User talk:Doc9871

Bundy

Hello, Doc9871. You have new messages at DoctorJoeE's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tasteless gloating

Doc, the comment at AN/I that I removed was exactly what the edit summary I used said it was: Tasteless gloating. If you knew the history, you'd know that. I'm removing it again. Kindly refrain from restoring it. Collect and Rklawton exchanged pleasantries with each other earlier about the (to them) appealing prospect of my leaving Wikipedia, and Collect bragged about how many editors he's fought with here who have left. I'm considering adding to that number, and he's trying to help me to do so. He knows perfectly well that I know our BLP policy, and his instructing me in it has been a favorite way of his to goad me. That comment from Jimmy, and the work I put in here to merit that, is one of the things I'm most gratified by in my time here. I don't need Collect's comment to diminish that, and I purposely didn't link to the archive, anyway, since it would be better to keep that less visible than more. It was a hugely contentious issue for Wikipedia, and we don't need links to it. I'm pretty disgusted with this place overall right now. Please don't restore the comment again.  – OhioStandard (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Whatever it is: we cannot remove comments from other editors at AN/I. If we could, it would be a free-for-all. I won't restore it, but I would advise you not to remove comments from others as a matter of policy. We all get frustrated, but we simply can't go around removing what we don't like. Good luck in this one... Doc talk 09:46, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Autopatroller at WP:PERM

Hi Doc9871,

I saw your request at WP:PERM for autopatroller and have granted you the right. You're a trusted user and do great work on the wiki, so if a minor guideline says no, I'm willing to ignore it! :)

Thanks for all your work on the wiki.

Hope this helps,

The Helpful One 23:49, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I really appreciate the kind words, and I certainly won't abuse the priv! Cheers :> Doc talk 23:52, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

FWIW I do not appreciate your open contempt for admin procedure, and it does not demonstrate the trust that is required for any tools. Happy editing! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:23, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

There's no "open contempt": I didn't ask the admin that gave me the priv off-wiki for the right, either. Ask him about it. Admins are humans and are prone to make mistakes like anyone else. I've corrected more than one admin on policy before, and you can believe that. The very second I abuse the privilege which will NEVER happen you can say "I told you so". Happy editing as well to you :> Doc talk 05:21, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

And I'll note this: your only given basis for denying me was, "Sorry, but the general threshold is 50 articles not including redirects. You have only created one article." When you found that another admin had granted me the priv (thus "going against you") you accused me of "open contempt for admin procedure" (just above), that my "contempt for administrator decisions does not demonstrate that he can be trusted with anything" (let alone the privs I already have), that you had "thoroughly reviewed your editing history before making my decision" (not a basis, considering you said you denied me only because I hadn't created enough articles), and that you would bring the admin who granted me the priv before Arbcom for "overriding" you. Get your ducks in a row before you make your case, because I will dig deep and hard if need be. Doc talk 07:02, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

East Talpiot

East Talpiot is NOT in the West Bank. It is west of the 1949 Green Line in what is called No Man's Land. The international community has NOT indicated that any settlements in No Man's Land are illegal. A blind man can see it on a map! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.13.42.240 (talk) 09:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Here's a reliable source that says "The work, in East Talpiot settlement, is aimed at creating a belt around East Jerusalem that would sever it from the rest of the West Bank, the group says." Sever it from the rest of the West Bank. What say you to that? If this is POV pushing, reliable sources such as the BBC will solve that right quickly... Doc talk 09:14, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Screw your courage to the sticking-place. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 09:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

"...Will I with wine and wassail so convince

That memory, the warder of the brain,

Shall be a fume, and the receipt of reason

A limbeck only." ;> Doc talk 10:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

IP Hopping

I have no choice in "IP hopping" as you call it. I work in the NHS and everytime I make an outside connection I'm automatically allocated a different IP within the NHS's N3 range. As I attempted to tell Bouncehopper, I have never vandalised Wikipedia, just because the IP range I use has vandals doesn't mean everyone from that range is. The NHS employs hundreds of thousands of people. There is no requirement for an editor to create an account and login name, so I will continue to edit in this way. --194.176.105.38 (talk) 10:18, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The recent connection between the Proof (2005 film) for so many of the same IPs you use and the fact that it is clearly you who has been reverting Bouncehoper is pretty uncanny. I'll be looking into this, you can trust... Doc talk 10:33, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Look away. In the meantime please read WP:HUMAN, particularly the second paragraph. Perhaps WP:AGF is worth reviewing too. --194.176.105.42 (talk) 10:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Have you yourself ever made an edit to the Proof film? Or were those all other editors that made them before you started reverting Bouncehoper? Doc talk 10:37, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I myself have never edited that article. I'm sure someone using an NHS connection has vandalised the article, but it wasn't me. You need to realise that with the number of employees the NHS has (1.4 million in 2005 according to this article in the Telegraph), that there is likely to be crossover and re-use of the IP addresses. --194.176.105.46 (talk) 10:44, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, and all of the IPs used to revert Bouncehoper are you and not someone else, correct? Doc talk 10:46, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know about any of his other edits, but I've only reverted the ones where Bouncehopper failed to follow MOS:MUSIC#Popular_music by reverting RichardOSmith and then tried to change the MOS without discussion twice[1][2] and seems reluctant to try to start a discussion on changing the existing consensus. I also nominated three of the images Bouncehopper uploaded for deletion as they failed WP:NFCC and have subsequently been deleted. --194.176.105.40 (talk) 10:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Fine. So for this[3] IP, the most recent edit was not you, the next two were you and the remaining ones were not you. Correct? Doc talk 11:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The only one of those I made was the one to Bouncehopper's talk page[4]. --194.176.105.56 (talk) 11:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay: so this[5] edit was you, this[6] edit was not you and this[7] edit was you again. Right? Doc talk 11:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes.--194.176.105.40 (talk) 11:19, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

And the constructive edits to The Twilight Saga (film series) were not made by you, right? Doc talk 11:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

No they weren't. --194.176.105.40 (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Dear Mr./Ms. Anonymous, you never "attempted to tell" me anything [amended, you just did, but you posted this before you did so you still fail] (the name is Bouncehoper, one p, by the way, thanks for paying attention). I understand that there are hundreds of IPs at your place of work, but A. how do we know which edits are actually you and B. really? You're doing this at work? Are your supervisors ok with this?

Not only that, you followed me and got my pictures deleted? Thanks. Really, thanks. I'm so glad I put effort into uploading and linking those when some random vigilante with a grudge on some other issue decides to latch on to my page and destroy my work. Frankly, that's rude. And you may spout that IPs are human all you want-- they are, but when ones with your history edit pages, those of us who have actually registered are wary.

Again, STOP FOLLOWING ME. PLEASE. It's creepy.

Bouncehoper (talk) 11:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The bad edits from these accounts far exceed the good ones, and I'm not at all convinced that this isn't "smoke and mirrors" in a WP:GHBH situation using different IPs. Edits to articles like Methotrexate one minute apart seem more than odd.[8] I'll get back to you guys on this, but it will be later today. Cheers :> Doc talk 11:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Can I suggest you learn how IP addresses work, especially dynamic IP addresses allocated by WANs and ISPs, before deciding all edits from a particular IP must be the same person? 94.14.83.153 (talk) 05:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Now who on earth might you be? I know how disruptive editors use the fact that dynamic IPs are harder to trace to a particular user; but I'm pretty good at figuring out when a disruptive user is using that to their "advantage". Doc talk 05:34, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

And your next edit is to revert Bouncehoper. Hmmm. Total coincidence? Right... Doc talk 05:46, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

um, no I'm the same person. God forbid someone should have access to more than one internet connection. 94.14.83.153 (talk) 06:19, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Well no shit you're the same person. You are hounding this editor, and I will see that it stops because you think by hopping IPs you are somehow getting one over on others. It's an old trick, trust me. Doc talk 06:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

If by "hounding" you mean "ensuring his edits comply with the manual of style" then guilty as charged. I have no control over the "IP hopping" they are allocated dynamically, or are you really that unable to understand? --194.176.105.35 (talk) 14:16, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

The MOS is a guideline. WP:HARASSMENT is a policy. One that you continue to violate. Policy trumps guidelines. Are you able to understand this? Doc talk 14:55, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Once again, thank you very much for the support, Doc. Would I be wrong to report this person for harassment? They appear to be increasingly harassing of me and you.

Bouncehoper (talk) 18:02, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I haven't made any bad edits. So if anyone is being harassed that would be me from you. WP:CIVIL is also policy, you would do well to read it and preferably understand it. 94.14.83.153 (talk) 17:45, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

You should take your own advice then, person. "God forbid someone should have access to more than one internet connection." and "are you really that unable to understand?" Also, if we're talking about policy, again, there is that nice little loophole of 3RR that you have circumvented.

One more thing-when we assume good faith and that one is a human, we do not go after them and blindly revert their other edits simply because we do not agree with the first "offending" edits. You have stepped out of line time and again, and I don't think we'd be incorrect to file a report against your ill treatment of us and this system.

Bouncehoper (talk) 18:02, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Is this a blocked or banned user? If so, report them. If you know who this is make a SPI report. Hey Doc #1 come give details. ;) --CrohnieGal^Talk 19:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

@Bouncehoper - No problem! You would certainly not be out of line to file a report for harassment (specifically WP:HOUND), but by intentionally gaming the system with different IPs this user makes it difficult to block them for any considerable length of time. If this were a registered user they most most likely already have been blocked indefinitely for "personal attacks and harassment". I'll see what I can do...

@Crohnie - Hello! I would not be at all surprised if this were a blocked/banned user. When they reply to my pointing out that policy trumps guidelines with "be civil", this shows a fundamental lack of understanding of our policies: something most blocked/banned users have in common. I told them the frivolousness of filing an AIV report against Bouncehoper but they did it anyway, and it was removed without comment or action by an administrator.[9] I'll keep you updated - BTW did you get my e-mail? Yes, a certain "someone" has returned, but it's not who you might think... Doc talk 23:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Should I file anyways, or wait until they return? Bouncehoper (talk) 03:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I'd wait - they are being watched closely. Please let me know if they follow you to revert you even one more time or otherwise impede your editing: the block will come down swiftly. It's all on the record anyway. Cheers :> Doc talk 03:36, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Doc. Thanks for your work on the ANI thread that BMK started. It is good to know that you and others are on the lookout for this persons nonsense. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 22:16, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Heh - no problem :> I couldn't believe the "cast list" I found on Adventures from the Book of Virtues - this could be a bigger problem than we're even aware of. Cheers :> Doc talk 22:28, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but it's OK

I appreciate your defense of the Frank Buckles page on Malleus's talk page. Don't waste your breath with him, cause he doesn't get it and isn't going to. Thanks though. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

It's certainly true that one of us doesn't get it, and I've no doubt that time will tell which one of us that is. Malleus Fatuorum 05:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Drop the stick Malleus. You shouldn't be judge, jury and executioner of content around here because most are afraid of you. I sure as hell am not. Even when you're told you're respected you shit all over those that don't agree 100% with you. You need to grow up and get off your high horse, not the "children who run this site". Doc talk 05:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't presume to lecture to me. Malleus Fatuorum 05:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

No one can - I know all about it. You're just another editor; don't forget about that. Doc talk 05:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not "judge, jury and executioner" on any article, and I grew up long before you did, if indeed you have, which seems to me to be unlikely. Malleus Fatuorum 05:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

As to Malleus, fortunately not ALL of Wikipedia's very best editors come with such baggage. :-)Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Sadly the overwhelming majority of them can't even write, but such is life. Malleus Fatuorum 05:43, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

• Doc, sorry. Malleus, use one more person attack, I take you to ANI myself. This has been a slow moving pissing match since I posted on your talk page at 20:38 UTC. That's 5 freakin' hours ago. You have insulted everyone who has come by, went to other's talk pages to do so as well. Take your insults and your ball and go home before I find a nice admin to make you go home. Geddit? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:42, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
  • If you fancy your chances at ANI then go for it. Remember though that it sometimes boomerangs. Malleus Fatuorum 05:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
    • That's a losing battle. If Malleus could simply put himself in the place of others without deriding them he'd be an almost perfect editor. He will resort to the very childishness he accuses others of, and it's very unfortunate. I see right through it. Sorry I challenged his authority, but not really. We all need a reality check from time to time, as it's what keeps us human. Doc talk 05:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
      • I thought we were going to ANI, not more personal comments? Malleus Fatuorum 05:48, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
        • You can initiate an AN/I thread if you'd like Malleus. I'm a gambling man, and I know that filing one against you is a losing bet. I wouldn't do it anyway, and I never wanted to, as it's neither productive nor likely to change a thing. Just try to take criticism in stride, huh? You're a man, not a god. Doc talk 05:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
          • (edit conflict) You're a joker, but perhaps your mate NH feels luckier. Malleus Fatuorum 05:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
            • I'll take that as a compliment. I may be a joker, but I'm not a joke. Cheers, Malleus, NH and AYW! Articles are in need of editing, and enough time has been wasted on this... Doc talk 06:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
          • Good point Doc. G'bye Malleus, I can say one thing, it has been a hilarious 5 hours with you. We gotta do it again sometime, I have really enjoyed the laughs from you. Much appreciated. Doc, you have a good night. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

No open secret

If you think someone I blocked is still editing, let me know the basics: who I blocked, and what other account or IP you think is him. I enforce my blocks pretty rigorously, but I don't always notice, and I can't monitor everything.—Kww(talk) 08:39, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

It's freakin' Jack Merridew editing from 125.162.150.88 (talk · contribs). Doc talk 08:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)