Jump to content

User talk:MuZemike

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.81.36.249 (talk) at 03:40, 27 October 2011 (Undid revision 457599852 by Sjones23 (talk)PERSONAL HARASSMENT). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Dancing House in Prague
Credit: Diego Delso

Subpages: Articles worked on · Good article reviews · GA standards · common.css · common.js

Archives as of the dates listed (250KB or more to load; threads more than 3 days to be archived by bot or earlier upon personal discretion; displayed in order of date of last thread):

2009-04-29 · 2009-10-17 · 2010-01-09 · 2010-04-27 · 2010-08-12 · 2010-11-21 · 2010-03-10 · 2011-08-07 · 2012-01-28 · 2012-09-17 · present

216.6.232.238

216.6.232.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) seems clearly related to 68.62.240.86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). You didn't mark 68.62.240.86 as a proxy (which surprised me as an observer), but this new IP may give some insight as to how an editor from the UAE is editing through geographically diverse IPs.—Kww(talk) 17:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first IP looks like it is an open proxy and hence has been hardblocked. The second IP, however, doesn't seem like it is, given that is coming from a cable ISP. –MuZemike 17:13, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He's a busy boy. Fiddle with the block on 98.98.237.70 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as appropriate.—Kww(talk) 18:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
and 69.34.37.32 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Bouncy, bouncy, bouncy.—Kww(talk) 19:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom election administrators/coordinators

MuZemike, I was reading the main ArbCom election page for 2010 and I see that there are two different positions, "administrator" (which seems to be an "official", "selected" position) and "coordinator" (which seems to be a self-selected position.) I am wondering, is there a "job description" for the coordinator position? Is there a "lead coordinator", or do the coordinators work under the supervision of the administrators? Or what? I guess what I am asking in general is, is there a detailed description somewhere of how all this works and exactly who does what? (And just out of curiosity, I see you were a coordinator last year, but you seem to be steering the boat this time, are you going to be an administrator?) Thanks for the information. Neutron (talk) 03:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was planning to post something on the RFC page shortly with regard to coordinators and election administrators. While we can discuss about the roles of coordinators (which virtually anyone in good standing can volunteer to help out), we will need several (it's been 3 in the past, normally) election administrators who are WMF-identified in which to grant access to the SecurePoll interface. Right now, we can take our time with regards to getting election administrators onboard until we get closer to the voting period or whenever User:Tim Starling asks for them, whichever comes first. –MuZemike 05:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:HeteroUltima

Based on edits to Australia – New Zealand relations, I strongly suspect that HeteroUltima is the same editor as DavidYork71. That might combine two long-term abuse reports.-gadfium 04:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He was on SuperblySpiffingPerson's IP range; now, it's possible that there might be a relation between the two, but given the quite blatant pro-Gaddafi bias in the disruptive page moves on Death of Muammar Gaddafi, it seemed like an easy call to make that this was SSP. In any case, we both agree that this is a sock of someone. –MuZemike 04:57, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You might like to keep an eye on User:Transglobular.-gadfium 05:10, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Astrometre

Just to clarify, the article in question wasn't created by this particular group(?) of user(s?), just heavily edited by two of them (the other two being throwaways for the AfD). - The Bushranger One ping only 06:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation


Hello MuZemike! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.


You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

These accounts look like sockpuppets of User:AtlanticDeep - contributions include hoaxes, nonsense edits to date pages and current events, and addition of incorrect information to the same school articles. Peter E. James (talk) 20:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have much experience on him to tell you, though. Anyone one else here with any knowledge? –MuZemike 20:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marburg72, again, again

Noticed you were the blocking admin. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marburg72/Archive this guy has returned, again, as 71.81.36.249 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). [1], [2], [3]. If he buggers off and leaves me alone, I don't guess it matters, but thats what I thought before he posted the 3rd diff. Thoughts? Heiro 03:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CONSTANT HARASSMENT HEIRONYMOUNS ROWE COPIED MY WEBSITE ON THIER PERSONAL WIKIPEDIA PAGE WITHOUT PERMISSION. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.36.249 (talk) 03:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC) [reply]
Unfound accusation by the IP struck out. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]