User talk:Kinu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Review of deletion at User:Ncox[edit]

If you don't mind, I would appreciate it if you could take a look the user page I deleted at User:Ncox and let me know if you think I made the right decision. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 20:19, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Replied at said user's talk page. --Kinu t/c 20:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate the second opinion. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 12:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Essay on Notability[edit]

I am working on an essay on the WP:GNG guidelines, and would appreciate your feedback/thoughts on it (it is still in an early stage., but I have been bouncing the idea around for a while now and decided to start writing something). User:Chrislk02/anarticleaboutaschoolthatcantfindagermanteacherisnotnotable Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 15:35, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Redland City[edit]

Hi, I saw you marked the user as a sockpuppet. Are there any other accounts I should be looking for? And should I request for temporary semi protection? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 06:40, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I think the only sock was the one I tagged and blocked. I don't think protection is necessary right now, but I'll keep an eye on it in case any other new socks pop up and continue the same behavior. --Kinu t/c 15:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Notable Artists[edit]

I found the "strongest" argument to date for why I should undelete/keep an article about an artist,but there was nothing about "soothing voice" exceptions in WP:GNG on it so I had to decline it. "...and if you are still not convinced, do a google search for <artist here> and listen to her soothing voice...."[2]. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 12:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I've been told my voice is soothing. Where's my article?! :D --Kinu t/c 19:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Keep it Up! C E (talk) 13:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Request for help[edit]

Hi

I am contacting you because you helped block a user (User_talk:Zachtron#Blocked) after he made up articles and I found your name in all three deletion discussions:

I suspect he is back, because someone is constantly editing the following articles:

Cheiron Studios was a Swedish production company that was shut down 15 years ago, but this user keeps adding information about a “revival”. The new company is based in USA and is of course run by Christopher Pasquin, who is linked to Rocket Records and Tim Coons (same story as last time). There is no evidence and on this “revived” company’s website the same statements are repeated (Tim Coons’ company being world-renowned etc.). As you can read in the deletion discussions, several of the sources back then were made up. One of the references he used this time for his article Cheiron Records (I have now reverted it to a redirect page, but I don’t know how long it will last) is a discogs.com biography he wrote himself.

When I revert his edits and ask for reliable sources he only undoes my edits and calls them vandalism. What should I do?

84.209.76.114 (talk) 12:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Request to ignore and block IP 84.209.76.114[edit]

Requesting your help. These 2 articles in question are continuously being vandalized by this IP address user. There is no mention of a Rocket Records, Pasquin, or Coons, and I suspect this user is actually some kind of fan or sock puppet with a spam agenda. This IP user mysteriously popped up the other day when no edits to the 2 pages in question had been made in many months. I tried undoing the Vandalism a few times hoping this IP user would stop, but now it seems hopeless as he or she is trying to use these articles as a way to force attention on himself or herself. Please view the history of both articles and you can see when this IP user first began initiating Vandalism on the 2 articles out of the blue the other day. Music2015 (talk) 16:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I've been following this battle, and the IP makes sense. Music2015, this is at worst a content dispute, it is definitely not vandalism, and calling someone a vandal when they are not vandalizing is a personal attack, which can get you blocked. Whether or not this account is related to User:Zachtron, the article should probably be deleted and the re-direct restored, as none of the sources in any way tie the current American Cheiron Records (which certainly exists), to the old Swedish studio. I could start a record company, and call it Gennett Recordings, but that doesn't mean my company would have anything to do with the legendary, defunct record label. This name-dropping and attempt to inherit notability is frankly very similar to previous behavior regarding Pasquin/Coons. Where are any reliable, independent sources that mention this new record label with the old name? 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I would have to respectfully disagree with you completely on that. The company is an official revival using logos, music, photos, history, and much more copyrighted content. Any of us could start a record company and name it whatever we want, i.e. "Bob's Records", but you have to have legal licenses and ownership of a brand (especially with that famous history) to do what they are doing, especially as an active company distributing music. I also see absolutely no mention of a Pasquin or Coons in the history of either Wiki article in question, just the company's/brand's history itself. Also, I never called the user a vandal, I simply pointed out what I perceived to be Vandalism of the 2 articles in question. That is not personal attack. I simply see no valid justification or good faith editing to alter the articles in question, but perhaps others can chime in.
Music2015 (talk) 17:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
You haven't answered 78's question: "Where are any reliable, independent sources that mention this new record label with the old name?" And as for not calling the IP a vandal, what do you think this is: "... are continuously being vandalized by this IP address user"? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I perceived what took place out of the blue with no good faith editing to be Vandalism. If I'm wrong for that, then sorry. Also, this is not a new record label we are talking about here and the independent sources already in the article are about the label itself and its vast history. This is not an article about some completely new company or music studio from Sweden which is now in America. An official revival with logos, music, and more is much different than creating something new and simply naming it after something old to get some notoriety. That is the way I see it at least.
Music2015 (talk) 17:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
For the THIRD time (and I apologise to other readers for shouting): "Where are any reliable, independent sources that mention this new record label with the old name?" - The only source in your article which mentions any connection is not independent. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:00, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Fine, I guess we will leave 78's most recent revert to the Cheiron Studios article in place until better independent sources become available. I'm not fully comfortable with this given that this so-called "new" Cheiron Studios seems to be an official revival of the same exact company/brand in question, complete with logos, history, licenses, and more, but it is what it is I suppose. Good day.
Music2015 (talk) 19:05, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately he does not respond to that question. I have tried: http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=CheironRecords#user=CheironRecords&item=label%2FCheiron (registration required, but I may provide screenshots if desired). I have asked him to prove that this company has acquired the rights to the Cheiron brand from Sony Music (Cheiron Studios was owned by BMG). I even confronted him with the fact that the original Cheiron staff does not appear to be informed (Sveriges Radio had a documentary about Cheiron Studios just a month ago). He completely ignores the burden of proof and asks me to get in touch with Pasquin’s company in order to get the sufficient evidence. My guess is that he hopes I will email them using my full name so that they will know my identity. He has already threatened me on Discogs with legal actions for “slandering” the company by asking for proofs. 84.209.76.114 (talk) 19:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
84.209.76.114, you are in clear violation of a personal attack against me, as I have never been a Discogs website editor in my entire life. You obviously have an issue going on over at Discogs with somebody there, but I would appreciate you not confusing me with that person and saying on here that I am the one who threatened you on Discogs. Your false statement is a blatant personal attack against me and is a direct violation of Wikipedia policy. Get your facts straight and don't confuse me with some Discogs editor you are fighting with.
Music2015 (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh, please … On 21 December 2014 a Discogs account named CheironRecords was created. Whoever created it only edited label pages belonging to Cheiron. No reliable sources were provided. Only hours later your account on Wikipedia was registered and the only edits you made were to the articles about Cheiron. You even used the Discogs biography written a few hours earlier as a source. It is also an incredible coincidence, to use your own words, that you have undone my WP edits about the same time CheironRecords answered me on Discogs. Every. Single. Time. Both you and “not you” have failed to provide even a single reliable source for the information that you have submitted. Your language is the same. Both you and “not you” claim to have nothing to do with Cheiron (even though the nick on Discogs was CheironRecords!). On Discogs, “not you” threatened me with legal actions: “attorneys might be highly interested in having your IP address traced” (go on btw, it is 84.209.76.114 (IPv4) / 2a02:fe0:c412:1741:6d0e:fe5a:f0a4:7ffa (IPv6)). How would you know my IP if not for Wikipedia? Discogs does not reveal that information. I understand that you want to promote your company, but both Discogs and Wikipedia are fact based sites. You need to provide sources. 2A02:FE0:C412:1741:6D0E:FE5A:F0A4:7FFA (talk) 20:30, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
(PS. 2a02:fe0:c412:1741:6d0e:fe5a:f0a4:7ffa = 84.209.76.114. My browser alternates between IPv4 and IPv6, I do not know why) 2A02:FE0:C412:1741:6D0E:FE5A:F0A4:7FFA (talk) 20:32, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Your IP address is available for all to see right here on Wikipedia since you are editing as an IP. For the last time, take your Discogs argument elsewhere and stop tying me in with them. This is Wikipedia, not Discogs, and your whole intent is to obviously draw attention to yourself which is why you started messing with the Wiki articles about Cheiron in question in the first place. I wouldn't be surprised at all if you are the same person(s) or a Sock Puppet of the blocked Rocket/Coons/Pasquin article creators you keep obsessing over and brought to the forefront because you sure seem to be behaving like them from the archived deletion logs you provided above. How many times were the Cheiron articles edited recently until you started "not vandalizing" them and immediately began drumming up conversation about Rocket Records/Coons/Pasquin? You seem to be fighting multiple fires with multiple people across multiple platforms trying to create whatever attention you can about these Coons and Pasquin guys, classic Sock Puppet behavior. Also, I checked out your multiple mile long Discog rants and they are scrolls of text, just like the long scrolls of text written by the banned Sock Puppets. Coincidence? I don't think so. Take your reverse psychology nonsense and quit trying to get attention for yourself (or your Rocket friends). You guys were banned a year ago, move on.

By the way, I see that it was an elaborate team of Sock Puppets who were banned, and they had multiple long conversations and fake arguments with themselves just like it appears you are doing on Discogs. Your same behavior is hardly a coincidence.

Music2015 (talk) 21:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
“your whole intent is to obviously draw attention to yourself”
That’s why I use an anonymous IP, right?

“multiple long conversations and fake arguments with themselves just like it appears you are doing on Discogs”
You gave yourself away there. You are now accusing me of creating the Discogs account “CheironRecords” in order to have fake arguments with myself. Well, that user added the information that you added to Wikipedia hours later. If I did create that account in order to troll, that means your edits are built on made up information. Quod erat demonstrandum. 84.209.76.114 (talk) 21:54, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I have blocked these two users for violating 3RR. Please see my post at WP:RFPP for my rationale and comment. ItsZippy (talkcontributions) 22:38, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Arbitrary section break[edit]

Apologies to all. I have been way too busy in real life to respond to this, but will take a look at everything when I get the chance. Allowing the AfD to play out is a good start... --Kinu t/c 19:12, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Do you like my socks[edit]

Just wondering, but who is the sockmaster? Dustin (talk) 05:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Based on this, it's this one from yesterday. There might be an older one, but the combination of WP:DENY and WP:RBI is good enough. --Kinu t/c 06:00, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
This must be User:Blueberry Aardvark, I reverted all of their edits as vandalism. Some examples of the user's socks vandalism [3] and [4], Possibly User:Blueberry Aardvark could be the sockmaster. Regards EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 06:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Okay; thanks for the response. Dustin (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arr4/Archive_7&diff=prev&oldid=659245789

The user:Yasmin542 writes in Bengali(using English alphabets) that she is a sockpuppet of Bishal Khan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bishal_Khan

--Cosmic  Emperor  07:10, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Tunisian Arabic[edit]

Dear User,

As you are one of the contributors to Tunisian Arabic. You are kindly asked to review the part about Domains of Use and adjust it directly or through comments in the talk page of Tunisian Arabic.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 13:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2006 December[edit]

What's your thoughts about the latest round (especially the last two "unrelated" socks)? CU can't be used to prove a negative, but on behavior there seems to be some disagreement. --Rschen7754 16:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)