User talk:Flowerpotman/Archive11

Whacky additions

I've given the user a final warning. Is this some kind of odd sock? Am I better off not knowing? Haploidavey (talk) 20:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not 100% sure of his motives; I *think* it's just a long-running in-joke for his friends, but anyhoo... I posted a message to the WP:IRL talk page about him last year here if you want a bit of background. I spotted the Martin Breyer reference in one of his edits tonight and took a shot at actually talking to him, or at least letting him know that the pattern hadn't gone unnoticed. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Righty; he might have previous mileage there. They're not normally articles I'd watch, but I'll stick a couple on my list and see what turns up. Thanks for the note. Haploidavey (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chandler Armory

Thanks! I hadn't actually spotted the NRHP mention. There's a template which I can use - as per Arcadia Round Barn - and I'll add that in. Cheers! --Pete (talk) 23:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(replied on Skyrings talk page) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Darren Conquest

Given that you had recently edited Darren Conquest, you might be interested in giving your views at its deletion dicussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Conquest. KTC (talk) 10:40, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Had it watchlisted :) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He died today.

My father is a family friend of his. He suffered a heart attack today and died. They are going to hold a public memorial service but the time and location of the service aren't known yet. Anyways, being remembered after his death was something that was always important to Tim. It would be nice if you put the edits back on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.159.123.138 (talk) 23:41, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you'll find that the Wikipedia policies for sources in the biographies of living people, especially for edits claiming the subject is dead, need perhaps a tad more than an IP editor coming along and saying "my father is a family friend of his". And I have to say it seems a bit strange that while your edits claim that the family have announced details of the arrangements for his funeral, absolutely no news sources have reported his demise. Odd that, isn't it? FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:53, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hello Flowerpotman,

Until now (after understanding some of Wikipedia's editing) I hadn't realise that your response was personal and not automated. I feel a bit of a fool but thanks for the welcome and for directing me to some starter guidelines, although I'm still trying to get my head around some things.

Regards,

Pat Collins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptkcollins (talk • contribs) 20:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Slightly late reply.) Actually the Horace Walpole picture date problem was well-spotted; I think I just happened across your query while clicking random links on the recent changes page. It was just an accident in attribution when the picture was uploaded. If you need any help, feel free to give me a shout. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 17:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator intervention against vandalism

Thanks for the information you gave at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism on the false-death-report vandal. The details you gave made it quite clear that this is a returning vandal, who does not need a string of warnings each time he/she uses a new IP address, so I have blocked the IP address. I have also reblocked some previously blocked IP addresses, as the user has come back to some of them after being blocked, and nobody else has ever used the IP addresses in question, so there seems to be virtually no risk of collateral damage. Also, as far as I can see the editor has used only a small number of static IP addresses, which gives reasonable hope that blocks may have some effect, unlike editors who use countless dynamic IPs, where no matter how many are blocked, they just keep switching to new ones. I will be willing to do the same for other IP addresses if you can point any out to me, either now or in the future. You did include 69.170.74.73 in your list, but this is an IP from a different continent, and, although the editing involves false death claims, I guess it is not the same person. JamesBWatson (talk) 23:45, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was a definite ooops with 69.170.74.73; I was searching for "fake death" in my edit summaries and accidentally included that one - my brain wasn't in gear in last night and I seem to have run into a rash of premature obituaries recently :) This guy has been active for at least 8 months and taking a trip through the edit histories of any of the more recent "Year in Film" articles will get more IPs. Using 1999 in film as an example, we have Special:Contributions/77.100.22.9 (unblocked but inactive for a month), Special:Contributions/94.169.6.135 (still blocked), Special:Contributions/82.36.32.179 (reblocked by you last night), Special:Contributions/94.173.158.110 currently blocked. He has a thing for the Castle in the Sky article, which brings up Special:Contributions/82.37.244.219 (unblocked but inactive). I'm sure I could dig up a few more if I wanted to burrow through a few more page histories. Many of the IPs do resolve to Telewest, but there is at least one Virgin IP address above and I seem to recall that when I did a check a while ago , there were Carphonewarehouse IPs amongst others. His main computer may well be on Telewest, but he seems to do the edits from other computers;again, I seem to recall dealing with edits from two IP which resolved to two different ISPs in one night. Not sure if this observer bias, but he tends to do edit over weekends rather than weekdays, although that could well be that I am more likely to be online then. Blocking the IPs might slow him down, but I have to say I'm not convinced that it will be much use in the long run. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:43, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I too am not convinced that it will be much use in the long run. However, if we keep making the vandal go to a bit more trouble, having to keep moving to different IP addresses to avoid blocks, there is a chance that he/ she will eventually get tired of having to do so and give up. Also, even if that doesn't happen, just slowing the vandalism down is worth doing. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there was at least one Carphonewarehouse IP that was quite recent Special:Contributions/92.19.51.8 which you reblocked; another Telewest one at Special:Contributions/77.101.136.134 who made only one edit but obviously the same guy; Special:Contributions/82.36.34.89 (Telewest but in another range and block has run out); Special:Contributions/92.236.131.196 (which you got last night)FlowerpotmaN·(t) 16:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page Curation newsletter

Hey Flowerpotman. I'm dropping you a note because you used to (or still do!) patrol new pages. This is just to let you know that we've deployed and developed Page Curation, which augments and supersedes Special:NewPages - there are a lot of interesting new features :). There's some help documentation here if you want to familiarise yourself with the system and start using it. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No

Go away. 176.251.226.136 (talk) 23:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet of 1337gamer help

Hey can you help me I think User:The1337gamer is using sockpuppets to harass me. I was recently in a edit war with him over a capitalization. around that time a new user confronted me Getback27 about my edit but his signature was another socks signature. Both users started editing around October 6th. both users have made unconstructive edits to music, just like User:The1337gamer

Also one Sock signed the other as his signature http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:75.65.123.86&diff=517461724&oldid=517461336

What do you think? --75.65.123.86 (talk) 22:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite sure why I was a port of call here, but as you have taken it to another venue, I'll make no comment and let it proceed elsewhere.FlowerpotmaN·(t) 15:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hoaxers

Living Famously (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) also has been hoaxing within the past few minutes. Cresix (talk) 01:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jake Picasso is a likely sock of Jake Duncan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Cresix (talk) 01:35, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Michael Portillo.

Hi, Just saw your response to my Michael Portillo addition. I don't know if you've seen any of the ads, (view them here: http://www.marksandspencer.com/MS-TV/b/311612031) - its obviously portillo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.42.144.169 (talk) 00:50, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch at Alexander ikeda

Figuring out that was a G10 might be all in a day's work, but noticing where it came from excellent. Well done, and thank you! --j⚛e decker ^talk 22:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, refs rendering as plain text is always a bit of a giveaway :) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 22:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Madam of Cranleigh

Well spotted. I was almost prepared to speedy it as a blatant hoax, and I now think maybe I should have; but, anyway, I have PRODded it and nominated the duplicate picture for deletion on Commons. How did you find the source of the picture? JohnCD (talk) 09:15, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TinEye is great for finding duplicates of images on the net. I have it as an extension on Chrome so it offers me a menu option to search on TinEye when I right-click on an image. (Should be available for other browsers). FlowerpotmaN·(t) 14:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bouley

How, that was fast. Thanks for your edits in Henri Marie Bouley. I was surprised that there was not a article about him, so I made it myself. It was only a stub because I can't write in English very well. :) Cainamarques (talk) 03:32, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the late reply. Yes, he should definitely have an article; even a stub is a good start. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:15, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]