Jump to content

User talk:J.delanoy/Archive 25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27→Archive 30



Happy New Year!

Dear J.delanoy/Archive 25,
I just wanted to wish you and your family a happy new year, however you're celebrating it. Whether 2009 was a good year for you, or if it wasn't the greatest year, hopefully 2010 will be better. Cheers, and happy editing in 2010.

December21st2012Freak Happy New Year! at ≈ 00:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Best Wishes for 2010, FloNight♥♥♥♥ 13:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


Thanks to everyone who wished me a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Here's to a better 2010 :D J.delanoygabsadds 16:31, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I never wished you a happy new year :( Sorry. But now I will, Happy New Year!--Coldplay Expért Let's talk 17:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Don't feel like you have to... but thanks! And happy new year :-) J.delanoygabsadds 17:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars 'thank you'

A Barnstar!
The Refdesk Barnstar
For being particularly helpful. DRosenbach (Talk

wow, thanks! J.delanoygabsadds 17:10, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I would say "you're welcome," but that was your line :) DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 17:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

meetup!

short notice but: Wikipedia:Meetup/Dallas-Fort_Worth -- phoebe / (talk to me) 22:53, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Ari Meisel

i am Amr2020eg and i built an article under name Ari Meisel and it speedy delete and want to tell me about the points that make it delete, s we will remove it from the topic. in fact i don't want make advertsiting or anything, it's all about a man have good conribution in the field of green buildings. thanks for your help & for any further clarification don't hesitate to tell me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amr2020eg (talk • contribs) 18:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


Homeland Security

Yup, thanks for the correction on my revert. I was just following one guy, without realizing that there is a 4chan attack going on. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I kept seeing it come up, but it didn't click. J.delanoygabsadds 17:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Bruce Forsyth seems to be dying a lot recently as well, so I assume that there is 4chan thingy, to use a technical term, going on there as well. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:11, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

For you...

The Original Barnstar
Awarded to J.delanoy for efficiently and painlessly dealing with what started as some suspicious users, and ended with a sockfarm. Thanks! J Milburn (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't know... it was probably pretty painful to them. :P --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 01:10, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

A request

Hi Mr J.delanoy, Could I ask you to do me a small favour?

Tim Song is currently away on vacation for a few weeks.

According to the message on his talk page I need to ask a sysop to add my name to this list in order to be able to use the Kissle application.

Would you be so kind as to do this for me please? I would be very grateful.

Many thanks & Seasonal Greetings :-) -- Marek.69 talk 01:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done. J.delanoygabsadds 02:45, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Cheers! -- Marek.69 talk 04:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

This might seem stupid but apparently you told people that im probably not a sock/sockrunner. (The CU results are the reason why I put in probably) Do you think that people still think otherwise?--Coldplay Expért Let's talk 04:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no way of knowing that. J.delanoygabsadds 04:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Silly. Me, I should have known that CU doesnt mean mind reader. Sorry to waste your time on my paronoid thoughts J.delanoy.--Coldplay Expért Let's talk 04:25, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreal article

This article has been the site of problems regarding an uofficial patch. The only thing that could be called a reliable source would be a single post in the developer's forum that acknowledges the fact that the source was indeed distributed to select individuals[1], on that note I have a question - Would this classify as a reliable source? I know that forum postings is explicitly a violation of WP:SPS, but one thing I haven't gotten my head around is whether, if a forum post is made by an authority on the topic, like the senior director as is allegedly the case here, does this change the situation? One last thing - I would appreciate it if you could chime in on the debate that's going on at the article's talk page. Eik Corell (talk) 05:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Possible sock puppets of User:FLPTrainor

Hi J.! I am not sure of this, but, because of the similarity of edits, I am wondering if you might use CheckUser to determine if User:Minsteire is a sock puppet of indefinitely blocked editor, User:FLPTrainor? I notice a similar tendency to overlink and user internal redirects for wikilinks that were already functioning properly and not in need of “fixing.” I don’t want to waste my time guiding this editor on these issues if in fact s/he is a blocked editor attempting to evade that block. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 20:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

UPDATE: I’d like to add User:Triadam to this request. Their new user pages look way to similar not to be related. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 20:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 Confirmed. J.delanoygabsadds 21:47, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I will revert their edits as having been made by a blocked wikieditor. Is that okay? Thanks J.! — SpikeToronto 21:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
If you want. J.delanoygabsadds 21:55, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done  Thanks again! You’re my favorite CheckUser. (No offence to the others, of course.) — SpikeToronto 21:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Persistant vandal

Hi! Back in november you placed a 31 hour block on 65.51.227.31. Since the block expired there have been repeated vandalism edits from the IP with a multitude of warnings, the latest being about an hour ago. Could you please take a look at the IP's talk page, for warnings after your block, and consider applying a considerably longer block? Richard Harvey (talk) 16:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Essay on consensus-building

I've been puttering around with an essay about consensus and wouldn't mind your commentary if you're so inclined. It's my first attempt at starting an essay.--otherlleft 22:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Rollback request

Hi J.delanoy,

May I have rollback please? I understand the three circumstances in which it may be used. I've been finding Twinkle a little slow, plus I find it annoying that Twinkle rollback is not marked as a minor edit.

Cheers, Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 13:14, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Have fun! J.delanoygabsadds 15:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

vandal block

I have just reverted an edit by this IP and warned them about vandalizing. In looking through their talk page, they have been warned many times for their disruptive edits and even blocked five times. It would appear that they have no intention of stopping. Could you block them, please? Upon further research, they have actually been blocked eight times and the last block just ran out. That definitely looks like a strictly vandal account. Thank you. PrincessofLlyr (talk) 17:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick work! PrincessofLlyr (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
FYI, that appears to meet the criteria for filing an abuse report, if you would like to attempt something more permanent. Throwaway85 (talk) 04:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Email

You have a new one.— Dædαlus Contribs 00:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Show/Hide feature on templates

Good afternoon! I'm trying to merge the big Awards section on Todd Field into a new template, but since it takes up abundant room, I need some help on including the Show/Hide feature. I saw on your userpage that you have fair knowledge on templates and wikimarkup, so I came to you. If you can't find a solution, you may point me to another administrator if you can. Thanks for your time! Schfifty3 20:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The basic code can be found in User:J.delanoy/3. If you need help tweaking code, colors, etc, just ask. Actually, I'd recommend finding a template that already does what you want to do, and just copy that, but do whatever seems easiest. J.delanoygabsadds 00:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the help! I used your subpage for the Template:Todd Field awards template, and it's nearly looking the way I like it. Is there a way to make it so the succession boxes touch the border so there's no transparent background? Schfifty3 02:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Try changing the padding width to 0px, or just removing the padding completely? I'm not sure what you're saying. J.delanoygabsadds 02:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I was asking if there was a way to make the succession boxes (the boxes containing the awards) cover up the transparent background behind them when the template is in "Show" view. Does this get you? Schfifty3 03:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
See template. Is that what you meant? J.delanoygabsadds 05:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Sure, it looks fine for now. I was hoping there was a way to make the distance between the boxes and the head tab even (kind of like it was in the first revision), but with the Show/Hide feature. Thanks! Schfifty3 05:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Not sure what you're saying, but if I'm thinking right, look for where it says padding: 1px; and try changing it to 5px or something. J.delanoygabsadds 05:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Please re-block

Greetings J.delanoy - sorry to hassle you, but towards the end of last year you placed a 2-week block on User talk:168.171.60.254 and, as was to be expected (from their lengthy record), they've been actively vandalising again once the block is up. Could you please do something about it. I've made a few random checks to see if there are actually any constructive edits from that IP address and drew a blank. Thanks. --Technopat (talk) 02:50, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

New Wallflowers98 sock

I got a new one, Toolfan1997 (talk · contribs) blocked pretty much immediately by Gogo Dodo. Also I happened to see your public block log after seeing the CU result and noticed that 2 of his sockpuppet accounts impersonated me (Momusufan). I know you were tempted to rangeblock him but I think this could be a good reason to do so because I was unaware of this until I saw the block log. Some of the filters may need to be updated by someone familiar with that, mainly filter 82 and filter 278. Thanks. Momo san Gespräch 06:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I got another suspected one too that is not blocked, Trekfan95 (talk · contribs). Momo san Gespräch 06:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I blocked what I could find on those /16s. I'll do another full scan tomorrow, when I'm actually awake... J.delanoygabsadds 07:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again. Momo san Gespräch 15:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is a sock, but I found Hal2090 (talk · contribs) who made the same edit at Man of the House (1995 film) after the previous sock got blocked. Momo san Gespräch 19:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Don't know if it's the same guy, but I picked up a few sleepers on his IP. J.delanoygabsadds 00:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Would you be able to protect Man of the House (1995 film) if my RPP request gets declined? It appears another sock is back on the page. Momo san Gespräch 21:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Ping!

You've got mail. Willking1979 (talk) 14:21, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

thx

well, that was random.... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Based on the early edits from that IP and the geolocation of the IP it's likely to be our old friend ScienceGolfFanatic. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 20:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Trying to write an article about Dark Fall: Lost Souls

Hi, I'm trying to write an article about Dark Fall: Lost Souls. As I have no experience in creating articles I'd be grateful if you could find the time to look it over and possibly give a few tips on how to improve it. Jarkeld (talk) 00:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, most articles have inline citations. Other than that, I don't really write much, so you may want to ask someone else for their opinion. J.delanoygabsadds 00:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll do that. Jarkeld (talk) 00:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

ping

About your comment on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nrcprm2026#Clerk.2C_patrolling_admin_and_checkuser_comments, Dual Use (talk · contribs) has begun editing again. Could you look into into it again? --Enric Naval (talk) 14:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Still waiting on you. Hipocrite (talk) 04:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
We are still waiting comment about Dual Use in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nrcprm2026. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I left a diff to your comment in the SPI case. Could you clarify if that was in reference to Dual Use or if was it just a reference to the dynamic IPs that are no longer editing? --Enric Naval (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to be so annoying, but I would like to close the case for good. I'll restate the question: is Dual Use someone's sock, yes or not? --Enric Naval (talk) 17:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

J. delanoy saves the day again.

Hey there old friend, It's always a pleasure to have the support of administrators when working on vandalism reversion. I think I went through about 5 or so vandalism-only accounts today with Huggle =]. After frequent vandalism to my userpage, I finally had it RPP'd to prevent that sort of thing. Anyways, just leaving my thanks for considerably helping in the vandal(ism) removal process! GLaDOS (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Unconstructive? Jabar broke his jaw, I am merely making the article ACCURATE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.202.37.203 (talk) 19:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

thank you for blocking 68.32.161.25

thank you for blocking 68.32.161.25. This person has been vandalizing many of my edits, but, being fairly new to Wiki (as far as actually contributing) I did not know how to report it. Also, I thought some of it might be a mistake. This person is very clever because in checking my history, I knew that some of the edits were not mine, but, again, figured it was my inexperience. Personally, I think 48 hours is not long enough for this "editor", but I defer to your knowledge and expertise. I do know that there is such a thing as other people having the IP of a former vandal, so perhaps you are giving the person the benefit of the doubt. Whatever the case, thank you. Mugginsx (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, most IP address are quite dynamic, so we usually don't block them long-term unless they have a significant history of vandalism. In any case, if you need to report a vandal, the page to do it is WP:AIV. Anyways, you're welcome, and I hope that your experience here on Wikipedia will be a good one. Cheers! J.delanoygabsadds 20:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Regarding your findings at [2], the user who filled this request, is now citing your findings as "proof" that I am the meatpuppet of User:WIMV [3][4][5]. I'm a long standing user with thousands of edits, I am nobody's "meatpuppet". I really appreciate it if you could study [6], and [7] to realize what the core of the problem is. As you can see, the user who filed this report, has been in violation of several core polices from WP:NPOV and WP:consensus to WP:NPA and .WP:3RR. I hate being constantly bullied and personally attacked, when I am actually trying a uphold Wikipedia's core content policies. I would really be grateful, if you could further clarify your findings, so this user does not think that he has a license to label and attack me. FYI, another administrator who is more familiar with the history of this dispute, has also raised this issue [8] --Kurdo777 (talk) 05:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Dual Use

Re: [9] and [10]. So is Dual Use a sock of Nrcprm2026, or not? Your latest comment seems to indicate not. If not can you officially declare them unrelated? I ask because they are currently indefinitely blocked and the blocking admin seems to be under the impression that they are Nrcprm2026, see [11]. Anything you can do to clear up this matter would be appreciated I am sure. --GoRight (talk) 05:53, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Kissle

I'd like to try it out, could you please add my name to the Kissle permission page? Thanks in advance. Connormah (talk) 14:28, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done. J.delanoygabsadds 17:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much! Connormah (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day NYC

Wikipedia 9th birthday coin

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 9th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Sunday January 24, 2010 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your great anti-vandal efforts, and blocking vandals. Most of the vandalism you revert looks like silly, childish vandalism. Keep up the Anti-vandal efforts! December21st2012Freak Talk to me at ≈ 19:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bambifan101

Hi J.delanoy, just a quick note regarding this case, or more specifically regarding the sockmasters user page. Do you think that you could remove everything currently on User:Bambifan101 (except for the link to simple:User:Bambifan101) and replace it with {{sockpuppeteer|blocked|checked=yes|spipage=Bambifan101}} (I would myself but its protected). Kind regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 05:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

on second thoughts, please leave the {{banneduser}} too. Thanks SpitfireTally-ho! 05:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, SpitfireTally-ho! 06:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Welcome :-) J.delanoygabsadds 06:36, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
They are small ranges, and have odd registrants. I'm betting that they are businesses or libraries or something. J.delanoygabsadds 18:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Mr ComeGo

Unblock is  On hold awaiting comment from you. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I never know what to do with those CU blocks. The last time I dealt with one, I sent an email to the functionaries list, which of course was put on hold because I'm not a subscriber to the list, then like three days later the user was unblocked, but that one was an autoblock that just caught an innocent person... Anyway thanks for responding. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Probably just ask the blocking admin, or any checkuser on their talk page. J.delanoygabsadds 02:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Funny username blocks

Hello, J.delanoy. I'm looking at the block log, seeing your username blocking ridiculous names like "The account password is poop" or "The account password is vomit" or "The account password is crap" or those. It's funny. Blocky cuzco (talk) 00:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... J.delanoygabsadds 00:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
You might also be blocking a sockpuppet. Which makes me wonder; Can I leave a message on one of those inappropriate name saying if he/she is a sockpuppet? Or will I get blocked for it? Blocky cuzco (talk) 01:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
They are sockpuppets, and they are blocked without talk page access. J.delanoygabsadds 01:01, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Well I'm going to go for the "The account password is vomit" and notify him/her of the sockpuppet abuse and inappropriate (yet funny) usernames which got him/her blocked on the talk page. Blocky cuzco (talk) 01:06, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, my friend. It's me again. I looked at the Wikipedia:AIV, and found this abusive user User:Ryan3896490. Please block him. He removed warnings on his talk page to make it look like no one has saw his edits. Blocky cuzco (talk) 01:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

FYI

[12]. I can't find an SPI case related to this, so was this block based upon a random CU? JamieS93 01:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. J.delanoygabsadds 02:03, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, okay. JamieS93 02:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey

It looks like you made a mistake in the blocking of User:Baseball1015. I highly doubt he's a sock, and most of his contribs are reverting vandalism. Excuse me if I'm wrong. Connormah (talk) 02:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I am virtually certain I am right. J.delanoygabsadds 02:33, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Alright. Connormah (talk) 02:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Ditto on that, J. This just doesn't seem like a classic MascotGuy sock. The naming convention, use of edit summaries, types of edits, none of it fits. If it is indeed MG, this is by far the most lucid sock I've ever seen. He might well be on a MG server, but I'm fairly convinced this isn't him. Just my opinion and I'll defer to yours. PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I emailed some people to ask their opinion. J.delanoygabsadds 05:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey! (AIV)

Been a while since I've bugged you here. Anyways, if you're on, are you willing to get your banhammer out? There's a backlog at AIV and some of them are really starting to get annoying. —LedgendGamer 05:13, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hm, that was the biggest-looking backlog of 2 users I've seen in a while. Thanks anyways. —LedgendGamer 05:21, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Any connection to ...

Do you have any connection to User:Blocky cuzco? The editor (who, importantly, admits to being 9 yrs old) has you listed on a edit notice for his talk page but I don't see any connection (like a mentorship or the like) implied, only that he took one of messages to assume you'd watch his back. I only ask as the user has uploaded two image files, citing them as free but clearly failing copyright or other NFC policy, and if he is 9 years old, I'm worried about trying to explain this to him from several different perspectives. --MASEM (t) 06:01, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I have never seen him before today. J.delanoygabsadds 06:33, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Large sock drawer opened, many socks blocked, but did I get them all?

Hello. On 1/16 I blocked Oneforanother1 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) as being a sock of GayleNuffer (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · sockssuspected). Today my user talk page was vandalized by Oneforanother2 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). On a hunch, I checked and confirmed that both Oneforanother1 and Oneforanother2 were created at 13:29 on 13 January 2010. Combing through the new user registration logs, I also discovered the following:

13 January 2010:

14 January 2010:

All eight were blocked and tagged for Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of GayleNuffer.

Without getting too BEANSy here, could you check and see if there were others that I missed, and/or examine the underlying IP to see if there a better solution available than playing Whac-A-Mole? Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't find any that you missed, but I don't think that rangeblocks would help either. J.delanoygabsadds 22:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

LeeD vandal acount

I came across Diicbtv2otwtdod23 (talk · contribs) and made abusive edit summaries againest another user in the usual manner that the LeeD vandal does. He got autoconfirmed on purpose to do what he did. Can you run a checkuser to see if he is on a different IP range? Here is his edit history. Momo san Gespräch 21:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Documentary Organization of Canada

Hi, I saw your name in Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles. Shortly after I placed advert and COI tags on Documentary Organization of Canada (DOC), User:Cirt speedily deleted it as blatant advertising. I've asked him twice to restore the page, perhaps as one of my userpages, so I could winnow out the spam and convert it to a valid stub that meets our guidelines. He refused the first time and has not been on the wiki since my second request. I'm a bit surprised than an admin would refuse a good faith request to restore a speedied article on a notable organization so it could be salvaged, and was wondering if you could accommodate me. I'd prefer to pare down the existing article rather than start from scratch as Cirt suggests, and since I'm the one doing the work, I hope that's a good enough rationale. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. I don't think it'll pass ORG, if recreated, anyway. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

User:J.delannoy

Heads up You might want to take a look at him: J.delannoy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I found him from the history of With the Lights Out, which also merits some investigation. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I looked at him when I blocked him. Thanks, though. J.delanoygabsadds 18:36, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Possible sock puppets of User:FLPTrainor

Hi J.! Further to our earlier interaction regarding the above-captioned editor, I think that User:Rachel-K-T might be yet another sock of said editor. The account was created at 18:15 on January 18, and by 18:34 was making the same legal article edits as we had earlier reverted by socks associated with User:FLPTrainor.

Another reason I suspect a sock puppet is that it seems odd that the first edit by a brand spanking new wikieditor would be made using WikiCleaner and have this edit summary: “WikiCleaner 0.98 - Repairing link to disambiguation page - You can help!” And, to be honest, that edit summary lacks any of the wikilinks that I seem to recall WikiCleaner usually leaves.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. It is very much appreciated. — SpikeToronto 04:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi J.! I’m just adding a wee note here to keep the bot from archiving this until you have chance to look into it. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 16:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Somehow missed this - anyways,  Confirmed and blocked. J.delanoygabsadds 22:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks J.! By the way, may I add {{sockpuppet|username|confirmed}} to User talk:Rachel-K-T so that it will show up in the list at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of FLPTrainor? Or can that only be done by someone with sysop and/or checkuser privileges? Thanks again J.! — SpikeToronto 05:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done With this edit, I added {{sockpuppet|FLPTrainor|confirmed}} to User talk:Rachel-K-T so that it will show up in the list at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of FLPTrainor. I used the following edit summary:

Adding {{sockpuppet}} for User:FLPTrainor. Confirmed & blocked by CheckUser:J.delanoy. See contributions & block log.

If this was to be done only by an Administrator, then please revert/override me and given me the requisite, ensuing <smack>. Thanks J! — SpikeToronto 22:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

No, there's no requirement that admins must do that. J.delanoygabsadds 01:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! — SpikeToronto 06:56, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

How do I disable editing sections on my userpage?

Hence the section heading, I figured I'd ask you a question again: I am trying to disable editing of the sections of my biography when on the standard User:SchfiftyThree page. Do you know of a way? I thought that "_NOTOC_" or something would help, but I honestly don't know since I have low experience with userpage design. :-) Schfifty3 23:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

__NOEDITSECTION__ but that will disable all section editing. –xenotalk 23:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
You could put certain sections of the page that you wish to protect in a subpage, protect that, then transclude that where you want it in the page. The Thing Vandalize me 15:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
That's how I would go about doing it. Useight (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

vandal 68.32.161.25

Another one of the pages I contributed to was vandalized today. see: Paul C. Doherty. Mugginsx (talk) 19:12, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Messages about a 'disruptive' user

Hi again J.delanoy! I have received some messages on my talk page Disruptive editor and Hubschrauber from user Sherlock4000 about the actions of Hubschrauber729. Sherlock4000 previously helped identify Ecuadorian Stalker as a sock of Historian19.

User Hubschrauber is using a completely different style of editing (not obvious sock), but still seems to be upsetting other editors with his edits. Would you mind casting your eyes on this one. Cheers :-) -- Marek.69 talk 02:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Question

I don't know how to get through to a user who is adding wholesale data points to numerous articles that are uncited and in several cases clearly erroneous, yet does not respond to posts and warnings on his talk page, User talk:190fordhouse. This user has been warned multiple times by several editors but never responds, just keeps on going. The data points are largely the dates a record was recorded (he generally adds the previous year to which a record was released, even when it was released quite late in the year, which may or may not be true but smacks of presumption to me; most albums by active artists on a major label take a few weeks to a few months to record and a few more weeks to master, press and ship; further, he's doing this to singles, which are generally recorded in anywhere from a few weeks to a day or two) and specific release dates that clearly don't add up to the chart data. Picking a song at random from his most recent edits, I note that he added one date, then changed the year (perhaps a typo), but then changed it to a completely different date. There might be a perfectly reasonable explanation for this, and it might be the actual date for all I know (this isn't a page I watch or even a song I'm familiar with), but in other cases, he has been incorrect. If "Time After Time" was released somewhere on January 7, 1984, as he claims, then it's surely not the same place where he claims her followup single, "She Bop", was released only a month later, on February 17, 1984; or where he tells us her follow-up to that, "All Through The Night", was released only two months later, in April, all still months prior to when "Time After Time" peaked on the charts in the U.S., in June. This does not correspond to these records' chart histories (my recollection is that "All Through The Night" was released near the end of '84) and is not the way singles were released in a single territory in the 1980s. Another editor has accused him on his talk page of having other accounts as socks. In any event, he's unwilling to note where he's getting these dates from.

For my first few years here I made a point of not seeking to have editors blocked unless their edits were in the mode of racist epithets and death threats, but the longer I'm here the more I realize just how much a single user can corrupt data points across the project. Still, I'm not interested in being the police, I'd just like to know who to call on to assess a situation and handle it appropriately. While I'm happy to revert changes on pages I watch, when I find someone making erroneous or suspect changes en masse, I suspect that what's needed here is someone to roll back all this guy's changes, something a couple editors have been doing piecemeal. I stumbled on your page out of curiosity over a different issue, noted your bot-assisted vandalism-fighting cred, and thought I'd see if you could assist. Thanks, Abrazame (talk) 08:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I take it you're not interested in addressing the above issue. Would you be able to direct me to someone whose purview it is to take care of this sort of situation? The edits in question continue. Thanks, Abrazame (talk) 09:42, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Just popping in for a minute, (I somehow missed this section). Anyways, I don't have time now to look at this more closely... Maybe try leaving a note on WP:Administrators' noticeboard. J.delanoygabsadds 22:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.

Thank you for watching out the usability wiki and restoring the multimedia hub from the vandalism. Much appreciated. You deserve a barnstar. --Shuhari (talk) 17:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and you're welcome :-) J.delanoygabsadds 20:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Regarding a suspected proxy

Hello, J.delanoy!

I reverted a number of edits by user 78.151.132.119. They were also given a "last warning" by User:Ipatrol, which prompted this post on my talk page. I don't know if it is actually possible that someone was in fact using a proxy and making unconstructive edits, so I wonder if you could help me respond...Thanks, Thatguyflint Talk to me! 17:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Quick check

Hey there J.delanoy. Was wondering if you could take a quick look at User_talk:NuclearWarfare#A_SPI_question. Thank, NW (Talk) 19:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Is that a Dalek I spy on your userpage? I didn't know that you were a Doctor Who fan! NW (Talk) 19:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Russian language, fyi

Hey you just blocked 91.77.129.245 for linkspam on Russian language. He is back as 91.77.252.41 and spamming as usual. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 18:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diligence
I'm awarding you this barnstar of diligence for your combination of extraordinary scrutiny, precision and community service to wikipedia. South Bay (talk) 22:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

nom nom nom

andyzweb (talk) haz givn u Cheezburgr! Cheezburgrs promot WikiLovez and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!

Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all lolcat buddiez by addin {{subst:Cheezburgr}} to their talk paj with friendly messuj to all.


Thanks for all the great editing you do!!! andyzweb (talk) 05:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocking of 68.193.162.27.

I think you blocked it too early. It was only at its third warning. It would have needed to receive one more warning (fourth warning) to qualify for a block, yes? - Zhang He (talk) 07:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, four warnings are the norm, but there is no requirement that any specific number of warnings, or even any at all, be given before a block may be made. Especially in cases of very blatant personal attacks, like that guy did. J.delanoygabsadds 15:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
He was actually only warned twice before the block. But, given the nature of his edits, I support the block. Useight (talk) 15:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
The first warning was a level two warning, though. Anyway, I'm not saying I don't support the block; I just think it deserved one more warning before being blocked. - Zhang He (talk) 16:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

spi/chu?

Is it fishing to ask for checkuser against User:Wemmert, whose user page says this account was created in response to "my previous ban"? tedder (talk) 22:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Advertising

[13] [14]

  • (cur) (prev) 19:45, 28 January 2010 72.82.214.29 (Talk) (21,247 bytes) (Yowusa please stop advertising your region.) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 17:28, 26 January 2010 Yowuza (Talk | contribs) (21,247 bytes) (Undid revision 340022488 by 72.82.209.46 (talk)) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 23:14, 25 January 2010 72.82.209.46 (Talk) (21,242 bytes) (Undid revision 339976402 by Yowuza (talk)) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 19:15, 25 January 2010 Yowuza (Talk | contribs) (21,247 bytes) (Undid revision 339967782 by 72.82.209.46 (talk)) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 18:25, 25 January 2010 72.82.209.46 (Talk) (21,242 bytes) (Undid revision 339770418 by Yowuza (talk)) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 17:51, 25 January 2010 72.73.89.146 (Talk) (21,247 bytes) (→Technical history) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 19:04, 24 January 2010 Yowuza (Talk | contribs) (21,240 bytes) (rv) (undo)
  • (cur) (prev) 04:15, 24 January 2010 72.82.212.158 (Talk) (21,235 bytes) (Spelling) (undo)

It is kind of very obvious. --Yowuza yadderhouse | meh 16:01, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Archive 20←Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27→Archive 30
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:J.delanoy/Archive_25&oldid=1091514345"