Misplaced Pages

User:MuZemike/Menu

• Deleted pages – if I deleted a page you were involved with in which you have an issue with, talk to me about it first here. I will be happy to userfy for you, restore the page if I believed to have made an error in judgment, or fulfill any other request within reason. If you would like a copy of any other deleted page to work on, also let me know. Keep in mind that I will not, for any reason, restore copyright violations or attack pages.
  • See Misplaced Pages:Why was my page deleted?

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/Dalejenkins#Report_date_January_6_2010.2C_19:50_.28UTC.29

As you were involved in an earlier related report, the above discussion may be of relevance to you. Sincerely, --A Nobody 20:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I see it. Thanks. –MuZemike 20:06, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocking of Paul24112

I see that you have quite rightly blocked Paul24112. Thank you for that. However, I am somewhat surprised that the block was for only 72 hours. This editor has previously had at least two accounts indefinitely blocked (Paulmch and Paulmchisback). My understanding is that, when an account has been blocked, it is not permitted to use a new account to avoid the block, which in effect you are letting him do, after those 72 hours. It seems to me, as I stated on User talk:Paul24112, that if he is to be allowed to return to editing this must be done via a request for an unblock, not via a second account. In addition, since this user has now given even more evidence that he is here only to be disruptive, the case for an indefinite block seems to me to be even stronger than it was when the previous accounts were blocked. I wonder if you have any comments? JamesBWatson (talk) 20:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I just indefinitely blocked him as a sock puppet right before your message. –MuZemike 20:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Great. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Great work chaps, a most appropriate course of action. Paul24113 (talk) 15:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q4 2009)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 2, No. 6 — 4th Quarter, 2009
Previous issue | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q4 2009, the project has:

Content

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 21:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Nc1701

Hey there; Alison wanted you to contact her about this case. Could you pop her an email? Cheers. NW (Talk) 00:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions/MuZemike

Just to note I've made your submission into a hidden comment- you can't claim points until the article has featured on the main page. J Milburn (talk) 13:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, thanks. I thought it was going to be added onto the Main Page 0:00 7 January, but I misread the DYK queue; it's actually going to be on the Main Page 0:00 8 January. But yeah, my bad. –MuZemike 19:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

2009 Norwegian spiral anomaly

MZ- Thanks for the great article. Is it worth mentioning that Barack Obama was visiting to receive his prize? Heyzeuss (talk) 13:20, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

First off, you're welcome, but don't necessarily thank me – thank the others who had helped improve and expand on the article. As far Obama's 2009 Nobel Peace Prize is concerned, what connection is that to the 2009 Norwegian spiral anomaly (I mean, I haven't heard anything about that). –MuZemike 19:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Bye-Bye, Gigogag Sockpuppet War!!!

I am so glad that you rid[REDACTED] of User:Gigogag and the massive sockpuppetry war/dispute he caused. Without him, users can be trusted once more! You should retire his account and its sockpuppets so people can use those names for their accounts.:-)

PS: someone should create an article about this particular sockpuppetry war. Dock26 Pwnage (talk) 17:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Please be a bit fair

This is GoonerDP. First you suspended me for a few days saying that I had a sock puppet named Comancheros. I had set up the other user name since I had forgotten my original one and wasn't meaning to do sock puppetry. Anyway I accepted that and have never used Comancheros again. Then you suspended me for a month from Dec 7, 2009 saying I have used another sock puppet called "Crouching Dragon" or something. I have no such user name or ID. Do you even bother to check or just go ahead and suspend people? Even after my telling you this in my talk page, you didn't bother to remove my suspension which has finally expired today. If you are a moderator, please take the responsibility seriously not just abuse your power.

No, I look at each and every one of them. If you didn't agree with my block, then you had a chance to request an unblock. –MuZemike 20:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Also administrators are not "moderators". –MuZemike 20:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see that you tried to, but you didn't follow the directions for requesting unblock. Instead of posting the unblock request below the template like it said, you instead posted it inside the template. Hence, no other administrator was able to see that you requested a review of my block. I don't know what to say, since your block has now expired. Just don't abuse multiple accounts like you have again. Regards, –MuZemike 20:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC) P.S. Make sure you sign your posts by typing four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your message.

DYK for Arcade Hoops Basketball

On January 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Arcade Hoops Basketball, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blocking of User:Sensei 0208, User:Sensei 2105, User:Shihan 883

That blocking is not right. I know those people personaly. It's a family of 3 people, which uses one computer. They all have interest in martial arts (as do I and many other people) and we are working together on different articles in many languages. That's ridiculuos that we can't work together in enwiki only. 20:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yakudza19 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, but I disagree. They can request unblock to have another administrator review my blocks. Regards, –MuZemike 20:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

How they can request - if they are blocked from editing? Also please explain why do you disagree. Yakudza19 (talk) 22:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

They should still be able to edit their talk pages. As for your other question, basically I'm not buying the reason given. –MuZemike 22:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The most funniest thing that this is true. And the most saddest thing that they were blocked because they have only one laptop for the family - that's discrimination.Yakudza19 (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, OK. And I can physically see across all Internet connections and see who's who. –MuZemike 22:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

86.96.224.0/21

You've blocked much of the internet access from the UAE, 86.96.224.0/21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Fred Talk 21:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, unblocked. I wished somebody told me this the first time I blocked that range. –MuZemike 21:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Gigogag

Could you please fix the indef block template on User talk:Gigogag. I'd fix it, but it will say that I blocked him. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's going to matter much. He's indefinitely blocked and userpage tagged. –MuZemike 22:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Alrighty. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for my somewhat annoying behavior, but how is User:Dock26 Pwnage not blocked indef yet as a sock of Gigogag? Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

 Confirmed by CU and blocked by User:J.delanoy. –MuZemike 22:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Re:NC1701

Hello! I am an experienced Misplaced Pages editor working on articles relating to warfare, primarily modern warfare, WWII and post-WWII. This appeal is not about me. Due to my skillful edits in the 2008 South Ossetia War article I have earned three Barnstars. Alas when you make good edits, you aren't always congratulated by the other side. In the title debates, over a year ago, I received a threat: As a personal note, this ends the title discussion for me and I hope not to spend any further time on this. I will also not forget HistoricWarrior007's actions during the vote. --Xeeron (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC) Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:2008_South_Ossetia_war/Archive_24#Results.

I didn't want to bring it up, but unfortunately it affected two new Wikipedians. NC1701 and BillyMays. Xeeron thought they were my sockpuppets, because they came onto the 2008 South Ossetia War talkpage and made arguments against the title change. In his evidence presented, Xeeron erred in his claim: "Both demonstrated a deep knowledge of the previous discussion (which is mainly buried in the lengthy archives) and cited[REDACTED] rules." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nc1701#Evidence_submitted_by_Xeeron. This was rebutted by NC1701: "My arguments came from archives. My arguments included massive copy paste. Arguments of Billy Mays came from the tip of the article: common sense, google search, first paragraph, article map, summary of first section on talkpage." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Nc1701

Alas, NC1701 was banned as per this case: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nc1701

Is there any way to reopen the case, as I feel bad that two new Wikipedians received the short end of the stick and I wasn't able to prevent it earlier? I think that both NC1701 and BillyMays would agree to a checkuser, to show that they are different users. I know that you are really busy, but it would be great if we could get the case reopened, and I'll do everything I can to help these new Wikipedians feel welcome! Or if you could just request a simple checkuser, and unban them if the checkuser comes back negative. Thank you! HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 07:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

青鬼よし

My account is blocked. Please explain the reason that blocked my account. I am an editor of Japanese Misplaced Pages. Please reply to my talk page. (I was connected from the Internet cafe. However, I hope to continue talking in my talk page ) Thank you. --219.101.251.98 (talk) 09:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)