| Revision as of 11:09, 6 June 2008 view sourceThatcher (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,287 edits →blocking IP range: further← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 12:06, 23 August 2008 view source Thatcher (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,287 editsm Changed protection level for "User talk:Thatcher/Alpha": possibly not needed |
| (19 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{pp-semi}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|
|counter = 20 |
|
|
|algo = old(5d) |
|
|
|archive = User talk:Thatcher/Archive%(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{editabuselinks}} |
|
{{editabuselinks}} |
|
{{User:Thatcher/Links}} |
|
{{User:Thatcher/Links}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== History archive == |
|
== Appealing editing restriction under Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren == |
|
|
|
This page contains the entire history of my previous talk page. As it has become a vandal target, but has over 5000 edits, making deletion a problem, I moved the history to a history-only archive, to start a fresh new talk page. For most purposes, my traditional archives will be more useful. ] 11:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
Hi. Since you were the one to block me, I decided its only fair to address this to yourself. I would like to appeal my placement under these restrictions. Following repeated conflicts with several editors, including being on an incivility warning, and in an ANI case now, it has become apparent (thanks to ]) that my problems are largely confined to the issue of ] ], and can all be resolved via the ] or when the newly proposed ] may come online. With this in mind, would you be able to suggest the process, if one exits, of appealing my placement on this editing restriction, and how to proceed. Regards--] (]) ♠<font color="#BB0000">♥</font><font color="#BB0000">♦</font>♣ 22:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== GRP == |
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed you blocked some accounts saying they related to GRP...I found ]. You might want to CU it.] <font color="purple">]</font> 23:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:Yes, that's him. No other accounts on that IP though. ] 15:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Intelligent design editors ] thread == |
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure your comment qualifies as a clerk note; would you consider moving it to a proper statement? Being picky, I know, but it's important to recognise what hat you're wearing when commenting (IMO, at least). ] 23:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:It's content-neutral advice on filing an effective case. It could apply equally well to any case, for the "prosecution" or "defense". ] 19:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Mistaken Impression == |
|
|
|
|
|
I am afraid you are mistaken in your assertation. I am not the person making "throw away vandal accounts". The IP range that I usually use is a corporate one. There are other people in my department who have created vandal accounts. I have spoken to them regarding the issue and asked them to cease doing so. ] (]) 00:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*If true, that is a good thing, and hopefully you won't get caught in any more autoblocks. Unfortunately, it is often difficult to discriminate between good editors and bad editors on shared corporate IPs, and a good editor making vandal accounts for recreation looks very much the same as a good editor who happens to have a bored co-worker. ] 15:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
** Understood. In this case it is the later unfortunately there is no realistic way to prove this to you. Hopefully I will have availed upon them to cease and there won't be another instance. ] (]) 23:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Thatcher. I'm pretty convinced based on the behavioral evidence that these two users are the same person. Do you think I can simply block based on the CU result? I know it's not "confirmed", but "likely" seems good enough to me. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 02:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*Well, if you were ready to block anyway, and now you know it is not an exact IP match (what would be after 2 years?) but is in the same city and ISP, it seems reasonable to me. ] 02:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Ok, thanks. I'll go ahead and block. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 02:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Paknur == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Thatcher. I CUed this guy on the suspicion that he was the still-banned {{User|Nadirali}}. However, it wasn't him, but another user whose ban has now expired, except he is now running multiple socks on the same IP. But because I ended up reverting a person who wasn't banned but accidentally came across other socks, can you please take a look for independent 3rd party confirmation? ''']''' ('']'') 02:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*It's absolutely obvious. Betacommand's user compare tool shows numerous edits to the same articles, and this is a recreation of similar behavior. (On the other hand, {{user|Boatrights}} is another banned user Hkelkar.) What do you want to do about it? ] 03:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:Well since I reverted the guy under the assumption that he was banned, and he isn't, I just figured that I should ask someone else to confirm it lest I be accused of framing someone I was reverting. I just need you to list the exact guys on that IP- there is one guy who's ban has expired and a whole stack of socks and I'll ask someone else to block it. ''']''' ('']'') 03:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*{{confirmed}} that Paknur is {{userlinks|Siddiqui}}, who was banned for one year on 4 March 2007 as a result of ]. He is currently using sockpuppet accounts: |
|
|
#{{user|Nawabshahi}} |
|
|
#{{user|Paknur}} |
|
|
#{{user|Mirza Barlas}} |
|
|
#{{user|Misaq Rabab}} |
|
|
--] 10:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
**Siddiqui's block has expired. Still The accounts were used abusively e.g. reverted to each other on ]. I have blocked Paknur for one month (it seems to be the main account nowdays) and the rest permanently. I propose to Community Ban the user if one more sockpuppeting found ] (]) 01:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Question == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello. Thank you for handling that RFCU I filed. Just a one question. How long should be the second block for that very same crime? Thanks. - ] (]) 12:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Privacy == |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm probably missing something very simple here, but how do I e-mail you? -] (]) 17:45, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*Sorry, you should be able to use the "Email this user" link that is on the side bar of every user's user and talk page. You can also do it directly at thatcher131 at gmail dot com. ] 17:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*{{ec}} You can just ] - ] <sup>]</sup> 17:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**(Does special/emailuser work if the other user has not specified an email address?) ] 18:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*** Per ], the answer is nope. There would be no means of reply, for one ... - ] <sup>]</sup> 18:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
You found the two users to be the same, but did you determine if they are the same as the IP address? That IP contributed again to the article, still injecting their POV. ] (]) 18:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== GRP == |
|
|
|
|
|
... is back at the Chicago Public Library right ''now'' making new socks. Can you quick look at 64.107.0.0/22 and 66.99.0.0/22 (I'll make a formal CU request if you would rather). I suspect is one, but I think he might have made a bunch before I shut down the ranges again. Thanks for your help, ] ] 20:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*stand by... ] 20:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**By the time you blocked the IPs he had only made a few IP edits and has not created any new accounts. ] 20:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Thank you! ] ] 20:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] and his socks == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello, Thatcher, |
|
|
|
|
|
I was just wondering, since the list has vastly increased since when I first filed it, to see if any of the users listed matched the large range of IPs now present. As I have not really seen any recent activity, the list as not really expanded as of late, but the ranges which he uses are becoming quite clear. Here is said page: ]. Thankyou for your time no matter what you decide to do.— '''<font color="Green">]</font>]'''<sup>]</sup> <big>'''/'''</big><small> ]</small><big>'''\'''</big> <sup>]</sup> 20:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*You can list the names as updates to the checkuser case if you want confirmation, your list is in alpha order rather than date so I don;t know which are recent enough to be worth checking. There's probably not much point in checking IPs unless its a current 3RR issue or something. You pretty much know where he lives, I think, so IPs from there that walk and talk like him can be blocked pretty easily. ] 04:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**The list is sortable now. Just letting you know.— '''<font color="Green">]</font>]'''<sup>]</sup> <big>'''/'''</big><small> ]</small><big>'''\'''</big> <sup>]</sup> 06:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Homeopathy /Evidence == |
|
|
|
|
|
Is there some way to see a scrubbed version of ] as a normal user? Should I be asking someone else about this? Thanks, ] (]) 17:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*Wow, I didn't see that when it happened. Scrubbing it would have to be a manual job and I don't even know what was allegedly revealed. You might the clerk listed as handling the case if he has the time to make a scrubbed version; otherwise ask arbcom or Dmcdevit I guess. ] 18:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::Thanks, I hadn't noticed there's a listed clerk. ] (]) 20:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Fuss == |
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, I'll be a good boy. <font face="Kristen ITC">''']''' <sup>'']''</sup></font> 23:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Recarnation of Azukimonaka? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, Thatcher. Can you check this seemingly sock IP(s) of {{User|Azukimonaka}}/{{User|KoreanShoriSenyou}} and his multiple gangs? Recently, ] article has been (typically) vandalised by very persistent ] IP user(s) over the same matter just like Azukimonaka did on the manhwa related articles. The ocn anon(s) appeared to blank the same thing at ] which he also did. Thanks. *{{user|61.119.138.171}} |
|
|
*{{user|211.129.140.247}} |
|
|
*{{user|220.104.47.22}} |
|
|
*{{user|221.184.41.234}} |
|
|
*{{user|124.86.248.112}} |
|
|
--] (]) 01:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Even if the anon in question is not related to Azukimonaka, another obvious sock {{User|Jazz81089}} seems to be related to him/her. per the long break from 8 months and the timing. Can you look at the sock? Thanks.-] (]) 21:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Thank you for taking the case, but I can't prevent the disruptive removals and POV pushing by this obviously Azukimonaka-ish ocn. anon and sock account Jazz81089. Besides, if Jazz81089 uses ocn.ne.jp IP, he clearly violated 3RR rules. I talked to the anon/jazz to participate in an open discussion countless times, and even requested RFC, but his disruption does not stop. So typical ] is no use because he has not responded to any of them. In such case, what else can I do? File this at ] or ] or just keep reverting his blanking after my limit of 3 time reverts is over? --] (]) 03:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thank you for protecting the page, but the last edit was by {{User|Jazz81089}}. Until he edited, the lead section clearly said about Korean ] and the current protected page only supports the disruptive anon/{{User|Jazz81089}}. The work is created by Korean artists and my version is a compromised version, but he does not listen to. Can you revert his edit? Thanks. --] (]) 03:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
This user is challenging his 2-month block for sockpuppetry, based on a "likely" finding you gave at ]. Can you comment about what you found? He seems to think that the checkuser result identified him as having the same ISP... I don't believe that but it's probably best if you comment. ]]<sup>]</sup> 20:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*Left comment. ] 02:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== blocking IP range == |
|
|
|
|
|
Greatings, some of the registered user from bosnian Misplaced Pages have complained about blocking their IP addresses see . Can you resolve the problem please, thanks in advance.--] (]) 09:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*Who has been complaining? The block should only affect anonymous editing and new account creation. Registered users should not experience any problems. If you give me some names I can look into it. ] 10:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**Actually, if they are registered on the Bosnian wiki but not registered here, and they want to edit while logged out, then I'm afraid I am unwilling to lift the block since someone on that range has been a considerable problem. They could also try ], then they would have the same account name and password on all wikis. ] 11:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC) |
|
This page contains the entire history of my previous talk page. As it has become a vandal target, but has over 5000 edits, making deletion a problem, I moved the history to a history-only archive, to start a fresh new talk page. For most purposes, my traditional archives will be more useful. Thatcher 11:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)