User talk:HighInBC

Tokens from other editors:

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report No RfXs since 12:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

Talk page archives - Archive index

• Hello and welcome to my talk page! Click the + button at the top of the page to create a new discussion or use any of the "edit" buttons to contribute to an already existing discussion.
• Postings made in the form of haiku will be given first priority.

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I protect vandalism on Wikipedia IntensityCR7 (talk) 04:49, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. Chillum 14:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Your close of the Davidcannon thread at AN/I

Sorry but I have several problems with your close and ask for you to revert it, or at the very least refactor it. While I agree the thread may be ready for closure (personally I'd have left it open longer but I don't think it's unreasonable to close it now) I do think the comment you used to close it is not a fair reflection of what has happened or the discussion. Yes, they had agreed to be more careful, but then promptly made three more errors that I spotted since then. The way you closed the report suggests I brought it to ANI without good reason - continuing to do what you had been doing and asked not to is a good reason. I also agree that David seems receptive to community now but the issue here was not so much being receptive as actually acting upon it. At his talk page there were a large number of comments about AWB and I agree he engaged with people but then seemingly carried on as before. I also note that although administrator action was not required AN or AN/I is the appropriate place to discuss bans. In short I don't like your close suggesting I was wrong to bring it to AN/I especially as this is against the obvious consensus in the discussion. Dpmuk (talk) 14:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I also note that there was on going discussion about the length of any ban with some people suggesting it should be longer than they suggested. Personally I disagree that it should be longer but also think it's wrong to close a thread before consensus has been reached. Dpmuk (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I have removed the comment about him agreeing to be more careful. It was a true comment, but I see your concerns. It was not meant as a criticism of you. There is little point in discussing a ban on a person who has expressed a willingness to voluntarily avoid the areas the ban would cover. If it turns out that they continue in the areas they said they would stop then I would say you have a strong case for a BAN.

I don't think duration is an issue as David says "I am willing to withdraw for a longer period — whatever length of time the community deems appropriate".

We try not to ban users from areas when they are willing to respond to the concerns of the community in a reasonable fashion. I really think as long as David is being receptive that you and others can just talk this issue out before resorting to the force of a community ban. Chillum 14:52, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

@Chillum:. That is slightly disingenuous: no-one was actually calling for a ban (yet)- and although the community deemed his response satisfactory, the question of how long the restriction should last was stil very much open. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 14:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Disingenuous? I only mentioned a ban because Dpmuk said "AN or AN/I is the appropriate place to discuss bans". I assure you I am being very ingenuous. When a user volunteers to stay away from an area it is not a "restriction" and it is generally they who decide the duration. Chillum 14:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

OIKOS Software Inc. page deletion

Help. The OIKOS Software page was deleted and we do not understand why. The content writer is no where to be found and we do not have a copy of the deleted material. Who do we turn to for help? J Leahy — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaniceLeahy (talk • contribs) 15:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

It was deleted as promotional. I looked at the deleted content and it read like a pamphlet. It appears to have been written by someone with a strong bias in favour of the company. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and must be written from a neutral point of view. In addition it must establish notability through reliable sources.

A quick google shows that you are the CEO of this company. Wikipedia is not the place to promote your company and we have little tolerance for it. Our conflict of interest policy asks you not to edit articles where you have a conflict of interest. We hope that you are here to write an encyclopedia and will stay a long time, however in general if your company is significant enough to warrant an article then someone unconnected with the company will write it. After all our article on Microsoft was not written by Bill Gates. Chillum 16:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I am contacting you because my organization cannot locate the content writer. So, I do not have recourse other than speaking directly.

None of us played into the writing of this content. You stated promotional in nature, please indicate one item on that page that was deemed promotional. It appeared nothing more than factual course of events.

We are victims here and are looking for help in getting this resolved.

We do not have any copies of the page content,so it is difficult for us to understand why you have come to this conclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaniceLeahy (talk • contribs) 18:20, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Ps...this content writer was totally independent and not associated with OIKOS Software in any way. The content writer represented themselves as a WIKI Editor.

Please advise.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaniceLeahy (talk • contribs) 18:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I see now I was referring to a version you were involved in writing in 2014 that was deleted as promotional.

The most recent version of the article was create July 1st by a user called Nicedisks. It turns out this was one of hundreds of accounts involved in a racket where they misrepresented themselves as having authority on Wikipedia and attempted to negotiate money from people for favours they have no standing to make. We have blocked over 400 accounts related to this. The articles themselves were copyright violations lifted from previously rejected contributions by other editors and have such been deleted. I do hope that you were not one of the people victimized by this scam. Chillum 19:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

More information can be found here: Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Orangemoody, there is also an area to ask about this here: info-orangemoodywikipedia.org. Chillum 19:03, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Normally I would be willing to send you a copy by e-mail, however in this case the article content is a copyright violation. Chillum 19:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Upon investigation on our side, this is the editor we thought wrote the content: We have sent Catherine Munro a message too. Is this not the same person who wrote the content?

Catherine lilly <catherinewiki@outlook.com> wrote:

Hi,

To check my status on Wikipedia, you can check my Wikipedia user page; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CatherineMunro

Some of the Wikipedia articles I have created:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_%28magazine%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Smith_%28columnist%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_Spade_%26_Company http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_%28school%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaniceLeahy (talk • contribs)

Let me explain again. This is a scam. The person who contacted you was part of a ring of people who impersonated real editors claiming to have authority they did not. They stole content from other sources and pretended it was their own and they accepted money for that service. Anyone contacting you claiming to represent Wikipedia and offering a service is lying to you.

User:CatherineMunro is a respected administrator and would not be contacting you to offer services on Wikipedia. Chillum 19:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Last question; and thanks for all your insight. You stated copyright violation...whose? Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaniceLeahy (talk • contribs)

They stole their content from a variety of sources including rejected article submissions. Chillum 19:13, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Chillum. I hope there is criminal pursuit if Wikipedia can figure out the group that scammed us and the others involved in that huge list deletions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaniceLeahy (talk • contribs) 19:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I hope so too, however I am not qualified myself to give advice on that matter. The e-mail address I gave above would be the best point of contact. Chillum 20:36, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Malik Shabazz arbitration case and Sockpupetting.

I am sending this to users involved in an arbitration case. I am not aware of too many details of the case. I also don't know how these cases work.

However I noticed that Malik Shabazz also violates Sockpuppeting rules.

He has two users: Malik Shabazz and User:MShabazz

He claims that User:MShabazz is a WP:DOPPELGANGER account.

However, not only does he use the account for editing (which violates the WP:DOPPELGANGER policy -), he also uses the account together with his Malik Shabazz account for edit warring. For example when he was harassing me and laughing at me for my mistake of editing another user's talk page he [[1]]

• First he undid my edit with user Malik Shabazz [2]

• Then He used his sockpupet user MShabazz to undo my edit the second time: [3]

(Then he harassed me and laughed at me and wrote: "PS: I'm sorry it took you half an hour to figure out why I gave VanEman a barnstar more than a year ago. I hope your reading skills improve." )

Is there anything that could be done now? Caseeart (talk) 05:37, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

This happened over a month ago. I can't imagine what I would do about it now. If you really think this needs attention then perhaps a post at WP:ANI will bring the attention you seek. While the civility issues are a concern there has already been a major response since your diffs, my advice would be to let it go. Chillum 15:06, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

The problem is that this administrator is repeating this behavior over and over. It is just difficult to detect between all the other edits. I also noticed dishonest and racially motivated editing and use of warnings etc. My concern is that now the user is saying the he "retired". After things calm down - the user may (cautiously) come back as an admin and continue the racially motivated use of admin tools all this behavior will be unnoticed and already forgotten. Is there a way at least to add my concerns to last discussion on the user? Caseeart (talk) 19:39, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Caseeart, since the alternate account is clearly identified as such, your "concerns" will probably get the consideration they deserve. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

I think @NeilN: and @Dennis Brown: have explained this fairly well for you. If you really want more attention you can post at WP:ANI and your concerns will be given attention by other administrators. I myself will not be taking any action in this case as I doubt using any of my tools in this matter will improve the encyclopedia. Chillum 20:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

@ @NeilN: and Chullim. Ok. I believe I will have a strong caseat ANI (not about the alternate account but about Shabbaz's edit behavior and attitude towards certain editors). However, I will have to decide if it is worthwhile to put the time and effort into compiling a case, due to the fact that the administrators might anyways refrain from taking action since as you point out that the user did not edit in the last month. But thanks for your advice. Caseeart (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Caseeart, let me just give it to you straight: Nothing good can come of this. You can take it to ANI, but more than likely, you will end up with the dirty end of the stick. He is gone, lots of things have happened since then, doing anything now would not only be punitive, but it would be pointless. I'm trying to do you a favor, save you from grief and embarrassment. And keep in mind that Malik and I have never crossed paths before all the Arb stuff, so this is from an outsider's point of view: Drop the stick. You can't win because Malik has already lost everything. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 21:37, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

@Dennis Brown: All of you fully explained and convicted me why it would be a big waist of time - and I want to thank you for that. I will definitely not waist any time on the ANI. There is however one more concern regarding the block of bad dryer. I am writing now on the page of bad dryer. Even if I am wrong about what am writing - I just want to write my opinion for future reference. Caseeart (talk) 21:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Talk page stats

From your post at Montana's RfA: I don't know about most read user talk pages, but awhile back someone linked to these old stats from last year on number of page watchers - Eric's #14 and has gained quite a few watchers since. Suddenly I feel so unpopular! Opabinia regalis (talk) 23:02, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

#351 Wooo-hooo! Chillum 23:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. I appreciate it. Nice to know I am not too distracting to the public. Chillum 23:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Along the top of every history page is a row of links to tools that provide all manner of statistics. One of those is 'page view stats' which reports the monthly number of hits to the page. Caveat: since the move to Labs from the ToolServer, the performance of those who maintain the Labs server and those who maintain the tools has become somewhat capricious. Urgent help is required from anyone who has a well founded knowledge of both Python and regex. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:00, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Only #14? I thought I'd be higher than that. Eric Corbett 02:09, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Here I thought I was the high one around here, turns out I am fairly low. Chillum 02:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

hi sir

Hi sir, good day, but i've been insulted... one untolerable language you know... why isn't the user being dealth with?NotAlpArslan (talk) 00:09, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Our No personal attacks policy does indeed prohibit that type of discourse. You are correct to demand action. Per the policy isolated incidences of personal attacks are dealt with using a warning which I have given here: [4].

Blocks can be done for personal attacks but only when they are part of an ongoing pattern or particularly egregious. See WP:NPA#Consequences of personal attacks. Chillum 00:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

You are the best sir

hope you'll be the sole admin in here, thank you so much.NotAlpArslan (talk) 00:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

I think it would be too much to hope that every other admin suddenly disappeared, even though I think that might not be a bad idea. Eric Corbett 02:12, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	bless you NotAlpArslan (talk) 00:20, 21 September 2015 (UTC)