User talk:Tnxman307/Archive 28

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

RE: Unblock

I'm editing from a University so it's understandable why this IP was used for vandalism. Thank you for unblocking me; I was not expecting such a swift resolution. --SprintingSplinter (Talk | Contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 15:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC).

The MediaWiki software was just upgraded and it's causing some funky issues with autoblocks. Let me know if there are more issues. TN X Man 16:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

RMK Engineering College

Hi. Could you please take a look at this article? Maheswaran2020 was blocked by Materialscientist for repeatedly adding unencyclopedic content. A few hours later, an IP (presumably Maheswaran2020) readded the same which I reverted. But after some time, Providence34 undid my revert. If you also see the page history, Keshavkumar123 has edited the article in a similar manner. Do all these pass the WP:DUCK test? And could you also revert the reinstatement of the unencyclopeidc content by Providence34. I do not want to do so as I have already done 3 reverts. Thanks, — Abhishek ^Talk 17:51, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the copyright violations and semi-protected the page. TN X Man 17:59, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Marc Bernstein

I was attempting to create an article for an entrepreneur named Marc Bernstein. It states that an article with the same name was deleted by you. Can you tell me the reasons why and hopefully confirm whether or not we are discussing the same person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Targo97 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The article I deleted in 2009 was about the CEO of Heritage Records. Is that to whom you are referring? TN X Man 11:28, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

You have nothing better to do than delete pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.152.23.10 (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

No, we are referring to two different Marc Bernstein's. I understand it's not the most uncommon name. Will I be able to create a page about the one I am referring to? How do I get approved to do so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Targo97 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

You can certainly go ahead and create the page. I would encourage you, however, to review our guide to writing your first article, as well as our information on what makes a person notable enough for a Wikipedia article. TN X Man 19:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

mail

Hello, Tnxman307. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

—SpacemanSpiff 08:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Basis on Which Articles get Deleted

Hi User Tnxman307,

I created a page for Zed-Axis Technologies on 7th October 2011, which was soon nominated for Speedy Deletion. It mentioned that the article didn't comply with A7 (No indication of importance individuals, animals, organizations, web content) and G11 (Unambiguous advertising or promotion). I contested for the speedy deletion and reasoned why the page should not be deleted. But it has been deleted nonetheless. To the best of my knowledge, the article was not an ambiguous or unambiguous, direct or indirect advertising.

I would be obliged if you could help me with reasons on what is considered as important or less-important matter for an article to be submitted in Wikipedia. I have read the 'FAQs' and 'Why was my page deleted' sections thoroughly. Have also checked the section: Identifying with reliable sources. Vibha Babbar 10:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC) Vibha Babbar 09:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibha.delhi (talk • contribs)

I'm sorry, but the article had no indication why the company was notable. To be notable, the company must have significant coverage in independent reliable sources (press releases do not count). You may want to work on the article in your userspace in a sandbox before moving it to the main article space. TN X Man 11:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I think I have got your point. I'll create the article in Sandbox and mark it for review first. Thanks for responding :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibha.delhi (talk • contribs) Vibha Babbar 12:11, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Donaldecoho

Tnxman307,

I noticed after I posted my comment on Donaldecoho, that this person has been banned for 1 week. When will the ban expire? Would like this person to expand an article for "us" (WikiProject Military History) if they are willing and are able too. Adamdaley (talk) 05:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Their block has expired. If they are still having issues, they should post {{unblock}} on their talk page. Let me know if I can help. TN X Man 11:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Reason why I asked was because I saw the "Banned" template that you put there. That is why I asked when it expired. Do we leave it there or what? Adamdaley (talk) 12:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

The template shows the block was for a week. The user is free to remove it if he wants. TN X Man 13:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Saxonshield

Hey there, I noticed that you recently blocked User:Saxonshield for sockpuppetry. I was just wondering where the case was for this? I did check here, but could see no mention of Saxonshield. Not that I believe that the checkuser has made an error or anything, it just seemed to be so sudden and arbitrary. Thanks for your help! – Richard BB 15:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

It wasn't part of the BookWorm44 case proper. When Saxonshield filed this SPI case that accused just about every editor under the sun of being sockpuppets, I smelled something fishy. TN X Man 16:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks very much for the clear-up. – Richard BB 16:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Please review these blocks

There was a bug in MediaWiki 1.18 that caused blocks made via the API to have talk page access disabled when it should have been enabled. This also affected scripts such as User:Animum/easyblock.js. Please review the following blocks to make sure that you really intended talk page access to be disabled, and reblock if necessary.

Hellomynameisnotmeep (talk · block log · block user) by Tnxman307 at 2011-10-10T16:13:44Z, expires infinity: Abusing [[WP:Sock puppetry|multiple accounts]]

If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to post at User talk:Anomie#Allowusertalk issue. Thanks! Anomie ⚔ 02:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Your attention is requested

At Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Gaydenver. BAMP is saying he's not using a wifi connection but plugged in. Alexandria (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

yet another question

Did you run a check on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jivesh boodhun? I'm just wondering if it's ok to close that one up. Alexandria (talk) 16:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Only on Start Over and Party because it was part of the Brexx case. Cheers! TN X Man 17:41, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

So I take it Jivesh and Start Over are unrelated then? Alexandria (talk) 17:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Everything on Jivesh is stale, so I did not run a check there. TN X Man 17:52, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

except he's complaining now on the case page. Alexandria (talk) 17:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I see that now. Sorry, I had glanced at the archive and saw that it was several months ago. Well, in any case, I see no reason to check Jivesh, as Start Over... is now identified as Brexx (unless there are other accounts around). Sorry for the mixup. TN X Man 17:55, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Alright, marking as closed then. Alexandria (talk) 17:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Article submission rejected on obviously ridiculous grounds - cont

Here is the article submitted that you could not find and the comment below it.

So Google Earth is 'not a reliable source' (see below). Well, well. So we should not take information from Google Earth as trustworthy, even though NASA supplies the data to Google. If Google Earth is not a reliable source, what is?

I have driven this road myself. ________________________________

The longest paved continuous downhill road in the world lies close to San Pedro de Atacama in Chile. This lies on highway 27 which descends from the Alma Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array Telescope site opened in 2011. From the point on the plateau when the road starts to descend, highway 27 does not rise in any stretch until the junction with highway 23 near San Pedro, a distance of 61km. During the descent the road falls 2408metres. Visitors may note the carcasses of several runaway vehicles which lie at the roadside. The data for this stretch may be checked continuously using 'Google Earth' which gives altitude as well as distance travelled on the road. To check this, start from the low point (2442m) and stop when the road levels out at 4840m altitude. Thus begin from the highway 23/highway 27 junction and follow the road uphill.

________________________________________________________________________ Review completed. Some issues were found with this submission, and therefore it has not yet been accepted. The reviewer left the following comment: We're sorry, but we cannot accept unsourced suggestions or sources that are not reliable per the verifiability policy. Please cite reliable, third-party sources with your suggestions. Third party sources are needed so the information can be verified and to establish the notability of the topic. Your submission did not meet Wikipedia's criteria, but if you can address the issues found in the review, you are encouraged to make improvements and resubmit it. You can visit our live chat for assistance. When ready, please add the text {{AFC submission}} at the top of the article to request a new review. The reviewer(s) who declined this submission will be listed in the page history. Last edited by Alpha Quadrant 10 hours ago. Reviewer: Inform author Signing for archiving. TN X Man 19:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Feel free

We both declined an unblock, only yours appears to have been first. I never got an edit-conflict. If you want to undo mine, feel free ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

How dare you overwrite my decline! :) Nah, it's fine. Cheers! TN X Man 17:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Goldman Sachs PR

Four minutes after you blocked Goldmansachs99 (talk · contribs), user PS99999 (talk · contribs) was created and made the same edit to Lloyd Blankfein. I have blocked him per DUCK and told him he must request unblock on the original account. JohnCD (talk) 19:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Alan_Friedman

Good Day, Regarding your "Protected Alan Friedman: Persistent vandalism" to the bio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Friedman, the following text may be more in line with the editing rules: Mr Friedman founded the Rome and London based FBC Media in 1998. FBC Media (UK) Ltd went into administration on Monday October 24th 2011. FBC Media still operates in Italy. My very best regards, Plazadellaliberta (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

It may be better to add your note to the article's talk page, where it can be discussed by all of the editors currently working on the page. You can use the template {{Edit semi-protected}} to draw attention to your request. If you have any further questions, please let me know. TN X Man 01:31, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of "EIC Model™" page

I do not really understand why this page was deleted. The EIC Model is a nationally recognized education strategy that is in use in schools across the country. Over the past 15 years, over 2000 teachers In more than 1000 schools have been taught how to implement the EIC Model.Here is a link to the website of the Education Commission of the States that describes the EIC Model: http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/18/63/1863.htm The EIC Model was developed by the State Education and Environment Roundtable as a consortium of 16 state departments of education. If the objection is to the use of the trademark symbol, we would not object to removing it.

Please reconsider. Thank you. Geraldl2000 (talk) 22:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Gerald A. Lieberman— Preceding unsigned comment added by Geraldl2000 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The fact that you had to include a trademark symbol in the title pretty much tells everyone else why it's deleted (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification but, won't eliminating the trademark, thus opening up the use resolve this. I am willing to do that or please tell me what else I might do to get this corrected so that it can be posted. I appreciate any help that you can give me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geraldl2000 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

It's a gigantic piece of promotional spam. The use of trademarks throughout prove it. I wouldn't doubt if you were actually related to the organization. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:10, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Konguboy

I see you have declined the CU for this sockmaster because the data is stale. Can you block this guy because of behaviourial evidence. It is pretty much duckish. He has recreated an article created by one of his previous socks including using a file that has been uploaded to commons using the same account (and which has sat unused in commons since the previous deletion)--Sodabottle (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

The reviewing admin for the SPI should see the behavioral evidence and go from there. TN X Man 14:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Masada_Remembered

Needs talk page revocation. Calabe1992 (talk) 20:47, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Already done. TN X Man 14:23, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Gumerperu's case

I've seen your resolution about Gummerperu's case and I wonder what does "No comment on the IP" mean: you considered that based on the circumstances the IP should not be checked, or you checked and for privacy reasons you can't give the result, or you checked and the check was not conclusive? (or you can't tell me it for privacy reasons? XD). Thanks! --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 13:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

It means I cannot disclose any connections between the IP and the listed accounts for privacy reasons. Generally, in a case like that, the reviewing admin will use behavioral evidence to take (or decline to take) action against the IP. TN X Man 14:23, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 15:25, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Verbose and un-cited content

Hi Tnxman307

Just wondering what you do about content that has relatively good intentions, but is appallingly written, is verbose, grammatically appalling and has no citations. Should i just delete the whole sections (thus losing small amounts of interesting content), or take time to re-write it? I see it as a minor form of vandalism. Page Graham Gooch. User:JLE Thanks for your time. Googly75 (talk) 14:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I would re-write where I could. If it's uncited, add a {{cn}} tag to it if it's potentially verifiable, but you can remove it if you can't find any sources. TN X Man 16:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

block sock?

Are you going to block a user from this SPI? tedder (talk) 18:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Just checked my watchlist, there's a new one, will add to the SPI. tedder (talk) 18:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I generally try to wear one hat at a time when I do SPI cases- if I checked a case, I'll leave it for the reviewing admin to hand out blocks. I hope this helps. (after edit confict- I will recheck the case for you) TN X Man 18:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Aha, I forgot about the disconnect between clerking and adminning. I knew you're an admin so I thought you were going to handle it. Good times. tedder (talk) 18:46, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

DoDo Bird Brain

There's an active autoblock on that IP that was mentioned on my talkpage, which might be related to DoDo Bird Brain (talk · contribs), or might be fallout from a more recently-blocked sock account. Might be worth a check. Acroterion (talk) 15:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Cheers! TN X Man 16:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I've taken a look- I can't say too much due to the privacy policy, but I will say your week-long block has not gone amiss. TN X Man 19:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for checking, good to have one's guesses confirmed. Acroterion (talk) 20:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Arts Magazine

You deleted this from the List of art magazines, but I have restored it. It was a major magazine, is mentioned in numerous artist bibliographies, is archived in the Louise Nevelson papers in the Archive of American Art and issues are collected by art collectors. I think it certainly warrants being included in the list of art magazines and was frankly very surprised that it wasn't already there when I went to look for it. Marrante (talk) 02:01, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I only removed it because Arts Magazine was a redlink at the time. Now that there is an article for it, it can and should be included on the list. TN X Man 13:26, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah. I left it as a red link because there was another one there and I've seen plenty of lists with red links. My first list has a gazillion red links, actually. I don't like it, but didn't see it as a reason to not create it (Germans who resisted Nazism). I've since turned a number of them blue, but it's way more than I can or want to do. I did the best I could with the one on Arts Magazine and will continue to try to find more from time to time. Marrante (talk) 16:54, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Dysentery

Thanks for taking care of protecting dysentery. --Pyrochem (talk) 20:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem! TN X Man 20:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Help

Please visit this page and help me please.--Njavallil ...Talk 2 Me 22:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Enjoy...

...your vacation! – ukexpat (talk) 16:28, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Martinevans123

Hi. I've been reviewing the block of this user, and the reasons for it. The block was certainly correct, but I'm thinking he perhaps deserves a second chance after having read his explanation at User talk:Martinevans123. He hasn't denied that the other accounts were his, and I think the explanation is plausible. And I can't find any evidence of any actual disruption, vandalism, evasion, etc, so I think the risk is pretty low. What do you think? Would you agree to my unblocking him on the condition that if he uses any multiple accounts then he openly declares them in each user page and says why he has them? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:59, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Although, I would restrict him to one account only ... he suggests that he could change his mind otherwise (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I've also looked back on some of the work of some of his accounts, and I see pretty positive stuff - this really doesn't look like a bad guy at all. But should being restricted to one account be the only way I can get agreement to unblock, then I think it's very likely he would agree, and I would be OK to go with that -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Tnxman307 appears to have been away for a week or so, so I've gone ahead and unblocked this user. On Bwilkins suggestion, I've made it a proviso that he is restricted to one account - I guess he can always come back in the future and request the use of a second account if he really needs it. I hope that's OK with everyone -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Text and pics of "Peugeot J9"

The J9 is supposed to be Peugeot's longest production van from 1981 to 2010.(if Boxer is still producing to 2015, it will be first) And, i go to TED Eskişehir College, in Eskişehir, Turkey. We have 4 premier editions of it (3 of them are normal 21+1, one is Maxi 14+1). And i saw a lot of normal J9s on roads (it is sold as 3 names in Turkey: Karsan J9, Peugeot J9, Peugeot Karsan J9). And really, you can tire yourself if you search it on Google, Yahoo, etc. And my schoolbus is the #19 premier 21+1. Please rewrite it! Please! I LOVE WIKIPEDIA!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRcarfan (talk • contribs) 14:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Follow-Up

Thanks for the feedback on the Fuqua School of Business page Tnxman307. You mentioned that you would edit the wiki pages for other business schools that we talked about in the past, if time allowed. Before allotting time to making further edits to the Fuqua School of Business wiki page, could you address these edits for other business schools? I have found that many business school's wiki pages have entire sections without citation. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamsungFuqua (talk • contribs) 16:08, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I would appreciate your help

In light of your comments at the bottom of this page, I've been trying to remove my name (and the associated stigma) from this User page to no avail. I keep getting reverted by a pair of partisan editors. Would you please remove my name from the User:Illume1999 page? I'd appreciate your help with that. Thank you. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

BigzMMA and Civility

Hello, you were recently involved in declining a unblock request by User:BigzMMA with regard to civility and personal attacks. I wish to draw your attention to a specific thread on the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard entitled WP:MMANOT, WT:MMANOT. BigzMMA has been making remarks about the other user in the dispute (User:Papaursa) and was warned to ceace making the attacks. A short time ago they made yet annother personal attack and I told them straight out they needed to strike their personal attacks from their latest posting, gave a 1 hour deadline prior to involving an administrator, and dropped a talk page notice on their talk page. As it's now been over 2 hours (I decided to be reasonable), I request that you please evaluate BigzMMA's statements and comment at their talk page. I am also posting this to the talk pages of other administrators who have dealt with BigzMMA before to form a consensus on how to improve the inter-editor communcation. Thank you Hasteur (talk) 19:37, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Notesenses

User:Notesenses, whom you had indefinitely blocked is back with a new account User:Scarmeganolinious and is causing the same disruption as before (October 9 as Notesenses November 22 as Scarmeganolinious etc.). If there are no unrelated active accounts in his IP range, could you block it as he'll keep creating new accounts?--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 22:23, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

deleting "annie bacon" page

Hello Tnxman307,

I'm contacting you because you previously deleted the page about "Annie Bacon" (full disclosure, I am Annie Bacon) because the page did not reflect the significance or importance of the real person being written about. It seems weird to be trying to make a page for myself, but in these DIY days, there's no one else to do it, and I do believe I've reached a level of significance in my field as a songwriter. I've released 5 (soon to be 6) albums of my own, one of which is mentioned on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Street_Opus#Discography, and contributed to 4 others, including one by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corinne_West which also featured Mike Marshall, and Jerry Douglas among others. I'm hoping you can give me permission to create this page again. Last time it was created by someone trying to help me with my tremendous amount of work, but she did not know the etiquette of Wiki page creation. I believe I can create the page with proper sourcing and demonstrating my significance :)

Thanks for your consideration, Annie Mangowanger (talk) 05:48, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Before you do anything, please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:CREATIVE. If you really are notable per the latter, someone will write an article about you sooner or later. There is no deadline. – ukexpat (talk) 15:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Deleting Just like vinyl

Why are you doing that? This is Important band. I listen it. I paid 3$ not for you deleting info about band! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.49.41.92 (talk) 13:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

Welcome back. Phew, that was a long vacation. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! It was more of a "vacation-blurring-into-busy-time-at-work-with-a-side-of-decreased-free-time". Hopefully I can get back up to speed. TN X Man 15:18, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

You missed all the fun where I quizzed the candidates about a purely theoretical case of an editor who is blocked indefintely for using multiple accounts. You may find some of their replies interesting! I'm sure there's no rush. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Emglosh

Just checking - does it matter that you put the block template on the user page instead of the user talk page? -- John of Reading (talk) 17:38, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

See below. Sorry! TN X Man 15:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

A favor

When you block someone indefinitely for being a spammer, could you delete the spam page, instead of just replacing the content with a "you have been blocked for spamming" notice? This will make things easier in terms of newpage patrol (and since I'm pretty much the only one who patrols that namespace, it will make things easier for me).

Also, you might want to block talkpage access, because such spammers are likely to try to use their talkpages for spam. DS (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I usually do that, but am a little out of practice, having been away for a while. If anything else comes up, please let me know. TN X Man 15:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

4Shared Deletion Issue

Hi, the 4Shared article should not have been deleted as I am not advertising it in anyway. This article is mainly translated and edited from this article: http://ms.wikipedia.org/wiki/4shared

The 4Shared article had no advertising what-so-ever - it is based on hard facts.

I am not an advertiser, I tend to go in to detail for all my edits & articles.

I am clarifying information that other users have not done properly.

4Shared has a high global ranking too, so it is still relevant: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/4shared.com

I had mentioned on the talk page why this article should not be deleted - and no valid reason was given against what I wrote.

I will repost this article as I make copies. Please do not delete without valid reasons. It was said the article was deleted due to '(Unambiguous advertising or promotion)'. There is no promotion or advertising, just facts - Like the MegaUpload Article. Articleperfector (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Bless sins

I was having a look at [1] particular in the light of this comment [2] which makes a lot of sense. I have blocked dozens of socks but I am not sure this one is right. Am I missing anything? --BozMo talk 12:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, the block is based on the findings of the two checkusers (Frank and WilliamH) who reviewed the case. While checkuser data cannot determine "fingers on the keyboard", as it were, the two accounts do appear to share enough data to make them technically indistinguishable. If other admins/the community think they should be unblocked, I am OK with that. (Please note, although I am a checkuser as well, I was simply acting as the reviewing admin in this case.) TN X Man 14:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

As I pointed out in the original sockpuppet investigation page, of the "only" 183 pages that overlap, some are extremely unlikely to have happened by chance. What are the odds that two different editors who generally only edit for the purpose of defending Islam/Muslim countries would also both edit Gecko or Seawater Greenhouse or Piracy? Also, we don't have the checkuser data - how many computers were the accounts sharing? Jayjg ^(talk) 14:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The continuation of this discussion seems better on the user talk page. --BozMo talk 20:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Responsive Web Design Article / Page

Tnxman307:

I was wondering why you deleted my entry for "responsive web design". my goal here is education. How can i make the page / article more relevant ?

thanks MagicDamo (talk) 20:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

See the message on your talk page and Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. – ukexpat (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

empowerment evaluation - please repost

Hi

Please see my next post - requesting reposting of my empowerment evaluation page. Thanks.

- David

Profdavidf (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

request - repost my empowerment evaluation page

Hi I would appreciate it if you would repost my empowerment evaluation page. I think it is an important contribution to make to the evaluation community. I am the founder of the approach. I presented it to the American Evaluation Association in 1993, as part of my presidential address. I am the author or co-author of many of the books and articles involved and, as such, I can see where that might have triggered the automatic deletion and appearance of a COI problem. However, upon inspection, I think I provided a balance perspective on the topic. I have cited many colleagues who are critical of the approach (two waves of critique), as well as supporters. In addition, I have conducted evaluations for over 25 years, including traditional and empowerment and qualitative and quantitative approaches. I am also happy to modify the piece as you recommend. Many thanks in advance for your assistance. Best wishes.- David Profdavidf (talk) 21:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Profdavidf (talk) 21:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Please read the notice on your talk page, WP:NOT and WP:SPAM. – ukexpat (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Unblock request of Orartu

Hello Tnxman307. Orartu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 23:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Commented there. TN X Man 16:08, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

AN/I

There is a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive828#Block review/unblock proposal, in which you might have an interest. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it has been handled. If there's anything else with which I can assist, please let me know. (FWIW, I have no issue with the outcome and am glad it was resolved amicably.) TN X Man 15:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

SPI etc.

Hey Tnxman, I need your help/some advice. This concerns Tachash, where a new user, User:Sniperscout, is redoing the work done before by User:Michael Paul Heart. Now, MPH is indef-blocked on the suspicion of socking, but I am not entirely sure who made that assessment and on what basis--Future Perfect blocked them on 26 November 2011. You blocked two of their socks, User:Tillie Jean and User:BenjaminDavidAharonDvi, on 8 May 2011--did you do a CU? But there is no SPI on MPH that I can find, so what I've done is add 69.66.209.3 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and Sniperscout to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hermitstudy, even though Hermitstudy (if I read the SPI correctly) was never conclusively linked to MPH. But there is no doubt in my mind, Hermitstudy is the master. Anyway, I really want to block Sniperscout for quacking like a duck, but a. I'd like to see if you agree (Sniperscout is doing other things in other areas, to get autoconfirmed) and b. it would be nice to get things on paper (in an SPI), preferably with some CU evidence. Any thoughts? Drmies (talk) 03:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Another question: do you know why MPH was blocked indefinitely only in November? They hadn't edited since April. Drmies (talk) 03:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

There is too much overlap in editing interests between Sniperscout and the MPH socks for them to be unrelated. Further investigation shows that Sniperscout is a

Confirmed match to LittleOldManRetired (talk · contribs), who is blocked as an MPH sock. As for relations to Hermitstudy, I couldn't say, as the technical data is all stale. I don't know if it matters as much, since that account has not edited in years.

I am not sure what led FPaS to block MPH in November, but it appears to be based on further socking and/or logging out to edit (just from skimming the talk page). I hope this helps. TN X Man 16:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you much. I've blocked them indefinitely. Drmies (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)