User talk:Thatcher: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:01, 2 August 2008 editThatcher (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users28,287 edits →Question: different← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 00:17, 24 November 2023 edit undoDonner60 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers235,978 edits not around since Oct 2021
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{not around\|3=31 October 2021}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|maxarchivesize = 150K
	\|counter = 21
	\|algo = old(5d)
	\|archive = User talk:Thatcher/Archive%(counter)d
	}}
	{{editabuselinks}}
	{{User:Thatcher/Links}}

			==I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all==
	== Fragments of Jade ==
			]

			== lol im not him ==
	Hello,

			who was he seriously? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	Sorry to bother you again with that, but I was wondering about your decision to block the user Fragments of Jade ...

			==ANI Notice==
	On her discussion page, you explained that you saw her break the 3RR on July 2 , but I'm only seeing three edits by Fragments of Jade on that day? ] (]) 03:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
			] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ].  Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> ]] 08:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

			== June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive ==
	:I'm really sorry to insist, but it would be ''very'' helpful if you could simply tell me if you decided to block Fragments of Jade for 3RR violation after confirming that she was also 76.120.173.40. Fragments of Jade is currently suspected of sock puppetry and claims she's ''not'' 76.120.173.40. I'd like that particular issue to be finally solved, and I'd rather not make a possibly redundant checkuser request... ] (]) 14:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

			{\| style="border: 5px solid #ABCDEF ; background-color: #FFF; padding:10px 15px 0"
	*I'm sorry, I thought it was clear in the context of the ANI report that Jade had violated 3RR through a combination of logged-in and logged-out edits. ] 16:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
			\|style="padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; font-size:130%" \|'''] \|''' <span style="font-size:85%">June 2022 Backlog Drive</span>
			\|-
			\|]
			* On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
			* Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
			* Interested in taking part? ''']'''!
			\|-
			\|colspan=2 style="font-size:85%; padding-top:15px;"\|You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives.<br> ] to opt out of any future messages.

			(] · ]) ''']''' 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
	::Well, that's what I suspected, anyway, based on your comments... So you ''are'' confirming that Jade and 76.120.173.40 are one and the same? She's denying that and has been using 76.120.173.40 to push her views regarding an article (there's also yet another IP with eerily similar WHOIS results I suspect she's been using in the same way). There's an open sock puppetry case about her ], and her overall disruptive behavior has been bothering some users (myself included) in the past few weeks. I believe a confirmation from you would solve that issue. ] (]) 16:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
			\|}

			<!-- Message sent by User:Buidhe@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Good_articles/GAN_Backlog_Drives/Mailing_list&oldid=1090143622 -->
	::Still resorting to the same dirty tactics, I see, just because you can't win an argument. Have you even bothered to read the rules? Staff cannon reveal the IPs of people with accounts. It's considered a violation of privacy, not that a stalker like you cares about such things. And don't forget that you are ALSO suspected of puppetry, and part of the reason you hope to get me blocked is to save your own hide. I know my IP is not either of the ones you're trying to claim it is, and if I get blocked, it will only be because you have that staff member who helps you bend the rules.] (]) 19:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	:::Staff can check the IPs of accounts suspected of sock puppetry. There's nothing "dirty" about it, really: if you're lying to us from the beginning and ], you should get blocked. That is all.
	:::Also, you're the only user suspecting me of sock puppetry (''for some reason''), as far as I know. Go ahead and file a report. Good luck with that. ] (]) 20:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	::::You filed the report, and that's the end of it. You can't go around crusading and trying to trick staff into revealing people's IP addresses so you can stalk them. And you're one to talk, considering you've argued your case as both 88 and Erigu. Doesn't matter if you've chosen to now admit you're the same person, you didn't originally-you only did it to try and avoid being labelled a puppet.] (]) 20:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	::::::''You can't go around crusading and trying to trick staff into revealing people's IP addresses so you can stalk them.''
	:::::I'd like to be ''done'' with you. So the "stalking" part really isn't alluring to me.
	::::::''you've argued your case as both 88 and Erigu. Doesn't matter if you've chosen to now admit you're the same person''
	:::::I never pretended I wasn't Erigu, and vice-versa. That's the big difference between you and me, sock puppetry, and just some guy finally getting an account (and getting logged out of it all the time for no reason). ] (]) 21:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	::::::You have pretended that, and I would like to be done with you. You've already proven you're stalking three different Wiki users, not including myself, who you have been stalking to some extent already. You need to grow up and stop making accusations against people, just because you can't handle the fact that they might be right and you might be wrong.] (]) 21:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	::::::::''You have pretended that''
	:::::::Nope. Gratuitous accusations, just like for the "racism" thing. Lovely.
	:::::::And please take it to my user page.
	:::::::(I'm really sorry about the mess, Thatcher) ] (]) 21:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	You alone are making ridiculous accusations. And don't try and make me out to be the bad guy here. You know you should never have posted here in the first place. What you were trying to do is a vagrant violation of the rules.] (]) 21:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located ''']'''. Any evidence you wish to provide should be emailed directly to any sitting Arbitrator for circulation among the rest of the committee. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ] 14:30, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

	;Notes for parties

	(FYI) These notes are detailed guidelines for the case, agreed by the ArbCom.

	# Please be aware in submitting evidence that it may be shared with other parties to the case, on a confidential basis, at the Committee's discretion.
	# Our intention is to circulate the leading points, but not full background detail, unless there are good reasons to do otherwise.
	#If there is a particular reason not to share some part of your evidence with other parties, please flag that clearly in your submission.
	#We will be open to all requests for further clarification.
	#To avoid any further risk to the privacy of third parties, the parties to the case are strongly requested not to make any further public statements concerning the matters under review by the Committee.
	#The Committee will understand participation in the case by a party as assent to the principle that the information circulated is confidential (cf. ] for some good reasons).
	#The administration of the case will be by emails sent to active Arbitrators; please send mail to an Arbitrator of your choice (preferably CC another), and not to the ArbCom list.

	] (]) 18:56, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	Please see the above mentioned talk page. He's hit by a rangeblock, should he be given IP block exempt? –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 00:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
	*Seems ok. IP exemption granted. ] 01:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
	**Thanks...Might you also review ]? A similar situation, but with not as much of the good-faithy background. –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 01:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::Thanks again. –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 01:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
	*ah crud, did i f up ? i thought he was cleared? –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 19:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
	**There was a lot of discussion and no one asked a CU until it had gone on several days, so it's not really anyone's fault. There is something odd about the IP from which the account was created (subsequent edits seem to have been made from tor, of course). I would like to review the account creation, hopefully with some input from the editor, any maybe have it reviewed by another CU, before taking action. There's not really any mischief someone can get up to with IPBE. ] 19:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::(Relates to {{user\|Rove2}}. ] 03:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
	***alright. and of course, feel free to revoke IPBE if things aren't resolved to your satisfaction. cheers, –<font face="Verdana">] (])</font> 19:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

	== Splat5572's logged out edits ==

	These are 68.4.* IPs, not 75.47.* IPs, right? --] 02:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
	*Why would that be important that I should reveal that? ] 02:57, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

	Well, there's a ] claiming he's 75.47, and he has . --] 03:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
	*OK, in that case I can confirm he is telling the truth about editing from 68.4 and he does not edit from 75.47. ] 03:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
	**OK, thank you. --] 03:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

	== Perhaps you know... ==

	who is. ]] 03:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

	*Probably {{user\|Hiwhispees}}, another sad little Grawp wannabee. ] 10:50, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

	== Harass accounts ==

	During last 20 days my edits are under attack of harass account. In beginning action of harass accounts have been stupid, reverting all my edits (]). After that he has used 1 account to revert "only" 5 of my edits (]) and shortly after that he has created account to revert "only" 2 of my edits (]). Because all this account are discovered and banned by administrators he is now having 1 edit harass accounts. Only on 29 July this user has created accounts:], ] ,] . harass account writen here are not even half of created accounts.
	Because of this situation I have started ] . Can you please look this case in near future so that we can block IP of that user ?--] (]) 15:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

	:IP 66.217.132.152 is not connected to any users ??? I ask you this because IP edits from that range are connected with many edits during July (example:66.217.131.60, 66.217.132.170, 66.217.131.62, 66.217.131.112, 66.217.132.56.....). Edits from this IP are 1 or 2 reverts and nothing else--] (]) 17:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
	::The 66.217 IPs are Paetec in Falls Church, Virginia. J. A. Comment is editing from a public library that is geographically consistent with the Northern Virginia/Southern Maryland/Washington DC area of many of the IPs suspected of being Velebit. The confirmed socks, Rilkas and Worobiew are from 3 other distinct locations. ] 17:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
	:::Yes I know that user in question is using Paetec proxy. I have asked administrator for check and he has put first tag on his talk page. After that using copy/paste I am writing this tag on talk pages of all 66.217...... "accounts". I am looking only for advice in how we can stop this IP edits because it has been always in support of this case puppets or J. A. Comment which is weird ?? It is not important if this is velebit or not, but I am interested to hear if it is possible to block dynamic IP from future editing articles in question.--] (]) 18:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
	::::I've blocked 66.217.131.0 through 66.217.132.256 for one month to prevent anonymous editing and account creation. This is not guaranteed to stop the person but will make it more difficult for him to edit and easier to track down if he does keep it up. If he starts coming from other numbers outside the 131 and 132 ranges, let me know. ] 19:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

	== Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Perusnarpk ==

	I asked you for the same CheckUser request on IRC a few days ago. I don't think you gave me the same result as Alison, though (I could be wrong). Could you please clarify your CU results on ]? <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">] </span><sub>(])</sub> 17:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

	== Thanks. ==

	I know Checkuser is not a crystal ball, but recently ODN users who have the same agenda of Azukimonaka or 2channel have a deep grudge at me vandalised my talk page several times. Pabopa's attacks seem to be in the same extension. Anyway, thank you for your help. --] (]) 04:30, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	== Request ==

	Dear Thatcher, Rlevse has suggested that I approach you with regards to clarification of IP addresses. I have been accused of sockpuppetry and specifically creating the account Plasmons. Can you identify the IP addresses used by Plasmons and myself please ] (]) 05:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	*I can confirm that your claim to be editing from the UK is true, and Plasmons' statement on his talk page that he is editing from India is true. ] 11:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	== You've got mail again ==

	Thanks, ] (]) 13:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	:{{done}} ] 14:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	:: Thank you! ] (]) 14:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	:::Sorry to bug you, but found ]. ] (]) 14:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	::::{{done}} ] 14:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	== Question ==

	At ] a new user {{User\|Priorend}} appeared to demonstrate an agenda shared with {{User\|Lucyintheskywithdada}} and {{User\|Logitech95}}, or {{User\|Ex-oneatf}}.. Is the anon evading from the given blockage? And I'm wondering whether Ex-oneatf who created an article with plagiarism multiple times is related to any of {{User\|Pabopa}}'s sock or {{User\|Boldlyman}}(blocked on Jan. however the user is active on multiple Wikiproject) or {{User\|Carl Daniels}} (likely boldlyman by last checkuser). Thanks. --] (]) 14:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

	*Piorend is {{likely}} Carl Daniels. ] 15:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	:Thanks. Can you also confirm on whether Piorend/Carl Daniesls is related to Ex-oneatf or not? Because the current dispute has been initiated by Ex-oneat with spurious list of his alleged references to back up for "Korean own comfort women". Besides, Ex-oneatf created his account on July 10 and after his block on July 19, he disappeared. On the other hand, Carl Daniels was inactive during the period, but reappeared after July 22. I think Ex-oneatf is Carl Daniels and Boldlyman for similar writing style and agendas. If Carl Daniels are really a sock of Boldlyman, it is a block evasion ''again. Can you confirm on this too? Thanks. --] (]) 15:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	::Most of these editors are in Japan as you know, on various ISPs like OCN, ODN, Softbank, and Plala and more. Ex-oneatf is in a different country. Boldlyman is too old for a current check, but if he was likely to be Carl Daniels before then that will still be true. ] 15:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	:::Thank you for the clarification. Then Ex-oneatf would be likely {{User\|Jjok}}? Because Ex-oneatf's edit and agenda are overlapped with Jjok much such as Comfort women, ], ]. Ex-oneatf quoted Jjok's comment at Chinilpa as an attempt to move the title of the article.--] (]) 15:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	::::Jjok's last edits are too old for a check. I may have saved some information at home, will check later. ] 15:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
	:::::Jjok's previous information was a different (non-Japan) country than Ex-oneatf. ] 05:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

	== Emergency Checkuser? ==

	I think this warrants an emergency checkuser. Sending email with more detail. <font style="font-family: Papyrus, sans-serif"><font color="#775ca8">]</font></font><sup>Not an admin</sup>  15:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:17, 24 November 2023

This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Thatcher has not edited Misplaced Pages since 31 October 2021. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all

lol im not him

who was he seriously? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.176.163 (talk) 08:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at WP:ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is 20_block_done_in_2008_still_needed?. Thank you. SQL 08:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| June 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Categories: