Misplaced Pages

Block of 72.152.37.124

Hi there. You blocked 72.152.37.124. Is this a mistake? He vandalized once, and I gave him a warning, but don't you usually give about 4 or 5 warnings before blocking? When you blocked him, he wasn't even warned until after he was blocked. Was this a mistake? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, if someone is editing in bad faith (not test edits, but something clearly showing that they aren't here to edit productively), then they need to be shown the door immediately. I'm not going to bother wasting the time of volunteers reverting someone over and over again just so we can be absolutely sure that they aren't going to be productive. If they wish to reform, there is always the unblock template. NW (Talk) 01:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

But he wasn't even warned once, that was his first edit. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Another SOCK bites the dust?

Hi there NUKE, VASCO here,

I guess that, during your absence, vandals really went head over heels on your talk page and akin...Pityful, thank god you also had good people helping with those lowlifes. Regarding this situation (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Marvingroves/Archive), where you efficiently intervened, i think (i do not want to sound pedantic or anything, but i don't think, i AM SURE) the vandal has come up with another account, now called User:Markvermeulen ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Markvermeulen).

Why do i say this? Because at Oleguer Presas, he inserted (falsely!!) this player has represented the Spain national football team internationally, a pattern in the vandal, inserting this kind of lie in footballers' articles. If you take 30 seconds to read this section in this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/Oleguer_Presas#Personal.2Fpolitical_writings), you will see all the more that it has been a vandalic "addition" by this "editor", a player as nationalistic in views (not an insult, just stating the facts) as Oleguer will only play for Catalonia, not Spain. However, if i was to be wrong in this approach, the vandal would still be WRONG, because OLEGUER (and dozens the "editor" has "contributed" in) has not, as of 23-02-2010, played for Spain in any soccer match.

Do you think something can be done about it? So sick and tired of PARARUBBAS and his siblings...

Cheers, ty in advance as always, have a great week,

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi there Vasco. I wasn't too sure on this one, so I asked a checkuser to take a look at it. Hopefully, it shouldn't take too long.

And thank you very much for your comments :) NW (Talk) 02:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Block immunity

Thanks, NW, helps a lotOrdinary Person (talk) 05:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request at User_talk:Silverblaster

Hi, just thought I would notify you that a user you blocked has filed an unblock request at User_talk:Silverblaster. They were blocked as a sockpuppet after being identified as a potential sleeper account at SPI, but claim they may have been highlighted as this by editing from a company IP address. Thanks, hope this helps, --Taelus (talk) 09:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any intersect in their editing patterns ... and a completely different style of personal interactions. Your call though NW. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'm not really going to be around till later, so feel free to use your judgment on this one, guys. Thanks, NW (Talk) 12:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
  • I went ahead and unblocked, as their editing pattern suggests they are unrelated, having made gnomish style edits over a long period of time. It seems plausible that as they suggested in their unblock request that they would have been linked in as a sleeper account due to a shared workplace IP. I will keep an eye anyway, I am sure that if there are any future problems they can be handled at the time, for now it seems best to assume good faith. Happy editing, --Taelus (talk) 12:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

G10 vs. PROD

NW, when you're dealing with unsourced, negative BLPs (like a few I'm in the process of deleting), please either delete the G10-able statements and PROD what's left, or blank the page and use {{csd-g10}} instead. There's no good reason for these correctly-identified BLP assertions to remain in the article for a week. Feel free to hit me up on my talk page if someone else declines a G10 like this and you don't think it's been appropriately handled. Jclemens (talk) 19:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey there Jclemens. Normally I'd agree with you, but Beeblebrox declined one of the first G10 taggings that I did in this case. Perhaps we could continue the discussion on his talk page? NW (Talk) 20:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure, that works for me. Jclemens (talk) 01:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that was close!

Hi there my friend NUKE, VASCO here,

This time i thought i was in for a period of detention, when i saw this message (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:VascoAmaral&diff=cur#Response); were it true, it could only be attributed to my (sometimes) uncivil summaries.

But then, i had the idea of checking my talkpage's history and...VOILÁ!! A vandal, using the appropriate template and signing as YOU, did the "funny deed". He has been, with a (seemingly) neverending supply of IP, been on my case, reverting stuff just because, sending me stuff to my user/talk page, vandalizing, ever since (1 year!) i did what? Report him for vandalizing WP!!

I do not wish (it's in your hands tough) for you to do anything (block, warn, etc), i just wanted to share this funny moment with you. Would not be (THE LEAST!!) surprised if he "visits" me today, especially if/when he sees i sent you this message (no one likes a smart ass, and VASCO AMARAL a smart ass being is...).

Take care, cheers,

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Filter

I have reactivated 294 (again) due to attacks on you while you were gone. (I think you're not around, not sure.) Feel free to disable it when you get back. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Michael Riley (film producer)

Thanks for the head up, but what notability is claimed? Woogee (talk) 00:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

The production of the ten-part series as well as a 15 year CEO-ship indicates that there might be some notability. Do you want to follow up on it, or shall I? NW (Talk) 00:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

His production company and his latest film are listed for deletion. Do you think they're notable, too? Note that the articles are created by a person who works for his production company. Woogee (talk) 00:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure; I'm just saying there is a case to be made that they might be notable. Perhaps you could change the speedy deletion tags to prods? And who the article was created by has no merit to whether we should keep it or not in most circumstances. NW (Talk) 00:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

The film is an afd, there's no speedy delete criterion for films, but I hate prod with the passion of a million flames, as far as I'm concerned it's totally worthless, so I really don't want to go that way. Woogee (talk) 00:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Sumbuddi

Hi NuclearWarfare (hmm, didn't you intend to rename your account?),
blocked user Sumbuddi asked that you be made aware of the discussion on his user talk page. Voilà.
Cheers, Amalthea 00:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I will! I promise! One day :( I feel really bad about it actually; I really should get on that

And thanks for the notice. I'll be sure to post there. NW (Talk) 00:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

:) Amalthea 00:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Living Persons task force

Hi, here are a couple of things you or the task force might want to consider.

1. I'm working with a few people to make it easier for BLP subjects and non-editors to correct or otherwise address concerns about material WP publishes about them. Mainly, we want to make it easier for these people to find out who to contact. We're aware of a few related page and are drafting material to streamline one or more of those.

One thing we're considering is whether their main recourse (point of interaction) should be e-mailing OTRS, posting their concerns at a special page, or something else. That discussion is here We invite wider discussion.

2. It would be good to get research on BLPs, such as comparing unsourced with sourced, etc. Let me know if you'd like more thoughts or info. Maurreen (talk) 08:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for these ideas. I'll be sure to look into these in greater detail later today. :) NW (Talk) 12:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Your post on making it easier for subjects to get help is something that seems to be a great idea. Do you happen to have any suggestions that the task force could use as recommendations?

As for statistics: Any would be very well welcomed. You would probably want to talk to Keegan about that though. I think he's handling the statistics end of things. NW (Talk) 20:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

89.195.18.43

That was funny. You, Nihonjoe and I tripped over each other trying to revert his vandalism. You wanna double check and make sure we didn't overwrite someone's commentary? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 20:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

That was indeed amusing. I think everything got cleaned up properly; if not, I say we blame Nihonjoe ;) NW (Talk) 20:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you relist these debates too

These need relisting Meteorbs,Jitsu (Masters of the Universe),Ninjor (Masters of the Universe),Scare Glow and for future reference how do relisting because I can't seem to do step 3 I can never find where to put it. Dwanyewest (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Someone will get to them eventually. As for relisting AfDs, there is no real reason for you to need to be able to do it. I use a script, but it is something that probably should be left up to the reviewing administrator. NW (Talk) 20:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

BjörnBergman

Hey there.

I understand that you were concerned about how Björn seemed not to understand advice to provide sources for the BLPs he was creating and giving him a serious warning was probably appropriate. However, I'd recommend to go easy on the block threats in cases like this. It was pretty obvious that Björn was a newcomer acting in good faith and he was certainly not adding dangerously speculative, slanderous or damaging information.

Björn has had a really bad experience on Swedish Misplaced Pages which was to a large extent caused by his being rather young, inexperienced with these things and not terribly patient. But I'm trying to coach him as best I can. Hopefully he will learn from the advice provided to him and continue to make useful contributions.

Peter 22:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Peter. I left a note on his talk page. Please let me know if there is anything further I can do to help. NW (Talk) 22:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

A request

Hello there, Nuclear, and thanks for blocking that user. If you could take a look over at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#SockPuppet/Vandalism, I would appreciate it - you can find the full story of the account there, which I believe is one of many sockpuppets. - I.M.S. (talk) 04:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

 Indef blocked them both, though you may want to get a checkuser to take a look at who that is. NW (Talk) 04:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. I'll let the matter stay for now - hopefully, whoever is doing this has learned his/her lesson. If it pops back up, should I refer to the list of checkusers? - I.M.S. (talk) 04:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)