User talk:Akhilleus/Archive 10

Unconscionable canvassing?

Nevertheless, since I know that you're familiar with the classical languages, could you take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Explicatus and register your opinion, whatever it may be? (I promise that I'll get around to Six Ages of the World soon; I've just been very busy in real life lately.) Deor 03:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Alecia McKenzie

I saw that you have previously removed a speedy tag on this article. Having just cleaned up the article (per the cleanup tag), and investigating some of the claims which would have generated notability, I have found that they are unsubstantiated by other sources. Specifically, the newspapers which have written her up are not themselves notable, and the article about the award she allegedly won does not corroborate that claim. If you can still identify any claims to notability please let me know, otherwise I will leave the tag there. Cheers. Jdcooper 17:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppet

Would you like to look at a sock puppet investigation, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ideogram, and see if it makes sense? Jehochman ^Talk 20:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Two posts removed from ANI

I've deleted the post that was here - you may want to check your history but I don't think you'll want it on your talk page. Kelpin 18:03, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Sock Puppet

I wonder if I could ask for your advice. Another user has been accusing me of being a sock puppet both here [1] and here [2] I have asked him to make a formal complaint or withdraw the comment (I have even suggested that as you blocked me last time he might want to make the complaint to yourself) but he refuses to do both. I don't want to make an issue out of this, but I also don't want to get a reputation on Wikipedia for being a sock puppeteer. Can you suggest how I should approach this? Thanks. Kelpin 18:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Help needed regarding block

I would be greatly obliged if you can help me in this issue.I was told to approach you as you were one of the impartial admins.I was blocked for something that was posted in my talk page which is the last place I would put something for others to see..[3].I came from one country to another with a group of students even my IP address belongs to my University.I have edited allowed my computer to be used by others and also university computers are used by others students as well mainly for studies,listening music,email etc rarely for editing Wikipedia in both countries and the use of the computer also corresponded to our examination schedule.I believe one of the students may have the said ID.But now it is vacation all the students except me have left my University.It seems the concerned user is abroad ,I think to either California/Texas/Lousiana or India where most of my friends have gone and is appealing for a admin to check his case and has put the tag wrong.[4].Now how do I go about if he does not appeal his ban.I seek nothing ,I served my ban .I am not appealing his ban.It is between him and Wikipedia.My name is mentioned which I would like to clear after serving the ban.I just want my name removed from his userpage or a checkuser done.Now a self request is likely to be declined as per normal policy.Harlowraman 01:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

A question about Sockpuppet report procedure

Hi there. I got in touch simply because I saw you write on Wikipedia talk:Suspected sock puppets a couple of times, so I assue you know the score about how cases are dealt with.

There is a case against me, and I know that I can't ask an admin to process the case. However I was wondering about two things.

1. Is it possible for you to either clear the current backlog so that my case can be dealt with faster by someone else, or for you to ask someone to clear the backlog but not my case?

2. A template was put on my talk page saying I had been accused of sockpuppetry. It linked to a list of points that mentioned here how if a checkuser request has to be made within 10 days I can remove the template - is that correct?

By the way, please reply on my talk page. Cheers, John Smith's 22:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your time. I have been doing other editing in the meanwhile, so will try to put this out of my mind more. :) John Smith's 17:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Ideogram banned, socks need blocking

Hi, I don't have admin powers, so you could block the confirmed socks of Ideogram? It will help remove the temptation for him to evade the ban. Thanks. - Jehochman ^Talk 04:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Agressive IP

Hi Akhilleus, I'd be very much obliged if you'd look into this for me. An aggressive IP is being extremely incivil on Talk:Men's rights. They have posted what I identify as an attack twice[5] [6]. I removed this and warned the IP the user was using at that time.[7] This user seems to be using at least a dynamic IP in Australia but maybe connected to a user making similar comments to Misandry using open proxies [8][9] (IPs 89.210.111.19 & 189.155.54.100 which have both been blocked). User:Edgarde identified these IPs as possible sock-puppets of the banned user Anacapa - I don't know whether they are or not. Can these comments be removed or am I wrong here--Cailil ^talk 13:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that Akhilleus, I just wanted to be sure I was doing the right thing--Cailil ^talk 15:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Request

I see you review SSP cases and just blocked User:Eeky. Would you mind taking a look at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kephera975? It's been languishing w/o attention. Several different ediitors have submitted evidence... IPSOS (talk) 00:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

My sockpuppetry allegations

Thanks you, for considering my applications. What confuses me is that the IP address still looks like an obvious sockpuppet supporting two editors who have used up their 3 reverts.

How should I report an obvious sockpuppet when I don't know who's using it?

BTW the sockpuppet User:72.220.146.66 has also technically broken WP:3RR although the first revert is one I've also had to do myself at [10]--Peter cohen 12:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Frater FiatLux

We've got a new obvious sock, User:Kremm. See [11]. IPSOS (talk) 00:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, they got two of them. We should have seen that one coming and semi-protected the AfD when the others were blocked. IPSOS (talk) 01:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Another one, Pleasereviewcarefully (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Check contribs for evidence. IPSOS (talk) 19:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

EdwinCasado

Was there any confirmation as to whether or not he was a sockpuppet? I thought the evidence was pretty strong. 64.131.205.111 02:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

So then why was my account taken away and his allowed to remain? I behaved far better and was a very good vandal hunter. I stated I would not use multiple accounts. I never used meatpuppets like he did. What was different?

With the evidence things can be implied but no admin stated that we confirm that this is him! 64.131.205.111 02:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppet case

Hi, i see you handled the sockpuppet case i made. I wanted to ask you, after the block expires and if similar edits continue, what should be done? -- LaNicoya  •Talk•  03:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious, wouldn't getting a RFPP for a page be worse in the sense that it would be difficult to monitor the persons edits because they can simply make a new account, therefore escaping blocks?-- LaNicoya  •Talk•  03:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Not severe, it is mainly trying to introduce wrong information, pushing pov, removing legitimate information which is sourced, things of that nature. Of course, before the first block it was worst, lack of civility, accusing editors (mainly myself) of being racist, ect. The user mostly focuses of the Nicaragua article (tourism section) and the El Salvador article.-- LaNicoya  •Talk•  03:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Please edit MediaWiki:signupend

Can you please do me a favour? I'd like you, who is an admin, to edit that page, by adding a sentence saying that if the person who wish to register found that the desired name is already been registered, he/she/it may go to Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations to request for using that username, if that username has no log at all (Except user creation log). I make this request because once I've changed my name from Edmundkh, then re-register with that name. Now I'm regret for doing that, so I'd like to help the person who wish to register with that name.
Thanks for helping! --Edmund the King of the Woods! 03:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I am grateful and honored to be still here, as you considered and decided justly in this case, having weighed all the evidence and my good faith. Actually, as I stated, when I registered here, due to my little knowledge of wiki rules, I used user:judgefloro, and them I registered this one, because I preferred this one and told User:FisherQueen that I would no longer use the first account; thus I consistently used this, but I committed a mistake in editing my own article and was warned by her, so I admitted the minor mistake, she re-wrote Florentino V. Floro. As to user User:Juanatoledo it is good that you blocked the account so that as I stated I do not know that one, and I submitted my own stance that many enemies and detractors had been pestering me using my name in other forums etc., and I concluded that I was used, without my knowledge.

Thanks again, and regard, good luck.

--Florentino floro 04:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for doing admin work.

I would like to thank you for the many hours of work you did Aug. 22-23 clearing up the backlog of sockpuppetry cases. This is the kind of work that helps keep Wikipedia running smoothly. --Coppertwig 23:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I add my thanks regarding the backlog, in particular the User:Jebbrady case (and that you took the trouble to help coach him on his talkpage). FYI, he's now the subject of this RFC/U. -- LisaSmall ^T/C 16:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sock puppet work

Hi Akhilleus, and allow me add to the thanks you have been receiving for your work in clearing the backlogs. Thanks! I do have a question as well: You recently reviewed and blocked Eeky for being a sock puppet. Now Gamer Eek (talk · contribs) has appeared, and at even a passing glance it seems quite clear that this is another sock puppet of Eep². Does a whole new case need to be opened or do you have discretion to take action without that? Thanks in advance for any guidance you can offer. Cheers, --Paul Erik 01:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation—much appreciated! --Paul Erik 03:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Agressive IPs again

Hi Akhilleus, sorry to bother you with this again but the IPs at Talk:Men's rights are at it again.[12] I've removed the comments again and warned the latest one (User:211.28.114.219) with {{Uw-multipleIPs}}. If this continues should I bring it to WP:ANI?

These comments have been posted yet again at Talk:Men's rights and also on Talk:Project Gender studies by another IP in the series user:211.28.8.5. as it stands there are now 5 IPs for the one user (User:211.28.114.219, User:211.28.7.95, User:211.28.7.81, User:211.28.8.5 & User:211.28.25.39)--Cailil ^talk 10:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk pages are not free speech zones

There's no need to make unsupported personal attacks on people on Wikipedia talk pages. That's not what talk pages are for. Discussion of source reliability can be made without inflammatory language. FCYTravis 04:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a platform to promote your personal grudges and religious biases. Quit monkeying around and behaving like a "maladroit hack".Bakaman 04:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Protection on Teresa Nielsen Hayden

Hi FayssalF, I was wondering if you could remove the protection on Teresa Nielsen Hayden--it looks like the situation that led to the edit war has been resolved, and on the talk page an editor has mentioned that he wanted to add some sources but couldn't edit the article. I'd remove the protection myself, but since I recently edited the article I probably shouldn't. --Akhilleus (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 16:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I need your help Akhilleus

Hi Akhilleus. I stepped once at that article Mother Teresa recently while i was dealing w/ unrelated case involving the now indef blocked User:Phral and User:Muntuwandi when i found out about another issue. The issue is found at MT talk page or for more details you can check this thread at my talk page here.

Since you intervened in a double CU request on Aug. 22 made by User:Peter cohen re User:Anietor and User:Majoreditor, i thought you can help me sort out an issue involving the subject of the CU. According to the information i could get from Peter, i know from where the IP was hailing and to whom it is connected. Thanks in advance. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 21:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for replying Akhilleus. As you now know the background and the fact that i'd consider myself a bit involved though not really as you've seen so i'd appreciate if you leave a note to Anietor about it and re WP:OWN as well. A note from me would be just treated wrongly by him. Thanks again. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 07:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Help wanted

See Talk:Augustus#intro. It's on FAC, and it's all like that. Care to join in? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

New sockpuppet report

Would you mind taking a look at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Green108 (2nd)? Lwachowski (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has been editing extremely disruptively on Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and has also created a POV fork of it at History of the Brahma Kumaris movement which is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Brahma Kumaris movement. While I didn't file the sockpuppet report, I agree that this is almost certainly a sockpuppet of Green108 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). IPSOS (talk) 12:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)