Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:58, 7 May 2011

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

NYyankees51

Hey, I unblocked NYyankees51 (talk · contribs) on an extension of AGF on the conditions that he stick to that account (and only that account) and that he consent to regular CUs to make sure he's not taking the piss. Could you find the time to do a check at random intervals? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?

I'll do my best - my memory isn't the greatest in the world. I'll remove the timestamp from your sig so this doesn't archive. Now, what were we talking about? Waffles? TNXMan

I appreciate it! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?

Talkback

Interference at Kurmi

Greetings, as part of WikiProject India I've been trying to crack down on uncited "puffery" in caste articles. Not sure if you're an India guy, but there's an endemic issue of every clan out there insisting they are a Kshatriya ("warrior") class. Basically, nobody wants to admit they were historically a farming class. I've worked to investigate the early designations of some of these clans, and if the article has an uncited claim to Kshatriya but the bulk of gBooks say Shudra ("farmers"), I cite that and change to Shudra. As you may note, this provokes an outpouring of hostility from IPs across India and the diaspora (presumably of the clans in question), so I'm hopping to keep the citation proper. Most don't remove the citation, they just change the one word and leave the footnote, which is even worse since it makes it appear their claims are borne out by academics. If this continues on Kurmi I'll probably request full IP protection. Note though that the brand-new account User:KurmiKshatriya tried to place an IP block... but also left the text saying "Kshatriya" which totally conflicts with the citation. In any case, just wanted to update you on the controversy. Any suggestions? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:01, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Somehow (I'm not even sure when), the Kurmi article ended up on my watchlist. I basically keep an eye on it to keep out the worst stuff. Thanks to your great info, I'll keep an eye out for the Kshatriya/Shudra change as well. Let me know if there are other ways I can help. TNXMan 19:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I already warned KurmiKshatriya for his deceptive edits; not quite sure why he's trying to fake IP Blocks, given that most of the IP vandalism is people doing exactly what he did. Brand new account too... Lovely POV-pushing username as well. I kind of expected all heck would break loose once I put the Shudra citation in, though I did the same with Kunbi (a related clan) and have only gotten a few angry edits a month. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping hold down the fort on this issue. I was pretty sure going into it that the citations I added were going to be markedly unpopular and attract IP hostility. I feel I have tried, in the interest of fairness, to document the fact that they themselves claim Kshatriya (warrior) vice Shudra (farmer) origin. When I get a chance, I'll dig up more info to document what's basically their struggle to be re-classed as Kshatriya by forming "Kshatriya Kumri" associations, and their multiple (unsuccessful) court cases under the Brits to be reclassed. I'm not at all trying to be malicious, I was just chaffed by the unreferenced (or partisan-referenced) rewriting of history involved, and if it pops a few balloons, so be it. Thanks again! MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Good Day

SamsungFuqua (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)Hi Tnxman307,

I appreciate your help in cleaning up the Fuqua School of Business page. I noticed that most other top business schools also do not have clear citations around things like alumni, academics, school history, etc. on their wikipedia pages, specifically: Harvard Business School, Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Sloan School of Management, Columbia Business School, Stern School of Business, Booth School of Business, Tuck School of Business, Haas School of Business, Ross School of Business, Kellogg School of Management, Yale School of Management, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration, and the Johnson Graduate School of Management.

Could you also clean up those pages as well? This would allow all schools to function in a fair environment on Misplaced Pages in which all data is accurate, well sourced, and patrolled/cleaned-up when necessary by administrators. Thanks.

SamsungFuqua (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

I'll certainly take a look at those pages. I've also reword the honor code section in the Fuqua article to be more neutral. The way it was worded, it looked like Fuqua was trying to put the best possible spin on the situation. Also, looking at your username, you may want to review our conflict of interest guide, as it may have information relevant to you. TNXMan 16:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Tnxman307. This is helpful. Also, thanks for taking a look at the other schools listed above. I know that they are all making similar types of errors and mistakes in complying with Misplaced Pages's guidelines for what counts as reliable, well sourced, and non-promotional information and I just want to be sure that all schools are abiding by these same standards. Thanks again. SamsungFuqua (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

Hi Tnxman307 - Any luck cleaning up the other top business school's wiki pages? They seem to be all making errors and mistakes in complying with Misplaced Pages's guidelines for what counts as reliable, well sourced, and non-promotional information and I just want to be sure that all schools are abiding by the same standards. Thanks. SamsungFuqua (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

Request a CU

Hi, can you take a look at this CU request?. --Sodabottle (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it.--Sodabottle (talk) 03:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry folks (esp TnxMan) for jumping in so late, I've just been too busy lately and haven't had time to follow through on my intent to send this one to SPI. I believe this user is User:PONDHEEPANKAR, but that case is stale. However, I recently blocked and confirmed that User:Knight44 44 was the same. Is this related to Knight44 44? Also, I believe User:Kongu Kaviyarasu Gounder is the same. These are all carrying out the POV that PONDHEEPANKAR used to spread on here before he was blocked indefinitely. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, he has a previous history. The guy is indeed pon deepankar. The name is given in the metadata of konguboy's commons image upload. He runs a couple of blogs full of the same pov he is trying to push here. The blog pandyaboy added as external links is also run by pondeepankar --Sodabottle (talk) 05:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok. I hadn't noticed that upload. I'll do the B&T now. —SpacemanSpiff 05:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Block/edit

Hi, you blocked my name for account for some reason, I don't really care because I was just trying to make one change. So in leiu of that, I'm not going to try anymore but could you revert the Byzantine Empire article back to what it used to be? The newest edit from someone has nothing to do with the article and added an offensive sentence at the beginning of the article. That's all I was trying to change. Thanks, 66.193.206.2 (talk) 18:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure which account you are. TNXMan 18:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

User Box2112

I saw your entry at User_talk:Box2112#Of Sockpuppets and Alternate Accounts and I wondered if you might take a look at WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Xenophrenic. That case was filed by User:Box2112 and appears to have been done in bad faith. Thanks, Mojoworker (talk) 21:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/2sc945

Hey, you recently declined my request for a CU due to it being a user and an IP. However, another quacking (in my mind at least) account has come up, and is named. Would it be in order to CU those two accounts? If not, just tell me why I suppose. Cheers, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 03:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I've commented there. Let me know if there are further questions. TNXMan 13:58, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Looking for sockmaster

Hi,
would you happen to remember if you identified a sockmaster for the following group of editors:

• TheGodzillaHobo (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• MrBrightside2006 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Mr. Turtlebird (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• MarioAndLuigiFoEva (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• MakesPerfectSenseToMeOCTOBER2004 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• ConcreteMofo2004 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• AnthonyBourdainIsLupinThe3rd (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

See here for context. Not terribly important though.
Cheers, Amalthea 10:50, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. Drmies made two related AIV reports about someone harassing Ohnoitsjamie. I checked and blocked the lot of them, but I don't remember more than that. Sorry I couldn't remember more, but I hope this helps. TNXMan 13:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

You do know he admitted to it. Right?

Regarding the case you closed: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Macutty

You do know he admitted to it. Right?

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/search/?title=Talk:Canadian_federal_election,_2011&diff=next&oldid=425943528

and that edits are still being done using IPs, to give the view that it is multiple people coming to a consensus: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/search/?title=Talk:Canadian_federal_election,_2011&curid=19785302&diff=426578365&oldid=426562699 even after being warned by HelloAnnyong.

--33rogers (talk) 20:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Pondeepankar / Konguboy

Hi, SpacemanSpiff has asked to contact you regarding this sockmaster's socks, as he is going on a break. His socks have been popping up at the rate of one or two a day now. The latest is Kodavatakk (talk · contribs). He went straight to a discussion on the previous discussion on the sockmaster and left a personal attack/insult. Please block this account--Sodabottle (talk) 10:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC). spiff took care of that :-)--Sodabottle (talk) 10:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm online right now, will be off in a couple of hours, so I've taken care of this. At this point there's sufficient evidence to start a new SPI as we've had about six socks over the past month and a half. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 10:27, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

MatthewVanitas is not indian so he dont know about caste system in india. Do not manipulate wikipedia, kurmi are Kshatriya not shudra. check more history about this before this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.110.239 (talk) 12:07, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

A award!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Your best effort for fighting vandalism.Enjoy! Damirgraffiti ☺Say Yo to Me!☺ 20:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Request a rangeblock

Hi, the pondeepankar / konguboy sockmaster is now resorting to vandalism of user and user talk pages.. He says he is going to go on "offensive mode" to target wikipedians. Can you block the 117.206.98.157/20 ip range. It is one of the IP ranges he uses and seems collateral damage will be less.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Has s/he used more than the one IP or is it just confined to the one IP that was blocked? I'm hesitant to implement a rangeblock until there's more evidence of abuse. Thank you for tracking this person, though. If more problems do occur, please let me know. TNXMan 11:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

He is back again.He uses multiple IP ranges - these are dynamic IPs belonging to Indian state ISP BSNL. I have used these connections before - the ips can be changed by switching the modem off and on. The first IP range is 117.206.98.157/20. Proof that this is a dynamic ip is that - he has used 117.206.96.114 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 117.206.100.197 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). The second dynamic range he uses is 59.92.112.0/19. Today 59.92.106.224 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) vandalised multiple user pages by adding profanities and in the past he has used 59.92.118.121 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). So question about them being static IPs.

He is now popping in every day to vandalise and taunt people reverting and cleaning up after him. Here he is taunting and defacing previously uninvolved editors - and here. He uses two more ip ranges, but these two are the most used ones. --Sodabottle (talk) 07:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Another IP from the 117 range used by him today to vandalise user pages 117.206.102.87 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)--Sodabottle (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

117.206.96.0/20 blocked for a week. TNXMan 11:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. My talk page got vandalised third time today by him. He used 59.96.28.72 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). This is another of his dynamic ip ranges. --Sodabottle (talk) 14:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

ItHysteria

I've unblocked МПЛка. This recent group of Russian-like accounts has me concerned that we've slipped a gear here. ItHysteria is an Italian editor, and back in the days that his editing was still fresh he tracked to three different Italian ISPs, which I decided was work, home, and some public place. He's still pretty active as an anonymous editor. If the accounts that have been being blocked recently don't fit into that mold, we've gone astray (one of the reasons that I wish that we placed "accuracy of blocks" as a higher priority than "not revealing IP addresses" is that this can happen).—Kww(talk) 22:39, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the accounts in the archive are ItHysteria. This particular account doesn't seem to fit the technical data though (especially given the info you listed above). Thanks for keeping your eye on this guy and if more problems arise, please let me know. TNXMan 01:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

HopeAfrique

He responded to the allegations of sockpuppetry made at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/HopeAfrique, and since you were the checkuser that confirmed the accounts I thought you might want to take a look at it. Ks0stm If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. 15:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Case

Should Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Imbonwwwww's CU results should be taken with a grain of salt? I'm just asking because they aren't directly confirmed, which could mean your indicating that they could be the same technically, but we should consider other factors. Thanks, -- DQ (t) (e) 20:55, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to be so oblique. :) In this case, while username similarity certainly tie a lot of the accounts together, I would encourage a close look at contributions of the other accounts just to be sure. I hope this helps. TNXMan 21:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Made my recommendation on that. Thanks, -- DQ (t) (e) 21:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Your reversion of my changes to W H Smith

You recently reverted some minor changes I made to this article, without giving any reason. In this case, I'm completely mystified why you reverted, as all my changes did was optimise out a couple of redirects in piped links. So I've re-reverted. If you still think there is a problem, could you please explain yourself. It is, in any case, normally considered good form to give a reason when reverting somebody else's work. - Starbois (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Nope, it was my mistake. Apologies about that. TNXMan 15:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

No problems. - Starbois (talk) 17:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

IP 130.126.76.170

I think we unintentionally conflicted in the handling of the AIV report about IP 130.126.76.170. I removed the report as declined because the edit that triggered the vandalism report doesn't appear to be vandalism at all, but rather a good-faith edit attempt that happened to contain a word ('terrorist') that triggered an edit filter. Considering the subject was Ayman al-Zawahiri, I don't think that what the IP wrote is even remotely vandalism. Anyhow, apparently I removed the report at the same time you were blocking the IP. Given the IP's recent edits, I can understand why you blocked (the IP's history is mostly vandalism), but the result is rather paradoxical if anyone were to look at the history of what I did at AIV vs. what you did. --RL0919 (talk) 20:51, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Definitely interesting. I saw this edit from three minutes before, which is really what led to the blocking. At least we didn't divide by zero. :) TNXMan 20:59, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a relatively short block so I don't think it matters too much either way. The IP's varying behavior and the fact that it is associated with a university makes me wonder if it is in a computer lab or something. --RL0919 (talk) 21:34, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

SPI CU needed

A CU like you is need over at SPI right now.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:37, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I'm getting back late. Is there still an issue? TNXMan 02:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

There are two cases needing your CU access, namely WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Ajdkj and another one.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Continued IP vandalism at Kurmi

Greetings, since you're familiar with the situation, just wanted to note continued attempts by an IP to remove any footnotes (to academic sources) mentioning the Shudra origin of the Kurmi, replacing it with claims to Kshatriya status, and reverting me when I've reverted it back. This is pretty much what's been happening off and on to any caste article where I provide (often copious) academic evidence on Shudra issues. It kind of reminds me of the joke "We lost Vietnam because everyone's uncle who was over there was either a sniper or a helicopter door-gunner; apparently we didn't have a single driver or cook in the country." In any case, if you could consider reinstating some form of block, that'd be great. MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:21, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Re-protected. If more issues come up, please let me know. TNXMan 14:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

AmiAyalon1969

Hello Tnxman307. The account AmiAyalon1969 is back editing after you blocked the first proxy. Could you please check this account again? I am almost certain this is the same user as AFolkSingersBeard. Thank you, nableezy - 14:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Already investigated - more proxies blocked. Whatever they're doing, it makes my spidey-sense tingle. Let me know if they pop up again. TNXMan 14:58, 7 May 2011 (UTC)