Jump to content

User talk:Dennis Brown/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10→Archive 15

Lucretius/Sir Gawain McGarson

What is the appropriate noticeboard for reporting that a blocked user is abusing the privilege of editing his talk page in the appeal process? The appeal guidelines require that you understand that what you did was inappropriate for this site, and confirm that you won't do it again. No appeal template has been posted, and he's been using the page for personal attack or to play games and make a point, which the appeal guidelines specifically caution against.

What he says about you is typical of his rhetoric: there's never anything wrong with what he does, it's just that everybody else is incompetent, or is motivated by vile preoccupations, or is out to get him because only he has any standards. It's also typical of him to call consensus among multiple editors "gangland style edits". In referring to User:Akhilleus, an admin who contributed a comment to the SPI, the user has linked to User:Achilles, an indefinitely blocked sockpuppet—an error, or a deliberate smear? At any rate, characteristic of this editor.

After spending a couple of days blaming others, he's now trying to tone down his rhetoric and justify his sockpuppets as "satire." Of what? Good faith? If he had said something like "I really didn't think I was violating sock policy, and editing Wikipedia is important to me, so I'm happy to confine myself to a single identity and feel I deserve another chance," I'd have been sympathetic. But his response to the block is to attack others, engage in self-aggrandizement, and confirm that he's been playing games for other editors to figure out. He's demonstrating why so many of us find him disruptive. Is he allowed to keep doing that forever?

Sorry to burden your talk page with this, but I didn't know what should happen next. Thanks again for your patience with such a complex case. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

  • After reviewing, I see that he has been blocked but received no block notice which is customary with socks...usually with the presumption that they may still control the master account and we issue the block notice there. In this case, I think that the notice should be issued which outlines his appeal process. He states that he is readying his appeal but doesn't know how to proceed.."I'll start assembling my case here, in no particular order, until I'm ready to appeal the decision. I haven't yet found a way to email key figures at WP about this case but I hope to do so soon." The notice serves to start that process and inform him.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Actually, there is a notice of sorts with link on the Master page, which is the norm. I told him in the SPI he could ask for an unblock but needed to provide a rationale, as his constant changing of names without properly linking and some overlap looks like avoiding scrutiny to me, and still does. If he wants to get unblocked, the others will stay blocked, and if he changes names he needs to be clear about it so there isn't the appearance of improper action. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I've made a proposal on the user's current talk page (it's in the drawer) that I'd like admins to review. This follows up a comment by Obsidian Soul. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I have no problem with the unblock with assurances that the account won't be confused again, such as your idea of keeping the one account only. (we would note the final agreement in his SPI archive). I'm not sure about the other issues, since that isn't the reason I blocked him, although they may be part of the problem that led to this mess, I have no idea. I recommend asking an objective and experienced admin with SPI familiarity to review. I prefer an outsider since I made the block. Either User:The Bushranger, User:Beeblebrox, or User:JamesBWatson are good examples of admins that I think would be firm but fair here. As for Elen mentoring, I don't see that happening because Arb eats up so much time, but maybe another can be found. No need for a mentor to be an admin, just experienced and level headed. Keep in mind, this is all moot if the editor doesn't agree to the terms first, but I won't stand in the way of any proposal that another admin and the editor agree to. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I do understand and agree that the indefinite block is justified by the rules on sockpuppetry. I was just trying to look at options, if an admin were considering unblocking him. As Akhilleus pointed out in the SPI, the use of serial socks by this user is hard to separate from disruptive behavior, because it's in returning to contentious articles under a different name that he violates "clean start" guidelines. He knew the rules and deliberately tried to evade them. I would hope that he wouldn't be unblocked unless he makes a positive appeal not based on "it's everybody else's fault". Cynwolfe (talk) 18:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I suggest approaching him and seeing if he is agreeable before contacting another admin, and you are free to tell anyone I am agreeable under reasonable restrictions. My goal isn't to prevent him from editing, it is to prevent him from being disruptive. Hopefully, he can do that without keeping the block. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I looked at this at Cynwolfe's request, and I certainly wouldn't allow an unblock at the moment. If someone talks him down off the Reichstag and gets him to change out of the Spiderman costume, then maybe something could be worked out. As it is, playing whack-a-sock seems the more likely outcome. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I didn't think it would be coming today, that is for sure. I still hold hope that offering hope can result in an unblock, if the user can agree to some realistic terms. I've already applied the stick, some might say rather boldly since some of the accounts were linked. I'm hoping a carrot might help calm them down a bit and provide some direction. Otherwise, we end up playing whack-a-mole anyway, which is the least desirable outcome. But it is up to them. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:37, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Baiting blocks

Since you deal with block a lot, I was wondering if you could offer an opinion at WP:VPI#Baiting blocks. Ryan Vesey 20:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Dennis. Ryan Vesey 20:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry if it wasn't the answer you were looking for. Baiting is something we have to keep in mind when applying other policies, but it would be very hard, if not impossible, to regulate. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
It didn't need to be the answer I was looking for. I referenced myself that it would be near impossible to regulate. Ryan Vesey 21:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I know, you are always neutral in how you point me toward a page, something I note and appreciate. I think many, if not most admins count for it. The key is presenting that evidence before the block, which is a timing issue. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:06, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Likewise, I appreciate that I can ask for your opinion and know that I will be receiving a neutral one. Ryan Vesey 21:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Did you happen to see the mess at here, here, and here? I suppose that is part of why baiting blocks wouldn't work. In most cases, taking the bait results in setting the bait and when emotions flare the comments are usually made in hot-hotheadedness rather than in malice. Ryan Vesey 12:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
"Walking away" is a fine art and a problem solver, but not everyone can do it. Worm isn't a block happy guy so I trust his judgement. Once you get the bit, you will find you need to walk away sooner, however, as you get zero slack. Check my archives, or even this very page below. My weakness isn't being attacked by others (it is so very easy to ignore personal attacks against myself, like water on a duck's back) but is watching others being attacked, which does piss me off. I've also learned that as an admin, I can never use humor to defuse a situation because someone will take it wrong. It just doesn't work as an admin. I learned that the hard way as well. Heated situations take dry, straight forward responses that no one can misjudge. Other responses tend to cause more drama. Right or wrong, that is the usual outcome. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

re: ?

this. I wanna make everyone be M'F'ing NICE to each other ... OR ELSE!!!!! — Ched :  ?  12:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

  • The Summer of Love™ at RfA has been a pleasant change and an eye opener, that is for sure. It is one reason I've gotten so involved at RfA, to help in whatever small way I can. I have found that a positive contribution is quite contagious sometimes. I won't hold that answer against him, I used to think the same thing, that the process was broken, until I realized it was really us that was broken. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:07, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
yes .. and very well said. — Ched :  ?  14:46, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The triple mop of mopping
Hi, I thought you could do with a barnstar in recoqnition of all the recent work you have done as an admin (or at least all that I've seen in the last while), and in recoqnition that you always are levelheaded. IRWolfie- (talk) 19:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Well if you aren't always, I've yet to see it :). IRWolfie- (talk) 19:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

YRC

Just a FYI, after promising nt to edit articles he comes on after 3 days and ... and he tells me im nown for something?? Arbcom for him is quite clearly the venue me thins..Lihaas (talk) 03:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Anderson9990's talk page.
Message added 05:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry for the inconvenience. Kindly, Anderson - what's up? 05:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The Fortune Cookie Barnstar is under construction. This is a prototype.

Last night I received the following Fortune Cookie: You have a natural grace and great consideration of others. Lucky #'s 22, 6, 34, 56, 11, 10


I think it was meant for you. ```Buster Seven Talk 15:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

FF

Just rolled your hat -- had my response in edit buffer -- talk page revocation seems a little hasty to me. Nobody Ent 18:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I'll revert the edit if you feel strongly about it. Nobody Ent 18:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
No, hatting wasn't a big deal to me, I'm 50/50 on it. The talk page access was due to a continued and escalating amount of disruption, taking the whole affair in mind. In truth, I'm probably doing him a favor before he goes off the deep end and gets indef'ed. So I agree that revoking was a strong reaction, but I'm not convinced it was hasty, as it seemed clear his intention was solely to continue soapboxing and disrupting, imo. As always, any admin is free to reverse me, and I take no offense if you ask someone to. I'm not the law here, just the janitor. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Nah, they can email someone if they wanna get it back. Thanks. Nobody Ent 18:53, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Anderson9990's talk page.
Message added 19:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kindly, Anderson - what's up? 19:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification

Thanks for the clarification at SPI, I really appreciate that you were willing to explain some points to me. I am now better informed than I was a day ago, so thanks for that Dennis! ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Not a problem. It is complicated, and even with my 15 years of network experience, I still learn many new things a day. The privacy policy is one of those things that is designed to protect the good guys and the bad guys, but it is necessary. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
So what exactly are the risks associated with indef blocks on IPs? Do we risk blocking innocent and uninvolved editors? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:49, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
If you indef block an IP, and it rotates to someone new in a week or month or year, then that new person isn't able to edit. Since one of the pillars is "anyone can edit" (excepting obvious trouble makers) then this is inconsistent with the WP:Five pillars, a pain in the ass for the new editor (who won't know how to overcome the block), and ineffective at blocking the trouble maker. To me, there is never a reason to indef. Maybe a 1 year block for a known stable IP, like a marketing company that keeps spamming, but certainly not a dynamic IP or questionable static IP, such as business cable, which can rotate the IP with a simple phone call. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Sure, that makes a lot of sense now, thanks for taking the time to explain this to me. Maybe there should be a link to the block appeal process directly on the first screen a blocked user sees when they attempt to edit. It could include, "if you think you've been blocked in error, please click here" or something to that effect. That may reduce the number of legitimate users discouraged by stale blocks. Also, what then is the proper use of a range block? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 02:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
For most blockes, except socks (ironically) a block template is used with links. The SPI tools put a sock template, but no block template. I always wondered about that. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Thanks for the notice on my talk page. I do feel that your wording was a bit too strong for my liking. I just wanted to let you know so that you didn't feel this was personal.--Kindly, Anderson - what's up? 21:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

AN/I Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Your actions were mentioned in a roundabout way. Thought this proper. Arkon (talk) 02:33, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Tree

I don't believe any consensus has been reached on which version of Tree to retain. Mark Marathon has returned the page to its original version. Is this what you had in mind as the future of the article? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Dennis, in my opinion this revert referred to above is a continuation of the edit war for which Mark Marathon was blocked. I also thought that the talk page conversation indicated a motion forward, not backward--a revert is counterproductive. I note that Cwmhiraeth's edits to the article indicate an editor's willingness to work on the article, an attitude I find lacking in the other editor's blind revert which fails to take into account the problems raised with the now-current version raised on the talk page and elsewhere. Drmies (talk) 06:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Speechless

Dear Dennis - Thank you for your work. I find it terribly sad that USER:Tim riley has decided to leave. I just don't know what to say. —MistyMORN 16:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

  • We might need to give him a day and perhaps someone who knows him can ping him with a note of encouragement. I've commented at the ANI. This is what I thought from the talk page as well, as I tend to actually like infoboxes, but hate it when someone seems to be intentionally disruptive by picking the worst time to climb the hill and make a stand. Seems WP:POINTy to me, and I would hate to lose an exceptional editor because of it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I think several of us are in supportive contact with Tim offline. I have blanked my own talk page, both to continue my solidarity with Tim in silence and, frankly, out of personal exasperation following a series of personal attacks which seem to be considered trivial (I have no intention to start a further ANI case; that's just not my style and I would be out of my depth). For now, I will just continue with my work on HIV/AIDS etc to support Doc James's initiatives [1]. —MistyMORN 08:04, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
(watching) I saw the blanking but misunderstood, I was afraid you would leave also. Perhaps say positively that it is an act of solidarity. - I felt sick once here (see top of my talk), I know what you are talking about. - People are more important than infos and boxes, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Gerda! It's really good to have your moral support and understanding. The sort of aggressive infantilism you yourself have undergone and allude to isn't worthy of this great project, Wikipedia. It seems willingness to be a standing target for bad eggs is a sort of unofficial eligibility criterion for serious contributors here. At present, I feel lost for words. —MistyMORN 08:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
As I said below, sometimes there is no easy answer. I've developed a very thick skin around here, but not everyone can do that, I understand. Hopefully things will cool down and he will come back, and a real discussion can take place. Meanwhile, Andy/pig is not faring as well at ANI. Good people can disagree, but it disturbs me that some people will choose the worst possible time to make a stand, seemingly intentionally just to be disruptive/soapboxing about their pet issue. This isn't the first time I've supported a ban for Andy, who can be a good contributor but spends too much time trying to make WP:POINTs. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Block

Some new editor User:Vic1093 keeps vandalising the David Rudisha article. How do I stop him? Hairgelmare (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

OK! Thank you for your kind assistance. Hairgelmare (talk) 02:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

it was simply because some of the information provided didnt seem to have any logical inclusion into the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vic1093 (talk • contribs) 02:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WHJG-LP‎

Hey Dennis, the nominator of the above linked AfD has said he won't object to an early close of the AfD, so since we have an almost SNOW keep consensus (the nominator is the lone "Delete"), could you early close the AfD, please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

  • He states he isn't withdrawing his nom, might be a bit premature to close as snow, even though the outcome is clearly going to be to "keep". I would recommend just letting it run or letting a few more keeps, to be consistent with the idea that AfD is a discussion, not just a vote. This is just a procedural opinion and again, I think we both know what the outcome will be but it won't hurt it running a couple of days. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Okie Dokie, when he said he wouldn't object, I thought "why wait?", but I don't mind waiting. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:37, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
      • Hey Dennis, been 5 days on this AfD and we have added another delete !vote, but the person who posted that !vote has stopped communicating on the AfD, so I am unsure what to think on that one. No comments have been made in more than 24 hours, can this go to an early close? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
        • If you do close the AfD early, I have posted a note at the bottom of the page requesting IRWolfie's !vote be struck for stubbornly and blindly disregarding established solid consensus. I have proven it, backed it up with sub-sections of WP:N and part of WP:OUTCOMES and he continues to disregard it. Obviously not being constructive. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
          • This is why I don't like closing early, as other viewpoints get aired out. I wouldn't worry so much about him disagreeing, he is actually a good guy, even if I disagree with him on this one. My understanding is that all tv stations and radio stations that are govt. licensed are considered automatically notable. Like I said before, the outcome is already certain, and now closing it early is certainly not going to happen, but it isn't a big deal. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
I was referring more to Neutralhomer's lack of assuming good faith and the number of accusations he has made about me (about a rather unimportant AfD), rather than the content discussion. IRWolfie- (talk) 23:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
D'oh. (no pun intended) That kind of discussion serves no purpose on a talk page anyway, if an RfC is needed, then someone should start one, but hammering on a talk page is fruitless, regardless of which side of the debate you are on. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for Admin assistance

I find myself forced to request Admin assistance (whether from yourself or from a colleague). Br'er Rabbit has posted content that I find deeply offensive, as well as being completely unfounded. The offensive material was framed in a highly personal idiolect which I was blindly expected to understand. I requested him to remove the offending remarks, including a completely unfounded accusation of trolling (I cannot recall any interaction with this user outside the Georg Solti infobox dispute). Since my requests remained unanswered, I decided a sensible course of action would be to remove the most offensive and upsetting parts myself, including a serious allegation of "trolling" [2], as well as other generally offensive content and accusation of "shite-stirring" [3], and allusion to "wankery", "trolling" and "badgering", etc. [4]. Sadly, my quiet removal of the offending remarks was almost immediately undone [5] [6] [7]. I then posted a polite but firm warning on Br'er Rabbit's talk page, explaining that I take this matter very seriously (Warning regarding personal attacks and other offensive content), which was greeted by the accusation "You are simply being disruptive."

I wanted to explain the context, but in this precise moment I'm so am so angry and hurt by the entire situation that I can't see straight and m temporarily withdrawing from Wikipedia. —MistyMORN 17:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I looked into this as an uninvolved and impartial observer and I can't find anything that would require admin assistance or intervention. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, "Neutral"", but I feel sorry for Wikipedia and its working environment. Personally, I consider accusation of "trolling" to be a serious personal attack. The other content of the diffs was clearly offensive.

FYI, I found your snap judgement [8] regarding a recently retired contributor who was the prime mover of 16 FA and 9 GA [9] (a tally which modestly doesn't include FA/GA where his copyediting was instrumental) to be painfully insensitive and far from impartial.

Anyway, I certainly didn't come to Wikipedia for the banter. —MistyMORN 11:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a rude place sometimes, much more so that I prefer, although I've developed a thick skin and become tolerant of a degree of it in otherwise productive conversations, simply because the act of correcting it can cause more drama than ignoring it sometimes. Being an admin, I have people call me all kinds of lovely things, but it genuinely rolls off my back. It does bother me to see others get called trolls or worse, but there is only so much that can be done. I see BR is having a discussion on his talk page with someone else, who is also addressing the issue. I can't insta-block over incivility like this, as that causes more drama and always explodes into controversy and yet more name calling. It is often a no win scenario, and everyone walks away with some mud on them. That is part of the challenge of WP:WEP, trying to find constructive solutions. Sometimes there is no good solution. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Thank you, Dennis. That's a good reply in my book. —MistyMORN 11:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Dennis Brown's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IRWolfie- (talk) 23:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at VQuakr's talk page.
Message added 23:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

VQuakr (talk) 23:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Request for Admin Sanctions.
Message added 13:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Dennis. Could you take a look at my latest comment on Bbb23's talk page. [10] There seems to be some sock-peppery going on here. Kurdo777 (talk) 23:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Block question

I blocked User:Mertface for 24 hours. I have now changed the block so he cannot edit his own Talk page. How do I "notice" that on his Talk page? I would think at a minimum he needs more instructions on how to appeal when he's blocked from his Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

  • After I use the regular block template in TW, I just make a note below saying "I've also removed your talk page access because ...." There isn't a template for this, since they don't need the links to unblock, since they can't edit. Normally, I dont take away talk page access unless they abuse the talk page, but there are some cases where it gets taken away instantly, but rare........ Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I removed Talk page access because they removed the block notice - twice. I warned them the first time, but they did it again, so ...--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I had already put a note on the user's Talk page, but I added Bwilkins's template because it has appeal instructions. Thank whomever told you on IRC (yeah, yeah).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
  • The template Jasper refers to is pretty startling (SO red). Also, it would be good if it appeared in this list. I haven't been using Twinkle for posting block notices. When I looked at it now, I only see one possibility - can I add more (didn't see anything obvious in preferences)?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
TW has a bunch of different block templates. Press that block button and they will pop up :p Don't feel bad, it took me two months to figure that out. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't see it. The block button is in the User drop-down, not in TW.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
TW ->Warn->Blocking Not the most intuitive place to put it, which is why it took me two months. The Blocking option is the last option in the first section of Warn. It is templates only, you still block from the other menu. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Stupid. I saw that before you told me, but I only saw one template and no arrow to drop down. This time I clicked in the box, and it dropped down. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I told you, I did the exact same thing. Major palmface. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:56, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Not that it will matter for a long time, but does Twinkle automatically update or do you need to install "admin mode"? Ryan Vesey 18:39, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Automatic. I've haven't updated Twinkle since it was called "Friendly". :) It is an externally controlled script. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:42, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Warren Benbow

I like my propane smoker so much, I uploaded a picture of it.

Care to take a look, or pass it along? This page is currently being edited by the subject and there might be copyright concerns. I'd dig into it, but I'm a bit busy at work. Ryan Vesey 18:57, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Hickory-smoked country-style ribs, which is what I was cooking that day.

***Actually, this is just a gazebo. A few years ago I did buy and completely gut a 3700 sq. ft. lake front home, replaced every wall, ceiling, floor, wire, pipe, all plumbing, cabinets, window and poured 110 yards of concrete and added a 24x36ft garage and a new boat ramp. THAT was a project. :) I still have that house, but I don't live there, I expected to sell it but the housing market went to hell, so it just sits empty. This is just a 18x20ft place to put the smoker and grill, but I'm doing all of it myself, and I'm not as young as I used to be. Pretty close to done, just need to install the wire screen and trim work, wire up all the lights and outlets, and dig a trench to lay the underground power line to the building. About three or four days work, but I'm working full time, so it will take a couple weeks to finish it up with everything else I have going on. I stay busy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:42, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

        • Referring to a smoker and a grill as separate things, spoken like a real american. Wood or electric? And that house, how could you not live there? Ryan Vesey 02:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
          • Propane, same as the grill. I added it to the Smoking (food) article some time back. It has a wood box at the bottom to let the wood smolder. Insanely good smoker. Think I paid just 100 bucks for it at Lowes a few years back, use it regularly. The propane makes the temperature very even. The grill is a standard grill, but looking to maybe build a custom job later. Again, I always have a project or two going on. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

User:HeCameFromTheShadows

Did you see his talkpage? I requested speedy dlete as its only bent on attacking you. Not sure why its still around.Lihaas (talk) 23:08, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Also the talk page of the other [obvious] sock admits hes been on here for years. Can we use that to check for sleepers (though he could have eft the country if its an IP search)Lihaas (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I find it more amusing than anything, but I'm not one to take ranting like that personal. It just rolls off like water on a ducks back. Anyone that matters knows better. You can ask another uninvolved admin to revoke his talk page access, but since he is trying to attack me, it wouldn't look proper for me to do that. Part of being an admin is having people attack you in these crass ways. Honestly, it is of no consequence to me. Oh, and they might want to indef the puppet master, User:FerrerFour while they are at it. Two weeks won't be enough here I fear. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Removing block notices/unblock requests

If a blocked editor retires like at User talk:Carthage44 do the block/unblock notices need to be restored? Ryan Vesey 01:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

If they are indef'ed, retiring is a bit, well, non-applicable. As long as the sockpuppet tag is on the user page, I wouldn't worry about it. They are just saying they aren't going to appeal the block. Which means they are going to leave, or just create a new sockpuppet. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SimonKnowsAll - What now?

I'm still pretty new. This is my first report of a suspected SOCK. Ironic because I was doing invites to the Teahouse. I look at a new user's talk and contribs to personalize my invites. I was surprised when I saw that the first activity was a !vote in an AfD. Usually it's the new user finding his or her first article up for deletion. When I looked at the AfD discussion, the Keep votes didn't make sense so I looked at others who supported Keep. The Investigation (case) to create or re-open format was logical although I chose to link to contribs rather than diffs; I judged that they told the story better. I was uncertain about requesting CheckUser so chose to let whichever clerk did the review to make that call.

I do have a few questions for you:

  1. Do I need to do anything more? What?
  2. Is it appropriate for me to check other articles created by User:SimonKnowsAll for obvious promotion? Or is that done automatically as a follow-up to the SPI?
  3. What could I have done better to ease your work in SPI?

I'll watch here for answers. Thanks for your efforts and taking some time to answer my questions, DocTree (talk) 04:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

  • It is being further checked, but a bunch of socks are about to be perma-blocked. Usually, a single check is all that is needed, but there must be some technical reason DQ is doing some extra checks. Good find, we will mop up the rest after all is checked. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Block review

Hello Dennis. Three days ago you asked me for an independent review of a block. Sorry for the delay in responding, which has been partly due to the fact that, for personal reason, I have had very little time available for editing Wikipedia in the last few days, and partly because, when I did manage to find time, I was thwarted by internet connection failure, apparently die to problems at my ISP. I have looked at the case, and I have now written a comment about it. I originally envisioned the comment as a message to post on the talk page of the blocked user, but I'm not sure whether that is the best thing to do with it, so I have put it at User:JamesBWatson/Sir Gawain McGarson Block review. It can be copied to elsewhere if that seems appropriate. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Alternate Acct info request

I seem to remember that User:RightCowLeftCoast is an alternate account, possibly of an Admin. How do I check something like that? I just need to verify my memory. Promise:No dust storm. ```Buster Seven Talk 15:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that. I have changed to the right name. Buster Seven Talk 15:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I looked for "what links here" and didn't find anything interesting. You could always just politely ask them. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

To RfA or not to RfA....

Hi Dennis,

Have to say I'm very impressed with what you've achieved since you've become an Admin.

I don't know how this happened, but I seem to have been suckered into doing serious work on Wikipedia. I've been editing for years, contributing to AfDs over the past year, I've put up a few articles for GAN, and now I've got WP:ANI on my watchlist. I always thought I'd never want to be an admin on here for a few simple reasons :

  • I'm an admin / developer (and a long standing and respected one, if I do say so myself) somewhere else and do all sorts of other things in my spare time
  • I wouldn't be able to commit the time to properly deal with the cross-examination a RfA candidate faces
  • I don't particularly fancy dealing with having to pull apart two people edit warring over some Middle-East related article and being threatened as a result.
  • I'd feel "committed" to the place and be unable to lose interest and go elsewhere

Having said that, a few times over the last week I've found myself saying "I'd do that, but I haven't got the bit to do so". One was a request to empty the WP:RPP queue, another was an obvious case of vandalism that I was absolutely certain warranted an indef block (which indeed happened), another was somebody looking into why a CSD occurred. That makes me wonder if it is worth looking at an RfA in the long term.

I don't think I'd stand a good chance at RfA right now, as I'm relatively unknown and haven't got a proven track record at anything, which, looking through the pile of recent reviews seems to result in a lot of "Oppose - wouldn't know him from a hole in the ground". Then again, I haven't done anything worse than mild quarrels with people, which I tend to drop. I think it's certainly necessary getting some "street cred" (ie: spotting vandlism, good calls on AfDs, regular contributions to ANI) for at least a couple of months before making any serious decisions.

Of course, in a couple of months I might have lost interest. Who knows?

Any thoughts on the above? --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:49, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Interesting, I see around 3000 edits is all from 12/2005 to now, but mainly in the last two months. Edit count for articles is only 22% [11], which is always a problem if it is lower than 40%. I think you might want to hang around and edit regularly for another 3 months, then get a formal review, which will put you another 3-6 months out. I agree that you would likely have a snowball's chance at RfA today, based solely on the statistics: you don't have enough of them, and article contribs are too low. But the more important issue is, is Wikipedia something you really want to do regularly, either as an admin or as an editor? Only you (and time) can tell that. Before you can convince others that you can be an asset with the bit, you have to convince yourself that it is something you want to do and it will benefit you in some way. I wouldn't worry about people knowing you, as your work will speak for itself. Focus on some article content, get those numbers up, try and see if consistently editing here on a month basis is right for you. You might find you enjoy that without the bit. I had 18,000 edits before seeking the bit, which is higher than most, but I was happy just editing for years. Most RfA candidates have at least 5k, and those with 10k have a better chance, as they have had the opportunity to learn and apply the policies here, which is the foundation of what being an admin is about. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the quick response, Dennis. What's basically driven me to think about this is instances like WP:ANI#Viktoria Bolonina where I've called out a bad CSD and been a bit annoyed I'm not on the same playing field as the other guys in the conversation, as they can make a judgement call on the deleted article, and I can only take guesses.
Actually, this is kind of what's driven me to finding out more about WP policies in the first place, as an internet forum I frequent fell foul of a possible questionable CSD some years back and most of the regulars now despise Wikipedia, so I've seen the collateral damage that probably goes unnoticed on here. I think that's what drives most of my recent motivation in this place.
Regarding the edit totals, most of the non-article ones are Articles for Creation reviews (which happen in the Wikipedia Talk namespace) and responses to them on my talk page, so I would say a lot of the non article edits are helping people. There tends to be quite a bit of a backlog, and it's not too much of a chore to explain WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV to newbies - it's kind of the "meat and potatoes" of Wikipedia, and I think it's quite hard for some newbies to "get it", but once they do, they can move on to greater things. Having said all of that, there's no point giving your opponents ammo if you don't need to, so I agree that working on the article space edits is a good plan. I have two GA reviews sitting in the pile (one's been there for 6 weeks), and I've got several more I want to have a crack at. Since I've spent time talking about FA reviews today in my attempts to bring the Pigsonthewing debate at ANI under control, I really should get one up to that status myself, first.
I certainly wasn't planning on putting in the RfA at least until next year, whatever the circumstances.
Anyway, thanks for your time - certainly something to think about. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:28, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem. Learning policies is tricky, as the written word is less important than the intent (hence the need for WP:IAR to normalize). As for collateral damage, I started WP:WEP with the goal of finding ways to minimize the damage and prevent as much as possible. As far as working with newbies, that is as good a purpose as can be found at Wikipedia, and is part of the Editor Retention program as well. Stop by and look around, you may find several who share your ideas. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:38, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Would you consider

Hi Dennis. I notice above that you gave a very accurate review, and wondered if you might consider adding yourself to Wikipedia:Request an RfA nomination? I believe having as many friendly faces up there as possible, and if you're willing to offer the odd review (I think I've worked it out as about one a week), then it would be appreciated. Also, if there's anyone you've got your eye on for adminship, we are running low. WormTT(talk) 16:07, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help with the DeFacto SPI. I really appreciate you taking the extra time to go through the logs, especially after the CU declined to do so.

Best,

GaramondLethe 01:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I understand why he refused. Looong SPIs are a huge pain to go through. We love having 6 good diffs and a single paragraph and do the digging ourselves, which is why TLDR comes into play on longer ones, which tend to get overlooked for a while. I try to take on some of the longer ones because it is hard sometimes for editors to be pithy in these reports, not knowing what all is needed, or not needed. I'm very confident in the outcome, however, and spent time over a couple of days going over the data. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:54, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
6 good diffs and a single paragraph: So it was written, so it will be done (as I expect DeFacto will be back around sooner rather than later). Thanks for the tip! GaramondLethe 02:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Congrats on the DYK and your other accomplishments!

Drmies (talk) 02:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks Drmies. I don't get as much time to work on articles as I used to, but trying to work on quality. This recent stub Zingbot 3000 needs work, but I think it can be made to pass since he was at Comic Con, etc. And he was on again last night. Yes, I'm a Big Brother fan, about the only TV I watch. Shameful.... Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 09:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection of Defacto's talk

I've sent the issue to ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Impressive kahunas. Nicely done. After this fiasco I chose to let other(s) take action. Toddst1 (talk) 05:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Not a problem. I had already been researching the DeFacto case, so was familiar, and the geolocation and other evidence was pretty strong. I ended up blocking one more sock, and not blocking one that as accused as well. SPI blocks on behavior (which IS proper) is very tricky and not without risk, which may be why so few do it. That was a messed up situation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 09:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, DeFacto is one of those editors where you're way better off going on behavioral evidence. If you think it's him, it probably is. If you didn't see it, the last episode would probably be interesting. I ended up arguing with an arbitrator about blocking some of his socks and was proven correct after some fur flew. It was pretty obvious that this slew of IPs was DeFacto to me, but I didn't want to make the rangeblock. Thanks again. Toddst1 (talk) 14:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

SPI Close

Hi Dennis, Close Can I ask what is the conclusion - NB this diff? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:57, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

  • A combination of stale and WP:TLDR led to the conclusion that a a link wasn't going to be made. There is no prejudice to reopen the case if they come back, but keeping it short with a few diffs will make it much more likely for someone to take on the case. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 09:54, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
    • I can well understand Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read, but the several admins who had participated in the bottom section of the SPI had already, as I read it, concluded that the IPs were user Kauffner even without this diff being spotted and were at the point of discussing where to take the issue next for remedy. At the least some advice input on that final question might be helpful - if closer can do that. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
      • I'm confused as to why the admins didn't block if they knew. SPI is not required, it is just a place for non-admins to take it, or admins who aren't sure. Let me look at it in a bit, I'm swamped working, just stopped in to check a couple things. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Gtwfan52

This editor is a fine example of someone that works with new editors in a special, nurturing way. It is really refreshing to see. I will work toward creating a dialogue with him and hopefully he will be willing to share some of his wisdom @ WP:WER. I'm sure a word or two of support from you will make his day. BTW......Frank is one of the best BB players in a long while. He may not win (nebbish Ian may be a surprise), but he is fun to watch.```Buster Seven Talk 13:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC) Just a thought as I was walking out the door.....WE, as a whole, spend SOOOOOO much time with problem edits and editors and the situations and discussions surrounding them that go on fdor days and weeks. So much wasted effort...and especially wasted time. This User, Gfan, is doing it right. He is teaching the new breed. Its the challenge of seeing an example of how it could be. Buster Seven Talk.

  • Excellent find! I will catch up with him in a bit. And yes, Frank is as good a BB player as I've seen in a while. I'm also hoping Daniel goes far, only because she is nice to look at. (and she has proven herself to be a good/manipulative player as well.) :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • You know what, we need a Barnstar for WEP, in mainspace. A star with the WP:WEP logo over it, standard template, "The Editor Retention Barnstar", for helping making Wikipedia a more enjoyable place for all editors. That would cover a great many situations, including this. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
My barnstar construction abilities are limited to "sidewalk Foreman"> I'll run it past User:amadscientist and see what he comes up with. ```Buster Seven Talk 15:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

SPI questions

If you have a moment to help out here, please do. Note that the issue of sock puppetry for certain accounts related to Turkey and Turkic peoples is being discussed on various editors' Talk pages.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I am writing to tell you both thanks for the compliment and the barnstar. I am sending this exact same note to both Buster7 and Dennis Brown. After much soul searching and weighing of time commitments, I have decided to go ahead and help out at WP:WER. Ok, the truth: My wife said I could! I would not be here at all except for this particular project and one of its efforts, The Teahouse. The encouragement and instruction I got there got me through the difficult early times. Also, much credit goes to Bmusician, who graciously adopted me. You singled out some of my best efforts, but you should know that I have had some moments where I have been not so nice too. I had an especially ugly incident at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard that I thought for sure was going to get me sanctioned, but I just let it drop and that was the end of it. I am hoping through my involvement with this project, I can learn how to get answers to questions like the one that took me there.

So, what do I do now? Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

  • You do what brings you joy. You help others, you can hang out and read a bit at WP:WER from time to time, you just do what comes natural. It should be fun and rewarding, so you do what you enjoy most, and you will be good at doing it. As for having a bad day, I've been here almost 6 years, rest assured, I've had bad days. I didn't go for being an admin until well over 5 years, and my first couple of years were a little rough. No one expect perfection, but we do appreciate good faith efforts to make Wikipedia a better place, and you seem a natural at that. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

HarveyCarter

92.7.26.188 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is him back again. Do I need to open an SPI (you won't get much more information than you can see from the contribs yourself), or can I save time? More background on him available if needed..... His charm hasn't disappeared! 2 lines of K303 16:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I've nabbed the IP under block evasion. I'm about to go out for a bit, if he comes back, protection might be the key, but I hesitate to block talk pages unless there is a clear and obvious need that can't be dealt with otherwise. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Emailed her, after I kicked myself for not thinking about her. Dougweller (talk) 12:22, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Not a prob, this is what is good about the project, many minds working on a common goal. Normally, those areas of WP are too far away for me to touch with my 10 foot pole, although we all need to work towards learning enough to "police" it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:25, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

How to solve this.

I have a problem and I'm told you might be able to advise me on how to solve it. Rather than repeating myself, I'll point you at my most recent failed attempt. Still-24-45-42-125 (talk) 06:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Also see: User talk:Tide rolls#Still-24-45-42-125 / Belchfire and User talk:Tide rolls#Problem --Guy Macon (talk) 08:00, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I see User:Tide rolls has become involved. What I know of him, he seems quite reasonable and competent, so I would defer to him in the matter as there is not an advantage to having multiple admins trying to deal with a problem and stumbling over each other's feet. For what it's worth, Still, I think you wear your feelings a bit on your sleeve and this leads to you getting your feeling hurt from time to time, and you seem to have a very negative view of everyone you encounter, admin or not. I don't have any comment on the merits of this particular case as I haven't looked into it deeply enough to express and intelligent opinion in the matter, but you would probably do yourself a favor if you worried more about content and less about politics. As for outing, you clearly named yourself after your IP, and the geolocation of any IP is public domain info, which is why it is actually more anonymous to have a registered name that doesn't indicate your locale, but it seems a bit late for that. Of course, I use my real name and everyone knows I live in North Carolina, but I find this keeps me honest.

There is an old expression Birds of a feather, flock together, and finding groups that have the same ideas or goals is just as common on Wikipedia as it is in the real world. When several editors share the same opinion, it isn't a Cabal, it is like minded people. Often this forms the basis for a consensus. When this consensus is counter to neutrality or policy, WP:DRN is the first option, or an WP:RFC can be drafted that will allow the larger community to pipe in and restore neutrality within articles. This is the proper way to deal with disputes.

I'm pretty outspoken on many issues in the real world, although I don't edit the articles on the topic here so much, simply because I have other interests and things I'm better at, so they get my time. This includes LGBT advocacy, drug legalization, opening the borders and other Libertarian-like issues that could easily descend into bitter arguments, but don't. I don't catch a lot of heat for being so outspoken because of the tone I take, the method of communication I choose, to engage rather than be confrontational. There is something to be said about using persuasion rather than accusations, and accepting the fact that not everyone will agree with you so the goal should be to achieve balance. While I appreciate your perspectives on several issues, I don't appreciate your methods (or the methods of some others in these areas, for that matter) but the solution isn't to be more combative, it is to set the example by being civil. The other advantage is that if there is a dispute, your actions aren't being examined.

Let me be frank, admins are asked to inject themselves in a great many situations, including many to which we are not familiar with the subject matter. That is just how it is, and we do the best we can to determine a fair resolution. We are always going to look at the wheel that squeaks the loudest as the most likely cause of the problems, because most of the time, it is. We are forced to make judgement calls based on insufficient data all the time, doing the best we can to look at months of contribs, determine the motivations and actions, and make a final call, all within 30 minutes typically. We can't spend hours on a single case, or nothing would get done. You are better off if you insure there isn't a reason to doubt your judgement, to make sure you aren't seen as The Boy Who Cried Wolf, or seen as someone who likes to stir the shit pot. You might not like hearing this, but I'm telling you for your own good: The people that are most successful in obtaining consensus here are the people that can work with others in a non-confrontational and civil way. It isn't instantaneous, but over the long haul, it is proven to be true. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

This doesn't particularly deal with the issue I brought up. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 20:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Nothing ever deals with the issue you bring up. No solution will ever be acceptable to you until any editor who has ever disagreed with you is blocked. If you continue in this manner, you'll be blocked yourself. Ryan Vesey 20:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Are you done?
The issue I brought up was Guy Macon. As far as I can tell, Dennis didn't say anything directly about it. I'm sure I'm not blind, so your attack is way over the line. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 21:00, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I told you that Tide Rolls appears to be dealing with the issue you raised, first two sentences. The rest of it was just free and very sincere advice. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I appreciate the advice, but as far as I can tell, Tide Rolls isn't doing anything at all. I wouldn't have bothered you if I thought he had any intention of acting. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 21:06, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I actually did address them. He didn't out you. You both leave something to be desired when it comes to civility. You both are interested in the same subject matter but are on different sides of the issue, so you will bump heads sometimes. That he and others agree isn't a cabal. If someone is trying to get you "in trouble", the best solution is to not give anyone a reason to think you are in the wrong, by taking the high road. I thought I deferred, then addressed the primary issues above. Again, it isn't likely what you wanted to hear, but it is the truth.
If your attempts at justice have failed, it might be because there is no justice here, we just try to keep the playing field level. You have a different idea about how Wikipedia works than the reality of it is. Admins aren't school principals, you have to learn to get along with others on your own. If there is a serious breach of policy, Tide Rolls would have taken action. I didn't see or I would have as well. I see two sides of an issue being dickish to each other. You set yourself up to get your feelings hurt and you need to develop thicker skin and a different way of communicating. Had you been the pinnacle of civility here, it would have allowed me to apply some pressure on Belchfire and Guy Mason, but you are all equally rude to each other, so you have guaranteed I can't really say anything. I covered this all above, just more gently. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Gentleness is wasted upon me; bluntness works better. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
@StillStanding, We crossed paths a couple of times when you were editing as an IP, and since then I've kind of kept an eye on you because you often make me laugh with your clever and sometimes snarky sense of humor. As far as I can tell I haven't had the occasion to take your side or to oppose you at any article yet, but I've seen a lot of the drama you've been immersed in recently, albeit from afar. The reason I'm butting into this conversation is because what Dennis said above is very good advice, in my opinion, and I want to encourage you to re-read it, and then try to follow it. Wikipedia is a community and for it to work properly people need to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable. Ok, I'm going to stop throwing around cheesy slogans and mind my own business now, but I thought I'd throw in my two cents. ~Adjwilley (talk) 21:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
I appreciate your input. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to go a bit further. Still, you are only making yourself look ridiculous when you essentially, tell well respected admins that "they got it wrong". Dennis is not the first admin you have disagreed with. While they aren't perfect, they usually get it correct and if they don't the issue usually gets corrected. Furthermore you are only impressing yourself with your ability to look up policy and the lecture others on the proper use of said policy. If that is not bad enough, you make it far worse when you act on enforcing your interpretation of policy. If you continue on this path, you will most certainly be facing blocks and community sanctions. If you are serious about building an encyclopedia instead of pushing POV, then I suggest you seek a mentor who can act as a sounding board and show you how to navigate the turbulent waters of political articles more smoothly.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  22:12, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, how did mentoring work for you on your previous accounts? How long did your blocks get before you closed them down and started fresh? StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Like any self-change, success is relative to the desire and willingness of the person being mentored. I've undergone mentoring once, it went swimmingly. I've mentored someone else, the results were a bit mixed. Mentoring only works if the mentored understand and accept their shortcomings and have a genuine desire to address them. This is no different than in the real world: people who think there is nothing wrong with the way they are, don't change. Those that can see and accept their flaws, take ownership of them and can change them. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:25, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
I think you just repeated the punchline to "How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?" StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:38, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I'm going to read them over and see what specific changes I can make in my behavior. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 20:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Good luck with that! ```Buster Seven Talk 03:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Boy

Your addition to Boy is precious again, awesome Wikipedian of 15 May ;) Left by User:Gerda Arendt

That is an exceptionally good image of a newborn, and certainly worthy of being the lede photo for that article. That it is also a "birth day" present is just a bonus. :)
Now Drmies can say "That's my boy." Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:59, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Rock on

You rock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111111 Egg Centric 23:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Arkon

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Arkon's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arkon (talk) 02:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Zingbot 3000, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Comic Con (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 03:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Possible vandalism; or disruptive editing?

Hello, Dennis

I believe I need your assistance regarding a situation which I don't know whether I should report to WP:ANI/WP:AIV or not. Miros 0571 (talk · contribs) is systematically removing images from Windows 8 article. (Please see [12], [13], [14] and [15].) In addition, he has added a {{di-orphaned fair use}} to File:Windows 8 start screen.png which is being used on five different articles.

I can neither assume good faith nor bad faith in him; but his edits are definitely wrong. Unfortunately, I cannot contact him because this incident involving him means that he is probably inclined to treat me with utmost hostility.

Any suggestions as to how to handle this situation would be highly appreciated.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 19:35, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Like all content disputes, and under WP:BRD, he changed, you reverted, now you need to start a discussion on the article talk page. ie: "I reverted the images because of $x, please discuss before reverting back", and allow others editing to pipe in as well. You always start on the article talk page, then WP:DRN if you haven't been able to hash it out or they refuse to participate on the talk page. The key is starting at the lowest possible level. And of course, listen to his rationale. I have left them a note on their talk page asking them to not remove images that way, and telling them they need to discuss it on the article talk page. That should be enough to get them started, if not or you get any heat over it, ping me again. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:52, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Conscientious Objection

Hello Dennis Brown,
Is it possible that I want to be forbidden from Wikipedia, forever, as a regard of my conscientious objection to be here anymore?
If it's possible, what should I do?
Thanks.
Barayev (talk) 03:12, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm a little confused. You can request to be blocked, although the number of admins willing to do self requested blocks is limited. You say you have "conscientious objections" to being here, a phrase I'm familiar with but usually in the context of military service. Wikipedia isn't mandatory like the military is once you sign on the dotted line, you can always simply not come here. Is there some objection or issue that you want to share? Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:20, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I know it's used as a term for military objection. Anyway, I used it allegorically. Thanks. ;) Barayev (talk) 03:30, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
I constantly see the phrase "we're all volunteers here" used as an explanation to new editors of why some requested change cannot be done (or at least, done quickly) on Wikipedia. I can never resist pointing out that introducing conscription may not be a welcome solution to that issue.
I'm also in agreement with Dennis that there are not currently any editors who are forced to edit. University level education is optional in all countries I'm aware of. Although secondary education is legally compulsory in many countries, I believe all of the editing projects at that level have been optional (what the Americans call "elective"). However, it's always possible that in the future, such secondary school editing projects will become more widespread, some will not be optional, and therefore we will have a subset of editors who are editing because they don't have a choice about it.
I do very commonly see editors forced to make edits because their employers tell them to, indeed sometimes these editors are less than happy about it. But of course they do in theory have the option of quitting their job. Perhaps some of those employed by the military are the exceptions to that. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:16, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Could a self-block be requested by an IP address? Such as those from corporations having problems with employees making incriminating COI edits? User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 02:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
It is doubtful that it would be fulfilled. I wouldn't. They could easily blacklist wikipedia by adding a dns or hosts entry pointing en.wikipedia.org to 127.0.0.1. Literally one line in the server's /etc/reseolv.conf file. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Personal attack?

Hi, Dennis. I have a quick question. Unless I'm mistaken, I have removed what appears to be a personal attack by MegaCyanide666 (talk · contribs) and warned him to stay back and follow WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA, as well as WP:BATTLEGROUND. Is this acceptable? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Hello!

 RexRowan  Talk  14:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

For independently restoring Penyulap's Talk. A hot, fresh, 1/2 lb. California deluxe bacon-chessburger. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Here again!

I don't appreciate personal attacks on my fellow editors here. - Dennis Brown
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Well as one of the most reasonable admins that I have encountered could you have a look at my talk page. Trying to just improve some pages I seem to draw a continuous gang of editors afraid I may have a differing opinion at [[17]]. I am sure you have seen this craziness before! LOL. I have attempted several times to offer an alternative to the apparent railroading going on there (1 Admin and 4-5 editors banned or blocked to protect a POV...give my "best" to Penyulap). Looking at my talk page you should see about the 5th accusation I am some sockpuppet to be feared by these editors despite process failure each accusation launched. (interesting to watch the hoop jumping though) My comment on almost every page have been closed or removed, magically disapeared or degrading comment[18] from most pages where discussion on this topic has been happenning. Now not one of these accusations on my talk page have ever been launched or successful (I have seen your involvement). If I didn't know better I would say they are terrified my POV may have some reasonability to it and each time I get off an incorrect indef block or some other hounding charge block, massive fear of this IP seems to set in again with this crowd. Please note that all attacks on myself are from people that disagree with my POV in the discussions. Anyway the process on that mediation page is a disgusting display of WIkiGarbage but has resulted in a constant barrage of attacks on my talk page. Another occasion I removed the apparent junk from my talk page and got blocked for harrassment or some other WP:POS reason another pointy editor did. Is there any point in continuing at wikipedia? I have no place to go anymore. Are editors so afraid of IP editor's input into conversations and so OCD into blocking and banning them as a game? I have been instructed to get an account a few times but absolutely refuse to even consider it, atter these demonstrations. It only appears to be a way of getting editors that want to discuss with a differing view, permanently banned, whereas an IP can usually come back. hmmmm... I wonder if my ISP would give me a different IP for the asking??. I am getting really sick of the name calling and attacks to disguise the The Beatles issue losing arguments. BTW:Nobody will buy into the outcome of that mediation anyway. It's way too obvious what's going on there. Many have hinted at the conspiracy and the comments just disappear along with all the contravening opinions. (I would supply some more examples but they have mostly disappeared from the page now) Most smarter ones are just silent and not heard anymore or ever. Yeah! Just what you needed to read today! The crapola is getting thicker. LOL 99.251.125.65 (talk) 00:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

FTR IP 99, I tried to introduce your suggestion of the "fourth option" but it was closed without much discussion. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:33, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Wow! All of four minutes. So responsive! I am not going to play your stupid politics game with you. I hope editors don't behave like you did towards previous attempts to resolve this issue previous your kangaroo mediation as you have others from. You have lost respect from most of the WP:music editors. You should have been spanked a long time ago but the most disgusting display is the support you have gotten from others including admins that obviously have a hidden agenda. Let me tell you one thing I have realized through this process. WP is based on editors giving a damn and in fear of their WP lives. I don't. Your gang is terrified of me. I may go down but I won't go exist being a suckhole when I am told not to be here. The project exists despite the cowards that hide behind sockpuppet accusations. Be very afraid of what I might say. Now run and hide some more, fucking coward. 99.251.125.65 (talk) 00:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Sorry Dennis! 99.251.125.65 (talk) 00:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Don't apologize to me, apologize to Gabe, and strike your personal attack while you are at it. I appreciate you thinking I'm this ultra fair admin, but surely you know I won't tolerate calling someone names like that. Dennis Brown - 2¢
YOu are correct I shouldn't have the used the "F" word. I apologize for calling GabeMc a "fucking coward". I doubt he is capable of that and only a coward. Thank you for your considerate help. Note to Gabby. I will assume a stalker of your caliber will see this within 30 seconds. 99.251.125.65 (talk) 02:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

© Join WER 01:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ryan kirkpatrick.
Message added 01:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Bushranger One ping only 01:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

3RR help requested

Many seem to be incorrect about 3RR and perhaps it is merely because of the wording, but am I correct that it is not a violation to make 20 (just an example, probably more like ten or less) reverts in a 24 hr period on different pages even when it is not reverting vandalism, just unconstructive good faith edits. I need clarification before I extend an apology to an editor I may have assumed violated the rule incorrectly.--Amadscientist (talk) 06:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Nevermind Dennis. Another editor has confirmed this and I believe it is correct. 3RR is not I remember it in the old days. It seems to have broader implications and the brightline rule seems something added from the last couple of years. I guess I really haven't had enough interaction with 3RR to know the current guideline. At any rate the editor has point blank stated he does not want an apology. Oliver Twisted made a deletion on the Paul Ryan article and made a thread saying anyone who wanted could revert it but he thought it was trivia. We seemed to clash over a disagreement on RS/N and he left a couple of post that made me feel he had begun to give me some percieved payback for the discussion on the Huffington Post as a reliable source. He left a message on my talkpage and I told him it didn't help the situation and that perhaps we should stick to our own corners for a while and stay on the articles, notice boards and talkpages of the articles. he took a break, I took a small break and we both continued editing Paul Ryan when he made the deletion and the discussion. I posted my objections and my reasoning, first expecting that he would understand the policies, but he wanted them linked and explained so I did and then adapted the information back in, which could easily still be a revert as it was the same info and ref but I didn't want to make a blatant revert but edit the information back in in relation to the mention of similar info. Eve though he said anyone could revert, i guess that excluded me and he became very difficult and just reverted it back. That is when I decided to check his contributions and made the mistake of saying he had violated the 3RR as I had just seen another editor be told this on the Mitt Romney talkpage. I even approched that editor and discussed ways to understand editing practices,consensus etc.. Not everyone is going to get along and my mistake didn't help. As for the content dispute, that can sort itself out. No one really seems to care except to mention they don't see reason to remove it, but not inclined to add it back. So there is some silent consent even if I think it was edit warring to put it back.--Amadscientist (talk) 07:46, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
This is one reason I don't jump on blocking on the 4th revert. I know some admins see the 4th revert as a "bright line to block", due to the unfortunate wording of the relevant policies. To me, that just means it is authorized without any further rationale, but is seldom optimal to do so. Most of the time, 3RR can be solved with conversation, as you've found out. Blocking blindly just leads to winners and losers and hard feelings. There are times when 4RR is a good time to block, when an editor has shown a POV and unwillingness to do any discussing, but that doesn't apply most of the time. It is always better if editors work it out themselves. Of course, this happened around 3am my time (east coast USA) so I was sleeping and not able to help, sorry. BTW, hope your event went well. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It did seem to work itself out with help of someone else awake at the time. Yes, the event was a lot of fun...but turned out to be the hottest day all year and it was at a glass blowing studio with 4 sepaerate open furnaces. LOL!--Amadscientist (talk) 21:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Protection

Thanks for protecting my talk page last night. It seemed like those socks didn't let up. -- Luke (Talk) 17:46, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

sockpuppet case on User:Carliniphoto

Just to let you know he came to me about this. You should probably read what I told him at my talk page, as I referred him back to you. Thanks! Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Sounds perfectly fine. I tried to tell him as much on his talk page, but I understand that since I'm the one that blocked him, he isn't likely to be as receptive. I would be happy to help him, but he has to realize he is no different than some 15 year old living in Wichita, Kansas or a 70 year old living in Tokyo, as far as fairness and expectations of policy go. We are all equals here. That might take a little bit of explaining. Artists (be they musicians or painters or photographers) sometimes have trouble understanding that. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:30, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Pound4Pound

Resolved
 – Reviewed by Steven Zhang and unblocked by me. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I am user Pound4Pound and I would like to discuss with you about the discussion made before about blocking me due to a link between my account and a entirely different user called BigzMMA. Now I would like to start by breaking down some about how me and him cannot possible be related using some of the points made on the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BigzMMA/Archive#10 August 2012 page.

User TreyGeek started off by saying that our editing time were virtually identical, yet our IP addresses are only just similar, not the same. Now lets us make the assumption for one moment that I am also BigzMMA with a different account called Pound4Pound through a different IP address, if I was to be functioning at the same times as I have been with my previous account but off a different IP address, then I must be using a different computer in a different area to the IP range. Now if the local times are checked from where you are to the UK times, I would be editing on Wikipedia from all times in the day, every day from a different computer, but where could I be at all day around those times, because lets say that BigzMMA was run from a IP address which is my house computer, then who's IP address am I functioning from for Pound4Pound every day as well? I could not be using a friends computer at their house, nor could it be a work/school computer as wouldn't it of been mentioned that it was a shared network? And because I use it exactly at the same time of the day, every day as BigzMMA did, how would it be possible? The user BigzMMA, from what I seen, had a sock-puppet called MMADon101, and he had the same IP address as he used for BigzMMA yet I do not. Ultimately if we are the same person, how can I be working off the one computer from, as I can see from some of BigzMMA's earliest edits via his talk page history, September last year till April this year, and then I created my account over a month after he stopped editing off a different computer and edited on Wikipedia during the same times as he did. So this must help show that it is impossible for us to be the same person.

User Jakejr pointed out that we both have different editing styles. From how he described BigzMMA as well as having a look at some of the AfDs he took part in, he seemed aggressive towards other editors in term that he seemed like he didn't actually care about making a real case, but just bombarded other edited with abuse and abusiveness like wording, whereas in the only two AfDs I took part in, I have simply tried to get the best cases from both the side I believed to be the right choice and the opposing. If you take the time to check Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iain Martell (2nd nomination), you can see that all I was trying to do was get the best out of the votes that were calling for delete. You can see that the arguments calling for delete were not constructive nor in the case of User Zujua was taken seriously enough to be possibly count for a vote. When the result of that AfD was delete, I messaged the closing admin, User Mark Arsten, pointing the issues in the deletion votes and after some though he agreed that he should of relisted it, not deleted. In the third AfD for the page, I did say that I was much happier with the overall votes being made for deletion, but ofcourse I was entitled to say why I still felt that the page was notable enough to keep. I even said that I would have a copy of the page on my sandbox if (which we know now resulted as was a delete) so that I could keep it updated through that so if there came a time that Iain did something that would propel him straight to being notable without debate, such as going to the UFC or hosting a weekly TV show on ITV or BBC, then I can add all those sources and information to my copy of the page so it saves retyping all the information/sources that was already on there without going through hours and hours research like I had to do to get the page as good as it was before it was deleted, as well as my copy on my sandbox. So, to break this down simply enough, Our editing styles have made any connection hard to make simply because BigzMMA had a blunt style whereas I was more open to reason and offered it much more.

I will leave this as it is for now, I am aware that by contacting you through only my IP address is a violation, but I feel like I was never given the chance to speak my side during the debate, it was too short and too quick for me to comment to by the time I was able to use my computer again. However, you have my word that I will not edit on any page other than yours until we can get this thing sorted out, I was really shocked and upset to see I was blocked a few days ago and am looking forward to the day when this is cleared up. Thank you for your time Dennis, I will be looking forward to seeing you reply. 86.130.241.52 (talk) 21:50, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Editing through your IP is a violation, block evasion, but I'm not going to block you just yet and would ask other admins to not do so just yet (even though they will not appreciate my request, as it is within their right to block on sight.) I will fully review the situation later this evening when I have time, and I promise I will do so fairly. As to IPs, that is meaningless to be truthful. Before a check was done, I already knew that you and Biggz are from the same area, which is known to be the worst to determine geolocation from. There was no WP:Checkuser, no IPs compared for me to make the determination, so I have no idea if your IP and the IP Biggz used match or not. It was based on behavior, and you and he having 36 articles edited in common, which is an extraordinary amount for someone so new. But again, I will review later. If I think I need an outside party to review, I will do that as well. And again, to prevent being blocked, do not edit as the IP at all, and then you will have to reply on your talk page, while logged into the P4P account. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I've asked a very experienced SPI clerk to review the entire case. He is not an admin, but he has more experience than I do, and I will comply with whatever result he comes up with. If he can't determine, I will ask another editor to review. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Hello, I have reviewed the situation carefully and will provide my thoughts on the situation. While I definitely do see the overlap in articles and some similarities, I do see a differentiation in style of editing, and the subject area is quite popular - so the overlap may be a coincidence. Being a rather conservative person, my assessment of the situation is that it's possible these two users are different. I would unblock and monitor carefully - however I don't think the block was a bad one - this is a borderline case and it could have gone either way - the block was reasonable given the situation - I'd just have handled it somewhat different. Hope this helps Dennis. Regards, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 23:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

A question

Would it be frowned upon if I was to mention Bagumba's RfA at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball due to his involvement with that project? AutomaticStrikeout 23:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Advice Requested from John D. Rockerduck

I'm relatively a newbie and I got into a heated exchange with two editors that started asking me personal questions about my religion and attacking it in my opinion. The disscussion was originally intended to be about the RfC they wanted to start about a wikiproject in debating a reason for the FrC I used the Pope as an analogy then instead of a discussion related to an RfC it became a forum for attacking the Catholic church and asking me about my faith. I made clear I found this offensive and intolerant of me being a proud Catholic but they kept the forum going asking me personal questions of like "John, as a Christian, do you believe it is more important to follow the teachings of Jesus or the teachings of your Church?" I repeatedly asked them to stop but they did not, now I'm thinking of going and reporting this to the wikiettique forum, but being new and never using this forum before (and not wanting to look like a fool with a off claim) I'm wondering if you (an unbias administrator) could give me an opinion of whether that is a reasonable course of action, or if I'm wrong about my grasp of the rules of wikiettiqute, also if I'm just to mad to see clearly; and if I'm being to sensitive (entirely a possiblety) here is a link the disscussion Thank you for time and sorry to bother you John D. Rockerduck (talk) 01:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I would just walk away from that conversation. It can serve no purpose to participate there on his talk page. I guess I could be in the middle, spending 20 years a Catholic and the last 30 a non-Christian Deist and it is easy to see that Stillstanding has a great deal of misconceptions about the Catholic Church. Such as being anti-gay, although it condemns the act, it doesn't the actor. The Catholic church was one of the first racially integrated as well. And as for contraception, Onan covers part of the reason for the church's stance, which isn't anti-woman. Ironically, it could be seen as anti-man, if anything, since the ban is about casting seed on the ground, including masturbation. And to be honest, I completely disagree with the Catholic Church on just about every single issue I can think of, but I'm not ignorant of it and respect those that are still practicing Catholics, and respect the (perhaps majority) buffet Catholics that pick and choose which parts they agree with and which parts they don't (As a Catholic, you know exactly what I'm talking about). We should respect even when we disagree. Most people don't understand Catholicism due to simple ignorance, which is often the source of these obviously non-neutral comments that they truly believe are neutral. As long as this doesn't work its way into articles, I wouldn't worry. Wikipedia is a global village, and only 1 in 6 people are even Christian, many less are Catholic. Everyone is a minority here.
Ping me here if it goes to RFC, I would be interested in looking at that closely. Looking briefly at the Wikiproject Conservatism main page, I don't see anything problematic myself, although I would have to dig deeper. Stillstanding is also a new user, and I think he might be assuming you can delete a project if you get enough people to say "delete it", but that isn't how Wikipedia works. As an Wikipedian, I'm empowered by WP:IAR, which is a pillar and a policy, arguably the most important policy we have. It means majority doesn't rule, common sense does, and I can't see how the idea of removing the project will ever take hold. Even taking it to RfC is risky for him, as it might be seen as being pointy.
There are a lot of articles relating to Conservatism, enough to justify a project, even if the focus has drifted temporarily from Classical Conservatism. So in other words, I wouldn't let the opinions of a couple of people worry me. People who get into philosophical wars don't fare well here, so it is better to express an opinion at the RfC, if there is one, and let others just have their opinions. If they make a war of it, the system is pretty good at taking care of it, although you have to be a little patient. You aren't going to change their opinions any more than they are going to change yours. Trying to is a waste of time and only causes drama. You are better off dismissing the opinions and just working on some articles instead. If it goes to RfC, give a calm rational opinion there, and of course ping me here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice you put alot of thought into, when I randomly selected you from a list of adminstrators I made the right call. I suppose your right and I should let it go as long as they don't continue it on my talkpage, or other articles talkpages that I'm editing. And if it goes to an RfC consider yourself pinged already Thanks for everything you really calmed me down John D. Rockerduck (talk) 02:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm going to tactfully avoid commenting about Catholicism, but I do want to mention that it's not the goal of the RFC to destroy that project, only to bring it back in line with policy. StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 04:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, the Christian/Catholic interpretation of Onan as supporting a precept against contraception is disputed by Jewish scholars.[20] Jütte notes that Christian teachings on contraception have little to do with Onan in the OT and more to do with the rejection of the OT and a selected interpretation of the NT. However, Christian ethicist Joseph Fletcher said it best: "Jesus said nothing about birth control, large or small families, childlessness, homosexuality, masturbation, fornication, pre-marital intercourse, sterilization, artificial insemination, abortion, sex foreplay, petting and courtship. Whether any form of sex (hetero, homo or auto) is good or evil depends on whether love is fully served."[21] He who has ears to hear, let him hear. Viriditas (talk) 05:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Respect is what counts most here. We are always going to have differences of opinion, but as long as we handle those differences like adults with honest dialog that stays away from personal comments, it all works out. Again, it just takes a little patience sometimes. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 10:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
This is for defusing me and saving me alot of drama, since I most certainly get worked up, sorry I got you pulled into to that forum there are relentless John D. Rockerduck (talk) 05:39, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the kindness. I've stored a copy in my Ronco Barnstar Vault for safe keeping. Often times, it is just helpful to talk to someone that understands your point of view, even if they no longer have the same beliefs. It isn't required we agree in order for us to understand each other, after all. Even with the best intentions, sometimes conversations just get heated up and the best thing to do is step away and let the benefit of time give us perspective. If there is an RfC, hopefully it will be calm, stay on topic and work towards a positive goal. I find processes that have positive goals are more likely to succeed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 10:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

WQA rfc

Hi Dennis - in regards to your comment at the village pump - we're not redirecting WQA to ANI - just marking it historical, and making a few other changes which I detailed in the thread to reduce the overflow to ANI (though WQA only saw 17 threads in May fwiw). Thanks again, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 15:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Zimmermanh1997/98.204.146.142

Hey Dennis, perhaps you can help with a problem editor. User:Zimmermanh1997 (using User:98.204.146.142) is causing problems by repeated making edits like this to numerous pages over and over. Other editors have given the user tips on how to avoid linking to off-Wiki images with no response from the user, I have even uploaded a couple to two of the pages, but the user continues to remove them and link to the off-Wiki images. I have begun giving out vandalism warnings as I feel this has ventured into vandalism territory. On the named account, he is up to Warn 2, IP is up to Warn 3. Perhaps you could have a word with the user before this gets into Warn 4 territory. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 16:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Check the recent edits to WAYZ, more vandalism, same editor, same IP. :( - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Amrit914

Hello Dennis, I'm reviewing Amrit914 who I saw you blocked for 2 weeks for sockpuppetry. I agree with your blocking decision but the editor has made an appeal that's convincing to me and I'd like to unblock them early to give them a chance to make good on their promises. I wanted to run this by you first as the blocking administrator. I looked into their activity and I think it's plausible that their misbehavior was due to an ignorance of our policies and not due to malice. Thank you. -- Atama頭 18:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

  • As always, I will defer to your judgement since you are on the scene and working with the editor, thus more capable of determining the wisdom in unblocking them. Often, this is exactly the case, so I appreciate you spending the time to educate the editor and hopefully get them on the right track to being a good contributor. I also appreciate the note here, by the way. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
  • My pleasure! I'll unblock them and keep an eye on the situation to see if they re-offend or start trouble elsewhere, I'll also watchlist the article that got them in trouble. -- Atama頭 20:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

TPS ers

165 for you. I had 99 this am and now 101, hmm... PumpkinSky talk 22:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Or, become less popular! You seem to be a popular guy.PumpkinSky talk 22:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not terribly entertaining, so not sure why. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Great question, see User_talk:The_Blade_of_the_Northern_Lights#That_RFA PumpkinSky talk 22:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Ahem. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:46, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
But most of those are admins, keeping an eye on you... :D Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
More than likely. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Wow NH! Yea, prob a bunch of admins ;-) PumpkinSky talk 22:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Admins and editors I have pissed off. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
One more than me. LadyofShalott 22:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
But you are nice and sweet. I'm mean and grumpy. I'm sure at least 40 or 50 of mine are editors plotting some kind of ArbCom revenge. ;) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Hah! :) Have you looked at Drmies's number? LadyofShalott 23:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
351, but half of those are his sockpuppets ;) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Old Template

Hi, I work on another wiki outside of wikipedia and I was curious if you could help me get the source code for a long deleted page. I really would like it as I saw it on wikipedia long ago but its somehow out of use and got deleted its Template:Spoiler which was last used in 2008. I think its the one I've been looking for. Numpty9991 (talk) 00:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Dennis Brown. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

TheSpecialUser TSU 02:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

re:

the RfA where various sports are mentioned. Have you seen this one: Chess boxing? — Ched :  ?  18:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm ... may have been you who brought it to my attention then. I was thinking it was 28bytes .. but I'm not positive on that - my memory isn't what it used to be. Anyway .. carry on. Cheers buddy. — Ched :  ?  19:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

A few requests

Hi Dennis.

First things first. I know you're a clerk at SPI, and I also know you currently have a trainee, but once you're all done with Tiptoety I was wondering if you'd consider taking me on? I added my name to the list a while ago, but thought I'd approach you directly as I know you've got your head screwed on tight. SPI is often backlogged these days and I'd like to help out.

And secondly...I'd like to request an RfA nomination. I realise there are loads of obstacles to me passing an RfA, the most significant of which would be my lack of content creation. I'm not a content creator, but I think there are other important areas in which I can help. I'm always dismayed when I glance at the backlogs, with so few active admins to do the water carrying. I'm a sensible pair of hands and I can help. I have other qualities which I think would make me a productive admin - I think I communicate well, stay civil in debate and act cautiously when using potentially damaging tools, especially when they are new to me.

I've thought a lot about this, and have always held off from running in the past because of my own perceived weaknesses, but I've reached the point where I feel I may as well just give it a go and see what the community has to say. Despite my relative inexperience I feel I'm ready to use the tools effectively, even though I don't have the history to demonstrate it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Anyway, I realise that you're likely to come to the conclusion that I'm not ready, and if so I'd welcome your feedback. If, however, you feel it's worth a shot, I'm ready to run the gauntlet. Regards Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 19:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

  • It will take me a bit to do a full check, likely a week or two as I'm backed up with one that I haven't even started on, but I will be happy to if you can be patient. As to SPI, it will likely be a long time before I am no longer considered a "trainee", as I don't devote all my time there, thus it will take many months. Right now, there are a lot of backlogs, but most things are getting done eventually. One case, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Morning277 has occupied a great deal of time due to the complexity that isn't even noted on that page. I've had a few lately that required many days to sort out. Most cases don't, so instead of me working 4 to 8 in a day, I'm working maybe 2. It is part of the cycle. Next week it might be all simple cases. So I can't promise anything on SPI, but I will look into RfA. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. There's no rush. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 22:49, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Mr. Chewy

Hi, could you please help me on a trivial issue? I am trying to rename this page: Mr. Chewy. However, when I view the page, the title shows up incorrectly as "mr. Chewy". Note incorrect lower-case "m". How do we make that an upper case? Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

  •  Done I've fixed the title, there was a {{lowercase title}} in there, see diffs. That said, the sourcing for that is problematic and I'm not sure if that meets GNG. Not surprising, since it is a new company, but what I saw was incidental mentions and weak sourcing. Only the two WSJ articles were WP:RS, and they weren't significant coverage. I would make sourcing a top priority before someone sends it to AFD. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Duh, sorry to ask for help on something so easy! I did not know about that tag. Thanks again. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:58, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem, that's what I'm here for :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Morning277 SPI

Hi! Just as a quick comment, I opened up an SPI for Jetijonez at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yattum - I think the there is enough behavioural evidence to draw a connection there, but I suspect a checkuser would be stale. I don't think that there will be a CU connection with Morning277, as my assumption was that the crossovers were due to subcontracting and because both editors appear to have, on at least one occasion, been employed to work on the same articles at different times and appear to maintain separate profiles, but if there is a CU connection then the Yattum angle might get interesting. - Bilby (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm going to try to work on this tomorrow, I had added it, but then asked CU to hold off since I didn't have enough ready evidence to justify the check, and I've been working my tail off all day, and just flat exhausted, too much to concentrate properly for this kind of case. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:52, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
No hassles. :) I don't think CU will turn up anything, but either way the Yattum angle should be worth considering. - Bilby (talk) 23:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't have access to CU, although I've spent the last 15 years pouring through Apache logs and have a pretty idea what they are looking at. In these cases, the situation isn't the typical match, due to the coordination and use of proxies, so many of these matches were on singular points, and more so, on detailed behavioral matching, which is something I am pretty familiar with. I'm hoping I can do a detailed analysis tomorrow. I'm actually developing some new methods (for me, at least) for doing behavior comparisons, but they are exceedingly time consuming. Of course, what I rely on most is good editors who point them out to me, so I only have to match up a couple at a time. I appreciate the efforts. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:00, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Youve got mail

Hello, Dennis Brown. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

It seemed like a pretty poor use of a great resource to me. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

RfC

Dear Editor, heated discussion on the renaming of this article. Maybe the article is not very interesting in itself for you but there is quite an example of a debate on the principle of naming conventions on its talk page. Everybody most welcome. Greetings. --E4024 (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

False Sock Charge

You accused me of using a sock puppet and the charge is false. MART2012 is a unique person with her own ideas. Please remove the tag from my User page. Thank you. University Internet Cafe Booth 6 (talk) 22:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I didn't accuse you, Dave Dial did. Then the CU, DeltaQuad ran a Checkuser and proved the two accounts used the exact same IP and user agent, etc., showing it was exactly the same person. I just came in and cleaned up afterwards by doing the block. Your views being similar wouldn't make your technical signatures be identical. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Dennis, this only makes it someone using the same computer (if it were done properly, which it isn't) - not that that need necessarily effect the outcome per COMMONSENSE and MEATPUPPET. Rich Farmbrough, 01:31, 25 August 2012 (UTC).
      • Rich, when you have the same IP, same OS, same user agent, same articles, and same POV, that is usually a sock. They haven't offered any explanation that counters this. Check and see, I'm not shy about reviews or reversing myself in the face of reasonable evidence, but there has been none, only denial. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:06, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

It is one I just opened[22] and you may want to look at. To me, its pretty clear the two accounts are the same user. Snowsnowbing did a large number of incorrect Ryder Cup edits in 2011 and MrARJ76 has made some of the exact same changes....William 17:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Look what I found

In your spare time (if you have any) please checkout User:WikHead#Intersted to nominate your name as Admin. He is a 100K editor with the largest Plum colored edits pie. Some one has challenged him to consider Adminship and he wonders if he has the "muscle" for the job. I opined that nowadays the heart is the prime organ of strength. Thanks.```Buster Seven Talk 20:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Typically, this is not the kind of user you want as an admin. I bet you weren't expecting to hear that. The reason is simple: This is a highly productive content maintenance editor. Becoming an admin would reduce productivity. He has never shown an interest in the politics and processes here, thus no Wikispace experience (which is problematic for RfA, to say the least). One highly productive editor is worth 10 admins in my book. People come here for the great articles, not the great admins, and losing most of his productivity so he can move article, settle disputes, determine consensus, might be a waste of his skills.
His stats, the less than 2 edits per article, tells me he does a lot of tagging and maintenance stuff as well and like to clean up articles, which is great and we need that even more than admins, but makes it hard at RfA, particularly since it looks like most of his edits are automated. Great for productivity, not for RfA. If he becomes interested in admin work, he would normally start working some at the boards and learn the processes, methods, and the policies he might never have run across before. So if he shows the interest, I will be happy to help him, but I'm betting he doesn't want the hassles, and being an admin is a lot of hassle. Rewarding, but a lot of hassle. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:18, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
I feel like an NFL scout that was excited to have found the next Peyton Manning only to be told he more closely resembles Bill Wade. ```Buster Seven Talk 22:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
No, he seems like a very good editor, but it is just a different skill set needed for admin, editors that engage more. Like I said, good editors are more important than good admins anyway. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Biruitorul

Hi, please take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Biruitorul/Archive

Biruitorul deserves ban for abusing accounts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nagyszikszai 100% RedParty is also Biruitorul. Biruitorul uses to reply his other accounts. The case is intricate and many other users warned before.

You could also please check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Anonimu http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bogdangiusca http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PANONIAN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/SidoniaBorcke With this user he replied himself: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Csangos&action=history (Full page of his users)

I could also add that Biruitorul found Dutch and German VPNs. 100% it`s him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.149.241.202 (talk) 23:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you two just learn to get along? You've been at each other for years. PumpkinSky talk 00:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I've already closed that previous case. If you want to open a new case, I will let another clerk review it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Wow, um, a whole lot being claimed there. FWIW, I don't think there's anything there. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

HarveyCarter, again

92.7.0.136 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is at it on Edward Furlong, one of his pet articles as you'll see from the article history - 92.7.5.190 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), CuthbertClifford (talk · contribs), 92.7.2.174 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 92.7.13.36 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) are all him, and that's only going back to the start of July. Do I need to waste time with SPI? Thanks. 2 lines of K303 20:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

You're wrong. I am not HarveyCarter.

Complaint on Jimbo's talk page

Hi Dennis, Inetcafe6 (or something close to that) should have notified you of this: they have complained about you at User talk:Jimbo Wales. LadyofShalott 20:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Thank you, Lady. If the most abusive thing he can find on Wikipedia is my comment "If you are trying to persuade me, being a smart ass isn't the way to do it.", then we are doing just fine. It does seem that many observers don't get the distinction between "acting like a smart ass" and "you are a smart ass", but that is fine. Think I will sit this one out, it appears everyone else has it under control. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:00, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Indeed, and you are welcome. Even though there's no rule for Jimbo's page like that of ANI, I think if someone is seeking injunction from on high, the least they can do is notify the other party. LadyofShalott 00:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree. Technically, Jimmy can override the actions of ANI or ArbCom, so if a complaint is made about an editor, it would be common courtesy to notify them. I pop in from time to time, but I generally do not stalk his page. As you can see here, it is all I can do many days to just reply to the many issues brought to my own talk page, which gets an amazing amount of traffic, requests, problems and just random questions. With all due respect to Jimmy, this is a higher priority than the random politicking on his page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

What did I say I was gonna do when I got back?

I can't remember now. LOL! I could seriously use a project that is mundane right now.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Fix DAB links! Use the DAB solver. Mundane, but very useful. Ryan Vesey 21:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I guess that doesn't auto generate an edit summary. What should I be adding? I don't see instruction for that. Could I just write "Fixing DAB Links with DAB solver"?--Amadscientist (talk) 21:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
OK...that took a couple of tries to figure out. LOL! But this is mundane and I will add this link to my page. I think I was going to create and sort some pages for WP:WER, but I can't find the note on here where I was telling Dennis what I was going to do. I'll look closer a little later.--Amadscientist (talk) 22:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm curious as to what happened. An auto summary should appear, see this example. Sometimes it will make genfixes and will leave an added summary stating that DAB solver was used. Perhaps it is because you didn't sign in? Try clicking sign in in the upper right hand corner of the DAB solver page. There will be a get credentials button. Click that and copy and paste the content into the box that should be available for you. Ryan Vesey 22:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
My fault. I was signed in with credintials but it doesn't auto generate until after saving and my first try was not signed in when it didn't auto generate. It is now however!--Amadscientist (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, unfortunately my internet explorer is blocking the use for cross scripting.--Amadscientist (talk) 22:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I've been saying I'm going to work on articles for two weeks, yet haven't found the time to fill up a double spaced sheet of paper with all the other things going on. Plans are fine, and make nice theories, but usually it is all I can do to just gnome around a bit. I need to start using one of my alt. accounts just so I can get some actual editing done around here :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

Hello, Dennis Brown. We are in the early stages of initiating a project to plan, gain consensus on, and coordinate adding a feature to the main page wherein an article will be listed daily for collaborative improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members.

 Happy editing! AutomaticStrikeout 02:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sending you this invitation because progress is coming very slow on this project and I'd appreciate help in getting it off the ground. AutomaticStrikeout 02:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm up to my eyeballs in other projects, but this actually sounds really good, particularly if you put a little focus on articles that were once GA or FA, but have fallen from grace. I'm more of a "process mover" than "article improver" myself, but I have a few friends that would excel at actually helping, including User:Drmies and User:LadyofShalott. Two users that are excellent at rehabilitating articles would include User:Parrot of Doom and User:Malleus Fatuorum, both of which are exceptional wordsmiths. Ping me again in two weeks, hopefully things will be settled down for me and I will see if I can draw more attention to the cause, but these four would be worthwhile contacts, and unquestionably better editors than myself. You are more than welcome to tell them that I recommended them as exceptional authors that would be a great asset to such a project. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Clash between two editors

Since both editors have concerns about my ability to be neutral in this particular disagreement, it is probably better that I simply recuse myself from the entire process. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dennis, about a month ago you interceded on the behalf of user Ihardlythinkso, when no fewer than three different admins wanted him blocked. Having had dealings with him in the past, I was very skeptical that his behavior would change after your benevolent action, as he has been given a million second chances and warnings in the past, to no avail. (Including an indefinite block at one point) Indeed, it's been a month, and the only difference I have found is that Ihardlythinkso is even more persistent than usual. Editing articles on Wikipedia is more aggravating than ever for me, as Ihardlythinkso constantly stalks my activities, starting endless arguments and challenging my most basic of edits. Even a simple, friendly message on his page provoked an angry backlash. Perhaps he misinterpreted your kindness as a blank check to act however he wants? Regardless, going to the ANI is an exhausting and annoying chore that I would rather avoid. I would much rather edit chess articles without constant insulting arguments, regardless of whether there is actual merit to the objection or not. Since you took responsibility for Ihardlythinkso, would you mind speaking with him yourself? Thanks a bunch in advance. ChessPlayerLev (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

  • WP:ANI would be the wrong venue anyway, WP:RFC/U is the right one, as it seems your goal isn't to block or ban him as much as get him to recognize his method of cooperating is problematic. I get along with him fine (even though we have bumped heads a couple of times) but I'm not editing the same articles that he is. There isn't a question that his motivations are to better Wikipedia but I can see where his intensity might be problematic at times. I think that he doesn't realize how strongly he comes across in print, and have made an observation to this effect before. I'm pretty sure he watches my page and would imagine he would pipe in here shortly. Maybe we can try to talk it out here a bit, before taking anything to the next level. I'm in and out for the next few days, but this isn't an "incident" and didn't happen over a few days anyway, and this should be a neutral enough place to discuss for now. I will invite him. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:11, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, I believe that Ihardlythinkso, in both his response on his Talk Page as well as the ANI, has made it very clear that he sees me purely as an enemy and refuses any sort of understanding. He is not interested in talking anything out with me. That's unfortunate, but well within his rights on Wikipedia. However, those same responses also make it clear that he sees me as an enemy that he has to "combat" the "garbage" edits and "nonsense" of. This I'm not okay with and would like to stop immediately.
Lastly, I have to respectfully disagree and state that ANI would indeed be the appropriate venue if this behavior persists. Since attempts at any sort of understanding with Ihardlythinkso have been futile and only resulted in increasingly worse, more belligerent behavior, I would indeed want him banned or blocked. In fact, as you well know, so did three other administrators until you stepped in on Ihardlythinkso behalf last time. I am hoping that you speaking with him will spare us all another long, annoying trip to the ANI. ChessPlayerLev (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, take a look at any of my posts in the reasonable past, and you'll find none of them are "intense". (If I've been "intense" toward anyone, that's news to me. Diff please? Even one?) I think your view of me was colored by our first interaction, Dennis, where I was "intense" with you. But, you don't seem to allow an editor to evolve themselves and recognize the change, once your view has been colored. (For example, you also claimed my comments to admin User:TheBladeOfTheNorthernLights on his User talk were "snarky", and asked me to apologize for that. I did apologize to him, but I regret it now, since I was never snarky to him; I wrote straight stuff. [Meanwhile, he got by, referring to me as a "10 year old" -- highly insulting.])
CPL is trying to make your User talk here a defacto ANI or whatever. I'm not going to participate because I'd be inclined to address all the false accusations, distortions, and exaggerations. I don't have to go thru this (defending myself against a stream of false accusations and exaggerations); I had enough of that at the ANI already. I've experienced attempts to smear me by this user repeatedly, and User:Guy Macon as well, repeatedly. I'm willing to discuss here if things are maintained fair and civil, but even at first pitch here, that is decidedly not in the cards. Wikipedia is voluntary, and I put in a good effort on my edits, and I know how to work with others, if the situation is reasonable. The two users I've named have not been reasonable, instead there are personal attacks and misuse of process to attempt to block me, bait me, threaten, falsely accuse, and so on. I won't be participating in this unless there's a semblance of fairness and objectivity. I see plently of false and personal attacks from CPL. This is abusive use of your Talk. What do you expect to achieve w/ CPL, Dennis? Perhaps you overestimate what you can do. CPL has interpreted disagreement as picking on him. He has interpreted protecting the Wiki, as stalking. He refuses to see the aggressive, enflaming nature of his interactions, and to ignore this and instead discuss my "snarkiness" or "intensity", shows me the train is already off the tracks. What do you want me to say, Dennis? I wish the Wiki could be less hostile and abusive, but it allows everyone to edit here, and incivility is not enforced here. And free, false attacks are the order of the day. I'm a volunteer editor; did not sign up to take repeated abuse. CPL has *no complaints* of anything specific in any reasonable recent time. (If so, show me the diff!) This is just a continuation of his ANI to get me blocked, which should be clear from his above comments. I've asked CPL to stay off my User talk, I was open to dialogue with him with a third neutral party, but! Cheers, and good try. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 18:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Update: Dennis, I just figured out *why* you're bringing in the "he can be intense" thingy. It is from one or more personal Emails we have exchanged, yes? Guilty as charged! (But Dennis, those were personal Emails. Where I felt free to loosen my behavior with you in them. I would never dialogue in same manner on the Wiki as in our mails. I think you are assuming I did. Didn't happen. [Not in any reasonable past.] The most pointed I've been with anyone was admin User:TheBladeOfTheNorthernLights, at his Talk. Perhaps "pointed" is a brother to "intense". Ok. But with CPL, I've never even been "pointed" to best recollection. You should grant me being adult enough to be able to divide my personal email writing, from my Wiki writing. I can and do.) Cheers, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 18:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Actually, it is based on observations here, the examples of emails and our first interaction might qualify as something a couple of notches higher than "intense" :). "Intense" isn't an insult, it is only an observation, and I use the word in the most traditional sense, not as a vague way of saying something else. I can be intense as well, although my usual demeanor here on Wikipedia is more reserved. You get passionate about something and the intensity goes up. That isn't the same thing as "rude" or "mean", but you are intense and it may come across differently than you perceive at times, and you appear more unyielding than I know you are. This isn't about assigning blame here, and I haven't looked at the situation deep enough to have an opinion on blame anyway, and I haven't had enough interactions with CPL to have an educated opinion about their typical demeanor here. What I'm wanting is for both of you figure out how to get along, which usually means give and take. I'm not stopping anyone from doing anything. This talk page IS a neutral place, and you should both try to hash things out here to prevent an ANI. If it does go to ANI, I have no intention of interfering there. I find many disagreements are based on misunderstandings, so I would prefer we keep it short and simple, and try to address why you keep getting under each other's skin. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:40, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't mind discussing that at all Dennis, and try to salvage a working relationship w/ CPL. But he wants my head on a stick, and I personally can't deal w/ uninterrupted stream of false accuses and attempts to smear based on distortions and fiction and exaggerations. I do think your expectation here isn't plausible. It takes two, I'm open, but not for more abuse. (Are we done now at this "mini-ANI"? The thing here has been an attack attempt by CPL. He's displeased. I'm not responsible for that. Please don't try and make me.) Cheers, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 20:10, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
This isn't a mini-ANI. I won't block anyone here. This is a discussion, with the goal of avoiding an ANI. No one is perfect, we all can improve (look above, I just got called out at Jimbo's page for using the phrase "smart ass"). I know nothing about chess (ok, I play, but I suck) and all I care about is figuring out if there is a way for your two to work together. You don't have to like each other, just work together. Or I step out of the way and what happens, happens. No one is perfect here, that is for sure. Either we start with the basis that we all, as a community, have a problem and it is to do with the lack of cooperation of your two, or we don't and less tolerant eyes can judge at ANI. It is up to you two. I'm not going to beg anyone to get along, but I'm willing to work with you both, which is likely going to be the less drastic approaches available at Wikipedia. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
It isn't a mini-ANI, but it certainly has *felt* that way, Dennis. (Complete with all the trimmings of false attacks, piling-on, over-generalized complaints, requests for block, more.) This is a discussion? (Have you read CPL's posts here at top of thread?) How can you care about "figuring out if there is a way for you two to work together", Dennis, when you've admittedly not reviewed CPL's edit history? I told you that your expectation is a little much. But I told you more than once I'm willing to discuss with CPL, but in a reasonable environment, but this isn't that, and I've already explained why not. I came here because you invited me, Dennis, mistakenly thinking you saw a conflict at my Talk, and offered to be a kind of mediator. But that isn't what happened. CPL came here to complain, and to attack, and to threaten. You have not cautioned him, or warned him about the potential incivility of that. Yet you find it worthwhile to remind me I can be "intense", when in any reasonable time past, I've not edited that way toward anyone, even though you say you've "observed". (Diffs please, Dennis?) This whole thread was opened by CPL to complain, attack, and threaten. Based on what? If had a brain in my head, which I like to think I do, I'd want to minimize my contact with CPL. And I do. How do you negotiate with someone who wants your head on a stake, Dennis? CPL has made his intentions clear. I've told you several times I'm willing to discuss differences with him, but, you seem to lay the blame on me in this thread, for that not occurring. That kind of unfairness is why this has felt like a mini-ANI. Now you seem to be making mild ultimatums and threats of this going to ANI, when I'd like to know the basis, because again, you have not read his edit history vis-a-vis my edits. People should listen more to Malleus: Just because someone says thus and so, does not make it true. You've made this a dialogue a contention between you and me now. There is everything to criticize about CPL, and little about me, yet you choose me. I think your objectivity is slipping (perhaps because I embarrassed you about "you're not perfect" ... now I see that is coming back to me, in your quotes above "everyone is not perfect", which I already know and do not need to be reminded). Dennis, you are not perfect, and, I think your objectivity here is not perfect, and, I'm outofhere thank you. Please don't invite me to your Talk again. Nothing good has happened here. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 22:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
"No one is perfect". Therefore, we're all equally at fault. (A fallacy, Dennis. A fallacy for the too-busy to read edit histories? For the too-busy closers of ANIs? Is that why User:TheBladeOfTheNorthernLights clumped me with CPL at his conclusion of the ANI? Which I took issue with and let him know on his Talk [which an editor is supposed to do, when said editor has issue with another user -- go to discuss at their Talk]. And what did I get? A retaliatory re-opening of the ANI for no basis, and recommendation to block from that admin. This isn't abuse? *Again* Malleus is right: A basis for block can be simply that an admin doesn't like you disagreeing with him.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 22:45, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
TLDR - I've already said I won't participate in an ANI, and last ANI I think I was the one who jumped in to insure you weren't blocked. If you aren't comfortable discussing here, that is fine, I tried. Then I would consider this closed, and CPL will have to find a another way to deal with the situation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:10, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
If Ihardlythinkso wants evidence of the problem, he only has to try re-reading his own comments here. If CPL goes back to ANI and you've bailed on Ihardlythinkso, I fear he will find himself going down for the third time. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Elen, there's nothing "bad" about my replies here. I'm not the one doing the personal attacks. You and I have never gotten along, from our first interaction you called me a condescending name, "Pet", and did so a second time, as though to rub it in, after I'd politely asked you to stop with the name-calling. (You call that being civil? You are Admin, and upholding to a "higher standard" of civility per Jimbo? How's that?) I find your comments now baiting. You have also selectively ignored the comments by CPL in this thread; you have nothing to say about them, but you like to pick on me. I say you have active prejudice against me, and act on it through baiting. Shame shame. "Going down for a third time." Gosh Elen, where was I "going down" twice? Or even once? You mean the block by admin User:Toddst1? There are several admins, who have given me their opinions re that admin, and the quality of his block. Please stop your baiting Elen, and please *leave me alone* and quit butting into my conversations with others, as you did in the past when I tried to dialogue with User:Qwyrxian. (I couldn't get you to stop butting in and baiting, and after asking Qwyrxian's assistance to stop you, where he advised you to leave me alone, you finally did. Are you our representative for good behavior on Wikipedia, Elen? Then I think you need to be replaced.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
If CPL "goes back to ANI", then maybe an admin should advise him, that it is misuse of that venue, which is to be used after all other dispute venues have been tried without success. You seem to be encouraging him to open an ANI, when that would be a misuse of that venue. (You're not doing that out of prejudice against me, Elen?) How uncivil! (How the heck did you get approved for Arbcom??) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 00:26, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
See, Dennis? (A piling-on. And nasty, condescending remarks. *So* ANI-like. No wonder that place is despised, by many top contributors. Go see the comments in my Talk archive, from those editors and what they say about ANI. My favorite is by Malleus: "Nothing good ever comes from that place.") Your little ANI-abuse chamber at WP makes WP one of the least enjoyable volunteer activities. Because people can get by with anything there, dishonesty, false accusations, lies, ridicules, the works.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 00:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Just read it back, but pretend it's somebody else writing it. Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:41, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Here's my favorite quote (though not about ANI, but the abusive environment at WP):

I was thinking yesterday, in all my life, I have never been so harassed, wantonly smeared, blatantly lied about or otherwise trashed as I've been on this website. Not even nearly. -- quote by Gwen Gale, December 2011

I think a lot can be learned from Gale's observation. Dennis, do you think it might relate to WP's editor-retention problem? For Elen, I'd like her to stop with the contributions to said, sick environment. An environment consists of all the little parts that comprise the whole, and Elen, you are one of the little parts. So am I. So is CPL. Good luck. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 00:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I think you are reading to much into what little she said here. And to be clear, Elen is always welcome to comment here, I depend on her and others to stalk my talk page and offer their wisdom, just as I comment on her talk page. I do think you are being over sensitive to her comments. I took them as her saying "Look, you are better off trying to work things out here." and that is all. I think you also took my comments in a different vane than they were expressed. Some people are just wired differently and perceive comments differently, I accept that, but at some point it is up to them to accept and adjust to the majority, at least to the point of getting along. It isn't about me, as I'm quite adept at "translating" the comments of many people into what I think they mean, but not everyone is so generous. I've known you long enough to know that what you mean isn't always easy to determine by what you say, but it took me a bit to adjust to this. You also have been known to read between the lines, even if there wasn't anything there (like here with Elen). I understand a degree of this, even if you don't. But in the end, it is you that must live with others misunderstanding your comments, not me. I'm sure you don't like hearing this, as you are someone who prides themselves on their English abilities, but proper English and effective communications aren't always the same thing. As you have noted previously, my grammar often leaves much to be desired, yet I'm able to effectively communicate my ideas in spite of it. Of course, this is only because I recognized a while back that I didn't, and made the necessary changes to remedy that situation. And please don't ask for diff's, it isn't a comment on your character, just an observation of many encounters. If I had questions about your character, I wouldn't bother discussing here, would I? Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:50, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, I never made any such criticism about your grammar. ("As you have noted previously, my grammar often leaves much to be desired.", implies I did. I never criticized your grammar, *ever*. (What I *did* do, was make a grammar correction in one of your messages to Malleus, because it was germane to the topic of your message, and had a humorous angle too.)
About your other comments Dennis, I'm aware what I write, and can back up what I write. (Can CPL do that?) You expect me to write unambiguously, and I feel my writing is pretty specific and clear. Yet you want me to "interpret what Elen means", not what she says?! (Isn't that a little contradictory? First you criticize me for "reading between the lines", but then you tell me to "interpret" Elen's comments -- what she "really" means. I have a suggestion: How about Elen simply writing what she means in the first place? You're applying a double standard to me here, Dennis, isn't that obvious? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Ihardlythinkso, I know some of what Gwen Gale experienced. The few small things said about you don't come anywhere close. If you could stop treating everything anyone ever says to you that contains any kind of comment or criticism of you as abuse, you would find your experience here less stressful. Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
To add: People that come here and find "abuse" everywhere they turn, are generally not happy here and don't stay here. Others come here here (myself) and see the positive side, and the problems, but call the problems "challenges" and work to make the place better, and tend to be happy. Two people can view the same situation and see two different things. It doesn't mean one is wrong and one is right, it is just a matter of perspective. The proverbial "glass is half empty / glass is half full", and it is in the eye of the beholder. Perspective, like happiness, is a choice. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, I started this topic with a very clear goal in mind. As you can see from his responses above, (and if you read the link in my first comment here) Ihardlythinkso views me as an enemy. Any friendly communication on my part seeking to come to an understanding ("glad you made that topic") is treated in a hostile manner and a reason for these long, never-ending replies filled with accusations and insults. Now Dennis, you're the ONLY reason Ihardlythinkso is around on Wikipedia at present. You interceded on his behalf, saving him from 3 different admins that wanted him blocked at the ANI. Thus, I thought you would be highly interested in communicating and conveying my desire for a friendly resolution with Ihardlythinkso, as he ignores these same requests from me. It will certainly be a shame if you cannot, or continue seeing this as just another "clash" between two editors who have identical positions. It's a last resort, and I think everyone would rather avoid another topic at the ANI. I know I would. ChessPlayerLev (talk) 01:39, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, you might have different feelings than I, about the nature of your Talk, because you are not the one attacked here. CPL opened this thread to attack me, not for any other reason. Then you blame me for not enjoying the "cup half full" perspective for greater peace and harmony. Yeah, I agree, perspective: I'm the one attacked with ANI-like smears here, you aren't. (Why not try and put yourself in another's shoes for an instant?) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Elen, it's not easy to respond to you. For example, implying that I've labelled as abuse "everything anyone ever says to you that contains any kind of comment or criticism", is pure exaggration, and seems to try and make me out as some kind of crazy. I don't use the word "abuse" lightly, quit making me out like some kind of loon. If I've called something abuse and you want to really object to it or call me on it, then let's go in a discussion room and go over it. But the over-generalized complaints, are a form of false accuse, false blame, your opinions and impressions are really worth nothing, unless you can back them up with concrete examples. (I know it is *so much easier* to simply blame someone, and utter one's free opinions to them, about what one "feels". But that kind of activity is self-stroking, easy, cheap, lazy, and ultimately unfair. If I have any criticism of anyone, I would expect to be ready to back it up and demonstrate why. But you and Dennis bathe in just throwing out opinions, which you want to do freely without investing in bothering to back them up. I don't do that. I find it objectionable. I wouldn't do that to others. I think it is a slippery slope to allow oneself to make comments without being wiling to back them up, because the logical end of that slope deprecates to simple name-calling. I think it's a mistake therefore to even begin down that road. So I don't do it). Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
This all started because someone has an issue with you, and asked for me to consider mediating a discussion between the two of you. It has degraded into something else, starting when I made an observation about your "intensity", which is arguably not a flaw, just a characteristic, but you took offense. Do you not see how this side tracks real issues? How easily the conversation goes from subject matter to personal because you take offense to anyone making an observation? I've been "reported" to Jimmy's page today and made less of a fuss. Actually, I didn't bother responding, so I guess you could say I made no fuss. Every observation doesn't requires a discussion, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:56, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Where did CPL ask you to mediate a discussion between him and me?? (Sorry, I don't see that. Did I miss it?) I did see attacks. I did see accuses. I did see threats. I did see talk about blocking me. Where was the "discussion"? Did it try to start? Where? I've been willing and open, but this threat is caustic, hostile, accusatory, abusive. (You apparently don't see that?) Dennis, the reason I objected to your "intensity" thing, is that in light of CPL's attacks already registered here, in my view, you've selectively ignored them, and chosen instead to pick on me for crimeless minutia. That speaks lack of objectivity to me, and after your "everyone's not perfect" repetitions, it seemed probable to me that you cannot be impartial, because you still resent my embarrassment of you on your Talk re the "fear of honesty" accuse you made of all oppose !voters at User:History2007's failed RfA. The fact you ignored CPL's blatant hostility and smear attempts in this thread, and go after me for "intensity" so on, was out of perspective -- not objective, not fair. I had no desire to degrade anything, but I'd already been attacked by CPL in his usual aggressive manner, with attempts to smear, and you aren't taking that into consideration. It seems you want to find fault in me, and not him; blame me, and not him. When it is boring to me if I have to show you how he has been massively uncivil here on your Talk. You admitted you never read his edit history, or checked the issue. Yet you want to dump criticisms on me here, however small, and completely ignore CPLs offenses. That is not objective. How ever would you think I wouldn't comment? Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:16, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Honestly, the past is the past and it is easy for me to get over. I'm blessed that way. I didn't see it as an embarrassment, however, just a difference of opinion and mine was a bit strong. Had I been actually embarrassed, it is doubtful I would have been so open, after all. But that isn't relevant to this discussion. He asked me to talk to you, which to me means we all talk. I haven't been afforded the opportunity to review his actions because the entire conversation has been dominated by your reaction and statement that you won't participate, which is ironic given your level of participation. I saw no need if you weren't willing to participate. The rest of this conversation has been reacting to your reactions, which I am confident most would see (and one has) as overreactions. You seem to live at Wikipedia in a constant state of defensiveness, and it is tiring. I didn't insult you, I didn't demean, degrade or criticize you, I made an observation and one that I feel is likely shared by more than myself. I was willing to mediate a discussion to try to find out why you two get on each other's nerves, but again, you said you want no part of it. You feel I can't be neutral here, which is odd considering the last time the two of you were at ANI, he could easily have concluded that I can't be netural, in your favor, yet he didn't. But if you don't want to participate, then let us discontinue this. If you do not trust me in this, then I suggest you both find another person or forum to work this out. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Please close the thread, Dennis, no "discussion" was ever gonna truely happen here. (None was ever asked for by CPL, or attempted to be entered by him. It was in your imagination he asked for mediator. Where is any effort shown here which supports those claims of intended discussion. There aren't any.) This was very ANI-like, with all the irresponsible comments thrown around. Very distasteful! Please close. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Dennis, out of curiosity, if this ends up going to an ANI discussion at some point (as unfortunately, your best efforts here appear unsuccessful), will you again come in to save and defend Ihardlythinkso? While I appreciate your kindness and desire to give second chances, Ihardlythinkso has received hundreds of second chances already, yet nothing ever changes. Also, this topic, started just 12 hours ago, is a good example of what I've had to deal with for MONTHS on end with Ihardlythinkso. I hope you can appreciate how utterly exhausting and annoying this is. Especially since I have tried dozens of times to "bury the hatchet" to no avail, and really just want to edit chess articles, not engage in personal squabbles. Thanks again for your time on a Saturday! ChessPlayerLev (talk) 03:18, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Outing sockmasters who appear to be using a proxy server

A while back we discussed CU and the dangers of outing a user. It now seems clear that the IP 99 is using a proxy server, so wouldn't that eliminate our concerns about outing? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

here, here, here, and here. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 23:42, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Not sure what that has to do with outing. Obviously, someone is obsessed with you, and if it ties back to a reg'ed account, that isn't necessarily outing, particularly if it can be confirmed to be tied via SPI. WP:OUTING is a funny policy. I can tell you with certainty who certain socks are, as it was done via an SPI investigation, as part of a necessary process, due to abuse. If you point out the same info outside of an official process, you open yourself open to sanctions. It is problematic to say the least. Fortunately, I tell everyone who I am, and anyone smart enough could easy mail me a letter, but I don't have a boss to worry about and I'm fully trained to defend myself under any circumstance, so I can't technically be outed. Others are not so lucky, which is why the policy exists. If you have a name to attach to that IP, I still suggest you do it in private, as I don't want to see you get stuck with some type of blame. Ironic that you can be sanctioned for outing a troll, but that is how it sometimes works out. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:53, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
It has to do with outing because I was under the impression per this thread that you were of the position that we couldn't really do anything about this troll since it could lead to outing a known user by connecting an IP addy with a Username. I do have a couple strong candidates so my question is if this needs to go to SPI, or can I request a CU without an SPI at this point? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
In cases where you are concerned about outing, but are confident of the linkage and can provide reasonable evidence, your best bet is to contact a CU directly, via email. They can run the checkuser, and just silently block the IPs, ranges, or will know how to react, privately. User:DeltaQuad is a good source, so is User:WilliamH, as they are both quite active. That keeps you out of trouble (ironic, yes) and is more likely to get results. CU's are bound by policy to keep things private, and you never get in trouble releasing info that links IPs to names this way. As an admin/clerk, my "powers" are quite limited, actually. I can block, sure, but I can't see the logs and such like a CU can. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again Dennis, you've been informative and helpful as always. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Don't think a Checkuser can be a huge help here. These edits do appear to be from proxies. The good old WP:DUCK test is probably the best. Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, if there are two registered users suspected of being the same person, and the master of the troll socks then a CU may help, no? Also, I wanted to ask you Elen, because on Casliber's page you said: "Can confirm this is not a sock and I believe it is the same person from the first edits at the end of June." 1) Do you still think they are not a sock and 2) Why exactly did you think you could confirm that they weren't a sock? ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I often say that Checkuser only catches the stupid ones - fortunately most trolls are stupid. Not to go into too much detail, but if your troll is clever enough to edit through proxies (and it does appear to be the same person each time) then they might be clever enough not to connect themselves to the IP used by their registered account. In the case of the previous IP, they were editing from their cable ISP account, not thru a proxy. Four checkusers have checked between then and now and could not identify any other editors on that IP. Who are the two users you think are the same person? Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
That's a great explanation Elen, thanks. I am hoping that the main IP, or one of the others is connected to one of the suspected accounts. I e-mailed you the names of the users suspected of being one and the same, and possibly the troll sock's master. Thanks for your input here. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 01:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I'll give it a good look in the morning (it's kinda late here, and they're not going anywhere....unfortunately) Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Helps to have that extra CU bit. Might ask for my very own the next go around. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Do. You've got the technical background, and we're perennially short of checkusers. Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:39, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Right now, we are majorly short of clerks. I'm still deemed a "trainee" so I can't train a new clerk myself. Only a few of us working it regularly now, and we technically have more CUs than clerks, although most CUs aren't remotely active. It would be good if more CUs would get active and train new clerks, although CUs don't normally do that. Tiptoety is technically my trainer, but our schedules are polar opposite, so I never see him. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

No Country for Old Men

Due to the intollerable attempts at article ownership by two editors who refuse to "allow" reducing the size of this article to a reasonable length, it is now in dispute resolution. I invite you to comment in the process
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#http:.2F.2Fen.wikipedia.org.2Fwiki.2FNo_Country_for_Old_Men_.28film.29
Jasoncward (talk) 01:09, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Prowling cats

Hi Dennis. If you or someone has a moment, could you create and populate this cat. I'm a little busy this weekend. Cheers. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Maybe I'm missing something (wouldn't be the first time) but it seems to have been created on the 21st, and it is auto populated due to the templates the SPI script uses. Cats are something I really need to learn more about, particularly with SPI. I've never messed with them, outside of adding them to articles via a script. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Well that's odd, because when I looked this morning and wanted to create it, it wasn't there! Obviously it was me who missed something ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Something weird at SPI

Category:SPI cases awaiting administration contains 38 cases, but only seven of these are showing up at WP:SPI. They're not transcluding for some reason. Can you help? Thanks. -- Dianna (talk) 04:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC) Actually, that's not what's happening; it looks like the structure of the page has changed a bit since the last time I used it. My case has now transcluded properly, so I will try not to worry. See you later -- Dianna (talk) 04:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Hosni Mubarak's predecessor

Hi! Hosni Mubarak's predecessor as president is Anwar Sadat. This is true, but I edit Mubarak's predecessor as Secretary General of NAM. Please first look to the subject then edit it. I make it true. Thanks. Tabarez (talk) 13:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

SPI report for Dualus

Why did you close this SPI report? The Npmay account hasn't been blocked and there continue to be IP socks that were used recently. The only action that was actually taken was to check for sleepers, and that wasn't requested in the original SPI report. There was also no confirmation from the SPI admins that the evidence of socking is (or isn't) strong enough that we can consider these definite reincarnations of a banned user and revert his edits. The socking and disruption have certainly continued. --Amble (talk) 15:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I forgot Sven wasn't an admin. I've checked out the case, made appropriate blocks to the user and 4 IPs, the other IPs are stale. The other two named accounts that weren't blocked aren't as sure but can be filed later if needed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Perfect. I think the two recent accounts were throw-aways, so there's no need to block them. Thank you! --Amble (talk) 16:53, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
And thank you in general for your hard work and dedication at SPI. --Amble (talk) 01:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, well thank you! I'm glad to help. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Interesting

ThePariahOne claims to be British, while Mega thingy is Indian. Look at the spelling in TPO's last request - three words there are not spelled the way a Brit born and educated would spell them. A lot of Indian written stuff uses US spelling, as does TPO. A much lesser feeling is that I would be disappointed (as a writer) to find I had written two characters who talked so alike. Peridon (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI discussion

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Possible wikihounding. Thank you. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, I'm very sorry it has come down to this, as I have tried to help work up a positive solution. The recent edits by Niemti seem to clearly fit the description of WP:WIKIHOUNDING due to expression of perceived slights on AN/I, the "errors" "corrected" are not unambiguous and violations of Wikipedia policy, and the hounding is being accompanied by tendentiousness, edit warring, personal attacks ([23], [24] on Ninja Turtles, on which I helped clean up, and [25], [26], [27] on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (film series)) like at AN/I. I have already noted on AN/I that I am going to be patient and should let others voice their opinion on this matter and I am clearly frustrated by Niemti's accusations and I have been voluntarily avoiding interaction with this user directly since the previous resolution. Also, per User talk:Berean Hunter#Apology and question, Berean Hunter said that fresh eyes on this matter may help lead to a positive resolution where none has worked so far, as this resolution did not work, even though I have Niemti's talk page unwatched. With that said, can you please tell me what are your thoughts on this matter? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:37, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Again I would defer to Berean Hunter. More likely, you two need to work in other areas for a while, or longer. I'm a bit involved, but since he is here, and unblocked, a fair opportunity must be given for him to demonstrate he can work here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:17, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately, as it turns out per User talk:Go Phightins!#ANI discussion, it suggests we refer this matter to the Arbitration Committee. What are your thoughts about it? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
      • Arb is not likely to take the case unless you have exhausted other remedies, such as WP:RFC/U. There are exceptions, but that is a pretty universal step on the way to ArbCom for most cases. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
        • My very best wishes has posted a suggestion on Go Phightins! talk page, which I believe to be very bad advice and I posted my suggestions on the talk page. I should consult with you first to see if this suggestion is a good idea, since I just want to edit more collaboratively with Niemti and give him the fair chance he has been given to return. I do not want to follow his edits, but only want to make sure that I don't want to cause any distress in doing so when taking a look at his contributions and finding obvious MOS violations. I feel like best wishes has been giving me some bad advice recently, as he has done with other users as well. Thank you for looking into this, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
          • Actually, I wouldn't call that bad advice. That is in line with my "air gap" comment. ie: the two of your don't "touch", he just explained it. Sometimes it is better to simply walk away and let others deal with the problems, particularly if we have been too "involved". I have to do that regularly, but I tend to have a great deal of interacts with people here. Even below, in the archived discussion, it became obvious that all I could do is walk away. Not exactly the same thing, but still the best solution was to walk away and let others deal with it. Things don't happen in a vacuum here, if he is doing something wrong, it will likely get noticed by someone else. If he has made a major violation of some policy, you can always ping Berean Hunter, who is familiar with the situation, and let him make a determination, but it might be better to remove yourself from noticing for a while. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
            • Yeah. Just to keep you updated, I just realized that Niemti's claim of "wikihounding" was not substantiated as what Bbb23 and I felt. The discussion probably was a misinterpretation of policy according to Sergecross73, since both Niemti and I have different theories and interpretations of our policies and guidelines and we have not broken any policy or done anything warranting any sort of discipline. As such, I do not choose to edit articles by searching his contribution history and do not watch his talk page, since I did not intend to harass Niemti in doing so. And according to Betty Logan here, just because I get involved in disputes with him simply because you watch or edit the same articles does not mean it is not wikihounding. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 12:27, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
              • The problem is always that if even looks like it to a few people, those are the few that will show up at ANI and cause problems until someone comes along and looks at the whole story. This is why I recommend keeping some distance unless you need to get involved. It isn't a "correction", just something I do myself with people I don't get along with. Yes, there are a couple of people here that I actively try to avoid, although they seem to follow me around. I generally just ignore them as best as I can. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:20, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
                • Hmm, I see. Keeping some distance from problematic users at ANI is a good idea. I also avoid quite a few people, even if they seem to follow me around. Thanks for the recommendation and helpful advice. I appreciate it very much. :-) All the best, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Grundle2600

Just wanted to point out that Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Grundle2600 is still semi-protected. I'm just letting you know so it doesn't become a problem or escalate into an edit war.

However, after Frood on IRC said: 

<Frood> LikeLakers2: if a clerk removes something from an spi page, there's probably a good reason they did it.

I'm leaving it like you had it. Just wanted to let you know. :) LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 16:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

  • We were having problems with transclusion, and still are, which I why I was cleaning up cases that had been modified just before the problem manifested itself. Actually, the page is still protected, when I removed that template, it only removed the little lock image at the top of the page, it didn't take away the protection, which is at a lower level of software. The lock image/template really isn't needed for archives., it still will not allow IPs to edit and shows up in the protection log. The template is just eye dressing, nothing more. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:41, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Duh me, that is move protection, not semi-protection, but you get the idea. It still won't let them move. Still debugging the entire SPI page :/ Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your early support in my successful RfA and breaking the monotony with your Cowboys question. In hindsight, Babe Laufenberg or Ryan Leaf might have been more appropriate responses. I hope to continue to maintain your trust in me.—Bagumba (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  • No problem. It is a bit easier to be vote #104 in a popular RfA, but when I find a good candidate, I prefer to support early. And sometimes a little humor is helpful as well. I'm confident you will do well with the bit. Feel free to ping me if you have questions about all the new buttons. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

note:

I dropped by ATG's talk page and was going to say something - but read your post first. I didn't really have much to add to it - so I didn't. Best. — Ched :  ?  01:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Well, I don't want to see him blocked but damn, he can't keep doing that. This is more than incivility, and it doesn't matter that he is right on the subject matter. It is a complete waste of his skills. I just wish there was something I could do to convince him that he needs to consider some kind of mentoring, or to work in less contentious areas, or something. This has become a habit for him, and I'm afraid he is one ANI away from an indef. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Feedback requested at The Village Pump.

Hi Dennis. I have a proposal at the village pump about introducing a color scheme to the text editor so it is easier for newer editors to differentiate between different kinds of syntax, particularly references. I'd welcome your feedback at the village pump whenever you have some time. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 07:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Groupthink ;-)

Good call with the declined request. This is clearly a years-long term pattern for M: Provocation followed by counter-accusations. Enough of this. Tijfo098 (talk) 14:19, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

User: 216.31.246.114

Dennis, I think it's time to withdraw this user's talk page access while he/she is blocked. The page is littered with NPA violations by the IP, his IP sock and the sockmaster, which the two affected editors and I have repeatedly removed. He was quiet for a while, and has now started up again, adding new accusations and personal attacks; I haven't waded in since the new round of activity today. Edit summaries in response to reverts have violated NPA as well, as well as continuing to accuse the two affected editors of being socks of one another. Moreover, he's well over WP:3RR. I've seen talk page access removed and blocks extended for a lot less. Thanks! --Drmargi (talk) 00:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Attaboy! This one is really out of control and needed a good reigning in. --Drmargi (talk) 01:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Your decision on performing an SPI for Bizovne

Hello Dennis Brown,

I am somewhat despondent to see that you did not support conducting a sockpuppet investigation for Bizovne when I filled a request for it last time[28]. Of course I acknowledge that as an administrator, you have the right to decline my request. But I would like you to check his contributions to Wikipedia. Between 15 June 2012 and 28 August 2012, this user did not do anything but to wage edit wars. This User:River party appears to follow around User:Koertefa to revert his additions to the project while not showing any interest to discuss anything. If River party should be Bizovne, he would not be even able to. It is because of the fact that Bizovne does not speak English. On the other hand, if a user should edit war with one another which is always the same person,viz. User:Koertefa, and does nothing else over two and a half months, it sets a very bad example of Wikipedia:Harassment. Imho, this should be worthy of an indef-block, even if you haven't seen enough pieces of proof of supporting a sockpuppet investigation.--Nmate (talk) 12:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I didn't refuse, I did looked and I couldn't see a definitive link. That doesn't mean he is innocent, it means that I wasn't capable of being sure enough to make the call. Keep in mind, at SPI, we see every type of article getting abused and I am simply not familiar with every topic so all I can do is the best I can do to determine a connection or not. SPI is more art than science, and if we are not sure, we are forced to not block. Not blocking someone who turns out to be a sock can be fixed with a block later. Blocking someone who ISN'T a sock can't be undone, and can cause us to lose good editors, which is why we are forced to be conservative and cautious. It is never as obvious to us as it is to those who are working directly with the articles, it can't be since we aren't there, and we just do the best we can. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk page notifications of blocking

Just letting you know that I noticed you blocked 24.170.192.254 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 142.197.8.220 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) today, but didn't post notifications of blocking on their talk pages - I've added them. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Djjazzyb‎

Hi, Dennis. I want to bring this matter to your attention: Djjazzyb‎ (talk · contribs) has been committing personal attacks towards User:Mikeymike2001 in his sandbox and attacking Mikeymike2001 in his edit summary ([29], [30]). Can you please deal with this? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

ping

just an FYI: User talk:Ched/YRC — Ched :  ?  20:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

FYI

[31] Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Sock

I am someone who saw the ANI, looked into what the issue was all about, and decided to comment--just as Staretc. said. I do not, as far as I know, edit those silly articles on pop music. That complaint by that young person was silly--from ANI to DRN to SPI: the pattern is forum shopping, not a pattern of edits by the opponents. One wouldn't dream of calling up SPI to see if Toa and that young person were the same. Take care. 66.168.247.159 (talk) 00:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Djjazzyb

Thanks for helping me with User:Djjazzyb. I think he attacked both you and Sjones23 with this message on his sandbox talk page.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 19:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

  • As a matter of fact, you was the only person I 'attacked' in my sandbox thank you very much Mike.

Dennis, to be perfectly honest, IDGAF if you block me or whatever, I have contributed a lot to this site in the past few weeks and I don't appreciate Mikeymike2001 & other users trying to undermine me & my contributions when all I asked for was a simple explanation. Kane (talk) 07:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

    • You don't attack other edits here, period, regardless of how much you have contributed in the last few weeks. I've contributed almost 27,000 edits in 6 years and I would expect to be blocked if I made personal attacks against others. You are not exempt from the policies on civility and personal attacks due to the work you've done over the last few weeks. Tone it back, stop attacking, or you leave me no choice. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
      • So what if you were kind of new here, someone deleted your contributionsto an article, you asked nicely for an explanation as to why said user DID NOT MENTION SAID DELETION IN SAID ARTICLES TALK PAGE AS SAID USER IS SUPPOSED TO? Would that not absolutely piss you off? Yes my actions as of late have been immature but in my opinion they are also justifiable within User:Mikeymike2001's refusal to follow Wiki guidelines. Kane (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
        • They aren't justifiable. It is fine to be frustrated or pissed or mad or any other range of emotions. It isn't ok to act out on them. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a forum or blog. We require a degree of civility. I'm tolerant of disagreements and a little heated dialog, but not of personal attacks. Attack their logic, their arguments, but not the person. Point out the flaws in their argument, but you don't call someone a "dick" here, even if they are being a dick. As for removing your contributions, this is Wikipedia, everything you write here will be mercilessly edited, changed, added to, taken from, copied and/or removed. That is how a wiki works. Do you and I a favour and read WP:Five pillars. It is very short, and a summation of what we are and how we do it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
          • OK, well I'll give that a read, and I understand what you're saying and that I was out of line by making personal attacks. While I'm not going to apologise for my recent actions to Mikeymike2001 as I'm far to proud; I solemnly swear to make sure that this type of behaviour does not happen from me again and all my content added will be encyclopaedic and verifiable and never personal. I just want to put the last 2 or 3 days behind us. Kane (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
            • Sounds like a plan. I've been here 6 years now, and an admin less than a year. I find that that pride is a two edge sword (here and in the real world). A little of it insures you create good content. Too much of it can prevent you from admitting a mistake, or from getting along. I gave up on pride a long time ago, personally, and just focus on doing my small part in building what I think is the most important collection of facts and information ever compiled by man, Wikipedia. Just something to think about. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

YRC/Cirt/Prioryman debacle

I just made the terrible mistake of reading the latest YRC/Prioryman drama. Since you seem to be one of the few level-headed people over there, I picked you to run this by. Through the whole thing, one thought kept recurring to me: What if the Wikipediocracy poster is Prioryman? Have I been spending too much time reading conspiracy theories? Bobby Tables (talk) 20:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

  • Maybe, but the point is, we aren't sure who it is. It may very well be him, but in order to take as drastic of action as was being suggested, we need to be very sure, and we aren't. As to Prioryman posting it, however, I sincerely doubt it based on my experiences with him. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree, that's extremely unlikely. And one of YRC's supporters and Prioryman's detractors is Cla68, a 'global moderator' there. Dennis, do you agree that fear of this sort of off-wiki attempts at outing, no matter who it is who is doing it there, is part of the editor retention problem? And if so, what do you think should be done if and when YRC returns to edit? And, hmm, now that I think about it, we have editors here who are in that thread and don't seem to be discouraging the request to out Cirt. Hadn't thought about that until just now. And taking a pause to look at the thread, one of the latest posts says "Setting aside the is-delhidan-riorob question, was there really anything that terrible about the initial "if anyone has anything on Cirt, expose it" comment in the first place? The Serens and the Dougwellers of that ANI thread act like he shat on the rug and hit on his grandmother while singing Springtime for Hitler." I'd really like your take on this. As someone who edits with their real name, I feel very strongly that those who do not should have their privacy protected as much as we can. Dougweller (talk) 08:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Might I add to this, and away from the place where springtime for hitler is hitting the fan, that privacy online is an illusion. Despite folk wish to be private, being truly anonymous just cannot ever happen. By creating a brouhaha about this and other incidents do we not increase the illusion of privacy and thus help foster a gullibility among the, well, the gullible? Editors will stay or go at their absolute whim. Some will be affected by this incident, others by the fact that today is Thursday. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Doug, I completely agree that fear of outing does lose us a few editors, and that activities off-wiki can be considered for sanctions here in limited circumstances, but again, the issue is one of verification. We have enough trouble determining socks here, with checkuser and logs. Trying to match up editors on another site without disclosure here is fraught with problems, like this case with YRC. You also lose editors if they think our admin processes are more akin to a witch hunt or mob rule. My biggest concern is process, that the smallest among us gets the same fair treatment as the most popular. To me, that is at least as influential in editor retention as anything, as no one will want to be here if the admin process is unfair or uneven, and it is currently far from perfect. I agree with your conclusion that if we knew it was YRC trying to out someone, an indef would be warranted, there is no argument there. It is how we determine "guilt" that differs here, not the punishment. The process itself is bigger than any single case.

And Fiddle, I agree that privacy is an illusion. This is part of the reason why I changed my name to my real name a few years back, even post my picture here and don't hide that I live in Lexington, NC. Anyone smart enough could mail me a letter with very little searching. I find this keeps me honest. My life situation is such that no one can threaten my job status and I'm not concerned with personal threats for other reasons. I understand that not everyone can be so open, however, so we have to protect their privacy. In the end, everyone is outed on the internet eventually. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Now that is vital information, because I need to know where I can get a quick meal on a Sunday night driving between Charlotte and Greensboro (well, really Raleigh but we need to eat long before then). And I think I agree with what you've said above. Note that I've asked Prioryman to stay away from YRC as much as possible. Dougweller (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Exit 91 is the first Lexington exit and has all the eats. Applebee's and Cracker barrel (right, then right), Golden Coral (right, then left) is just a mile off, every fast food is within a mile (left: McD, Wendy's, KFC. right: Arbys, BK, Taco Bell, Zaxby's). Turn left at the end of the exit for half a mile and eat at Jimmy's BBQ (on the right) if you like Lexington style, they are my choice. A mile further on the right is Oceanview Seafood, which is pretty good. It is very easy to get on and off I85 there and there are several gas stations there as well. here is a map of that intersection. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:41, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
If I dropped off some urgent dry-cleaning, quite near Exit 91, late on Saturday, do you think you could get it back to me, via Wendy's, for noon next Tuesday? haha. But seriously, Dennis, you are literally the friendliest face in the Admin team, by far. Use of your real name, real picture, etc. is a real breath of fresh-air here. And has helped to produce the kind of profile to whixh all admins should really aspire. Kindest regards. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 14:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC) (shy ip editor) p.s. Springtime For Hilter is quite a jolly tune, really.
Thanks Dennis. I'm torn. We really prefer western North Carolina style BBQ, ie sweet tomato-based. So it's a toss-up, Lexington style (which of course is famous) or the Sonny's in Concord. When we want to stop will probably be the deciding factor. Dougweller (talk) 14:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm from Texas originally, so I do barbecue completely different than anyone here. I'm smoking out about 14 pounds of pork ribs this weekend, dry rub Texas style, plus chicken legs, country style ribs and sausage. About 10 of us getting together to drink beer, wine and eat Q. If it was Saturday evening around 6 or 7pm, you could stop by. I'm close to the Interstate. Maybe next time. Not sure if you live nearby or just passing through, not sure how much you want to volunteer here either. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I live in the UK, but am American - Jonathan Worth was a relative. My brother now lives near Burnsville in Yancey County and we're visiting him, but also visiting relatives in Raleigh (who are there simply because my cousin's a senior manager for Cisco and they've moved him there). I've never been east of Charlotte myself, but have been visiting the Asheville area, or rather Yancey County, for more decades than I like to remember. Oh, also spending several days in Houston on this trip so might try some Texas Q. Dougweller (talk) 19:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dennis_Brown/Archive_8&oldid=1254594970"