User talk:Jéské Couriano/Archive 5

• NOTE: If you leave a message for me here, I will respond to it here.
• NOTE: If you need to ask me a question regarding certain users, be aware that I will look into the history.
• NOTE: I reserve the right to remove any posts by anons unrelated to building an encyclopedia. Personal attacks, vandalism, Internet memes, etc. will be reverted on sight.

Thank you

Thank you for removing User:I think 2 + 2 = 22.'s account. Gh5046 (talk) 02:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I was having trouble because the database got locked. Contact Thatcher. NOW. I'm doing cleanup and can't ask him to ferret out the sleepers. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

That was fast work. I'm impressed. Gh5046 (talk) 02:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I had help from East718. I didn't do all of it - in fact, I kept getting "Database Locked" messages. That twat picked the right time. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Prompting

Waiting for response at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Kender#Conditions. :) BOZ (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Your Issue with me

I agree to hold removing more of Gavin.collins tags until they are done moderating. However, once it is established that he did nothing more then cut and paste a block of tags into every RPG article he could find. I'm going right back to preventing the removal of the hard and honest work people have done. --Cozret (talk) 19:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Replied at AN/I. Please restrict the discussion to there. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

My prot of 169.'s user talk

Is there some reason that it matters? KnightLago (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Full-protection is overkill and keeps non-admins from fixing or updating tags as necessary. Semi-protection keeps away the IP, whom is the intended target, as well as any other anons that would vandalize his user page. Also, there's no evidence that a registered user is posting abusive material on that talk page, making the full-prot seem preemptive. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Good points. I will watch that in the future. Thanks. KnightLago (talk) 20:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Null persp, chummer. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 20:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

jimbo's sockpuppet acct-creation blocking

Have you seen the last note on User_talk:Jimbo's_vandalism_sock_puppet? If that is a shared IP, you may not want to block new account creation. 18.85.46.159 (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have absolutely no way of knowing what the IP is. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Further, his requests were made on the 19th of April. Any autoblock has long expired by now. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 17:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Not autoblocking; blocking new account creation. If you update the current indef block so that new accounts can be created, other people at that library could make their own acounts in order to edit. Having to email someone in order to make small edits tends to drive people away and keep them from editing -- the whole point behind supporting anon edits in the first place. You should probably allow new anon editing from that IP as well, since it wasn't a repeat offense and seems to have been hijinks by a young student. 18.85.46.159 (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)