Jump to content

User talk:DoRD

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a global renamer.
This user has CheckUser privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has oversight privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wyden (talk | contribs) at 19:12, 2 June 2017 (→‎ENGVAR?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Robert Young

I'm sure you won't remember it, but you were involved in a sockpuppet case involving vastly inflated autobiographical claims of a sportsman who, at that time, fell well below notability thresholds. The same man now has a very different personal and sporting history, again arising from his own evidence, being presented in an article. Non-admin editors cannot edit from an informed point of view as to the man's reliability without there being some presentation of his previous claims, which only an admin can unearth. Sadly, admins who have involved themselves in the situation thus far have wilfully remained uninformed: would you be willing to present a summary of the sockpuppet claims in the talk page so that readers and editors have grounds for coming to an informed judgement.

With thanks, Kevin McE (talk) 09:22, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of experienced editors and admins there, and I see no reason to involve myself. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
None of them have declared themselves willing to even look at his previous deleted claims. I hoped that as you had done so in the past, you might help bring that to light for a fuller consideration. Kevin McE (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
First off, this version was started by Drmies, not by some sockpuppet. Second, saying that the admins there have wilfully remained uninformed is an assumption of bad faith. If you want a direct answer to whether they've looked at the sock implications, ask them a direct question, either on the article talk page, or on their talk pages. I don't see anything in the recent history of the article that suggests sockpuppetry, and since I have no other interest in the subject, I have no desire to become involved there. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My point was that because they haven't informed themselves by reading the previous articles (and I have asked them on their talk pages, and can only take their refusal to answer as a no, and a position I can think of no better description of than wilful ignorance), they are not alert to the claims that Young has made about himself in the past, and because they cannot compare that with his more recent version of his sporting and personal history, they cannot see the inconsistency in his story, so they take the more recent at face value. They threaten to discipline me for questioning his veracity, without considering the evidence of his inconsistency. I really can't understand why it is so hard to find an admin willing to consider the evidence. Kevin McE (talk) 16:16, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I have a question about ip block exemptions - I am going to be in Turkey for an extended period of time. For obvious reasons, I will have to edit through proxies - I am not sure how this works or more specifically, what kind of exemption I would need (or even how I would ask for it behind the block.) There was also the one incident where I used a second account, which I am really sorry about, and I don't think it's representative of the work I've done and would like to continue - do you think that will that be a problem when requesting an exemption? Seraphim System (talk) 16:50, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The details about IP block exemption are here. I don't know what VPN service you'll be using, but you may find that it has not been blocked. If it is, however, you will still be able to edit your talk page or access WP:UTRS to request IPBE. Yes, the use of the other account could pose a problem, but if it was a one time mistake, it may not. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Seraphim System (talk) 19:01, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural question

Would requesting checkuser regarding good hand, bad hand here be considered fishing? Tiderolls 21:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After I commented on the user's talk earlier, I ran the vandal IP just to make sure they weren't the same. I didn't find any accounts on the IP address, so I decided to AGF. Of course, that doesn't prove that they're unrelated, but that's as far as I want to take it for now. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:23, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Tide rolls, if renaming of the account is needed, I can take care of that as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3Artiklar

Just curious, since I got a friendly helping hand from 3Artiklar not too long ago: how did they come to be blocked? Awien (talk) 16:24, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That account, along with several others, was found to be a sockpuppet of a banned user. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Awien (talk) 17:31, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, DoRD! I came here to ask a similar question, as I was thinking of speedy-nominating this non-topic as G5. Were all nine users you blocked today similarly connected? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:46, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the accounts I blocked between 11:09 and 11:30 today are the same. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in

this message I got a little bit ago. (I'm not watching your page, so ping me if you reply)ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:50, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, MjolnirPants. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 10:43, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ENGVAR?

That didn't tell me anything...if we use spelling used by each country, shouldn't we use US spelling for something usually found in the US? is this like a taxonomy thing? I'm confused... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyden (talkcontribs) 14:58, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct - I apparently didn't notice the habitat, so I have self reverted. My apologies. ​—DoRD (talk)​
Ok. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyden (talkcontribs) 17:57, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem kind of arbitrary to me, though...it is an ocean-dwelling creature so it isn't like it's American or British or whatever else...