User talk:SGGH/Archive 2010/July

Wikiplayer13

Can I edit my user page please I do not have any intentions of upsetting anybody because i did not no the process of how to become a administrator , and this won't happen again in the future as I am now now the procedures of becoming administrator. - Wikiplayer13 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC). Thank you very much im sorry if my actions upset anybody but i hope you understand i have no intention of impersonate an admin. - Wikiplayer13 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:57, 1 July 2010 (UTC).

stalker

Hi! Following your comment in Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Atheisty, I have an idea who my stalker might be. This diff, from User:Storm Rider expresses clear objection and even anger to my comment. I am not sure about him, but he's the only user I could think of. I will appreciate it if you run an CU request about him. Cheers, Maashatra11 (talk) 21:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I don't know if SPI will let us take a fishing expedition but I shall browse around. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 21:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi SGGH! I have more evidence based on the striking similarity between the comment and vote made by User:Storm Rider, and Atheisty' vote, as can be implied from the AfD of Mormon criticism. Both use "Weak Delete" and use very similar wording. I think similarity of edits can be a good reason for a CU. Anyway, I will make a bit of copypaste for you so it's easier for you to compare :

Weak Delete Repetition adnauseam benefits no one and LDS topics do seem to particularly repetitive. If there is anything novel in the article, then keep it and change the title to fit the new topic, i.e. Criticism of the Doctrine and Covenants. A hierarchy for hierarchy's sake is meaningless unless the progression results in a cumulative addition of new information. Simply repeating what already exists elsewhere is aggrandizement. --StormRider 18:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

vs.

Weak Delete The information in the article seems to be expressed in other articles critical of Mormonism. The article could be salvaged if it was entirely redone and devoted to a specific criticism..... Hierarchy, I believe, is meaningless. --Atheisty (talk) 20:35, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

The suspected sock seems to have cooled off for now so nothing immediate is required to be done. Cheers, Maashatra11 (talk) 22:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

It seems a bit tenuous (no offense) but something to consider. With no evidence of block evasion, and only a sliver of possible vote stacking, I shan't be taking it any further at this time. From your comment above I assume you are satisfied with this at the moment. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 22:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I might sound ignorant. What are "block evasions" and "sliver of possible vote stackings"? Anyway, If I wish to, I can always request a sockpuppetry investigation myself, because IMO there is enough evidence that it's him. Maashatra11 (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The improper uses of alternate accounts include two things: using an alternate account to evade a block on the original account, or using multiple accounts to give the impression of there being more support for an argument, which is like vote-stacking. There are some legitimate uses of alternate accounts. WP:ILLEGIT has some polices on it. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 23:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I see. But I think that if this user continues to wikistalk me, which is clear harassment, sockpuppet allegations might be taken into account as evidence for it and a subsequent block might be enforced for inappropriate conduct. Anyway, thanks for informing me on the policies. Maashatra11 (talk) 23:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem, I expect WP:SPI won't have a problem if there is a stalking problem. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 23:16, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Is a stalking problem enough to request a SPI ? I think these are no longer "vague thoughts" but rather evident, based on my comments above, and his edits clearly indicate stalking behaviour. Maashatra11 (talk) 23:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, see this policy in WP:ILLEGIT: "Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts should not edit policies, guidelines, or their talk pages; comment in Arbitration proceedings; or vote in requests for adminship, deletion debates, or elections.". I really think a SPI is appropriate. I thought that after you suggested it in the ANI board, should you be given evidence about who it is, you would do it. I'd be glad to do it myself, but I'm afraid I'm not so experienced in making SPI reports... Maashatra11 (talk) 23:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I can do it - however you would be required to give evidence at it because I am obviously not familiar enough with the situation to do it all myself. Atheisty is a suspect sock of User:Storm Rider you believe, yes? I'll file it up for you and link it to you. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 09:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for filing it up for me! I'll add more info later to the SPI if I find it appropriate. Maashatra11 (talk) 09:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

You could have saved yourself time by just asking me. I would strongly encourage anyone capable to do a search and compare my name with anyone else's. Maashatra, I don't know you from Adam, but I can assure you of one thing, you know how to ruffle feathers. This was poorly handled. --^StormRider 03:03, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Battle of Lucas Bend

Hello! Your submission of Battle of Lucas Bend at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Harrias ^talk 19:34, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, approved now. If you have a chance, have a look through Somerset County Cricket Club in 2009 that I'm working on at the moment. Harrias ^talk 21:17, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The Request for mediation concerning World Wrestling Entertainment, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. An explanation of why it has not been possible to allow this dispute to proceed to mediation is provided at the mediation request page (which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time). Queries on the rejection of this dispute can be directed to the Committee chairperson or e-mailed to the mediation mailing list.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK 17:15, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
(This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.)

Lol, what a pointless waste of time that was. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 18:33, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Lucas Bend

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank	Articles Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content
Members June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members	Editorial LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet categories

When creating new sockpuppet categories please use the {{sockpuppet category}} template e.g. [1]. This template automatically links to the correct Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations subpage and other useful pages, places the category in the correct categories, etc. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 23:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Ahh, that's how you do it. Thanks! S.G.^(GH) _ping! 08:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

New section

Please help.. new to Wiki and having all kinds of difficulty. Not to mention that there really needs to be a "chat" feature between admins and users here. I have been trying to create a couple pages for the brands that I manage, no different than Ford, Coke, or any other company listed here... not as an advertisement, just a page of general information. I've had them all deleted.. any advice welcome... thank you! Damiean12- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Damiean12 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello there Damiean. With regards to Timbersmith, I deleted the article because I believe it failed this policy. This is because it failed to assert any notability. Subjects like Coke and Ford have articles because they have "notability"... they are a 'big deal' if you like and warrant inclusion. Your article did not explain why the subject was notable, and I sincerely doubt that a company founded this year would have time to become notable.

Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information but a collection of notable topics (though I admit that the inclusion criteria is fairly lax). If you wish to contest the deletion you can file an entry at WP:DRV. I can do this for you if you so wish.

Another issue you may wish to keep in mind is that covered at this page. Wikipedia articles must be neutral, unbiased. If you have a conflict of interest with a subject I am sure you realise that it is very difficult to write about it neutrally. This does not mean you can't, but you may run into difficulties. I hope this answers your question. Don't forget to sign your posts using ~~~~ and put new entries at the bottom of talk pages. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 15:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the information.. I originally started by attempting to update our main corporation page.. TAPCO, which has been in business for ove- 25 years now. We actually are a well known name in the gun industry. I ran into issue after issue when attempting to correct the information for the "TAPCO" wiki page. After becoming frustrated with the edit of TAPCO, i thought i would move on to creating the TimberSmith page... which you're right, is a new brand and not yet well established. Creating entries has proved just as difficult as editing them. I have been very careful to speak in 3rd person from a neutral point of view, only to describe these entries, not to promote them. I'm going to attempt to create a wiki page for TAPCO again later today.. hopefully with better luck... thanks for your patience and help so far. Damiean12 (talk)Damiean12 —Preceding undated comment added 15:40, 8 July 2010 (UTC).

That's because something else called TAPCO already exists. You need to put the information at TAPCO (mail order company) or a similarly appropriate title. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 16:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Please review this thread

[[2]] and also review my uncivil personal attacks User:Hm2k/Hell In A Bucket Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah where did this come from? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 16:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Redlink dispute. It's the same problem as the first one. I'm just a tad low on good faith for this particular editor at this point and the community at large needs to impress upon the user what is and is not personal attacks. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:46, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh with the de-linking of redlinks? Yes I remember. Well, I left a comment on the ANI. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 16:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

blanking + "CNN racist motherfuckers" not worthy of a lvl 4im?

[3] You can have your opinion, I just think it's wrong. Even though s/he stopped, I see nothing wrong with that report. But I respect your decision. -Tommy! [message] 19:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think its anything more than your average bored youthful idiot who saw something on tv that occupied 30 seconds of his time. I don't have a problem if you want to re-report it. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 20:06, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Seeing s/he stopped, it's not worth it. Thanks anyway -Tommy! [message] 20:09, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

However, you might wanna take a look at User talk:Ksucasey13.. I don't know what you may want to do, but it looks like problems are down the road. -Tommy! [message] 20:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and blocked Ksucasey for vandalism and for defamation (On another note, Hey SGGH how've you been? Long time no see :) ). Best, Mifter (talk) 20:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm good thanks Mifter, glad to see you around. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 21:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Hey!

Red Gown ^{squeak at me!} _(quietly) 16:58, 12 July 2010 (UTC) YO S.G.^(GH) _ping! 17:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Ron Broxted

Dear SGGH, With regard to my user page. It has been vandalised (yet again). Two things - firstly the blog I wrote for "The Independent" no longer exists therefore I am happy to have the page taken down. Secondly I have prof of the person who is doing this, is there a legal way to redress this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron Broxted (talk • contribs) 18:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

---

Thank to intervene in this case. This user keeps vandalising my userpage. He is now editing my userpage again without his username. Please, WOULD YOU STOP HIM once at all ? Do I have to shut my userpage and close my account ??? Vandals have more protection than good users, that's amazing !

He has been blocked by another admin. Don't forget to sign your posts, and if he returns under another username tell us and we will deal with it. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 17:03, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Howdy

Take care on Tea Party movement, Xenophrenic, you are at WP:3RR. S.G.^(GH) _ping! 13:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

At the time of your posting, I was actually at 2RR, but I do appreciate you taking the effort to look out for me. I have software that helps prevent me from exceeding 3RR, and discussions toward making reverting unnecessary are now slowly moving forward, but the extra eyes and concern is always appreciated. Best regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 19:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

There is such a software? I was not aware of that, what is it called? S.G.^(GH) _ping! 20:39, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

You Know

You can help me ? How create a Wiki ? the some the wikia don't is good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KnuxD (talk • contribs) 22:05, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Re:You Know

Well phallus portuguese,know create pages but will deleted. Know create pages is easy.KnuxD (talk) 22:20, 18 July 2010 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Create_A_wiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by KnuxD (talk • contribs) 22:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Create a Wiki

Sorry me think that already there,don't find nothing,already make my wiki but need logan where find ? KnuxD (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for your addition to the article Julius Caesar on the always fascinating issue of his health. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Your essay

Sorry that it's taken so long for me to give this the perusal it deserves. Obviously, I agree totally with your overall point, but I did want to make a few comments, which I hope you will find useful. My aim here is for constructive criticism, so if I'm clumsy in my wording, please don't take offense – believe me, none is meant.

• I think the ideas you've got going are all excellent, and true and valuable for the project. As it stands, you start from a global principle and work your way to the point you want to make, which is quite a reasonable way to proceed, but it has the disadvantage of "burying the lede" as they say in the news biz. You might want to start off with an introductory paragraph that states your ultimate point, and then go into the principles which support it.

• I think that, overall, the tone is a little hyperbolic. I'm no aficianado of Wikipedia essays, but I imagine that it might go over better if you toned it down a bit, and made it a little more NPOV. I know that's an odd thing to say about an essay which, after all, expresses the writer's opinion, but I think that with online communication, a little bit of opinion goes a long way, and if the opinion is buttressed by more neutrally presented material, it has a greater chance of being more widely accepted.

• I realize that the images are meant to be humorous, but I'm not sure how well they work to support the ideas in the article.

That's about it - I hope you find this helpful to you -- if not, please feel free to ignore it, or use from it what works for you. If you'd like me to, I'd be happy to continue to critique the essay as you work on, but please don't feel obligated to keep me around. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, I took your advice in the good manner it was meant to be received, and I shall work more on the essay this evening. Cheers! S.G.^(GH) _ping! 05:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, SGGH. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerks.
Message added 17:25, 26 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.