Jump to content

User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2013/07

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rob.HUN/Archive

[edit]

No sanction on the sock master? RashersTierney (talk) 20:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. Blocks are meant to be preventative, not punitive. Since it was June 23 already and the socking occurred most recently on June 11, the standard one-week block that should have been levied on the master would have already expired. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:00, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Punitive my arse! No socking record? Fuck all response for dishonest editing. What a waste of my time. RashersTierney (talk) 01:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The record is the SPI itself. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No. A record would be a sanction on the sock master. RashersTierney (talk) 01:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What benefit is there? How would a 1-week block now prevent any disruption from him? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It would be recorded in their block log. They would be on warning not to sock again. Is this really how we now address sock puppetry? RashersTierney (talk) 01:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's far from ideal, but it's a logical consequence of a backlog. When it takes this long to deal with the case, the closing admin gets left with a bad choice: let the bad behaviour appear to have no consequences, or put a block in place that it's hard to describe as preventative. A reasonable compromise might be to put a one minute block on the account with a pointer to the SPI in order to make sure that future admins are aware of this if there's a recurrence of any kind of disruption.—Kww(talk) 01:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that's not a bad idea.  Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. And perhaps forgive the expression of exasperation above? RashersTierney (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All is forgiven. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two more socks

[edit]

I've got two innocent-sounding unblock requests from User_talk:FoolMeOnce2Times and User talk:CamelBaks, both tagged and blocked as socks of User:MooshiePorkFace as per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Morning277/Archive. The trick is that I can't find either name on that SPI. Is there a different archive I might check? Or should I leave these for another checkuser to confirm? Thanks. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 12:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having a CU look at it would be a good idea. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tech news: 2013-27

[edit]

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Translations are available.

Recent software changes
(Not all changes will affect you.)
  • The latest version of MediaWiki (1.22/wmf9) was added to test wikis on June 27. It will be enabled on non–Wikipedia sites on July 8, and on all Wikipedias on July 11.
  • On Wikisource, the canonical names of the "Index" and "Page" namespaces in the Proofread Page extension are no longer localized (bug #47596). Please check scripts that depend on $wgCanonicalNamespace. [1]
  • A JavaScript problem caused the "View history" and "New section" tabs in the Vector skin to be moved into the drop-down menu on right-to-left wikis. The issue is now fixed and links are visible as before (bug #50196). [2]
  • There was a short site outage on June 28.
  • The automated Category:Pages with missing files now includes broken file links inserted inside the <gallery /> tag (bug #50119). [3]
  • The Nearby feature is now enabled on Commons and shows images in a user's area. [4]
  • There is now a special page listing disambiguation pages for wikis that use the Disambiguator extension (bug #44040). [5]
  • The old version of the Article feedback tool (version 4) was removed from wikis that still used it. [6]
  • VisualEditor news:
    • Many bugs that caused text to be removed or damaged have been fixed, including one related to copy-paste (bug #49816).
    • VisualEditor now offers a visual interface to edit references.
    • In preparation for enabling the VisualEditor on a wider scale, new documentation has been created, including a list of frequently-asked questions and a user guide with many images. Please help with translations.
    • Several problems related to overlapping of elements with the VisualEditor toolbar have been fixed (bug #50096, #50159, #50324).
    • TemplateData information is now displayed for templates that are added to a page (bug #49778).
    • Section edit links now show links to both VisualEditor and the old (source) editor (bug #49666).
    • Images are now loaded securely when using HTTPS (bug #43015). [7]
Future software changes
  • VisualEditor will be enabled for all logged-in English Wikipedia users on July 1, and for all users on July 8.
  • From July 8, it will be possible to upload WAV and native FLAC files to Commons, and use them directly on wiki pages ([[<tvar|bug-49505>bugzilla:49505</>|bug #49505]]). [8]
  • The Universal Language Selector will be added to the English Wikipedia on July 2, and to remaining wikis on July 9. [9]
Erratum

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

14:19, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Captain Correcto

[edit]

Hi King of Hearts, you closed Captain Correcto SPI last week. The IP was mainly editing the Better together page. Well today CC has turned up and started editing on it. WP:3rr brech included. Your call dude, will I report him or do you want to have a chat with him? Cheers bud. Murry1975 (talk) 16:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please file a report at SPI if sockpuppetry is involved, or an ordinary AN3 if not. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dick1968

[edit]

You recently unblocked Dick1968 pending a CHU and with their promise not to make further COI contributions. COI is in fact exactly what they have been doing since that time at the Vijay Goel article, attempting to use it as a means of political campaigning. Please could you review? - Sitush (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CHU request is here but the entire situation of naming is confusing me. They seem to be contributing as Amaratechnofutures (talk · contribs) but User talk:Dick1968 suggests they had requested Dineshjatjjn (talk · contribs) and the CHU refers to Admindcdelhi9 (talk · contribs)}, while another request also exists for another name. A case of "I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure", perhaps? - Sitush (talk) 08:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am becoming very confused regarding what is going on but am pretty sure that Delhidc1986dc (talk · contribs), Rritu (talk · contribs), Vamindian (talk · contribs) and Tkimtg (talk · contribs) are also the same person. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friends, I just want to updat emore information, with picture only, I am new on Wikipedia, So i just send request for change name. Rritu (talk · contribs), Vamindian (talk · contribs) and Tkimtg (talk · contribs) these are not me .

You've just sent me an email that pretty much passes the duck test for one of the above prior usages. I'd take this to WP:SPI if only I could work out which is the master account. - Sitush (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Filing an SPI is the best idea here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:00, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it would be if I could work out what name came first and whether any of the others were CHU cases, along with the ones I've already found. I mean, Dick1968 appears to have no contributions but was blocked for POV pushing? I think this needs an admin to sort it out because they have access to historic views that I do not. - Sitush (talk) 05:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Take a look at my response here :) ·addshore· talk to me! 08:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closure of sockpuppet investigation

[edit]

You've essentially ignored WP:DUCK. GotGlue's behavior suggests that he's probably a sockpuppet of somebody. I think you were wrong to close it without a check pbp 03:04, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

fish CheckUser is not for fishing King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:07, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You've gotta be kidding me! I can't believe you're defending that user! He's clearly a disruptive account pbp 03:27, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Innocent until proven guilty. In general, a single edit would only be sufficient for a check or WP:DUCK if there is a match in the editing pattern, as opposed to merely having the same opinion as another user. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:52, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipediocracy

[edit]

I hadn't counted the number of reverts and wasn't sure if it was a BLP or not. However at the same time you blocked User:Mathsci I fully protected the Wikipediocracy page. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, protection should be used when multiple users on both sides are revert warring with each other. However, in this case, Mathsci has been the only editor on that side since Dougweller unprotected yesterday, so I believe blocking is preferable to protection. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:49, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Normally I would agree but in this case there was a claim of BLP. If it was then it was then protecting the article would work to allow the editors to discuss it. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 05:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KoH. Per your note on Mathsci's talk page and his agreement to leave the article alone while ArbCom looks into how to deal with it, I have unblocked him. 28bytes (talk) 05:03, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems sensible to me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Admin's Barnstar
For acting against Celeste6566 and her sockpuppets. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deneuve15

[edit]

You probably want to deny his appeal of my block as well. It's kind of strange to have him appealing my block when you've blocked on top of it.—Kww(talk) 00:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some info

[edit]

I'm guessing your comments at AN/editwarring were due to a lack of info.

This is merely the case where several editors with a declared bias, didn't like a close, are trying to interpret it in a way to support their POV, and are edit warring over it and then trying to accuse the closer (me) of edit warring with them.

Reverting a close, especially while a follow up discussion (which I asked for) is ongoing, is, as I'm sure you'd agree, disruptive.

(See also: User_talk:Good_Olfactory#3po.)

Anyway, since she's now run to AN/I with accusations, I guess I need to comment there next.

Happy editing. - jc37 08:34, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't know everything that's going on, so maybe I could have looked at it more carefully. Though in a similar case what I'd personally do (and have done in the past) when my close of a discussion is challenged is to revert once or twice (or never in the case of an admin action) and if they insist, wait for others to defend my close. This has two advantages: 1) you are not edit warring yourself and no one can accuse you of such, and 2) if your close was actually rubbish then you will quickly find that out by the lack of defenders, instead of escalating the problem further (I'm sure I've avoided being dragged to ANI on at least one occasion by this principle). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair points all around.
While this wasn't a concern before, I'm now concerned that such a tack rewards the idea that bullying a closer trying to implement a close is acceptable and appropriate. There's just a lot of stuff I'm seeing here that seems so contrary to the consensus process and the "wiki-way".
I realise we see examples of this all too often at AN/I, but I guess I just really would like to think (my own AGF) that editors, should want come together and discuss. But I guess maybe I'm too old school, and "whoever can bully the best" is the way of Wikipedia now. But I'd like to hope not, and that we'd all step up and try to prevent that. dunno. But then, I'm merely one editor...
In the meantime, I fully expect I'll be repeatedly cudgeled by them with your block comment. (And I suppose I should note, that one of the 4 of then has once again reverted the close.) Part of me just wants to walk away. This is utter nonsense, about something I honestly could care less about. But I just don't like the precedent. Closers shouldn't be treated this way. And if we don't stand up to this nonsense, every future closer will likely have to deal with this. - jc37 05:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've noted your accusations of bullying at AN/I. Doing it on a page that you didn't expect me to be watching instead of saying it to me straight doesn't impress me much either. For King of Hearts's information, I was not part of or even aware of the CfD, I have never encountered Fayenatic London before, I have had occasional dealings with BHG, and I've been on the same side as her about 50% of the time, and I don't even know who the fourth member of this "cabal" is. Scolaire (talk) 17:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shadowthedog

[edit]

When you move a case to a different sockmaster, you need to also update the "User compare report". Not sure if anyone had told you or if it just slipped your mind. I went ahead and updated it. Also, we normally make the move without a redirect unless there is a specific reason, but I noticed [11]. Again, not sure if that was on purpose or you didn't know. If that was a mistake, you can just G6 it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 17:10, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was never told this before. I'll keep in mind in the future. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem at all, just wanting to help. Even though I'm still labelled a trainee, I've actually been there over a year, so pretty familiar with procedure. You can ask anytime you have a question. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:06, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dennis Brown: I'm still not quite sure on the specific rules for this. There are three ways to move something: 1) leave no redirect; 2) leave a redirect; or 3) leave a piped {{SPIarchive notice}}. When do you do each? For example, why did you do (3) on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MatthewBarclay (a very recent case) but (1) on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IranitGreenberg (which has been the name of the case for a long time and is hence likely to be referred to)? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm off-wiki for the most part right now, so you might need to ask Reaper some of this. Of all the clerks, he is the most knowledgeable when it comes to the paperwork (and arguably, everything else there). He did correct me one point. If there was a CU done on the OLD name, then you leave the redirect so the CU log isn't a redlink (I've corrected my mistake above). As for the template, most of the time those are generated automatically when you archive. I've not ever added one manually. I suppose there may be a circumstance when ignoring all rules and using one to point somewhere else makes sense, I just can't think of one. Another thing, if someone creates a bogus or bad faith SPI report on a known good user, we will often delete them via G6 technical once it is obvious that there is no possible linkage, as a way to remove the mud that was slung. Obviously, the summary/log entry needs to be crystal clear on why you are CSDing it, and this should be used except in very obvious cases. Better details can be found in this rough draft [12]. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 18:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

[edit]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wran

[edit]

Hello. If I am not mistaken the CU request was eventually declined on this one. However, the CU request was, in my opinion, fairly substantiated. CU has already been run once on this editor before and the results were 'Inconclusive' rather than 'Unrelated'. I think it should have been done again if only to clear Wran. Wran's only response was yet another personal attack against me ("this is clearly an accusation in 'bad faith' to prevent his own incompetent and abusive editing being examined"), for which they received a warning by another editor. --Omnipaedista (talk) 07:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking Advice

[edit]

Hi KoH-

I recently published a comprehensive list of fatal aircraft-related occurrences and nominated it at FLC. I seem to be having an issue with members of the Aviation Portal. Based on the fact that my communication has been monitored, let me be clear I am not asking for your participation at AfD. Rather, based on the writing on the wall, I am curious if there is an appeals process post-AfD? I have spent considerable time and effort to create a comprehensive reference list that takes advantage of descriptive statistics while not crossing the line into original research. It draws on some material already on Wikipedia, incorporates new information, but goes significantly farther in terms of detail, organization, and functionality. It would seem that there is an effort to dismantle this new list, even if it survives AfD. Given the lacking level of detail, organization, and referencing of the comparison lists, as the new one is accused of being a duplicate of (1 & 2), I must assume there are other motives for the AfD. As an uninvolved admin, could you let me know if there any steps/options I am not aware of? Thank you in advance.--Godot13 (talk) 23:13, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Views Needed, Parikipandla Narahari

[edit]

The article which you deleted in past was strongly notable(http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-18/bhopal/36414703_1_facebook-and-twitter-gwalior-followers, http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/MadhyaPradesh/Got-a-complaint-Poke-Gwalior-collector-on-Facebook/Article1-945195.aspx and http://www.tehelka.com/gwaliors-game-changer/). I was to rewrite that article due to copyright violation, but I was banned till 5th July, so I wasn't available to rewrite it. And in between the article got deleted.

You restored this article earlier after reading http://www.tehelka.com/gwaliors-game-changer, but under second nomination it again got deleted with lack of notability. I am confused what people are upto.

Please tell me how was that possible? or was your review of restoring the article lacked somewhere? Your views will highly catch the drift. Shobhit Gosain (talk) 12:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tech news: 2013-28

[edit]

Latest [[<tvar|technews>m:Special:MyLanguage/Tech/News</>|tech news]] from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. [[<tvar|more-transl>m:Special:MyLanguage/Tech/News/2013/28</>|Translations]] are available.

Recent software changes (Not all changes will affect you.)

  • VisualEditor news:
    • VisualEditor deployment has been delayed by a week. It is now planned to enable the editor for logged–in editors on chosen Wikipedias on July 22, and on all Wikipedias on July 29.
    • A bug that made it impossible to save VisualEditor edits that triggered a CAPTCHA has been fixed. [13]
    • Several bugs that occurred on right–to–left wikis have been fixed last week (bug #49416, bug #49613, bug #50543).
  • Uploading files has been restricted on Meta Wiki to administrators and the newly created uploader group. An exemption doctrine policy is being developed (bug #50287). [14]
  • Emergency priority CentralNotice banners will always be shown unless users have hidden them, ignoring cookies set for lower priority banners. [15]

Future software changes

  • MediaWiki will allow choosing a specific page of a PDF document or a thumbnail of a video file to show up inside the
    tag (bug #8480). [16]
    • It will now be possible to create empty MediaWiki: messages, for instance in order to disable them (bug #50124). [17]
    • The Nearby feature will soon be enabled on Wikivoyage wikis again. [18]
    • The Notifications extension messages will now include a direct link to diffs on wiki as well as in notification e-mails (bug #48183). [19]
    • Table of contents will now use the HTML <div /> element instead of <table />, fixing a nine–year–old bug #658. [20]
    • First mock–ups of a mobile Wikidata application have been published by Pragun Bhutani as part of his Google Summer of Code project. [21]
    • A discussion on minimum documentation practices in MediaWiki code has been started and awaits comments from the community.

    Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

    18:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

    Michael Johns (policy analyst)

    [edit]

    Hi King of Hearts,

    It looks like you were watching the page for Michael Johns and I wanted to inform you that I was going to move it to Michael Johns (business executive). Let me know if this causes any problems for you. Josiah2013 (talk) 23:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 10 July 2013

    [edit]

    Tech News: 2013-29

    [edit]

    Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Translations are available.

    Recent software changes (Not all changes will affect you.)

    Future software changes

    • A new version of the Single User Login system for global accounts will be enabled on July 17. Users will now automatically go back to the previous page instead of seeing the "Login success" page with logos. [25]
    • The software that resizes images on all wikis will change on July 18. Resizing of big images will be faster and more reliable, and the resolution limit for GIF, PNG and TIFF files (currently set at 50 megapixels) will be removed. [26]
    • Edit tags (mostly used by AbuseFilter) will now also be on diff pages. They include a link to Special:Tags before the edit summary. Wikis that use links in tag messages should remove them. [27] [28]
    • Global edit filters are currently in testing and will be added to wikis later. [29]
    • Wikivoyage wikis will start to use Wikidata for interwiki links on July 22. [30]
    • A new image gallery design has been proposed by Brian Wolff; comments and feedback are welcome.
    • An IRC discussion about Bugzilla is planned for July 16, at 16:00 (UTC) on the IRC channel #wikimedia-office on Freenode (time conversion). [31]

    Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

    17:29, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

    Premature close

    [edit]

    The sanction removal at WP:AN#Request for sanction removal was in my view closed pre-maturely before anyone has had sufficient opportunity to voice an opinion that is factually based. It is not possible, in my view to factually oppose the sanction removal. Opposing the sanction removal for deliberately misspelling a word as an example of words being misspelled is not a valid reason to oppose, nor can I see any valid oppose votes. In deciding sanctions the question is do the sanctions benefit Wikipedia, and I do not see any possible yes answers to that question. Would you be willing to allow the request to run at least seven days or until there have been no new comments for 36 hours? (archiving is set to 48 hours) Apteva (talk) 06:26, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    A query from Incnis Mrsi

    [edit]
    █
    An incredibly colorful red rectangle from Incnis Mrsi; see a technical explanation

    Hello. I hope a guy with ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ in the signature will not refute that I may have the user:Incnis Mrsi/█ page in my User: space. I need it for user:Incnis Mrsi/contribs that, in turn, is needed for my user review.

    I can’t create it myself because of a page title filter, but I think a sysop can post several spaces (or whatever trash) to this title. Or maybe somebody of talk page stalkers will be so gentle? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

     Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. You acquired my exclusive gift; the hue can be changed if you wish. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 17 July 2013

    [edit]

    Suggested change to your signature

    [edit]

    Hi, KOH, I'm theonesean. This is totally out of the blue, but I noticed one of your posts on some page somewhere on WP, and I rolled over the links on your signature, and being OCD, it bothered me that one of your card icons isn't linked, presumably because of character limit. I have a proposition for you. Change your signature from

    King of ♥ ♦♣ ♠

    to

    ♥♦♣♠,

    which code-wise is

    [[User:King of Hearts|<font color="red">♥</font>]] [[User talk:King of Hearts|<font color="red">♦</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<font color="black">♣</font>]] [[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<font color="black">♠</font>]] and provides a concise, unique mark for signing, much like Sigma, and utilizes all four characters. Just a suggestion, feel free to ignore me completely if you want, but just a thought. Thanks, you're awesome, theonesean 00:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I actually did that previously, back in 2006. But ultimately I felt that the icons stood out too much in the wikitext and would be distracting, so I changed them to their full expansions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Tech News: 2013-30

    [edit]

    Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Translations are available.

    Recent software changes (Not all changes will affect you.)

    Future software changes

    Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

    21:00, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

    User:Fête SPI

    [edit]

    In reference to your comments "the account last edited in January" that is as the account was blocked globally then: [39]. Returning as an IP is block evasion, doing so and returning to exactly the same pattern of edits that got them blocked is disruptive, here and across other projects looking at global contributions [40], [41]. They do announce their identity in the summary one of the changes: [42]. Noting that this though is a global block a SPI or even the English WP may be the wrong venue, but I don't know what other venue might be more appropriate.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 03:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    SPI is fine for handling these requests, but you do need to explicitly mention a global lock or we won't see it. A lot of people, especially SPI clerks, like to use a tool called User:NuclearWarfare/Mark-blocked script.js which formats the (linked) usernames of blocked users in a distinctive way, but the tool only sees current local blocks, not global locks. This way we can easily check on a user's block status without visiting the block log. I should be a bit embarrassed considering I was quite involved in the original case, having blocked the account initially, and only now remember the global lock. Six months is quite a long time, and it must have slipped my memory. But still, you can't guarantee the case will be handled by a clerk with prior knowledge, so be sure to lay out everything explicitly. Right now, I will not be taking action against the IPs as they are likely dynamic, but please re-report if the activity resumes. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    RFC of interest to you

    [edit]

    You might like to contribute to this RFC concerning the recent trouble with DeFacto/Cobulator. Martinvl (talk) 06:45, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Leo711

    [edit]

    Please note that after your username change it is impossible to edit under your old username. Leo711 is not my "old username". It's my "present" username on Russian WP and due to some recent changes it is now also my "single user login" of which I have four actually. Merging them is not possible and I don't always remember to switch them when I switch from wiki to wiki. Could you please lift that block? When the feature of merging accounts appears I don't want to have problems because one of them is blocked. Thank you. BadaBoom (talk) 07:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Are you willing to place {{User alternative account name|Leo711}} on BadaBoom and {{User alternate acct|BadaBoom}} on Leo711, to make the association clear? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:16, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Already did. You could've asked me to do that instead of blocking. BadaBoom (talk) 08:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Unblocked. In most such cases, the user has less WP:CLUE than you do, so we block the old username to remind them to use their new account. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. BadaBoom (talk) 08:33, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    The Signpost: 24 July 2013

    [edit]

    Special:AbuseFilter/576

    [edit]

    Hello. Are you sure this filter has to be that broad when it's set to disallow? There are many legitimate users who use this range and this would prevent any such users from editing user talk pages of any kind, as I don't see any conditions specific to this sockmaster.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:47, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I have replied by email. In the future, when discussing private filters please communicate via private channels. I know this particular filter has very low information density, but the multitude of simple and complex private filters is what keeps them guessing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:14, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Photo consensus discussion at Talk:Rick Remender

    [edit]

    Hi. Can you offer your opinion regarding the Infobox photo discussion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Tech News: 2013-31

    [edit]

    Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes; not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

    • The latest version of MediaWiki (1.22/wmf12) was added to test wikis and MediaWiki.org on July 25. It will be enabled on non–Wikipedia sites on July 29, and on all Wikipedias on August 1. [43]
    • Wikivoyage was offline for around 40 minutes on July 24. [44]
    • Pywikipediabot moved their code from SVN to git; bot owners need to update their tools. [45]
    • The Notifications and Thanks extensions were added to Meta-Wiki on July 26; other wikis will get them soon. [46]
    • It is now possible to add edit summaries on Wikidata using the API; the feature will be added to user interface soon. [47]
    • The software that resizes large PNG images on all wikis was changed on July 25. Resizing of PNG files bigger than 35 megapixels should be faster and more reliable now. [48]
    • Three new webfonts (Gentium, Old Persian and Shapour) will be added to Universal Language Selector. [49], [50], [51]
    • Special:MIMESearch, which gives a list of files by type, will be enabled on all Wikimedia wikis with MediaWiki version 1.22/wmf12 (bug #13438). [52]
    • A mailing list to discuss multimedia features was started; users are encouraged to sign up.
    • VisualEditor news:
      • On July 24, VisualEditor was added for logged-in users on the German (de), Spanish (es), French (fr), Hebrew (he), Italian (it), Polish (pl), Russian (ru) and Swedish (sv) Wikipedias; it will be added for all users on those wikis on July 29. [53]
      • A preference to completely disable VisualEditor while it is in beta phase was added on July 24. [54]
      • Many bugs were fixed in right-to-left languages. [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60]
      • It is possible again to scroll down in the template editing window (bug #51739).
      • VisualEditor now works with the FlaggedRevisions extension. (bug #49699)
      • If the user opens VisualEditor using a section edit link, the title of the section is added to the edit summary (bug #50872).
      • Invisible templates now can't be deleted by accident or on purpose (bug #51322).

    Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by Global message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

    20:41, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

    Tricentis

    [edit]

    Hi,

    You closed Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011 March 16#TRICENTIS Technology & Consulting as incubate.  I have improved the article and yesterday I tried to move it back to mainspace, but I am getting a MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-forbidden-move error.  I've tried to track down the source of the supposed blacklist without success.  Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/tosca-testsuite.com and Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/Local/tosca-testsuite.com are possibly related, but they both seem to indicate User:COIBot#Domainredlist which as best I can tell has never existed.  Nor have I been able to find anyplace where a complaint was raised against this title.  Please advise or complete the move.  Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 00:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't exactly see where the significant coverage is, even after your improvements. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:14, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know what more you expect, everything there should be solid, no promotion, and receiving global attention as shown by multiple reliable sources.  The two dead links are unusual, but each is there for a specific reason.  I could merge this to TOSCA Testsuite, but my personal life experience is to prefer factoring over complexity.  I consider both Gartner (Conn) and investing.businessweek.com (NY) to be solid sources, and I also added that Austrian source in the further reading, "Since software is never bug-free, sailing the small Austrian Tricentis even during the financial crisis to expand and grab large competitors such as IBM, HP, Compuware and Borland do some job away.".  What you don't see is anything from PRweb.  Unscintillating (talk) 07:15, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, significant coverage. When I Ctrl-F Tricentis on Gartner, nothing comes up, so I don't know what the extent of the coverage is. As for Businessweek, that's more like a directory listing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:King_of_Hearts/Archive/2013/07&oldid=1146467423"