User talk:Tiptoety/Archive 29

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25 ← Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 → Archive 35

Archiving?

Hi Tiptoety, I noticed you archived my arbcom request. Has a decision been reached in that case? If so, it hasn't been explicitly stated. Could you please let me know what the decision was and add it to the archived thread?--Thomas B (talk) 10:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, ArbCom has indicated that it does not wish to amend the case at this time. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 10:35, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
I hope I'm not being a pain, but where has ArbCom indicated this?--Thomas B (talk) 11:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
You are not. They indicated this to me on the Arbitration clerks mailing list. You are free to contact the Arbs directly if you would like this clarified. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 18:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. I've written to the Committee. Happy editing.--Thomas B (talk) 21:24, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

request

Want to request you to allow me to move on to a new user name. Mrinal Pandey —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrinal Pandey (talk • contribs) 19:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thats fine. You will need to file a request at WP:CHU though, as I do not have the ability to rename your account. Tiptoety talk 21:55, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll do that.Mrinal Pandey 08:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrinal Pandey (talk • contribs)

Oregon COTW v 3.0.2010ish

Greetings WikiProject Oregon team member. Time for the first new Collaboration Of The Week in 2010. Thank you to those who worked on Bill Schonely and archiving talk pages. For this week, we have Concordia University and the Berry Botanic Garden. Hopefully we can mine the garden’s website before it closes down. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Cheers and stuff. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Chuck Knipp

Tough luck. Hundreds of people share this IP.--190.173.218.144 (talk) 01:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Editing restriction query

Good morning. In 2008 you put an editor under editing restrictions, here, and I was wondering if you considered them to still be in force as I can find nothing removing them. Reason I ask is not long after that the editor abandoned that account and started editing under Miesianiacal (talk · contribs). It seems they're up to their old tricks and I'm trying to find out whether or not the previous editing restrictions should still be applied as it seems they abandoned that account to get away from their copious block history. Thanks. Canterbury Tail talk 12:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, those restrictions are still in place unless he can provide you with evidence that they were removed by community consensus or another administrator. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 16:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. Canterbury Tail talk 17:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Just Out, COTW does well in new decade

Howdy WikiProject Oregon folks, time again for the latest installment of As the Collaboration Of The Week Turns. Last week was one of the more successful COTWs in recent memory as we really worked hard as a community to improve Concordia University and Berry Botanic Garden. Both are now at least C class articles and nicely illustrated (thanks to Tedder, Finetooth, and Ipoellet). Plus it really was a group effort as we had five different WPORE editors work on the garden and ditto with the school, with some overlap between the two.

Anyway, this week, we have by request the completely unrelated Just Out and Terrell Brandon. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. This message paid for by Fooians against COTW killing taxes. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

86.96.228.84

I have unblocked 86.96.228.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). All UAE internet traffic is filtered through a few addresses. Blocking those addresses blocks the country. There were no open ports. Fred Talk 19:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Alright. Tiptoety talk 20:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Collect - Note his past

Note that the user had a RFC about him Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Collect, two of the reasons were disruptive editing and wikilawyering. See: User_talk:Gwen_Gale#User:Collect_-_Time_to_back_up_your_words Phoenix of9 22:06, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Problematic_User_Keeps_Being_Problematic_After_RFC.2C_Breaks_Restrictions involves this. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
I am/was aware of his prior blocks and RFC. My block was simply based on his disruptive behavior at a specific article. Once he agreed to abide by the rules there, I saw no further use for the block. I assume you are asking that he receive some sort of "punishment" for his poor block history. And while you may be right, that is not really an administrators decision. Either gain consensus for some kind of editing restrictions (though, the AN/I thread appears closed), or contact ArbCom. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 04:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

User:WikiLubber/Sock Puppetry

I noticed you were part of the sockpuppet investigation against WikiLubber from 19 January 2010. One of the IP accounts has again engaged in edit warring (after a 1-week block expired) that has also involved WikiLubber previously. I updated Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WikiLubber with this and another IP address but wasn't sure if I am following the proper steps since there is already an archived investigation. I have only updated the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WikiLubber and have not placed anything on an administrator's noticeboard.

Am I reporting this properly? Please let me know if you have any input or advice/additional steps I should take. Thanks. Sottolacqua (talk) 00:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I will take a look at the case if I have time. Otherwise, another administrator will get to it. As for the report, it looks fine. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 05:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Appys suspected sockpuppet of banned vandalisim-only user Cheyenne99911

User "Appys" is vandalizing the e.Digital Corporation article with substantially the same edits as a user banned for being a vandalism-only account, "Cheyenne99911." As I did with Cheyenne99911, I have asked Appys to bring his/her concerns to the discussion page, but neither user has done so. Your review of the matter is appreciated. Thank you. OccamzRazor (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Am I reporting this in the wrong way? Please advise. OccamzRazor (talk) 21:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't have a bunch of free time on my hands, otherwise I would handle it for you. Instead, you should fine a sockpuppet investigation. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 06:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for responding. I will see if I can figure out how to to that. OccamzRazor (talk) 18:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
If you cannot, post to the talk page and a clerk will help you. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 19:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Question.

Hello, earlier today I opened a sock puppet investigation Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/76.27.113.124 but was wondering why it isn't showing up on the main page where all the listings are? Did I do something wrong filling it out? Thanks! --milonica (talk) 02:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh, the bot is broken currently. I went ahead and listed it for you. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 02:46, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks --milonica (talk) 04:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI

I saw you commenting at talk page of PeterSymonds recently, so maybe you should be aware what is going on. After the repeated outings and ridiculous WP:COI accusations about me (both on-wiki and off-wiki), I feel uncomfortable editing anything related to my work. That's fine. There are many other subjects to edit. Unfortunately, when I tried to return to editing recently, the guys are following my edits everywhere. That's not a problem too as long as they respect policies, because I can provide all sources, up to the original quotes on Russian, but they seem to simply remove everything they do not like, no matter that everything was sourced to books. No action required I think; this is just to let you know. Biophys (talk) 05:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a "vandalism only" account:[1] (look at the numbers and below), same here:[2], same here [3]. Biophys (talk) 15:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Ana 20

I've gone ahead and selectively removed some of the information from that page. A look at page history will show you what I changed, and once Google updates, the information in question should no longer be searchable. Hopefully that gets everybody happy here. Let me know if you've got a problem with what I changed or think I need to take it to another level. —C.Fred (talk) 19:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Nope. No problems at all. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 19:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks for the rollback permissions ! Anish7 (talk) 10:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

-Clerk

Thanks for removing me. I'm a little too busy irl to keep that up right now. Thanks for the experience; hope I can come back eventually. ceranthor 23:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Thanks! --PinkBull 07:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Advice on check user

Hiya, was just after some advice/another opinion on sockpuppet investigations, as I've never submitted a request. I came across Ohio Junior Classical League and noticed that many of the editors have not contributed much beyond that article. Looking further I came across this investigation which unveiled a large number of socks. Many of the editors to the classical league article were started after the sockpuppet investigation, and have a similar name construction. Their user pages are also formatted in the same way. Editors I'm a bit suspicious about are as follows:

There's more than that, and some IPs as well, but I'll stop there lest I bore you! The main pages I've noticed as being affected are: Ohio Junior Classical League, WMMS, Northeast Ohio Conference, WKRK (FM) and Stow-Munroe Falls High School. It seems pretty clear to me that there's a pretty big sock farm going on, but there isn't too much obvious disruption being caused, which User:Smfhs photographer appeared guilty of. Many of the apparent socks also don't seem to have been used for a few months, so a checkuser will be of limited value (though it would hopefully uncover current ones). I would be grateful if you could let me know your opinion on how best to proceed. Quantpole (talk) 22:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I would file an SPI request under the same name as the earlier request you mentioned. Tiptoety talk 06:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hey, this may sound like a weird request, but can you remove my Rollback rights? I got it because I thought I may be interested in using Huggle, but after seeing how it works I'm not really interested. The rollback kind of scares me because of the way it reverts automatically and I'm afraid of clicking on it mistakenly. If can't be removed or it's too big of a deal then don't sweat it. It's not that important. Thanks, --PinkBull 03:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done - Tiptoety talk 06:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Oregon COTW and randomness

Greetings fellow WikiProject Oregon member, it is once again time for the Collaboration of the Week (yes, I know they are not actually every week anymore). Thank you to those who helped out the last few weeks improving Terrell Brandon, Just Out, 75th Oregon Legislative Assembly, and all the unreferenced BLPs. This week we have by request Oregon Coast Aquarium and Arvydas Sabonis (maybe the Blazers can sign him as I think he's healthy). Both need more sourcing. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. And remember folks, the only thing we have to fear is death and taxes, unless of course the dingo ate your baby, at which point you may feel the need, the for speed to get away from said dingos, which in turn can lead to a failure to communicate due to the dynamics of sound waves, though at some point hopefully we can all just get along. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:15, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Request that Precautionary's Evidence be reinstated

Please consider reinstating Precautionary's Evidence Statement [4]at the Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Transcendental Meditation movement/Evidence page. Precautionary was not being deceptive, and the evidence he presented is important for this case and was well-presented.

Thank you for considering this request. Hickorybark (talk) 20:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

He can still email ArbCom with his evidence, that way they can still read what he has to say. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 02:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

RfC/User on PCPP

Hello. Please be aware that I have opened an RfC about the conduct of PCPP (talk · contribs).--Asdfg12345 01:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Avril Troll

Please note: In reference to the Avril Troll IP sock investigation... With the evidence of trollish behavior shown, the Avril troll is using multiple IP addresses (ie: this one) to revert to complete vandal behavior. -- kainaw™ 23:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

RE: Your comments on User talk:Nil Einne... I am not certain how to handle this particular situation. If the user is making a constructive comment, should the comment be removed? The Avril Troll states that he was never banned and has been given permission to return. I do not know if that is true. My question is: If a user is indef. blocked/banned, is it proper to delete any and all posts from the user on sight? -- kainaw™ 23:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The comment does not have to be removed, that said I recommend that it is. While Avril is not "banned" they are indef blocked and are not allowed to create sockpuppets to evade said block. If they wish to appeal their block, they should email ArbCom. Tiptoety talk 23:43, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
It may be a coincidence, but as soon as this started, a new account was created that continued the same behavior. contribs here. -- kainaw™ 15:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Appears already blocked. I will have a CU look into it. Thanks, Tiptoety talk 21:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

re notification of arcom thingy

Wow, how about that! Thanks for the heads up. Herostratus (talk) 03:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Looking for a SPI Clerk

My concern was over the single purpose accounts focused around the article Baron Mulingar. User:Leeadam68 (article creator) stops editing, then User:Historyislife starts, which is followed by User:Irishlibraryguy. As far as I can see this alone is not an issue if it is the case that these three accounts belong to one user, as there has been no overly disruptive behaviour in that a user is trying to disrupt or sidestep wikipedia process buy multiple account use (that is before the article was tagged for AfD).

My attention was raised to possible socking taking place was with the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baron Mulingar. Thing to note is the use of ( ) brackets with the signatures for User:Leeadam68 & User:Historyislife and the addition then removal of a comment by User:Irishlibraryguy. All 3 edit with a six minute period of time, in reverse order of account creation. The chronological order of the actions seem to be Irishlibraryguy adds comment to AfD, reads other comments, deletes comment then deletes content from Earl of Carbery. Historyislife then adds comment to AfD, followed shortly by Leeadam68. To me this looks like a single user using multiple accounts.

Is it worth while taking to SPI, or am reading to much in to it and leaning into bad faith? --blue520 08:12, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I would say it is fairly obvious. Go ahead and file a SPI case. Tiptoety talk 20:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Good, thank you. One more question. With or without Checkuser? --blue520 04:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Please review my block and unblock request on Wikimedia Commons

Hi Tiptoety,

I've posted an unblock request on Wikimedia Commons for what was apparently an auto-block that affected me here as well. Once it was removed here, I thought it would be gone there as well, but apparently it is not.

The particular page (IP, etc) in question can be found here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:75.127.221.12#Unblock_Request

Sorry to bug you about this, but one of the notices (I think when I tried logging in or creating an account there) was to contact the blocking administrator, which was indicated to be you. Sadly, as I am blocked there, I could not do so there.

Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 19:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I am leaving right now, but I will look into it later today. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 19:54, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Much thanks, and have a great day! RobertMfromLI | User Talk 20:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Some more info, if it helps. Here is the block that is affecting my IP range on Wikimedia Commons:
04:36, 15 October 2009, Tiptoety (talk | contribs) blocked 75.127.128.0/17 (talk) (expires on 15 April 2010 at 04:36, anon. only, account creation blocked) (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 03:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Much thanks for taking care of that for me!!! Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 06:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I love you for who you are

I have created Roses Are Purple (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as an alternate account for I love you for who you are (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and counseled her regarding spam. Obviously this is a long shot. I'll play close attention. Fred Talk 23:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Great, sounds like a good way to handle it. Thanks for the heads up. Tiptoety talk 02:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Chapecoense

Hi, although you recently blocked this user from editing , he has continue his disruptive editing using different IP's (189.30.65.207, 189.30.83.63, 189.30.115.246, 189.30.96.119 and 189.30.113.196), and by the way this user is actually a sock puppet of user Picolotto who was blocked for 1 month for disruptive editing. I hope you can do something to stop his disruptive behavior. Regards --Bocafan76 (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jada.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jada.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
  • If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:39, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

SPI Clerk for Matanui44.

I noticed that you handled a SPI for MataNui44 before. Well, unfortunately he has possibly created another account under the name of Clisntover. This user has a similar editing history as MataNui44 and Everyman21. --ETLamborghini (talk) 16:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Visual edition of the Oregon COTW featuring the Glass Palace

Hello WikiProject Oregon member, time for a new edition of the Collaboration of the Week. Thank you to those who helped out the last few weeks improving Oregon Coast Aquarium and Arvydas Sabonis. Also thank you to those few of you helped with the attempt to celebrate Women's History Month with Barbara Roberts and Ursula K. Le Guin.

This week we have by request the Memorial Coliseum that has been in the news a lot lately, and then one of the more important political figures in our state's history, Douglas McKay. The MC needs some ref work and EL work, and McKay really needs a lot more sourcing. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Aboutmovies (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Clara Barton protection

Hello, in this edit [5] you lifted the protection on the article, saying you were giving it a try. It looks like that the level of vandalism in the past couple of months shows that it needs protection again. Thanks. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done - Tiptoety talk 20:00, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank You --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 21:47, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

You Have Been Blocked

Happy April Fools Day. Best regards. (I hope this substitutes for a knock-knock joke).--RM (Be my friend) 01:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Your request for rollback

Thanks Tiptoety, I appreciate it and will read the suggested article. Thanks again. DD2K (talk) 01:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Welcome. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Commons

Hello! Why you blocked my count in the Commons?

Look at this:

O seu nome de usuário ou endereço de IP foi bloqueado.

O bloqueio foi realizado por Tiptoety. O motivo apresentado foi Open proxy or zombie (more info).

* Início do bloqueio: 01h43min de 7 de janeiro de 2010 * Expiração do bloqueio: 01h43min de 7 de janeiro de 2011 * Destino do bloqueio: 189.93.128.0/17

Você pode contatar Tiptoety ou outro administrador para discutir sobre o bloqueio.

Você só poderá utilizar a funcionalidade "Contatar usuário" se um endereço de e-mail válido estiver especificado em suas preferências de usuário e você não tiver sido bloqueado de utilizar tal recurso. O seu endereço de IP atual é 189.93.236.171 e a ID de bloqueio é #31748. Por favor, inclua todos os detalhes acima em quaisquer tentativas de esclarecimento.

Because of this I can't edit anything. Sway 2 (talk) 12:59, 4 April 2010 (UTC)Sway_2

Removing my personal information

I would just like to say thanks for making me aware of the rules and removing what I had wrote from my userpage. I had no idea the rules existed and how serious it can be. (I created an account to edit so that I did not have to show my IP address) Chevymontecarlo. 20:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. And no worries, you are not expected to know such things. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 21:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

It Takes a Rim Village - Oregon COTW

Greetings WikiProject Oregon member, time for the next edition of the Collaboration of the Week. Thanks to those who assisted in improving a few articles over the last month. For May Day edition of the COTW (in Wikipedia time its May already), we have by request Rim Village Historic District and the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry (AKA OMSI). Rim Village just needs some refinement to get to GA, while OMSI needs a lot of work in general. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Adios (on May 5th that is). Aboutmovies (talk) 04:49, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello Tiptoety. How are you? Well you may not remember me, but you were the one that removed my rollback priviledge, because I ended up misusing it. I have learned my mistakes, and I believe my contribution in Wikipedia shows that I have really evolved for the better as an editor. So my humble request is will it be possible for you to trust me again with the Rollback tool? I am absolutely sure that I won't be using the tool for any misuse. Thanks --Legolas (talk2me) 10:17, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done - Cheers, Tiptoety talk 20:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you a lot Tiptoety. I promise I will never give you a chance to lose your faith in me. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering

  • I know this was a couple years ago, but do you remember this edit Here. I'm just trying to get the same editor to remove the same thing Here It's not major stuff but it goes to editor integrity and if he's is trying to get his interface rights re-instated Here it would be nice to knowing "whois". Thanks, could you reply on my talk ? Again thanks P.S. if you don't remember or you weren't involved no problem. Mlpearc MESSAGE 02:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

:)

):):):):):):):) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roxy:Pkid (talk • contribs) 02:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

hey how did u put on the wikimood? reply to roxy: JELLO says HELLO (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC).

Transclude User:Prodego/Wikistress into your userspace. Tiptoety talk 03:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

My question

Hi, will you be answering my question on your request? Aiken ♫ 15:34, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh jeez, I didn't even see it hidden up there. Give me a little bit and I will have it answered. Sorry! Tiptoety talk 19:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

About the Eliseo Soriano article

I saw this conversation and I would like to get your help. I recommend that the Eliseo Soriano article must be locked so that only admins could edit it. COI editors Shannon Rose and "anonymous IPs, Dar book, Journeyist" are struggling to prove whose edits are right. I believe that the term "International Fugitive" should be removed since the official (not an archive that was only added by Shannon Rose) INTERPOL website does not include Soriano in the fugitive list. 180.191.63.230 (talk) 07:57, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You can file a request at WP:RFPP. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 02:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 99 support, 9 oppose, and 2 neutral. Your support was much appreciated.

Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 17:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Per Flo

Per Flo. You are always welcomed back and will be missed. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I am not taking a break from the wiki, just from Arb-clerking. But, thanks anyways! Cheers, Tiptoety talk 00:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

First Admin I Saw!

Could you create Template:Editnotices/Group/User:Mono for me with the following content:

Content


I ask that you do not edit this page without my permission. If you would like to propose an edit, contact me.

Do not use this page to send a message to me. Use my talk page to talk to me. Thanks. mono

? Thanks. --mono 03:42, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done - Tiptoety talk 03:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!--mono 03:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

ello

Good day. I was wondering if you could take a look at my recent rollback rights request. I'm unsure what I need to do: should I wait until an administrator responds or ask one to do so? I assumed the latter was correct. Sorry if I'm wrong there...Fair ☯ talk 05:32, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Nard the Bard

At WP:PERM/A, you recently gave User:Nard the Bard the autoreviewer privilege. He has only created 4 articles. This permission is usually reserved for those who have created upwards of 50 articles. I think it would be best if you unassigned the permission. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 14:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I see no real reason to decline the request. After looking at his deleted edits (speedy deletion tagging and such) he clearly understands our policies regarding article creations, notability, etc... Also, he is a trusted user with a clean record on multiple wikis. I see no harm in grating him autoreviewer. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 16:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Talk:The Pool Party

Either you're too good or I'm too slow and fat-fingered. I started an admin note on Talk:The Pool Party. Could you please delete it? --moreno oso (talk) 00:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

 Deleted - Thanks, Tiptoety talk 00:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed. You're good; I'm fat-fingered. ;) ----moreno oso (talk) 00:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Page protection

Good morning.... can you please protect the article Demographic history of Bačka until the conflict me + Wladthemlat vs Hobartimus + Outesticide is solved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarekSS (talk • contribs) 05:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

No need for protection. You both just need to move from reverting one another to discussing the issue on the articles talk page. Please note you both have violated WP:3RR and could be blocked, so I suggest you both cease. Tiptoety talk
The dispute will not stop soon, I think it should be introduced at leaast a protective rule (1RR or something like that)
There is an old conflict on WP: [6] [7] (MarekSS (talk) 05:34, 28 May 2010 (UTC))
At this point, I am not going to take any further action. If you both use a little common sense and move to discussing the issue on the talk page, the dispute will be resolved for the time being. If you want a more long term solution, I suggest making a post at WP:AN/I. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 05:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I will try to sum it all up :

  • The problem is about inserting in the article the sourced data sbout the censuses from 1715 and 1720 which present an overwhelming majority of the Serbs over Hungarians
  • The Hungarian users refuse to add these data to he article, claiming that they are not reliable (personal opinion unsupported by a source) and organized in september 2007 a vote about the reliability of these census data, even if the data are confirmed by academic sources User:Fcsaba (Hungarian editor), User:Hobartimus (Hungarian editor), UseR:PaxEquilibrium (Montenegro editor), User:Rjecina (Croatian editor) (so not even an user from Serbia, the country that the area belongs to)
  • In present Me, User:Wladthemlat, User:PANONIAN contest this vote and the argument of the supportees of not inserting data from these censuses is that themselves consider History declared them unreliable (without showing a source, so it is just a personal POV)
  • In conclusion, does an opinion of a certain user from Wp override an academic source? (MarekSS (talk) 06:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC))
Please note the above posts of user:MarekSS were confirmed as a sockpuppet of the indefinitely blocked user:Iaaasi, while user Iaaasi is tagged as sockpuppet of user:Bonaparte. Hobartimus (talk) 14:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear "user", if you read your own post, you will realize that you yourself describe a consensus of editors from different countries -as you point out-. A consensus by definition is not the opinion of a single or "certain" user. You also seem to have an extremely good knowledge of wikipedia for someone who has been an editor for only a few hours. Hobartimus (talk) 08:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Please explain what are your arguments for not including those sourced data, except personal POV (MarekSS (talk) 08:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC))

Full stop. My talk page is not a noticeboard, and is not intended to be used as a battle ground. Please take this discussion elsewhere (article talk page, one of your talk pages, AN/I). Thanks, Tiptoety talk 18:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Orangmike

I have made the real Orangemike aware of this impersonation account in a post just a moment ago. Seemed like the right thing to do. Just making you aware. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 05:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I can only assume he would have made some kind of confirmation edit if it was actually his. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 05:34, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanx to both of you. Odd to be impersonated with that degree of enthusiasm. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Amandabilliot

Following on from the Alx Dokkis SPI, another user pointed out Amandabilliot as the potential puppet master. I have raised Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amandabilliot as a result. Cheers Fæ (talk) 10:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I will keep an eye on the case. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 17:35, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tiptoety/Archive_29&oldid=1136131842"