User talk:Alison: Difference between revisions

Hi, Alison. I saw a recent edit by an editor here who I was familiar with and his concerns that a vandal assuming my old name was actually me.

I would like to verify that, yes, I am Encyclopedist...as you can see my contributions have been productive on this account and I have absolutely no intention to vandalize.

As a further note, I believe clinical depression is a serious problem and one I would not dare make fun of, seeing as how I wonder if I have it at times too (yes I read your note about it and comment that "WikiStalkers like Encyclopedist love to make fun of...")

You are a brave, wonderful woman and I only wish you the best in your future...keep going to check yourself up, I personally support you...

Thanks for all of your contributions and work here...I am on my way to Georgetown U. in a few weeks so I don't have time to edit, let alone vandalize. I acted as "CIyde" mostly as a joke...after reading about your personally plight I feel really bad about that now.

I hope this account isn't blocked or banned, but these are the rules so I can see how this would happen. Thank you for bringing light to the fact that many have assumed my name in the attempt to vandalize while disparaging me... In just two years I have seen how stupid that really was.

Keep up the fight, and Go Hoyas!Ulises Heureaux (talk) 02:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I see you are active on the Irish Wikipedia. I was considering going there myself eventually - these days I'm learning the Irish language in my spare time (wow, do I ever need a hobby, eh?). Is there any way somebody with little knowledge of the language can become an active contributor there? Master&Expert (talk) 21:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like your input on Domer48 on AE.--Tznkai (talk) 21:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly reminder. If you don't have anything you wish to add, please just tell me.--Tznkai (talk) 18:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I likely do, but I've been too busy here. I'll try taking a look later but I have to say that I'm burned out from the Troubles ArbCom and related issues. I'll try pop in later if I can .. thanks for letting me know! - Alison ^❤ 04:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. User:LessHeard vanU suggested you might be a good person to ask about range blocks. Lately we've had quite a bit of a problem with an editor vandalizing numerous Disney articles and talk pages, making spurious redirects, creating duplicates of templates, undoing article clean ups, MoS violations, etc, with the very rare good edit mixed in. Through two SSPs Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/70.146.241.244 and Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Iluvteletubbies confirmed what I had already figured out from the editing history, that these were all the same person. He has thus far edited under at least 7 usernames and 19 IP addresses. Some of the articles he's hit are on long term semi-protection, which has helped some, but he also moved out into the Teletubbies arena.

When he continued making new socks to evade the indef bans, and continue using IP addresses as well, I filed an AN/I report, which confirmed measures needed to be taken, and that he was also causing lots of problems over at Simple Wikipedia in the same sets of articles. During the AN/I, range blocks were discussed and one was implemented for 68.220.160.0/19. However, he also appears with IPs of 65.0.16X.XX. I also don't know how to tell if the 68 range block is covering most of what he uses (I have a full list at User:Collectonian/Links#Disney vandal). Would it be possible to also range block the 65s, which he appeared again today with, and made another sock account? Any other ideas on how to at least slow him down so an hour a day isn't wasted undoing his edits.-- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 20:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Collectonian. I'll take a look at this in a short while ... - Alison ^❤ 21:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! -- [[::User:Collectonian|Collectonian]] ([[::User talk:Collectonian|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Collectonian|contribs]]) 15:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, just wanted to touch base on this issue. He made at least two more named socks today (I suspect I'm dealing with a third now), and hit with another IP. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mean to seem to rush, but this guy just returned with another sock Teletubbiesfantalkcharacters (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and IP 74.249.96.152 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and made a massive mess of a bunch of Teletubbies articles. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Collectonian, I'm really sorry, but I'd a ton of stuff to do. I've processed your information at User:Collectonian/Links#Disney_vandal, found some sleeper socks and softblocked one of the ranges. Hopefully, that will slow the guy down a bit. And sorry for the delay - my RL stuff is getting in the way of Wikipedia :) - Alison ^❤ 04:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and thanks! He seemed to go a bit nuts today...I think now he's just doing it for the attention :P Hopefully this will at least make it a bit harder for him to keep it up. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been translating an article and a template (and hoping to do more) at gawiki. I was wondering if you know whether gawiki has a technical dictionary of sorts — my conversational Irish is fine, but finding the technical terms for "template", "stub", "sysop", etc. is time-consuming. Stifle (talk) 09:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I've opened a translation queue for en to ga (or other intersections of languages I speak). Stifle (talk) 10:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved this to the bottom because you seem to have missed it. Understandable, given your popularity ;) Stifle (talk) 11:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I owe you an answer on this one. Will get back to you in the morning .... - Alison ^❤ 09:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alison, it has been suggested to me that you are quite an even-handed and fair-minded admin, and certainly I seem to remember having seen evidence of this. I wonder therefore, if you'd mind giving me some help with a particular matter, through private correspondence. Mind if I e-mail you? Cheers --Setanta747 (talk) 11:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Yes, you can email me if you like Special:EmailUser/Alison here. I'll be delighted to help where I can - Alison ^❤ 19:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alison. E-mail sent. The link above suggested you had your e-mail facility turned off, but the link on the left column seemed to work. Cheers. --Setanta747 (talk) 22:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's because the link she gave you is to email User:Alison here, which, as far as I know, has not been registered yet. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 06:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC) This random comment-which-adds-nothing-to-the discussion could not have been brought to you without the generous support of our sponsors...[reply]

I left the pipe character out. D'oh! It should be [[User:Alison|here]] - Alison ^❤ 18:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh! Thanks for that addition J.Delanoy! I never even examined the link tbh. Alison, I sent that e-mail. Please let me know, when you can, if you received it or not. If not, I'll try to resend. Cheers. --Setanta747 (talk) 20:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Setanta747 - I got that one all right but it got stuck in my ever-increasing backlog. I'll get to it in a min here .... - Alison ^❤ 03:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Alison. Thanks for letting me know of its pending status! :) --Setanta747 (talk) 19:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please block these IDs, they are deffinately the banned editor User:Beh-nam again.

• User:Scythian77
• User:Dundapanj
• User:PashtoonGhafar

Banned User:Anoshirawan, User:Tajik may also be involved in this but not sure. Anoshirawan is from USA and Tajik from Germany.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wish good luck to you and your strange accusations. The Scythian 22:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is my accusation strange to you? Beh-nam has close to 100 different socks who constantly vandalises Pashtun related articles. His latest sock was User:GeorgeClintonWiki, editing Pashtun people on September 15, 2008. Then these new socks come to do similar edits on the same article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have no basis for it, and took ZERO initiative to seek any dialogue or consensus in our dispute. Trying to label me a "banned user" with no proof, simply because I may disagree with you, is a disgrace. The Scythian 22:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nisarkand :/

1. Scythian77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Unrelated
2. Dundapanj (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Unlikely
3. PashtoonGhafar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Confirmed
4. GeorgeHarper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is  Confirmed

- Alison ^❤ 22:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks dear Miss Alison —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The saga continues here --Enric Naval (talk) 17:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Eric! I've just  Completed this one, too. One Beh-nam and one Nisarkand - Alison ^❤ 18:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, another editor seemed concerned that User:Pakhtunking is actually banned editor User:NisarKand. Could you possibly look into any IP connection between these two accounts?

• User:NisarKand
• User:Pakhtunking

The Scythian 22:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pakhtunking (talk · contribs) is  Confirmed as being a Nisarkand sock. Big surprise there :/ - Alison ^❤ 22:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time, Alison. The Scythian 22:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Miss Alison, just because I am editing from Islamabad Pakistan, that does not mean I am other editor. Pakistan has 160 million people and most have DSL internet connection in their homes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakhtunking (talk • contribs) 22:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Nisarkand. There's a lot more evidence than just your city. Thanks for trying, though - Alison ^❤ 23:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol thats cute   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 10:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is lucky to have an admin like you, and that's the truth. I will now do my very best to reward your faith in me. DollyD (talk) 10:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In agreement, Administrator Alison is super-duper. GoodDay (talk) 12:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alison the Rockin Admin   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lol - you guys!!! :) - Alison ^❤ 18:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Felex'ja, User:Úsáideoir nua, User:LFOT, and User:Excuse Me Mr. -- same old, same old. NawlinWiki (talk) 11:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, NW. I've blocked them all over there now. Global block might be a good idea there - Alison ^❤ 18:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But i think it's your friend Bluegold somehow :p Unidentified man in green firing turret (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Y'know, I'd say that's highly likely, Johnny. Fortunately, as you say, the account's four years old now!! Longest. Block evasion. Evar! :) (Thanks for the Red Bull, BTW, but I'm still blocking ya. You know the deal - sorry!) - ^__^ - Alison ^❤ 03:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to bring it to your attention (as you seem to be the main checkuser person) that Checkuser is in a severe backlog. The oldest request is from the 10th of September (almost 3 full weeks old). Any help would be appericated. - NeutralHomer • Talk 07:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okies. I'll try paring it down over the next few days. YellowMonkey is over there right now, clearing up, BTW - Alison ^❤ 08:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both very much :) Please let me know if I can ever be assistance in helping with checkusers. If you all need extra checkusers, I will be glad to sign up. - NeutralHomer • Talk 08:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh - thanks, Redvers :) - Alison ^❤ 19:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are you posting here for??! Party's over! Get back to work. To be serious now, I got all the obvious ones. I just wondered if there are any more that I missed. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 19:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

lolz @ Painfully obvious sockfarm comment in the logs :) Yes, it looks like you got them all. There's no sockmaster or anything ... - Alison ^❤ 19:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC) (working already!!)[reply]

Heya! Since you're around... ;) There's an unblock request from someone operating from a hardblocked range (hosting company). He doesn't dispute that fact, and says he's the only user on that -personal- proxy. Could you please check if Xorlev (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) is really on the 75.126.215.26 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) range and that there is no foul play? I'm leaning towards giving him an IP Block Exemption if everything seems correct. -- lucasbfr ^talk 19:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That checks out just fine, Lucasbfr. He's just logged in to another IP to post requests. If you do that, can you leave a quick note on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption? Thanks! - Alison ^❤ 19:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Allie! I went ahead and granted him the exemption. -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NHRHS2010 (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		You have a good sense of humor; you make me smile. NHRHS2010 |  Talk to me  22:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments regarding Mike there before releasing any information :) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 01:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel, I've just commented on that on ANI just now ... - Alison ^❤ 01:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do it Alison. Human life trumps wikipedia rule bullshit, and you know it. Do it. Keeper ǀ 76 02:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contacting Mike and getting his explicit approval (he emailed me just before you posted saying you had contacted him). For whatever reason he felt he should be contacted before any release at all was made, and I was simply the messenger; I hope you can appreciate my role was simply that, and not anti-yourself or similar. Daniel (talk) 03:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'sokay, Daniel. I appreciate where you're coming from on this one and yes, that stuff is important. Fortunately, though, I'm in regular contact with Mike and happened to have his cell handy. Of course, this wouldn't be available to just anyone, so ... well, it was kinda lucky, I guess. Mike's take on this was that he was confused by your email as it appeared to him that you were requesting release of privacy-related data to an arbitrary third-party, and he wasn't cool with that. I pointed out that I intended to go to the police, and the police only and he was perfectly fine with my doing that.

I've since dealt with the police as best I could, though they were pretty-much at sea on the whole matter. Still, they got the information they need to follow it up should they do so, and they can also contact me if needs be. And that's about as good as we can get. Let's leave the policy stuff for another day, but I do think we need to revisit this when we have a so-called "spare moment" :) It's unfair to basically throw this one unto some hapless checkuser who's passing by and have them make the tough call - Alison ^❤ 04:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Real Life Barnstar
		For your great work in possibly saving a life today (despite the fiasco on ANI.) Toddst1 (talk) 04:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Toddst1 :) That's very kind. I think this might be overstating things a weency bit, but thank you! - Alison ^❤ 06:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We (JFH78 and Wowbobwow12 [we share the same house and computer, in case you're wondering]) both wish to thank you for granting us the rare privilege of IP block exemption status. We were at our wit's end trying to figure out why we couldn't edit, but you cleared up our problems quickly. Again, thank you! JFH78 (talk) 15:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a rant from Einsteindonut on the case page, in case you're interested. I dunno what to do with it to be honest :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 16:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alison Domer has given an indication that he will let it drop could this be the end of it now, and no more need for further sanctions I'm sure he is feeling very persecuted at the moment when maybe an email a month or so ago might have resolved this. But I am not telling you either how to handle these things as you have tons of experience in situations like this. Thanks for your time. BigDunc^Talk 19:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dunc and I take your point on the email :) I've just replied on Domer's talk page so I think this will be the end of it. While we're on the subject, though, I'd like to apologize to you about making assumptions as I did over the past few weeks or so. I was off on a number of matters, IMO. You've been doing some serious work around here and you have been playing by the book with other editors like Thunderer. In fairness, you've not been doing a ton of edit-warring and you're doing your best to work with some of you "adversaries" and that's not an easy job. I just want so say sorry for misjudging you over the last while. I'll try to pay better attention :) - Alison ^❤ 19:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alison your comments are appreciated. BigDunc^Talk 20:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to drop you a line to say thanks for granting rollback rights to me. Much appreciated. Jonesy (talk) 06:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all :) - Alison ^❤ 06:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this - None of those are sockpuppets. Three of them are throwaway accounts that I created because I didn't want to associate my main account with those topics (that's not against the rules afaik). Johnnycashnin, Crazytrain89 and Parmegan all created one topic in the talk pages and replied only to the topics that they created, and that was that. I didn't respond to those topics with any other account name or try to deceive anyone by "agreeing" with myself, and those accounts were created before I was given that warning so they were not an attempt to dodge sanctions or whatever. Enairku was just recently created for Ukraine topics (look at the user page, I publicly said it's the same user as Krawndawg), and Krawndawg is/was my main account, which I've all but given up on. I don't believe it has ever crossed paths with this account. This account was created to edit in war-related articles specifically. You're not going to find any instance of me using these accounts to POV push or edit war or for any other dubious activity. I don't understand where your accusation comes from "A few of them appear to be throwaway accounts for revert-warring on 2008 South Ossetia war" ? I didn't revert war with any of them, I've never even edited in the main South Ossetia war article with any other account than this one. And what is the basis that I'm "possibly" related to the user I was accused of being a sock of?LokiiT (talk) 12:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you pretend you were not aware of the 3rr here [1][2] when you obviously were? And in general, why do you create new accounts to make points on the South Ossetia page? That's exactly what that page doesn't need. Grey Fox (talk) 13:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LokiiT, you used Johnnycashnin and Crazytrain89 to edit the same page (Talk:2008 South Ossetia war) and you used Krawndawg and Enairku to edit the same subject, Enlargement of NATO. Those are impermissible uses of alternate accounts, and once you do that you lose the presumption of good faith. Checkusers are not required to examine every alternate account to determine if perhaps one of them was used for permissible purposes. "Creating one topic" on a talk page is far too narrow an interpretation of the alternate account policies and I doubt you will find any admin willing to sanction that behavior. Thatcher 14:34, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't use any alternate account to sockpuppet, vandalize, edit war or gain consensus. And like I already said, I made a point of stating that Enairku was Krawndawg because I didn't want anyone accusing me of sockpuppeting. That's not against the rules and I had no bad intentions. LokiiT (talk) 15:34, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LokiiT, your use of multiple accounts was most certainly unacceptable. Note also that the policy explicitly talks about "evading scrutiny" for one. Also, using them to give impression that there is more support than there is, is another. The talk page of 2008 South Ossetia war is the last place on the project that needs socking of any shape or sort. So, I'm sorry but I'm calling this abuse of multiple accounts, yes - Alison ^❤ 01:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because you are checkuser in this case I am interested to hear if his IP is from Belgrade, Serbia (User:PaxEquilibrium). If answer is yes there it will be OK to give data to checkuser Thatcher for User:PaxEquilibrium check. If answer is no then Balkan articles are having new puppeteer.....--Rjecina (talk) 21:58, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. No, the editor is not located anywhere in Serbia - Alison ^❤ 00:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this AN/I thread. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 01:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - thanks! - Alison ^❤ 02:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sock Puppet Barnstar This Sock Puppet barnstar is awarded for... well... flushing out Sock Puppets. Sensible, no? Stifle (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I emailed you with something that may need your attention. You'll see why. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Te? NawlinWiki (talk) 18:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[3]. Cheers! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Completed - both Nisar and Tajik - Alison ^❤ 22:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to be pain but I just could not watch a banned guy like Tajik come back and destroy Afghanistan related articles and get away with it by fooling you guys. I have lots of respect for you and your hard work here, that's why I don't edit anymore. Is it possible to check if User:Enzuru is also Tajik's sock, it left a very suspecious and strange message on Tajik's talk page recently.[4]--Irozee (talk) 22:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's  Unrelated to Tajik. Wrong continent - Alison ^❤ 23:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alison,

Is any specific reason why User:Guyver85 was not blocked? He was confirmed by you as a sockpuppet of indefinitely blocked user Top_Gun (talk · contribs), as follows from this report [5]. He simply stated: "no, I am not him" and continue editing. This is obviously him, as he edits precisely the same articles and has exactly same problems, like copyright violations [6]. What do you think? Thank you.Biophys (talk) 22:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Biophys. No, I'd no idea why he was left running about, given that he was  Confirmed as a sock. It's not usual for checkusers to block RFCU cases based on the results. Usually either the ever-busy checkuser clerks do it, or the person filing the requests puts a request in at ANI to have them blocked. I guess this one slipped through somehow - Alison ^❤ 23:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked now. Risker (talk) 23:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since you commented: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement#Modified_remedies_proposal — Rlevse • Talk • 02:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See new change I made...1) should Sarah be on civility parole and 2) can you draft up a list of articles needing 1RR restriction? — Rlevse • Talk • 11:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC) Can we use this list: Wikipedia:WikiProject Irish Republicanism/Watchlist or is it too slanted toward the Irish side? — Rlevse • Talk • 15:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Sarah is already on civility parole. But then Sarah hasn't been uncivil except in response to uncivil attacks. Sarah does not accept that she must endure unrestrained incivility and attacks by Admins and others which go unremarked and unchecked while she is denied the right to reply in kind. While Sarah will endeavor to remain civil she will never, ever, ever, ever accept lopsided restrictions. Alison is my "mentor" (I think) and she points out to me whenever she feels I'm being unacceptably uncivil. Sarah777 (talk) 16:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is where Sarah is wrong. Because others are uncivil to her does not give her the right to be uncivil back and not suffer the consequences. Responding in kind to incivility only makes it worse and makes you just as guilty as the other user. In those cases you need to step back and let uninvolved outsiders handle it, bite your tongue, and let our your frustrations by playing racquetball or something. This mentality only perpetuates the problem without doing anything to solve it. If others are "getting away with it" as you claim, you should report them if you haven't and if you did and nothing happened, you need to look at where and to whom you've reported it. Enough is enough on The Troubles, Sri Lanka, A-A, the Mid-East, and all the other ethnic problems areas on wiki. It's way past the point where people need to start behaving and build the encyclopedia rather than using wiki as a means to foment their real world ethnic wars. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you are not suggesting I'm fomenting real world ethnic wars? Unfortunately most of the incivility directed at me comes from the "Administrator Community" and I get zero protection from other Admins and when I have complained (basically I've given up on that ) all I get is rubbish about why the Admin was justified or bizarre claims that he/she "wasn't really uncivil". I thought WP:NPOV was the key ethic of Wiki; seems it isn't. Rather WP:CIVIL, defined vaguely and Administered randomly and arbitrarily is the only REAL crime the Wiki-police see. Sarah777 (talk) 19:05, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fomenting problem was a general comment about problems I see in the ethnic wars on wiki. For you Sarah, your major problems, as others have often pointed out, is your combative, defensive attitude and incivility. NPOV is a key pillar but what I often see in the ehtnic wars on wiki is that one side always sees their own view as NPOV and the other as POV, ie, as the "misinformation" I talked about before. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:11, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is A-A? And I'd dispute your characterisation of the Middle East as an "ethnic problem" when clearly it is an issue of Western Imperialism, colonisation, land-grabbing and the reaction to that. But the "Wiki majority" cannot see or won't accept that their "mainstream" (in the parochial Anglosphere) views are in fact those of a minority ethnic faction, every bit as much as the Tamils or the Serbs. It is that failure to understand which is the real problem on Wiki; not the non-acceptance of totally arbitrary "civility" rules. That and the avoidance of my comments about the complete biased manner in which the civility rules are enforced (or not enforced). Sarah777 (talk) 19:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For A-A, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan_2, an area of wiki that I'd rate as the most problematic of all. The Mid East is ethnic, religious, Western influences, etc and so on. It's not just anyone one of those. Its problem go back thousands of years. Quality articles emerge with all sides work together, not when one side pushes out the other. Users do have differing standards of civility and I often disagree with others about what is and isn't civil, as do others with me; just as people have different views about other things. This does not mean we can't work together to build an encyclopedia. Not knowing the specifics of the civility cases you're talking about, I can't say much more at this point on that. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alison. Can you look at Wikipedia:Administrators_noticeboard/Incidents#Spamming_sock_farm_needs_blocking for me? An admin is asking me to file a checkuser request but I'm not sure how to when the case is obvious. I can't work at the computer for extended periods of time due to medical issues (the Commons pic you deleted for me) so I need to ask for help. Sorry but I hope you can help me. EconomicsGuy (talk) 05:05, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Completed - Alison ^❤ 07:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For being the best damn checkuser at Wikipedia. Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awww. Thank you :) - Alison ^❤ 07:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now there's a funny title... Anyways, the barefoot guy is back. Can you check Dremen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and see what other sockpuppets are around? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you ready for this??  Confirmed - the following accounts are all the foot fetishist:

1. Dremen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
2. AbbST (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
3. Ceetton (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
4. Cizerex (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
5. AdoraShe-Ra (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
6. MDwww (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
7. Primegoodie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
8. Rwws (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
9. Lliaa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
10. Landings (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
11. Arcanne (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
12. Lestml (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
13. Stratrep (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
14. Promnowe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
15. Bellrem (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
16. TheBoneWoman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
17. DlsHouse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
18. Crommorc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
19. Fornsc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
20. Relater (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
21. Vakala (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
22. Calidite (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
23. Bythh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
24. BrandRM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
25. Sotrev (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
26. Dessirre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I was able to block and tag all these in one go with some new checkuser tools. Kinda handy, that.

Footnote:  IP blocked also - Alison ^❤ 07:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can that blocking and tagging tool be made available to clerks and favored admins. *fawn* *fawn* Jehochman ^Talk 19:11, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That would be waaay handy. Pity it's part of the checkuser result screen :/ - Alison ^❤ 19:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More work for you. Less work for me. Woo hoo! Jehochman ^Talk 19:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I not surprised? Thanks. On a completely unrelated note, did you get my email from a week or so ago? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did, yep. My mail's in backlog right now but I'll reply soon :) - Alison ^❤ 19:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, the email isn't that important. Was just wondering if you got it or not. =) I hope you don't mind, but I redid all of your sock tagging on the accounts so that they all point back to the "original" (or at least the earliest I found originally) account. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you have a look at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Blue Bugle. There are two single purpose accounts stalking another editor, doing reverts like Great Britain and Ireland -> The British Isles. I believe these two socks have a master account, or perhaps a banned user behind them. Jehochman ^Talk 13:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to confirm I've sent you an email on one matter. Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The matter is

Resolved

for now. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you also block this User:ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ's sock[7]? The troll impersonates my previous screen name. If possible, could you also semi-protect my pages? I already got attacked by the troll twice.--Caspian blue (talk) 19:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)  Done I've protected your userpage indefinitely, as well as adding move-sysop. I've also protected your talk page for a few hours and blocked the vandal. One of the images used is now in the image blacklist - Alison ^❤ 19:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help. I hope the troll accepts his block and give up to edit(disrupt) Wikipedia--Caspian blue (talk) 19:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...for blocking User:Raisininthemoon, apparently the latest sock of the guy discussed immediately above a.k.a. User:Nefbmn or maybe a copycat. Where do I go to request semi-protection of my talk page AND my user page, just so I can choke off that character? (along with User:Ron liebman's occasional socks, unrelated to the Nefbmn situation) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - same as Caspian Blue's above ;) - Alison ^❤ 20:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail. Tvoz/talk 01:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fancy that! So do you :) - Alison ^❤ 03:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still making dinner? <jk, but take a look - at email, I mean> Tvoz/talk 04:08, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied - Alison ^❤ 06:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipeire's latest sock is called User:CroatiaShoes Snappy56 (talk) 03:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed and blocked. I thought he's stopped. It might be time to block another range, unfortunately - Alison ^❤ 03:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but what can be done with this user? This is in danger of becoming a full time job! Snappy56 (talk) 03:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just rolled back all his edits where he put in his POV weirdness. It took all of about 20 seconds. Sooner or later, he'll realize that the time that's being wasted is his own. Do you have rollback, BTW? - Alison ^❤ 03:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The message is taking its time to sink in to him! No, I don't have rollback, next time (and there probably will be one), I'll leave it to you. Snappy56 (talk) 03:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you have rollback now :) Have fun and don't use it for anything other than vandalism or reverting block-evading editors - Alison ^❤ 04:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, Wikipeire is the guy who does that? The other day on Huggle I saw someone doing that. I wish I could remember what his name was. I'm new with most long-term abuse people, other than Grawp. Do we block Wikipiere on sight? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 03:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do, yes. He's block-evading, has had dozens of socks and is fast cruising for a community ban. Which, all said, is a pity :( - Alison ^❤ 04:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alison, I've discovered a few IP addresses which appear to be this Wikipéire fella. I submitted a couple of reports: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser#213.202.143.88 and Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser#Editstan. Please note that the one I did on Editstan was submitted before I became aware of the Wikipéire puppetmaster, and therefore includes Domer48 and Fennessy. This is only because of similarities in editing and the fact that one of the users was blocked at the time (I considered the possibility of block evasion) and were added to the list purely from a logical standpoint (recent editing histories etc). Both reports have so far been ignored. Cheers. --Setanta747 (talk) 16:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More socks?? Oh no, oh no, noooooooo. GoodDay (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Setanta747 - I've run the latter case tonight - Alison ^❤ 08:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Alison, whatcha think of my performance (the Oh nos, above). Academy worthy? GoodDay (talk) 12:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But he's a 'name'! Yes this is 'her' for sure Special:Contributions/Dereks1x same interests when she turns up on articles, same edit summaries etc. I picked Pressie up when she was having problems on AN/I, what a strange turn of events, and a disappointment. Sticky Parkin 12:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Driveby...Was this one checked? Something amiss here, I feel.⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 13:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We can't checkuser people just for being adoptees of mine, can we?:) I knew 903 was presumptive, 'she' said she felt harassed under her old account and so (allegedly lol) changed to a completely new one, in accordance with policy. I recommended she tell a checkuser she was doing this. Its not something I'll let someone do again and stay my adoptee. I really hope Tohd isn't one too, but they don't seem to make similar edits. Sticky Parkin 15:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Sokay. Tohd isn't :) And don't feel bad about Dereks1x - remember, he got through RfA as Archtransit! - Alison ^❤ 18:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good! I'm happy to be wrong about that..I'm sure Sticky is too. Thanks Alison. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 22:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Alison. A very crafty sock, he was; he seemed to try to gain my support at Talk:Joe Biden by suggesting I too was being suspected of SPA. GoodDay (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki talk:Bad image list#deletion of 2257-triggering images - BanyanTree 22:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I followed up on Jimmy's talk page and am watching closely. I'd like to see a little more clarity from Jimmy first, though - Alison ^❤ 08:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi alison how r u —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mp517 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fiine, thanks - Alison ^❤ 02:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to be able to learn from your example! -- Avi (talk) 04:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yippee! Thanks Alison. :) Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 04:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you take a look at the new addition by me? I think the vandal ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ is a reincarnating the indef.blocked troll named RestoreTheEmpireSociety (talk · contribs). Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/RestoreTheEmpireSociety would be a reference.--Caspian blue (talk) 07:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just replied over there as you were typing this :) Hopefully, the two rangeblocks should hold him a while - Alison ^❤ 08:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I also hope he give up returning to English Wikipedia.--Caspian blue (talk) 08:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Muke (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been caught in a rangeblock made by you. He's been around for a while, and a cursory glance at his contribs revealed nothing alarming, so normally I would just grant IP block exemption. However, since you blocked his IP range with {{checkuserblock}}, I decided it would be best to appeal to you. Here is a link to the unblock request: User_talk:Muke#Unblock_req.

Thanks for your time,

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Thanks for letting me know. Yep, go ahead and give them exemption, I say. They check out fine and are sysop on other projects. Could you just leave a note on Wikipedia talk:IP block exemption and point out that it's been okayed by checkuser? Thanks! - Alison ^❤ 15:12, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]