Jump to content

User talk:Tiptoety: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tiptoety (talk | contribs)
Krawndawg (talk | contribs)
Line 260: Line 260:
::And what if checkuser defines them as the same user?[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 00:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
::And what if checkuser defines them as the same user?[[User:Biophys|Biophys]] ([[User talk:Biophys|talk]]) 00:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Then they would be blocked. [[User:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#4E562C;font-weight:bold">Tiptoety</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#FFDB58">talk</span>]]</sup> 01:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Then they would be blocked. [[User:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#4E562C;font-weight:bold">Tiptoety</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Tiptoety|<span style="color:#FFDB58">talk</span>]]</sup> 01:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
::::The reason I've pretty much stopped contributing to wikipedia is because of Biophys constant attacks, attempts to get me blocked, and stocking/revert warring with me all over the place, in almost every single article I ever contributed to. This isn't the first time he's accused me of sockpuppeting. In fact I've almost come to expect it, which is why I still check his edit history once in a while. I am not the same user as Offliner, I don't know who Offliner is, and I don't plan on getting involved in wikipedia editing again (aside from maybe a few updates here and there) because of the sort of harassment Biophys has put me through since I first began editing. Kind of takes the fun out of it. I mean, what's the point in spending countless hours contributing to this site for free in my few spare hours of the day if it only brings frustration, conflict and continuous paranoia/accusations of bad faith? I can think of a million things I'd rather do, up to and including eating glass. [[User:Krawndawg|Krawndawg]] ([[User talk:Krawndawg|talk]]) 02:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


== Deletion ==
== Deletion ==

Revision as of 02:56, 22 September 2008

9:28 am, 17 October 2024 (PDT)


vn-92This user talk page has been vandalized 92 times.
Wikimood
[purge] [edit]
Archives
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

RfA thank you

Tiptoety, I wish to say thanks for your support in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 82 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to your expectations. I would especially like to thank Rlevse for nominating me and Wizardman for co-nominating me.
                                                  JGHowes talk - 19 August 2008

Help with semi-protection for Memphis, TN

Hello Tiptoety, I hope you are doing alright. On August 15 you lifted the semi-protection from the Memphis, Tennessee article after some months of protection. The article had been vandalized by the same person, adding the same un-notable information about the official songs of Memphis over and over again. Well, a few days after the semi-protection was removed the same exact thing started again. The article was vandalized in this manner nine times since September 1 already, a very persistent person it seems. The vandalism comes from different IPs and there were warnings left on the IP talk page. Furthermore, the topic had been discussed in great length on the Memphis talk page, where the clear outcome was that the material lacks notability and that it should not be added to the article. What can I say, I have tried to have the semi-protection re-instated indefinitely at WP:RPP but the request was declined. It is already getting annoying that someone has to remove that information almost every day now. What can we do or how long do we have to wait to re-apply for semi-protection? I hope that you might have a good idea from your experience as administrator. Thank you very much! doxTxob \ talk 17:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Tiptoety talk 16:15, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tiptoety. Yesterday, I looked at the new user contribs and noticed the edits of the above user and User:Redhearts11. I obviously didn't see any relationship at the time, but when I added the subst:welcome template to Redhearts11 talk page, and right after that, BlueCaper said it was his/her sister. Instead of immediately looking at BlueCaper's account creation log, I responded first, but I realized the close connection. I then went to BlueCaper's Log to see if there is a sock puppet involved — this could be a mistake, but I don't think we should ignore it, especially since BlueCaper was blocked before for creating nonsense pages. User:JP4Jackpot (another new account) then went to the same places that both BlueCaper and Redhearts11 edited (like here). On JP4Jackpot's user page, it says that the three have "relations". I'm not sure at all if any of these are "positive" relations, but nontheless, it looks to me as though we should contact a checkuser. ~ Troy (talk) 18:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend filing at WP:SSP, seeing as I am not really sure if those accounts are being used abusively. Remember it is alright to have more than one account, as long as it is used correctly. Tiptoety talk 16:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 Sept you kindly semi-protected Randomness for 9 months. The magic seems to have worn off already, however, and I can't see why myself — something to do with the intervening page moves on 6 Sept perhaps? Would you mind taking another look? Regards, Qwfp (talk) 18:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, the protection is still there. Tiptoety talk 16:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't when I wrote that, but it is now as User:Jj137 reinstated it then added move=sysop commenting "add move protection, since there have been problems with that", which seems to confirm my suspicion. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 18:41, 14 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]

User:Miyokan and threats of outing

Hi Tiptoety. Could you please give a piece of advice as someone not previously involved in the matter?

Some time ago Miyokan (talk · contribs), with whom we had certain disagreements, decided to to reveal my true identity and advertise it in WP. This resulted in the following warning from Alex Bakharev. The deleted threads are at the talk page of User:Moreschi to whom I complained, because he knows this user well. Unfortunately, this warning apparently had no effect, and this user continued making similar threats here, and here. He is talking about "Georgians" because my real family name sounds as a typical misspelled Georgian name. Hence they want to paint me as an anti-Russian Georgian troll, which I am not.

Please also see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Miyokan. Note that Miyokan and each of his sock puppets accumulated a lot of blocks. "Berkunt" was so good, even checkuser Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Miyokan could not identify that was him. So, I can only wonder who else might be him.

Now he continues to be distractive and comes uninvited to my user page with various accusations. And he is not alone. Some of his friends make uncivil comments like that. So, what do you think? Just looking at you recent comments and actions, I think you are very fair administrator. Of course if you need more information, I can provide it. Thank you.Biophys (talk) 18:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case, last uncivil comment does not mention Piotrus. Pieter is another user, apparently from West Europe.Biophys (talk) 18:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is worse and worse with every minute. I asked one of the users to remove an inflammatory userbox that tells "polonium is a good substitute of sugar", but he inflames anti-national felings and attacks other users (fortunately not me) with phrases like "Russophobes will not be allowed to remove Russian POV from this or any other article." [1]. This is really offensive, especially if other users are Russians like me.Biophys (talk) 21:47, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tiptoety. With regards to "outing" Biophys, I have done no such thing, I specifically asked Biophys permission [2], he didn't give it, so I didn't say anything.
Even after he replied allowing me to show my alleged proof (he said, "What proof?"[3]), I STILL didn't take up his challenge and further asked "so you consent to me showing my proof?"[4]. Alex Bakharev said it is appropriate if there is a convincing reason to do so. Of course I would not mention it for no reason, nor was I even the user that even brought it up there. Other users believed Biophys to be hiding a conflict of interest - I was not even the one who brought up Biophys' "Georgianness", nor even the second. User:DonaldDuck did [5], followed by User:Russavia [6]. "He is talking about "Georgians" because my real family name sounds as a typical misspelled Georgian name." No, it is not this, but I won't reveal it.
With regards to some ad hominem, vilification stuff that Biophys has added, with regards to my previous account, I announced to the whole community when I stopped using User:Ilya1166 and started using User:Miyokan [7]. When I walked away from User:Miyokan to User:Berkunt, I fully admitted I was the same user as soon as asked, I never tried to deny that I was the same user.--Miyokan (talk) 07:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, this is clearly too big for just one measly administrator such as myself to deal with, as such a thread has been started at ANI and hopefully that yields a positive outcome. Tiptoety talk 16:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's Dodgechris

Hi, Tiptoety, me, the real life person of User:Dodgechris has just created an account, this is him (see on the signiature for name), i'm just saying i'm sorry, you were persuing the Dodgechris incident, weren't you? I'm just like to say sorry to you, and please can you forgive me and please don't block this account, all i want is to edit constructively, i love wiki, but if you chose to block me, i'll be sad, but i won't use socks, i'll stay away, maybe i'll just add 1 unblock template, but that's all, if you let me keep this account, i'll edit constructively, and never, ever vandalise, i'll also be civil, avoid spamming and stick with the rules, and i'll say sorry properly to the others i harrassed , can you please send them my apologies. Gabazauls 20:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bye, bye. Tiptoety talk 16:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for a few good editors....

...who are willing to help hack through the labyrinth we call Wikipedia Policy. I've started up a project called Wikipedia:Policy condensing to help address the increasingly problematic instruction creep on the 'pedia. Ideally, this project will work to condense, merge, and in some cases delete the jillions of policies and guidelines into their basic components, so that both new and experienced users only have a few pages to read through if they have a question or concern instead of many. I'm hoping that once this project is through, we'll be able to reduce the number of policy and guideline pages by half while still keeping all the nuances and interpretations clearly available for users to understand. I'm contacting you about this because either you have previously expressed an interest in this, and/or I know I can count on you as a reliable editor who knows their way around the project. I'm not advertising this in the open just yet, as I'm hoping we can get a good foundation started with the few editors I'm contacting now so that when we do make this more public, we've already got a head start to show people what this project can do. So, if you've got the time and are willing, please stop by Wikipedia:Policy condensing and jump right in. If you have any questions, post to the project's talk page or leave me a note - I'll see it quickly either way. As always, thanks for your help. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map for Wales Page

Hi there Tiptoety, I just came across your page and noticed that you seem to be keen to help. If you have the time, would you mind looking at this request please? We are looking to improve the map on the Wales article. The style we have in mind is something like the Monaco or Andorra articles. Sadly, the creator of those maps has a notice on his talk page saying 'No more map requests'. So, I was wondering if you knew where I could go, and/or who I could ask instead. If you don't have the time, would you mind suggesting someone you think may know, please. Many thanks and (Welsh: diolch yn fawr), Daicaregos (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I take it that your lack of response means you don't have the time? Daicaregos (talk) 12:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for checkuser/Case/Footballfanirl

Thanks for the clerical corrections. Aaron carass (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome. Tiptoety talk 22:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please look at this

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:JavierMC_reported_by_User:ProWesternUkrainian_.28Result:_.29

If you have time, would you please take a look at this 3RR report. thanks--«JavierMC»|Talk 00:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reverts were made in an attempt by me to prevent vandalism. I use huggle to patrol page changes and in this case I saw no edit summaries, removal of sourced information, addition of information followed with a "?" as if the veracity was in dispute even by the editor. I issued warnings concerning the edit summary, as well as, the removal of sourced information. All reversals were made in a good faith effort to stop vandalism. --«JavierMC»|Talk 00:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A follow-up

It seems that I am now very popular among Russian users for the lack of "patriotism". A User:Igny you know about just came back from your block and and immediately stated this, which is a bad faith accusation at least. He was soon supported by others. I believe this edit by LokiiT (talk · contribs) is certainly over the top. Although I had absolutely no disputes with Igny, the latter user (LokiiT) was repeatedly coming to my talk page with various accustions he shows in his diffs. I am not sure if these sanctions apply, but something should be done I think. Thank you for consideration.Biophys (talk) 01:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I never make references to blogs. I have provided a link to "La Russophobe" web site (LokiiT is talking about) only from a talk page, because this site provides English translation of an original text published in a different and reliable source.Biophys (talk) 01:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Something should be done alright, just look at my post and tell me there isn't a problem here. And I'm not a "Russian user" so don't accuse me of being some patriot. You've constantly gotten in the way of and often prevented me from improving articles by continually reverting me in different articles and tag teaming with your buddies. It seems anything that isn't anti-Russian doesn't belong in Wikipedia according to you. Enough is enough. LokiiT (talk) 01:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have never reverted you, or even engaged in any form of edit warring with you. I am simply a uninvolved administrator attempting to resolve a long standing dispute between a large group of users. Honestly, I could care less if you are Russian, American, African, or Chinese. What I care about is the fact that you are attacking users, that others are edit warring, and that Wikipedia is being disrupted because of it. I have never interacted with Biophys prior to this incident, and do not care what his WP:POV is in this case, all I care about is insuring that he and everyone else abides by the rules. Tiptoety talk 02:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking to Biophys, sorry for that misunderstanding. I responded to your comment on my own talk page. LokiiT (talk) 02:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, well in that case disregard what I said above. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 02:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for causing this trouble. Next time I will ask another administrator. I asked you only because you were a blocking admin of Igny. At least you can see their attitude. Thanks again, Biophys (talk) 02:07, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Biophys, my comment above (in this thread) was directed at LokiiT, not you (though seeing as his comment was meant for you, mine is now really directed at no one). Please understand that I am happy to look into this issue, and have left LokiiT a short waring. Tiptoety talk 02:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, understood. Thank you.Biophys (talk) 02:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interpretation of the rules

Regarding the notice you put on my page, can you explain something to me. The rule says: Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to Eastern Europe, broadly interpreted) if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia

Where was I repeatedly warned? Where did I repeatedly make personal attacks? I even removed the part that you interpreted as a "personal attack" at my own will prior to the notice. LokiiT (talk) 02:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a warning, that's all, a warning. It is just like the one I left you earlier, except I have linked a relevant RfAr case, meaning that if you continue you will be repeatedly or seriously failing to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, and there for subject to sanctions, understand? Tiptoety talk 02:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, now I have a question too. I have just been warned as well. I feel like I was reprimanded for doing nothing wrong. I have never been uncivil, have I? I understand that I participated in an edit war in an article on a controversial subject, and I was already punished for that by a block. Was that the reason for the "restriction" or "sanction"? If so, why Biophys and others were not warned as well for participating in the same edit wars? (Igny (talk) 03:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

This. Tiptoety talk 03:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So? I still do not understand. I was uncivil or disruptive? Or that edit constituted a personal attack in your opinion? Please explain. (Igny (talk) 03:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Saying that he "whitewash Georgia's images" is a bit of a personal attack. Like I said to LokiiT on his talk page, calling people names does nothing but turn Wikipedia into a battleground. All that message is is a warning, so that you do not end up being sanctioned in the future, that's all. Tiptoety talk 03:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, in my opinion it was just criticism of the work of a fellow editor (actually a whole group of them). I can live with a warning, it did not seem fair, but ok. (Igny (talk) 03:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Please

Could you please close this, because of the 3rd policy paragraph: "III. If the accuser hasn't requested CheckUser for ten days, the report will be closed by an administrator."? Many Thanks--D'Agrò (talk) 12:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But he has, please see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Giovanni Giove. Tiptoety talk 14:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, at least, not concerning my account(of course, because his "evidencies" against me has been proved fakes,see here I don't like to keep in my talk page an accusation proved as fake and where "the accuser hasn't requested CheckUser for ten days". I see two option only: 1) do a CU that can prove that I'm not a sockpuppet 2) close and erase the accusation notice because "the accuser hasn't requested CheckUser for ten days"

BTW, did you consider my request here? Thanks for your time. --D'Agrò (talk) 14:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I removed the message on your talk page. Tiptoety talk 19:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks--D'Agrò (talk) 20:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My userpage....

Umm, About my userpage thingy, what exactly do you want me to do? And why the f*ck is my talkpage always being replaced with muslims rock and other crap? II MusLiM HyBRiD II 20:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoot me an email and I will be happy to provide you with a copy of the deleted material (with the understanding that you will not re-post the info about your age). Also, I have been trying to revert all the sockpuppets that have been vandalizing your page, but no luck. If it gets really page, request your page be protected at WP:RFPP. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 22:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second eyes

Tippy...I'd like another set of eyese to close the loose ends here, so I didn't totally finish all that is needed. I'd appreciate it if you'd look this and all the sublevels over here: Wikipedia:RFCU#Eastbayway. RlevseTalk 21:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will get on it here in a few hours. Tiptoety talk 22:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you pretty much got all of it, with the exception of a few accounts, which I have since taken care of. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 05:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Endless saga

It seems that User:Igny did not learn much. Now he conducts edit warring by removing other users comment at an article talk page. I believe removing or modifying comments by other users is against WP:CIV and some people were blocked for that. But you can see for yourself. I could advise Igny myself, but he probably would not listen.Biophys (talk) 22:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, another gay does not like these comments to be placed to his talk page. But that is understandable. He wanted to tell something, but that was deleted without asking. That is how flame wars are started.Biophys (talk) 22:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this discussion should not be at the article talk page, and Igny right about that. However, the problem is how he does it.Biophys (talk) 22:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see an issue with him moving the discussion to a more appropriate venue, so for that reason I am not going to warn/take administrative actions against him. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 23:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"another gay", I'll take that as a typo ;). There's no problem here bio, I did remove it from my userpage, but responded on the other users page, he didn't want to reply it seems because he deleted it himself as well. Grey Fox (talk) 01:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This endless harassment is getting ridiculous. Biophys, why do you keep bugging admins with your complaints and baseless accusations? (Igny (talk) 21:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for your participation at my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to act in ways that earn your full confidence, even though I don't have it now. Cirt (talk) 01:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Wiki Barnstar

The Golden Wiki Award
For your exceptional contributions in defending wiki from socks, trolls, and vandals, especially at WP:RFCU RlevseTalk 20:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why thank you sir, that is very thoughtful of you! Cheers, Tiptoety talk 20:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tiptoety, long time no see. Listen, User:AtlCrash, in the Kirsten Storms' article, is adding unsourced statements of her "supposed" engagement, I added a hidden note stating to add a source for her "engagement". If you see the history page in the article, you'll see that the user keeps undoing edits and going back to the engagement claim. I was hoping you could talk to him/her about this situation, since the user refuses to stop adding the unverified claim. I'll appreciate your help in this.... A lot. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, maybe the article could use a break from the user. For the future, and stupid question, would it be suitable to report the user to AVI or what? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, AIV is not the correct venue for that (that is for reporting simple vandalism). For issues such as violation of WP:3RR or edit warring you can report those to WP:AN3, for issues with adding unsourced content you can direct those concerns to WP:RSN. Like always, my talk page is open for you to bring it here too. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 00:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks for the know. The reason I asked, is cause I didn't want you to get stressed out by me, you know, coming to your talkpage and telling you about a user who's..... That's why I wondered and wanted to know. Alright, if the user continues, I'll let you know. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI.
Hi Tiptoety;
Please spend more time in order to understand the article Jewish_Internet_Defense_Force
BR« PuTTYSchOOL 19:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

....for the message and vaulable information in it. Cheers!--GökHan 23:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ORE COTW Version 2.2

Hello WikiProject Oregon contributors. It's time for another COTW. Thank you to those who helped improve Kevin Duckworth and the Statesman Journal last week, we received another DYK () for the SJ. This week, by request we have Mr. Ken Kesey and not by request Nike, Inc.. Nike is the only Start class article in the top 30 of those articles selected for the hard copy edition, and it could easily be improved to B class. Once again, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Anderson (MySpace)

I asked that Tom Anderson (MySpace) be re-protected. Unprotecting was worth a try but alas the vandals found it. It's been pretty bad the last week. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Tiptoety talk 04:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Here's hoping that's enough. I'm not optimistic though. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi Tiptoety. I would like to thank you for your support in my RfA and the confidence expressed thereby. It is very much appreciated. :) The RfA was closed as successful with 73 supports, 3 opposes and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank WBOSITG for nominating me. Best wishes and thanks again, —αἰτίας discussion 23:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dels

I've been trying to stick to the low edit count pages. Iliad had 1800 edits -- that doesn't usually lock the server. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My response here Tiptoety talk 04:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you bulk deleting old RFAs? I can see they're all (or seem to be, I haven't checked them all) untranscluded, but unfinished doesn't mean someone wasn't planning to come back at some point. Was this discussed anywhere? – iridescent 15:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I started this project some time back and Tip was helping with it. The discussion was at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/Archive_138#Deleted_RfA and I ran test MFDs here and here to demonstrate that such a task was not controversial. Currently there are about 1500 RFAs that do not have a category placed on them. About half are untranscluded pages from retired/SPA editors and the rest are old RFAs. I am categorizing those that were transcluded and deleting those that were not, from the list and script at User:MBisanz/RFAlist2. MBisanz talk 18:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, no problem; makes sense now. – iridescent 20:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for any confusion I may have caused, Iridescent if you happen to run across a RfA I deleted that you feel should not have been or was not given enough time before deleted please feel free to restore it. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 20:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no confusion at all. Although you've prompted your very own conspiracy theory over at everyone's third-favorite attack site. – iridescent 20:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Gah! This was MY project, that should be a conspiracy thread about ME, yet again Mr. Tip steals my thunder! MBisanz talk 20:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A hilarious WP:DUCK joke

A funny performance takes place at this AfD. This article is about Dmitry Galkovsky known as "A leader of Ducklings movement, a group of several hundreds MMOG players and bloggers, said to aim at planetary domination". The article is vigorously defended by User:DonaldDuck (also a "Duck"). So far, eight users voted to "keep": R l (talk · contribs), Volodymir k (talk · contribs), 69.142.115.39 (talk · contribs), Asolver (talk · contribs), Anton Rau (talk · contribs), Vsevolod makeev (talk · contribs), and 24.82.155.49 (talk · contribs). As you can see, all of them are SPAs. It seems this Galkovsky has a lot of "Ducklings".Biophys (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I currently do not have the time to look into this, but will sometime later tomorrow. Either you can file a WP:SSP report, or you can just wait for me to get around to it. It is up to you. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 20:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. You asked to leave you a "hilarious joke" at your talk page. So, I though this is the one. But maybe I was wrong. "Donald Duck" took my comment at an AfD very seriously and already complains at the BLP. Fortunately, it was not me who nominated this article for deletion.Biophys (talk) 21:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I had a few minutes so I took a look. First off I spoke with a CheckUser who said the results where inconclusive, meaning this is probably more of a case of meatppupetry then sockpuppetry. Either way, I indef blocked all of the SPA accounts and blocked the IP's for 1 week. As for DonaldDuck (talk · contribs) I have left him unblocked seeing as there is really no way to link the other accounts to him, I mean just because the !voted like him does not mean they are him. I have also stricken their !votes from the AfD. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 22:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! That was swift. It is good to know this is not a sockpuppetry at least. Thank you.Biophys (talk) 23:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock for Dstern1

I would like to thank you for unblocking me. I intend to follow the agreement and not edit information about Sarah Palin until after the election. While I cannot think of an example at this time, it is possible that I will have something to add in an article in which she has a remote connection; in which case, I will avoid discussing her. Your wording raised immediate concerns but I am assuming that you did not have ultra-concrete intentions. Again, I appreciate your assistance.--Dstern1 (talk) 02:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Tiptoety talk 02:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unjustified blocks

You have recently blocked indefinitely several users with no other reason besides "suspected meatpuppetry". This is clearly against wikipedia policies and rules. Please unblock the users and restore deletion discussion disrupted by your strikings out.DonaldDuck (talk) 04:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more SPA.Biophys (talk) 15:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, DonaldDuck, your comment about me at the AfD was inappropriate, as I explained here.Biophys (talk) 20:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Death treaths on user pages

I don't know if you have noticed it but User:Kuban kazak has had a death threath on his user page for two days. User:Irpen removed it but now the threath is back again even though without the picture. I don't know if there is a rule against death threaths here but I sure hope so. Närking (talk) 09:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide me some diff's, please? Tiptoety talk 13:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is how the page looked like before Irpen removed it: [8]
But now he instead has put the same text there and a link to the picture instead. Misha that he is waiting for is Mikheil Saakashvili. Närking (talk) 15:19, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A probable sock

I strongly suspect that two Russian users User:Offliner and User:Krawndawg are the same. I asked Offliner, and he replied that he never had any other account, although he is obviously not a newcomer. Although they carefully avoid any common articles, they edit in the same WP:DE style. They talk and behave very similarly, and they edit in the same general areas. I checked their time schedule during the July-September period and found that they do not edit in the same time. Say, O. did not edit during Sept. 2-11, but K. edited during Sept 6-9, and so on. Krawndawg often worked together with User:Miyokan, almost as a team (Moreschi should know him). Should anything be done about it?Biophys (talk) 23:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is far too little of evidence for me to block on, but if you have a concern and legitimately feel that they are in fact the same user, compile some evidence and file a report at WP:SSP. Tiptoety talk 23:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And what if checkuser defines them as the same user?Biophys (talk) 00:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then they would be blocked. Tiptoety talk 01:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I've pretty much stopped contributing to wikipedia is because of Biophys constant attacks, attempts to get me blocked, and stocking/revert warring with me all over the place, in almost every single article I ever contributed to. This isn't the first time he's accused me of sockpuppeting. In fact I've almost come to expect it, which is why I still check his edit history once in a while. I am not the same user as Offliner, I don't know who Offliner is, and I don't plan on getting involved in wikipedia editing again (aside from maybe a few updates here and there) because of the sort of harassment Biophys has put me through since I first began editing. Kind of takes the fun out of it. I mean, what's the point in spending countless hours contributing to this site for free in my few spare hours of the day if it only brings frustration, conflict and continuous paranoia/accusations of bad faith? I can think of a million things I'd rather do, up to and including eating glass. Krawndawg (talk) 02:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Hello Tiptoety! I'm here on behalf of an editor on his/her request to see the deleted text of an article you deleted. The article was this one. He/she contacted me over email (He/she thought I was an admin ;) ) and asked why you had not yet responded to his/her email(I assume you were busy) and why his/her article was deleted.(I should mention it was an extremely polite request) I've already explained some of our policies but it would help if you could provide the deleted text. Thanks--Xp54321 (Hello!Contribs) 01:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please send me here email address via email and I will send her a copy. Tiptoety talk 01:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the quick response. Email in a few minutes...--Xp54321 (Hello!Contribs) 01:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Email sent. Have a nice day.:)--Xp54321 (Hello!Contribs) 01:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop disruption

Stop disruption at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dmitry Galkovsky discussion page. It is strictly prohibited to use blocks in content disputes. None of the users you have blocked is sockpuppet, so your blocks are totally unjustified. Unblock new users and restore their comments on the discussion page.DonaldDuck (talk) 01:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DonaldDuck, all these users are obviously your "meatpuppets" who came here by your request. Look at the last User:Serebr who just voted for Galkovsky [9]. Among his ~20 edits in English WP, a half are votes in various AfD. For example, he voted for
  1. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denial of Soviet occupation (that was deleted, thanks to meatpuppets like him. Sure, there was no Soviet occupation),
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Russian sentiment (this is kept of course - a lot of "anti-Russians" are around here),
  3. Ukrainian-German collaboration during World War II and
  4. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homophobic propaganda- those suppose to be deleted, but not enough meatpuppets came.

Serebr usually tells something like that: "Delete, POV-fork and per User:Ghirlandajo". Do not you see that such "voters" are bad for English wikipedia? So, Tiptoety has every right to block User:Serebr, even though he did not do this yet.Biophys (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, that was wrong answer. You also apparently did not like the warning from FayssalF.Biophys (talk) 04:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biophys (talk) 04:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm writing to Tiptoety, not to you, Biophys.DonaldDuck (talk) 05:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knock, knock

User:Jehochman/joke Jehochman Talk 15:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who's there? Tiptoety talk 22:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]