Jump to content

User talk:Alison

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.189.111.2 (talk) at 23:21, 18 April 2013 (→‎Brittany Griner). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives
2004 Entire year  
2005 Jan • Jun Jul • Dec
2006 Jan • Jun Jul • Dec
2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 Jan • Jun Jul • Sep Oct Nov Dec
2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 Entire year  
2013 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2014 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep • Dec  
2015 Entire year  
2016 Entire year  
2017 Entire year  
2018 Entire year  
2019 Entire year  
2020 Entire year  
2021 Entire year  
2022 Entire year  
2023 Entire year  
2024 Entire year  

Re: Email

I don't know what's going on. Hoping that you're not thinking I'm Colton Cosmic? I wonder if it might be a restaurant IP address? I was at a Burger King some hours ago when I made those edits, and the only other time that I've visited Burger King recently (perhaps all year?) was around 16:59 on the 30th of March. I don't mind saying that I normally have a static IP address from Comcast; every edit in the history of Special:Contributions/98.223.199.119 was made by me, as you can see especially easily if you look at the next few edits after the ones it made to WP:AN in February. Sorry to keep piling on the comments, but...overall this makes a lot more sense. I download my Gmail with Windows Mail, and I had a bad connection a few nights ago; that must be responsible for what made the system think I had a hacker. It also explains why the IP's most recent edit is to Bedford, Indiana — I wonder if the address has been with Burger Kings in the area for a while, since Bedford is less than half an hour's drive away from where I am currently. Nyttend (talk) 07:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Let's take this to email - Alison ❤ 18:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage lock's message

Hi Alison, I think I would like to inform you out of courtesy that I have changed the lock message from "...semi-protected from editing" to "...fully-protected from editing". The lock is the one at the topicons. Cheers. :) Arctic Kangaroo 14:48, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TB

Hello, Alison. You have new messages at Talk:FEMEN#While_in_France_FEMEN_key_activist_Inna_Shevchenko_had_bought_shoes_for_.E2.82.AC800....
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 13:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Child protection policy

I can give you a lot of reasons for why your alteration of the policy would be a serious problem. Personally, I think that page shouldn't even be subject to bold changes as the potential consequences are severe since it is such a solid policy page with such strict enforcement. Explicit allowance for off-wiki evidence of any comment that could be construed as advocacy just creates an opening for abuse. To say nothing of joe jobs, it would be easy enough for someone to take an innocent comment or two out of context. Keeping the review of such evidence to a very small number of careful deliberators as is currently expected would minimize the potential harm, but if it involves public spectacles like those that have been gracing Jimbo's page then you create the very serious risk of people being maliciously defamed and blocked indefinitely for false or dubious charges.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 23:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for this. Here's the updated list of his socks & blocks over the past day (that we know of): 99.104.185.17 (primary account), 200.233.70.48, 64.75.159.129, 196.12.59.12, 202.88.225.150, 46.209.250.1. Have a nice week. :) --76.189.111.2 (talk) 06:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the report! These are all open proxies, from what I can see, and they all trace back to the one IP address that a particular anon editor is using. This is actually unrelate to the IP I blocked (different case), but nonetheless, all the above are the same IP editor. Thanks again :) - Alison ❤ 06:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome. :) I'm not sure which IP you're saying is unrelated, but if it's 46.209.250.1, that's a proxy server from the same person using all the other ones. 99.104.185.17 is the original/primary account (located in Stockbridge, Georgia); it's not a proxy unless I'm missing something. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 06:45, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

?

[1] meaning what? Are you emailing? am I supposed to? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

alright. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[2] Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 07:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Informal request for editor review by an administrator

Hi Alison,

Not wanting to start a formal RfC, I was wondering if you could review Administrator John's recent edit summaries on the Margaret Thatcher article and monitor our current discussion?

To summarise, regardless of the edit itself, his language was inappropriate and could discourage editors such as Radiohist from making contributions (especially after John used a level 3 template warning). I pointed this out on both his and my talk page, but he has not been very forthcoming. I should concede that when I first pointed it out, I used a template message, which is not advised by Wikipedia. However, recipients should still assume good faith.

Again, I'm not trying to worsen the situation. I was just concerned, especially considering he is an admin.

Regards

--Forward Unto Dawn 11:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The issue now appears to be resolved. I apologise for bothering you with this.--Forward Unto Dawn 11:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Twice in the last couple of days, I've had to request oversight of edits I've found while vandal patrolling. I'm not sure if you personally oversighted them, or if you replied to the RfO emails on someone elses' behalf, but either way, I wish to give you this barnstar to award the work it takes to preserve safety of others. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 02:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

109.173.98.64

Please see admin Boing's talk page regarding IP 109, who's on yet another proxy server. Thanks. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:29, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Black Kite has been playing Whac-A-Mole with the troll. Zzzzzzz. Have a nice week. 76.189.111.2 (talk) 20:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno

You seem pretty focused on me. Bow chicka wow wow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.36.194.92 (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fagovian your outclassed here.
Lmao you coward Boing, you lock your page out of fear. I face you all and do not give an inch.
I'd love to play an' all, but I'm busy IRL right now. One of my kids is in hospital. Go have fun elsewhere - Alison ❤ 20:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BenjiBoi

Since you are familiar with BB, Im asking here instead of at SPI. User:Lightspeedx has caught my attention as a possible sock of BB.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  05:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SilkRoad

I see that you have hidden 52 revisions on SilkRoad, all seem to be relating to a certain link being added. On the talkpage, there is an RfC going on regarding this link. Does the official hiding of the links render the discussion whether it should be included moot, and should further attempts to include the link (or any way around it) be considered an action which violates the OTRS ticket? I think a bit of guidance might be needed there (for as far possible with private OTRS data), as other editors will come in to try and include a link. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's a tricky one, Dirk. The matter was reported to Oversight and, while it's borderline suppressible, IMO, I revdel'd the existing links. I did this for a number of reasons; 1) it's almost certainly illegal in many jurisdictions, 2) the link itself is fraught with issues - phishing has already been mentioned. My primary concern, however, was the legal issue. Many people will point to WP:OUTSIDE and WP:NOTCENSORED, etc but on balance, I believe they should not be allowed stand. Having said that, IANAL and am just another volunteer on the project. I do not represent the WMF in any way, and all I can do is respond to the ticket to the best of my knowledge and ability - Alison ❤ 07:02, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, I thought it was an official OTRS decision. But it seems you mean that this is a sort of a pre-emptive action based on the request. Thanks for that clarification.
    • I agree with the point 1, if it is determined to be illegal, then it should be erased, oversighted, and editors who try nonetheless, even in good faith, should be told in not-to-be-misunderstood wording that it should not be re-tried, no questions asked. The second point is not the problem of the official link - the problem is that the link gets being replaced with phishing-type links, and that the official site seems to change regularly, which in itself is difficult to check. All those attempts (in combination with the same problem on another .onion site) have recently resulted in .onion to be blanket blacklisted.
    • But if it is determined, that point 1 is not the problem, then there is no issue linking to the proper, official site. Point is, that that is not going to be solved by a consensus in an RfC .. People will try to add the link, and the discussion will be reopened to try to include the link. Whatever. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:23, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is requested

Greetings, Alison! If we have not met, I'm AutomaticStrikeout. I've come here to ask you to take part in the survey at User:AutomaticStrikeout/Are admins interested in a RfB?. I am trying to gauge the general level of interest that administrators have in running for cratship, as well as pinpoint the factors that affect that interest level. Your input will be appreciated. Happy editing, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 01:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't Know If You Might be Interested but here it comes

WikiProject U2 invitation

Hello! This message is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please, join this discussion on this talk page!


You may add yourself to our member list below by clicking here!

Project U2 member list
  1. Melicans (talk · contribs) 14:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Dream out loud (talk · contribs) 16:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Pjoef (talk · contribs) 16:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC) The 80s, from Boy to Rattle and Hum plus the ONE Campaign[reply]
  4. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk · contribs) 03:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Lemurbaby (talk · contribs) 03:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Difop (talk · contribs) 20:26, 19 October 2012 (WEST)
  7. Miss Bono (talk · contribs) 11:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC) The entire career of the band plus Bono and Ali Hewson.[reply]
  8. Cullen328 (talk · contribs) 22:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Teancum (talk · contribs) 14:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  10. PBASH607 (talk · contribs) 03:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Mayast (talk · contribs) 19:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC) Upcoming songs and album (2014)[reply]
  12. c_meindl (talk · contribs) 10:45, 6 February 2014 Taking a WikiPedia class and had to join a WikiProject. I am interested in supplementing song stubs and articles!
  13. atuldeshmukh1 (talk · contribs)
  14. Calidum (talk · contribs) Wish I had seen this sooner. 01:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Fylbecatulous (talk · contribs) returning to active status; just based on a feeling... Fylbecatulous talk 15:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  16. [[User:<Pushandturn>|<Pushandturn>]] ([[User talk:<Pushandturn>|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/<Pushandturn>|contribs]]) 00:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC) optional: Im a longtime U2 fan and I went to the U2 360 tour and love sharing their music!

 Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any thoughts, please contact me on my talk page.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi there. I'm not really a massive fan of U2, though I did grow up in their neighborhood and remember seeing them play in the Dandelion market, back in the 80s. I was only ickle :) Most of my U2 stuff is [[WP:OR|anecdotal]. Hey, I saw them play in the Phoenix Park in 1984. Thanks for the invite! :) - Alison ❤ 19:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As the deleter of AMS Sourcing B.V.,

I'd like you to restore it and move it to User:Launchballer/AMS Sourcing B.V.. Thank you.--Launchballer 18:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief, they made articles that badly back then?!? You'd think they'd've attached some references whilst at it. But thank you anyway.--Launchballer 19:30, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revision Deletion Request

Hi Allie! I have a request to redact the two edits to my talk page from the only anonymous user who made an edit(with the IP address beginning with 98). The edit was made unintentionally (the user didn't intend on revealing their IP address) and -- as you can see --removing it removes nothing of substance to the conversation. It's just a matter of not revealing anyone's identity. (Thus, it falls under the "Non-contentious Housekeeping" Criterion for Redaction. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steeletrap&action=history) Steeletrap (talk) 19:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've suppressed the edits, per policy. Thanks for letting me know :) - Alison ❤ 19:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are beyond wonderful! I am sure you gathered this from the cryptic phrasing of the previous post, but you just did me a personal favor! Steeletrap (talk) 19:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Figured they were your own :) Anyways - gone now, and even admins here can't see them! - Alison ❤ 19:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nice. I really appreciate you helping me so quickly! Steeletrap (talk) 19:31, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please help with a socking situation?

Hi Alison. I'm the editor who wrote you a few days ago, here and here - about the blocked editor who was using numerous proxy accounts to evade the block. :) The reason I am writing now is because there are two accounts, User:Alondrav and User:BetsyR00, that I'm almost certain are the same editor. Both have edited only one BLP article, Lazaro Arbos, in which they were adding unsourced, embellished, or out-of-context content; look at the edit history for April 15, 16, and 17 to see all their edits. You'll also notice that BetsyR00 edited immediately after Alondrav on both the first and second day, which caused my initial suspicion of socking. But the thing that finally convinced me that they're both the same person is that they replied in a very similar manner on their talk page to comments I left them; not only are the comments very similar, but even the atypical section heading (month/day/year) is identical (Alondrav's talk page, BetsyR00's talk page). Also, neither signed their comments. I didn't discover their talk page similarities until after I had already replied to Alondrav; it wasn't until I then went to Betsy's talk page that I immediately realized, "Wow, this has to be the same person." ;) So based on all this evidence, I'm confident that the two accounts are the same editor. As you'll see from the replies on the talk pages, the editor is apparently new, friendly, and open to help, but they are indeed socking (I assume). I went to SPI to file a report, but it would not allow me (an IP) to do it. I even used the box that is instructed for IPs to report, but it doesn't allow me to submit anything. Therefore, I was hoping you could please handle matter in whatever way is most appropriate. Thank you very much, Alison. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, and thanks for letting me know. Umm - there's something quite odd going on behind these accounts (and others). I need to ask another checkuser for a second opinion right now, but I'll get back to you soon! Thanks again - Alison ❤ 19:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 19:28, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alison, quick update. Both of the accounts have edited again within a very short time of each other. First, these edits in the Arbos article by BetsyR00, and then this post by Alondrav on their talk page. Btw, you said something is "quite odd" with these and other accounts. Can you elaborate? :) --76.189.111.2 (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We're discussing this amongst the CU team right now, but there's a question as to whether these accounts may be some sort of collaborative/school effort or something. They're very obviously connected, CU evidence aside but rather than just blocking them all (and there are quite a few), I'd like an idea as to what's going on - Alison ❤ 22:07, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the great update. :) I noticed that BetsyR00 made the edits to the Arbos article just a few minutes after you commented on Alondrav's talk page. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC) 22:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brittany Griner

Changed source to the one featuring the actual article mentioned by ESPN and it contains the line: "'It was hard. Just being picked on for being different. Just being bigger, my sexuality, everything,' said the 6-foot-8 Griner, who acknowledged she is a lesbian."--Rockchalk717 21:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Rockchalk, the content you added to Brittney Griner says, "In an interview with SI.com on April 17, 2013, Griner announced that she is gay."[3] I feel that the word "announced" is inappropriate. It makes it sound as if she made some sort of formal announcement about her sexuality, when in fact it was merely a comment within an interview about bullying. The word "acknowledged", as used in the source, would be much more accurate. Finally, you might want to consider adding a little bit of content about her connection with bullying, per the source. It is apparently an important part of her life. Here's my suggested text:

Griner also revealed in the interview that she was bullied as a child, explaining, "It was hard. Just being picked on for being different. Just being bigger, my sexuality, everything".[SI.com cite] She said she is very passionate about working with children in order to bring attention to the issue of bullying, particularly in the LGBT community.[SI.com cite]

Thanks, --76.189.111.2 (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Good to hear. I often use the 'find and replace' function on Microsoft Word to remove all uses of a string on a page. Does that count as automated?--Launchballer 21:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply!

(Reply to [[4]])

Ha! For better or for worse,I actually created that modular synth userbox, and the image is a photo of my own MOTM system. I sure do love it - though I've been really enjoying my portable Harmonium recently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Overand (talk • contribs) 21:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alison&oldid=551051394"