsifal _Hello 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IPSOS -Would you check out this conversation on my talk page about the pair of socks? Your name was mentioned so I would like to get your input before proceeding any further with the idea under discussion. You might be interested in the earlier comments in that same section too. --Parsifal _Hello 01:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I'll send you the link, probably in a couple hours. --Parsifal _Hello 02:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The report has been posted here on WP:ANI.

You may also wish to take a look at this, if you feel like one more click. Good evening... --Parsifal _Hello 04:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's at it again... --Parsifal _Hello 19:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IPSOS - the deletion page has had some really strange comments from SqueakBox ... I really do think this calls for an admin review of the procedure in general, and El C and his sidekick SqueakBox in particular. Something is very wrong in this isse. All issues aside regarding the article - and it really does need to be rewritten from scratch - this is not good enough. Take a look and give your comments please. docboat 01:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another view two

Look at User:Frater FiatLux's contribution history.[1] It's very interesting. There is a year hiatus. Look at User:Kephera975's contribution history [2] Almost the same hiatus. User:Kephera975's first edit was in February 2006, about the time the multiple socks that were caught started -- the User:Ekajati/User:999 socks -- and the MO is definitely similar. Here is User:Frater FiatLux talking to User:Kephera975 but it is over a year ago. [3] However, notes from User:Baba Louis (another User:Ekajati/User:999 sock) and User:999 are on the same page. I don't know what to think as one of the things they used to do was post on each other's pages. Regards, Mattisse 00:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what to think. Just idle speculation. I had not been paying attention to JMax555 so I had no ideas regarding him. It is interesting though that JMax555 contacts 999 [4] and User:SynergeticMaggot [5] (who at one point was accused of being a sock puppet of User:999 and who stopped editing at the same time as the sockpuppet ring was caught in February 2007) (this page also contains a posting from User:Hanuman Das (who was tight with 999 -- cross postings and such and who, to me, seemed behind it all). I got very good at looking at patterns in my particular case, but it was ultimately a bureaucrat who stepped in and caught them. The only reason I am even aware of your problem is that the Golden Dawn articles were part of a group of articles on my watchlist that the socks from my situation almost always edited extensively. It was a way of trying to detect new socks. Once the group was caught we had our eyes open for new aliases. We are quite sure that User:Jefferson_Anderson was one, but he bailed out before we could shut him down. So those socks are around somewhere. But this kind of thing can drive you crazy. You have to spend a lot of time in detecting patterns and is it worth it? I think I looked back to the beginning of one of the Golden Dawn articles and found User:999 created it. Go figure. So, what makes sense? I don't know. Regards, Mattisse 14:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lilith

Good edits. Reliable sources are obviously much better than just somebody claiming something on the web somewhere. DreamGuy 14:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rebirthing

I've merged the duplicate and Rebirthing-Breathwork articles. Still think it needs some work as it seems to be composed of lists rather than paragraphs for a lot of it. Anyway, feel free to take a look.:)Merkinsmum 21:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reply- I merged everything in, no content is lost, all the edit history is there in the redirect, I could just rename the other page I suppose. Redundant redirects are easy to delete/or just keep as redirect I think. Anyway- it's all still here so I can be bold:)Merkinsmum 01:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I merged into the R.B one is because it already had the proper name.Merkinsmum 01:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It needs to be at the name people will search (not ones with (duplicate) in the name etc. I think it is at the right page now, and there's a redirect. But I'll ask an admin on their talk page, because I too am unsure lol:)Merkinsmum 01:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi just to say that thought there is a redirect from the duplicate article, all the edit history is still preserved there, nothing has gone and it is compliant with the G-thingy. I merged what little extra content there was in, so Rebirthing-Breathwork is not a lower quality article than the other one or owt.:)Merkinsmum 23:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation

		The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Just wanted to let you know that there are some folks out here that really appreciate your diligence and tenacity keeping the troll-edits at bay on the BKWSU article. Please let me know if you have any advice or need any assistance from me. I can also be emailed via Wikipedia. I have been trying to deal with one issue at a time but the talk page gets covered in trolling quicker than a garden gets covered in Russian vine weed! Bksimonb 06:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A.O.

Hi IPSOS

Just letting you know - I've been swamped with off-wiki stuff, and also some annoying wikihassles unrelated to the fraternal orders topics. I wonder if Wikipedia is getting too big and filling up with problems.

Well, anyway, not to go off on that stuff... I've been reading the King book and will post some info soon. It's pretty interesting, but his timeline is unclear.

What he does say though is that A.O. is not a "new" order, it was Mathers' new name for the Outer Order, replacing the name "Golden Dawn", at least for his lineage.

One thing that is sure, King never mentions the prefix of Rosecrucian Order of A.O., it always was just Alpha et Omega.

I'll post some text when I can find a short quote - his writing is wordy so it's hard to pick out a good summary. --Parsifal _Hello 09:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article which might benefit from the Ippy touch

If you feel like it at any point, wave your Ippy wand at Unicursal_hexagram, just have a feeling you could easily clean it up/make it better.:)Merkinsmum 12:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts

Please avoid getting into any unnecessary revert wars with User:Watchtower Sentinel -- I notice both of you have had repeated problems with each other, recently, frequently reverting each other's talk pages and such, and I'm not convinced that this is productive or likely to resolve anything. In the future, I'd recommend reporting such incidents to the admin noticeboards, instead, if they are truly that urgent. In particular, if you revert his talk page again, at any point in the immediate future, I'm going to have to block you. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What was that advice you gave me a little while age about overreacting? And you were right! Why should we let someone else control our behavior with their remarks, however rude or wrongful? Sincerely, Mattisse 17:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lay out matter

Please respond first before you change things - Mdd 01:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can take soem time to talk about it instead of changing all the articles I'm working on. I have been doing some comparing featured articles and I've seen that you are probably right.

But I have also seen that what I call "literature" is mostly called "Further reading". So instead of making all these hal corrections, let's first talk about it. - Mdd 01:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 93: / Line 93: @@
 But I have also seen that what I call "literature" is mostly called "Further reading". So instead of making all these hal corrections, let's first talk about it. - [[User:Mdd|Mdd]] 01:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
-== Use of Language ==
-Ever since you lowered yourself to use language as you did to me, you have lost my respect.
-If you want to appear even handed, apply your observations to all contributors.
-I asked you the direct questions of what knowledge you had and how much of the literature you had read. The answer appears to be none. As such, I apply the same observation as I did to Renee. You really have no grounds by which to judge bias.
-I find your tone pedantic and overbearing and see other contributors note the same tendancy as you wave about your wiki weapons. We will have to agree to disagree.
-If you wish to become informed, then I suggest you start by reading John Walliss's book. Once you have, then please come back and contribute from an informed point of view. [[User:Faithinhumanity|Faithinhumanity]] 18:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:IPSOS: Difference between revisions