Jump to content

User talk:Eagles247

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.230.118.58 (talk) at 03:43, 4 October 2011 (→‎Requesting help). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to Eagles 24/7's Talk Page!

Please add your comments at the bottom of this page. If I leave you a message on your talk page and you reply there, please do not leave a {{talkback}} template on this page, because there is a good chance that I have watchlisted your talk page. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C)

Mike Sholars

The AfD notice on the Mike Sholars article isn't linking to the AfD discussion. Can you take a look and fix that? Thanks. Cbl62 (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How's that? Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Mike Sholars

Sir.

Your comment regarding Greg Sholars is False... He is an EIGHT TIME NCAA DIV. I ALL-AMERICAN Sprinter for TCU, He is Also a 4 Time NCAA Div. I National Champion and a member of TCU´s Hall of Fame. This is CLEARLY STATED in the No. 10 Reference, as are All other Facts in the Article Supported by Viable References — Preceding unsigned comment added by EuroNews (talk • contribs) 01:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

However, it is not stated that Greg is Mike's brother, which is why it was removed. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sir

the reference of which are listed are to prove the Notability of Greg Sholars ALSO.... Whether or not they are Brothers, has never been disputed — Preceding unsigned comment added by EuroNews (talk • contribs) 02:04, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We need a reference that states the two are brothers, but you have to remember that the article is about Mike, and Greg's notability is not in dispute right now. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Hi. I still wish ot run for admin. Thanks. I seem to notice many pages being spammed and abused. At times, I wish I can lock the pages, instead of having to bother an admin to do so.

--Hacker1 (talk) 13:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]

One-day retirement contracts

Eagles, what's the policy of including these one-day retirement contracts in the infobox: [1] and [2]? Although it strikes me as infobox clutter, I really don't have a strong opinion about it one way or the other. I would like to be consistent from one player to another, however. Thoughts? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The contracts they sign are for ceremonial purposes only and have no real monetary value, so I wouldn't include them in the infoboxes. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

request

Can you undelete Darryl Gamble and Bryan Walters? Per Kevin Acee on twitter, both made the team.--Giants27(T|C) 21:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Can you do the same for Kellen Heard?--Giants27(T|C) 23:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
and Eric Hagg?--Yankees10 01:44, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done and  Done. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
David Caldwell and Terrence Johnson as well, if you could.--Giants27(T|C) 04:12, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:21, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Chris Neild? I had a feeling these AfDs were pre-mature...--Giants27(T|C) 04:40, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Undoubtedly. Horrible timing by Vanadus. Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:42, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Practice Squad

You fixed the count, but now the practice squads are not showing up. This is why I hate the new format. So many problems that the old one didn't have, and the old one was easier to use as well. RevanFan (talk) 17:43, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remedial

It's a word, haha. Probably didn't fit there nonetheless, but it's neither vandalism nor non-English. Haha,--Giants27(T|C) 03:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I meant non-English grammar-wise, and I couldn't find an appropriate use of "remedials" there. I'm gonna go with failed vandalism. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:25, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help? Thanks.

You helped me out often, and I thought you wouldnt mind helping again. Is User:DarkestWolfSoul a violation of:

"Promotional usernames are used to promote a group, company, product or website on Wikipedia."

-taken from Wikipedia:Username Policy.

The user page explains why I think it is. mysterytrey (talk) 01:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are correct. I have blocked the user and deleted his/her userpage. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:32, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New York Giants roster

What's your take on the disagreement between me and Ositadinma over the Giants template? What I did is what we've been doing for two years now, and he's reverting me. We've had this disagreement before, and I remember someone changing it to my edit, but I want to see your opinion now. Thanks. RevanFan (talk) 19:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No need for comment, disagreement has been resolved. Thanks. Ositadinma 19:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure NFL rules would even pertain for players on injured reserve. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Reform update

Hi. It's been a little while since the last message on RfA reform, and there's been a fair amount of slow but steady progress. However, there is currently a flurry of activity due to some conversations on Jimbo's talk page.

I think we're very close to putting an idea or two forward before the community and there are at least two newer ones in the pipeline. So if you have a moment:

Thanks for reading and for any comments that you've now made.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 21:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]

WP:HOUND

Eagles 247, I'm noticing a lot of WP:HOUND coming from you and I am thankful for the helpfulness on my user page but could you please stop "stalking" all my edits. I can edit my own userpage and I don't mean to come off as rude I would just like to stop being so closely watched. TRLIJC19 (talk) 03:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how I've violated WP:HOUND in any way. I noticed that you used the wrong service awards on your userpage and I removed them. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:08, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But as when I was blocked you had to comment. You tend to revert my edits. Perhaps a misunderstanding on my part.TRLIJC19 (talk) 03:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage is on my watchlist, that's all. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for fixing up my userpage. It shows my opinions and helps me quickly give a warning to a vandal.--1966batfan (talk) 02:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and your last statement is clearly untrue. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:06, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It appeared as it was on the userapge when I warned a vandal. Make so I can copy it and instanly warn a vandal.--1966batfan (talk) 03:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently {{uw-cluebotwarning1}} is not a template that can be used by non-Cluebots. I've modified your userpage. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing the templates. Actually, the stuff I said about Philadelphia sports teams is not as bad as I would say about Boston sports teams. (I prefer the Yankees and Jets over the Mets and Giants) (AL and AFC are better than NL and NFC.)--1966batfan (talk) 21:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, then. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3 reverts and new User:Holtmf

Hi there, What do you think about blocking or at least strong warning new User:Holtmf? He has violated WP:3RR, along with the IP 71.80.94.43 which added the biased content yesterday that he is so vociferously defending. Thoughts?--TM 23:41, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've given him a warning, and I don't think a block is necessary yet. He's a new user who just doesn't know the rules around here at the moment. I'm willing to assume good faith right now. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:44, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Holtmf here: I did not add the biased content in the Alshon intro blurb. Check the logs. But whatever, I'm not here to vandalize your precious encyclopedia. I'm just trying to give credit where credit is due. I could use some feedback on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devin_Taylor since I wrote that whole thing myself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holtmf (talk • contribs)

You may not have originally added the bias, but you kept restoring it when it was removed. In regards to the Devin Taylor article, please be careful about paraphrasing too close to the source. Besides that, it looks good. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alshon Jeffery

OK I'm new to Wikipedia editing, obviously, but I really don't agree with your removal of my 2011 section.

Calling my reference "unpublished synthesis" (i.e. Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources. This would be a synthesis of published material to advance a new position, which is original research. "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published the same argument in relation to the topic of the article.) is a lawyer's trick, semantic, rhetorical, hair-splitting.

Those 3 sources showed 24 consecutive games in which Alshon had a reception. So my "conclusion C" in this case is that 9+14+1=24. I don't think I need a reliable source to publish the fact that 9+14+1=24. If you would like an easier math problem, I could refer you to his official player bio, which said at the beginning of the season "has at least one reception in 23 straight games..." You just have to add 1 (ECU) to 23 to get 24. This kind of nitpicky BS is why I am reluctant to contribute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holtmf (talk • contribs) 23:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the SC bio would be a better source for that, but your using three of his season game logs to reach a conclusion is a direct violation of WP:SYNTH. Saying he had a "characteristic performance" is original research as well. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:01, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK I'll watch my language, and I can leave the receptions streak off since publishing it would jinx it anyway, but as far as paraphrasing, there's only so much you can do when you're trying to relay succinctly a list of sports stats. Thanks for the feedback and patienceHoltmf (talk) 00:10, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, agreed. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:40, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Roster navbox

For the Cowboys roster navbox, do you think it would be alright to put rookies in italics? RevanFan (talk) 04:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say no for the same reason we don't include positions. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the fixes. GB fan please review my editing 23:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, good luck! Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Porchcorpter Edit Filter manager request

Hi Eagles. Porchcorpter has requested edit filter rights, and I have declined the request. I believe it is far too soon after the expiration of his topic ban to be requesting advanced permissions, but I told him that if there is consensus on his talk page to re-open the request for wider review, I would do so. Your input there is welcome. Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 03:57, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll defer to Worm's judgment on this one. Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Vick

Is Michael Vick in his ninth season or his tenth season because NFL.com say ten even though he played 6 years with the Falcons and 3 with the Eagles? WayneSlam 21:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta be a mistake at NFL.com. The "career stats" only lists nine seasons, including the current one. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:04, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TRLIJC19

Can you have a look at TRLIJC19 again, looks like he is continuing his battle over "head" vs "chief" at Grey's Anatomy related pages. Mtking (edits) 22:45, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. I've blocked him for one week. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:57, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe he is after an entry in Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars ? Mtking (edits) 23:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hah, could be. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:20, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

Sorry about that it was for school.

Sorry for changing that. In school we were told to edit any Wikipedia page and then post it on out class site so he could see what we did. He was showing us how easy it is to edit information and see how quickly it is changing back. I was told to change it again and see how long it took someone to change it back again. Again sorry for any inconvience it was all for school and grade. I was only doing it the one time and one time only for school. Sincerly Chance93— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chance93 (talk • contribs)

SPI on an IP whose unblock you declined

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/FaheyUSMC. You declined to unblock 76.31.236.91 (talk · contribs) and I believe you were correct. Toddst1 (talk) 06:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I am fully confident that the IP is FaheyUSMC based on behavioral evidence, but DF67 gave him a second chance. I won't be wheel-warring DF67's decision to unblock, and whatever the community decides is the best way to go about this. Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:47, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Page

You previously deleted an RfA page I created. I'd like to request that it be restored. Thank you. Lambanog (talk) 11:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Are you sure? Your block expired only recently, and you'll most likely meet with much opposition if Eagles did restore your RfA. If I were you, I'd give it more time, a year perhaps, before trying for adminship, since recent blocks and RfAs never go well together. Regards, The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 15:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your concern and thoughtfulness, but there is no time like the present. An RfA will clarify certain things for me regarding Wikipedia and what my relationship to it should be. I am willing to contribute to Wikipedia currently. The block record will still be there a year hence; whether I will be able to contribute as I have been doing so in the future is less clear. I dislike a muddle; best to iron things out now if possible. Thanks again. Lambanog (talk) 16:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have you given thought to an editor review? With an editor review, you will receive a thorough review of your edits without all the drama that an RfA causes. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 16:07, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

question for you

Does File:Tallest CB ever.jpg look like a copyvio to you? It was uploaded by Lwalls (talk · contribs) over on commons and the user may or may not actually be Lenny Walls. But nonetheless, the copyright has obviously not expired and it's not a public domain, so it looks like a BS license. Now, I don't know enough about images and can't find the image online, so I have no idea if it's deletable or not, which is why I'm bringing this up to you, haha.--Giants27(T|C) 00:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing comes up in a Google Images search, so the uploader probably owns the rights to the image. However, as you said, the licensing is wrong, so I've nominated it for speedy deletion at Commons. Not much else we can do, the uploader needs to specify what he licenses it as. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ARS

It is my claim that in the public domain there is readily available content about him apart from the event. That clearly falls within ARS domain.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where does his notability come from? His career as a pastor or his NFL career in which he never played a game? You can't just assume there is notability somewhere after finding nothing elsewhere. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is to be argued at the AFD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Wheel_warring_by_DragonflySixtyseven. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep an eye on it. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Can you undone your action of delete my article talk page, Nguyễn Xuân Minh (wikipedian)? I'm still discussing with the admin who deleted that article. When we're done my article will either recover or permanent delete then you can delete the talk page after that.Trongphu (talk) 00:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk pages without corresponding articles are to be deleted per WP:G8. The admin with whom you are discussing the article can view the contents of the talk page, thus I see no need to restore the talk page. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:55, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Rice

Hi, I'm the one who added Jerry Rice's new videogame to his article, in the Media Work section. I wanted to find out why it was removed, and how I can make a proper addition to that page. The release of the first game featuring Jerry in its cover, title, and in the game itself seems at least as noteworthy a fact as his participation in Zaxby's TV ads. Was my format inappropriate, or should I have passed the content through an official Wikipedia editor? I'm a huge Wikipedia reader, but this is my first attempt to contribute, so I'm not familiar with the process.

I am an employee (software engineer) of Judobaby, maker of the game, but both the game and Jerry's participation in it are legitimate. It's available from Amazon and EBGames. You may contact me thru <redacted> . Thanks.

Paul Kwinn 71.146.208.214 (talk) 18:14, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul. I removed your addition as it was not written from a neutral point of view and appeared to be promotional, especially the line: "The game is designed to appeal to players of all ages, both football fans and dog lovers." Besides the POV of the addition, you have a conflict of interest and it is recommended that you refrain from editing articles related to your company. However, I will help you out and add the video game to Rice's article. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Yeah, I'd wondered about that line. For future reference, is there an accepted protocol for those who could be considered to have a conflict of interest to submit information for Wikipedia consideration? Some editorial channel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.208.214 (talk) 17:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is an essay which you might find useful (here), but basically it is best to suggest changes/additions on the talk page of an article that you have a conflict of interest with. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Thanks again for the help. --Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.208.214 (talk) 18:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk Page

Eagles 24/7, the edit I made was extremely minor. I don't like abbreviations on my talk page so I changed one tiny thing. It does not change the meaning of what he wrote at all and it still directs to the same place. He wrote "WP:3RR" and I changed it to "three revert rule". They mean the exact same thing. I just didn't like the abbrev. on my talk page. I could understand your concern had I been changing the meaning of what a user was saying but they mean the exact same thing. "WP:3RR" is term for "Wikipedia three revert rule. Which is what I changed it to. Not to mention it's my user page so I can customize it to look as I please as long as I'm not changing a user's meaning in any way, which I'm not. Like I said, I could understand if it was a significant change but this is simply unnecessary. TRLIJC19 (talk) 21:39, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:TPO and don't do it again. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are acting as though I'm completely changing his meaning, it means the exact same thing. Please acknowledge that. TRLIJC19 (talk) 21:44, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So by your logic, I can remove your entire comment above and just write "It was a minor edit. I didn't change the meaning. --TRLIJC19" I didn't change the meaning, right? But seriously, please read the guideline I linked above, it states you cannot refactor comments as you did. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's completely different. I didn't say I was going to erase his whole post and summarize it. I was making the abbreviation the full meaning. User meant exactly what I changed it to, he just abbreviated it. TRLIJC19 (talk) 22:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look, there's no discussion here. Your refactoring is not one of the exemptions listed at WP:TPO and I expect you to refrain from doing so in the future. This should have been done in the first place and only Mtking is able to determine whether your refactoring is appropriate or not, as s/he's the one who wrote it. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, I'm a user and you're an admin. I should know my place right? TRLIJC19 (talk) 22:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC) Just kidding. I was quoting Grey's Anatomy. But I see your points. TRLIJC19 (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Akwasi Owusu-Ansah

I explained my edit in the edit summary. I contacted a Dallas beat writer to see if he is still at WR, or if they moved him back to safety. I'll update the roster template if anything changes. RevanFan (talk) 16:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should I be concerned?

Apparently you and User:Bigblue535658 have recently had debates on edits at an article or two recently. I've received this talk page edit from that user requesting help. I'm concerned that this is an attempt to canvass on their part. Should I be, and what if anything should I do? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 16:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bigblue535658 clearly canvassed you IMO, but I'll assume good faith and say he just didn't know about Wikipedia's policies against such attempts. If you are interested in participating in some of the discussions, I don't feel that you're a biased party and you can objectively make your own decision. It's up to you, but you have my permission (if that's what you were going for). Eagles 24/7 (C) 17:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1990 Consensus All-American template

Thanks for creating the 1990 template promptly. You inspired me to create the 1991 template, which was fun to do since I was a Michigan student during Desmond Howard's Heisman Trophy season.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:01, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 September newsletter

We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions), Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) and Australia Sp33dyphil (submissions), all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 12:33, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting help

Hello Eagles. Once again, I request your assistance. User:Mystylplx is sockpuppeting on and vandalising the Ralph Nader presidential campaign, 2000 article. Here he talks with himself again to create the appearance of a consensus, as User:Mystylplx and IP 207.158.4.64:

(cur | prev) 17:31, 2 October 2011 Mystylplx (talk | contribs) (2,335 bytes) (undo) (cur | prev) 17:12, 2 October 2011 207.158.4.64 (talk) (2,103 bytes) (→Third Party Voting Controversy) (undo)

And where he repeatedly deletes sourced material:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2000&diff=453454733&oldid=453432527


I'm tired of this repeat offender. Please assist.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.147.237 (talk) 19:39, 3 October 2011 (UTC) ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________[reply]

I am supplying additional links which may be helpful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/207.158.35.55 

   01:06, 15 June 2011 (diff | hist) Talk:Music therapy ‎ (→Giving Wikipedia a bad name)
   01:00, 15 June 2011 (diff | hist) Happy Hairston ‎ (Hap!)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/209.216.228.53 

   00:39, 20 June 2011 (diff | hist) Matt Gonzalez ‎ (correction)
   00:38, 20 June 2011 (diff | hist) Matt Gonzalez ‎ (→On the board: edits)
   00:36, 20 June 2011 (diff | hist) Happy Hairston ‎ (Hap!)
   00:35, 20 June 2011 (diff | hist) Hermann Oberth ‎ (Oberth!)
   00:34, 20 June 2011 (diff | hist) Dayton, Ohio ‎ (punctuation!)


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=SCFilm29 

   23:57, 21 June 2010 (diff | hist) Happy Hairston ‎ (Hap!)


Of course, in each case we see the odd " Happy Hairston ‎ (Hap!)" edit. Also, the "On the board" edit to the article on Matt Gonzalez "happens" to involve "Wikipedia Idiots" and the author, while "Talk:Music therapy" is directed at the sister of the author. The same IP visited the web site of the author's sister just one day prior to this edit, searching two pages listing the sister's appearance on radio regarding music therapy. Also, take special note of the IP addresses for each. SCFilm uses 71-, i.e., home IP for "Griot," while 207- is the self-confessed "public" IP for "Mystylplx," which appears to have been done repeatedly:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eagles247&diff=prev&oldid=402117332

From the Ralph Nader talk page: 

       IP 207.231.4.168, are you Mystylplx? 99.59.98.198 (talk) 09:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

       Yes. That is me. Mystylplx (talk) 10:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Like his denial of knowing "Griot," amazing under the circumstances, considering the Happy Hairston ‎ (Hap!) edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eagles247&diff=prev&oldid=402499673


Certainly, one cannot reasonably deny these strikingly odd and obscure identical edits.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.147.237 (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I'm copying this over to ANI for input from other admins. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Eagles. I have more information, including evidence of cyberharassment and cyberstalking on other web sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.147.237 (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to share it, if you wish. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are you User:Telogen? Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:53, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am not this person. Here is more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/207.158.35.55

Same strange edit notes as Griot's banned handle "SCFilm29." Edits Talk:Music Therapy 6/15 after visit to "Wikipedia Idiots" author's sister company web pages 6/14, same 207- IP. Pages list sister's involvement with Music4Life music therapy program. Goes to "Wikipedia Idiots article, posts weird poetry about article author.

Same 207- IP posts to a website called "The Nervous Breakdown" regarding the author's sister. Makes repeated visits to related web sites. Posts on WikiAnswers.

More on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Mystylplx http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=SCFilm29


Handles for "Griot," i.e., "Mystylplx" and "SCFilm29," both into same "conspiracy"-related articles, particularly Chemtrail and 911. User began in conjunction with appearance by "Wikipedia Idiots" author's sister and is, again, mocking, as per:

http://www.sanderhicks.com/truthstock.html


The relation of these handles, i.e., "Griot" and "Mystylplx," per the Wikipedia web site, is particularly with the Ralph Nader-related articles. "Mystylplx" aggressively holds the same position on the Ralph Nader and related articles as Griot, and was "praised" by a handle from Griot's IP that you banned, i.e., SCFilm29. Griot frequently wrote to himself on his SP discussion pages. More specifically, Mystylplx aggressively holds the exact same position on a quote from the Atlantic Monthly regarding Ralph Nader, and the source of activity for which the user was banned:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Griot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SCFilm29#Blocked_indefinitely http://www.sfweekly.com/2008-02-13/news/wikipedia-idiots-the-edit-wars-of-san-francisco/


Julie Dash is directing a movie written by the sister of the author of "Wikipedia Idiots." Both handles make dubious edits to the Julie Dash Wikipedia article, such as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Julie_Dash&diff=431921760&oldid=416768904 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julie_Dash&diff=414811273&oldid=414173793


Both IPs have vandalized the Julie Dash article and the IMDb pages related to Julie Dash and the author's sister. Both IPs have hit several websites related to "Wikipedia Idiots" author, including the article page and company web site pages of the author's sister. Mystylplx claims not to have known anything about Griot, yet he has for years visited the aforementioned web sites relating to Griot and the indiviudals he stalks, namely, the Spicuzzas and those related to them. Then falsely claims he doesn't know anything about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ralph_Nader&diff=443741186&oldid=443739887


The IP 207- use of Latin on the Ralph Nader 2000 article talk page, it is meant to mock my use of Latin.

There is more, but too much to go through and post here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.147.237 (talk) 21:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 99.88.147.237 (talk) 21:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information, but all I can determine from your evidence so far is that Griot is probably the 207-IPs. However, unless you have clear diffs that show Mystylplx is Griot behaviorally, I can't truly agree that the two are the same, although the evidence is almost compelling enough. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And you have Mystylplx admitting he is 207- IP, too. And that Griot is SCFilm, and SCFilm and Mystylplx edits same articles with same weird edits. It will take a little time to search the specific edits, but I know which articles to go with. Thank you. 99.88.147.237 (talk) 22:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I "Geolocated" all of the IPs you named, and they are all from different cities in California (including yours). If Mystylplx's declared IP address matched any of Griot's locations, I'd have blocked him by now. However, this is not the case, and we need more evidence. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. This user uses anonymous proxies a lot, 207- 209- 198- 71- etc., so that may explain the city-jumping. I can get to work searching the diffs, may take awhile. But this may do it, too, Mystylplx admits that he is IP 207- here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ralph_Nader&diff=402121722&oldid=401752004 Thanks very much 99.88.147.237 (talk) 22:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime, in addition to my locating the matching Griot diffs, you've got Mystylplx on vandalism and sockpuppetry per his recent edits to the Ralph Nader 2000 article and talk page. He did this before, in December 2010, on the Ralph Nader article and talk page. Same behaviour, 207- IPs. He pretends to be different people. Btw, this is Griot behaviour, too. 99.88.147.237 (talk) 22:56, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Griot diffs only prove that Griot = Griot, not Griot = Mystylplx. We need matching diffs that show Griot = Mystylplx. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me, I meant Griot and Mystylplx diffs. In summary, let's look at a logical proof: 1. Griot is SCFilm. 2. SCFilm has identical diffs with 207- IPs. 3. Mystylplx admits he is 207- IPs. :/ Griot is Mystyplx. Now, behaviourally, Griot talks with himself. Mystylplx talks with himself. Griot holds same position on all Ralph Nader-related articles as Mystlplyx. Same POV-pushing. Use of term "whitewashing" and "accurate quote". I can go through one by one contributions. As far as I am concerned, however, the evidence is overwhelming and proof through logic is already established. Furthermore, since Mystyplx admits he is 207- IPs, and he is pretending to be two separate people to create an illusion of consensus on Ralph Nader 2000 article at present, he is sockpuppeting. And he is repeatedly removing sourced content, which is vandalism. Would you like to start a report for that while I search for more re: Mystylplx/Griot? 99.88.147.237 (talk) 23:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mystylplx admitted that he was an IP which had 207 as the starting three digits, but does not match up to the other 207 IPs. There are many 207 IPs out there. I'm not seeing it with the type of evidence we have. The IP who wrote messages in several edit summaries is the best piece of evidence IMO. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. So the next step is, check the recent 207- IP on the Ralph Nader 2000 article and Mystyplx with CheckUser? Also, I would be searching the Griot and Mystylplx diffs. Some additonal IPs used: 207.67.148.250, 207.158.4.91. 99.88.147.237 (talk) 00:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that CheckUser cannot connect registered accounts to IP addresses per Wikipedia:CHECKUSER#CheckUser_and_privacy_policy. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:44, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. So he protects himself, then. What are our options from here? 99.88.147.237 (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think I see one method of approach. Start with diffs similarities of the 207- IPs, which we know to be Griot aka SCFilm, also, Griot, and Mystylplx, and go from there. Example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader&diff=446671529&oldid=446663359

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader&diff=441913934&oldid=441577080

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2000&diff=453553960&oldid=453454733

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2000&diff=437905093&oldid=437905038

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2000&diff=437905038&oldid=437904954

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2000&diff=437904954&oldid=437094319


What do you think? 99.88.147.237 (talk) 01:19, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you understand. We need comparing diffs that show Griot = Mystylplx. We have enough diffs of 207- IPs exhibiting behavior similar to that of Griot, but we need diffs of Mystylplx himself exhibiting that behavior right now. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to use CheckUser on me. I specifically logged out so my IP address will be visible. You also have my permission to look back through the years to see what timespan it was that I had the ip address starting with 207. It's highly unlikely (though not impossible) that there's any overlap with any of the stuff mentioned above. As far as I can see this guy has decided that this Griot person once had an ip address starting with 207, and that because I also once had an IP address starting with 207 that must mean we are the same person. That's the totality of his "evidence." To be honest I'm really getting sick of this persons harassment and edit warring. He lost the consensus on the Ralph Nader article and so is now trying the same thing on the 2000 election article. You want evidence of sockpuppetry? Look back a few months at the Nader article when this user announced he was leaving for a month, suddenly another IP user showed up making absolutely identical edits and arguments and claiming not to be the same person, then that new IP user vanished exactly when this user returned. Coincidence? Not likely. 69.230.118.58 (talk) 03:43, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eagles247&oldid=453828559"