Jump to content

User talk:Luk/Archives/2009/04

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

This Archive Page goes from 1/4/2009 to 30/4/2009 (dd/mm/yyyy)

Previous conversations prior to 1 April 2009 (UTC) are archived there.

Merci

Merci pour l'exception dans le blocage d'IP pour User:MystBot. Et merci aussi pour le crosspost, sinon je n'aurai pas vu. Je pense changer dans l'année de dedibox et malheuresement d'IP (Merci dedibox...), je te contacterais à ce moment. Encore merci. Myst (talk) 22:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

OK nickel merci ! :) -- lucasbfr talk 05:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Dedibox block

I still don't see why you hard blocked thousands of computer, just because there might be some open proxies among them... In fact, have you even checked that the four dedibox involved in the recent sockpuppetry case, on which it seems that you based your decision, are open proxies? They don't seem to have any of the usual open-proxy ports open. Anyway, imho open proxies should be dealt individually. If you have a better reason that "there are a few open proxies among the 65000 IP, so I blocked them all", please explain it. 81.249.4.91 (talk) 10:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a hosting company, not an usual ISP and we routinely block these. I have no problem granting IPBE on legitimate users and bots there. -- lucasbfr talk 12:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

RE:You made easter bunny cry!

Hah! I have no idea how you go around looking for lol catz all the time :P

Don't worry - the Easter Bunny has got over it - let's hope I still get an easter egg from him! :P

The Helpful One 12:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Bilge Pump (band)

Hi.. Could you please userfy the deleted page for Bilge Pump (band). Thanks. Circuit (talk) 16:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 17:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Question about your bot

Does your bot look for images on en.wiki tagged with {{NowCommons|File:Some other name.jpg}}? Is that how it finds images to replace in articles? Thanks, – Quadell (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes exactly. It builds a gallery that I manually check before starting it :). -- lucasbfr talk 19:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
What a great bot! Thanks for the details. – Quadell (talk) 19:37, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
No problem, I'm glad it helps a bit :) -- lucasbfr talk 19:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

Special:Contributions/76.252.201.97 is doing the same edits as User talk:Buffaloke, so if you could take a look at that too. Thank you, CTJF83Talk 20:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Do you think a page protection of Family Gay for a bit is warranted? CTJF83Talk 20:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
No, but I blocked SugarSnake (talk · contribs) that is  Confirmed to be the same user for 2 weeks :) -- lucasbfr talk 20:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok, that's good, thank you! CTJF83Talk 20:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Replied on this user's talk page - 15:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Lucasbfr/Sandbox/Virgin Killer

In order to prevent your sandbox from violating Wikipedia's fair use policy, I have placed a colon before the title of each of the two images on this page in order to prevent them from displaying as fair use images are not allowed to be used outside of the main article space. Please let me know if you have any questions. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I have deleted the sandbox altogether (it was used to test an abuse filter). -- lucasbfr talk 06:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Commons Moves

Thanks...

The reason for the apparent duplication, was to do with another contributor pointing out that sometimes the history wasn't transferring over.

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Palin article..

was there a phantom edit? I cancelled my revert a couple of mins ago, and saw you reverting yourself.

anyway, Im gonna take it to the talk page, rather than revert

カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 15:51, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

JamesBurns

The CU log indicates we are following the same leads. I've posted my findings, please chime in with confirmations or corrections! -- Avi (talk) 22:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done You found 2 I missed! -- lucasbfr talk 22:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Watch and learn, young grasshopper -- Avi (talk) 23:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

DynaTAC8000X.jpg

Can you restore previous license from Wikipedia please???--Kozuch (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done you seemed to have forgotten CC-BY-SA when moving it. -- lucasbfr talk 20:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: SPI I recently filed

I do hope the 'you' is referring to other admins, as I am not one. However, would you be against extending the sock master's block based on the block evasion, and blocking this sock for a year or something?— Dædαlus Contribs 07:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

In fact, you was referring to MBisanz who pinged me on IRC :). I let him do the deeds. -- lucasbfr talk 09:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Jerome Trammel

While i will not object to replacing the speedy with a prod template on your side, i find the reason "Not a valid speedy. He is most famous for" a little odd for a reason. The article itself was deleted as an A7 with the same content minutes ago before it was recreated. Also, the reference for "Most Famous" is for a weebly site, which is blacklisted on wikipedia's spam blacklist. Besides, how many people put something such as "He is most famous for invention the moon" or something silly? :) Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 12:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Likewise, i see you stated on the WP:AIV that the edits are not vandalism - Yet according to WP:CSD and the standard overview of blocking templates removing speedy templates repeatedly is. Could you please elaborate this? Did i miss a change in this policy in my two month's of away time? Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 12:26, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
A7 only demands an assertion of notability, which means that if you write that I am the king of Uganda, the page shouldn't be deleted as A7 (however I wouldn't hesitate to delete it as G3 - vandalism). The user was evidently confused and lost, I didn't think that deleting it on the spot again and blocking him was the best thing to do. Discussing with an user can lead to less frustration on both sides, and a less dissatisfied "customer" :). -- lucasbfr talk 12:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Agreed - But most times clearly non notable claims also fall under A7. I always report people telling me they created a band or facebook group as an A7 because they are not notable, even if they say they are. Since that website was a blacklist, i just threw it under A7 and thought i was done with that article.
How wrong i was. 2 recreation's, a dozen of speedy tag removals and like the cherry on the cake a socketpuppetry case for the creator and 4 or so wikipedian's juggling AFD, CSD and PROD templates with none agreeing what the best way is to say it should be removed. If that was a good faith editor this circus most likely got him crazy. O well, at least i cannot say my newpage patrol was a boring one =). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 12:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Good faith editors usually don't start sockpuppet accounts to save COI articles about themselves... But I agree, there have been more elegant deletion processes. Yintaɳ  12:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Technically, there was no sock at first. I blocked him on the spot, too obvious :) -- lucasbfr talk 12:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Follow ups
Also, i tagged two second puppet case for G6 - we already had a case on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/206.23.81.18. And i agree on the more elegant handling, this is quite the circus for something so simple. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 13:01, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

User:General Tojo

I reported a few accounts at WP:SPI but it was declined as the accounts were already blocked, a few more accounts have been created since then recently blocked accounts include User:Yak breederz, User:Z Karz, User:Ay Bee Sea, User:General Hideki Tojo, User:Eee Zee 99, User:Fred Riley 1972 and User:Gargan Tchewan. —Snigbrook 16:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Two more accounts: User:C U Soon 56 (blocked) and User:Dee Lite II (currently unblocked, although I've reported to WP:AIV) appear to be the same vandal. —Snigbrook 17:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 Confirmed and blocked. -- lucasbfr talk 17:43, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Coco Chanel

Oh it's OK, don't worry about it. It just threw me for a minute or so, but all sorted now. Mabalu (talk) 21:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

87... IP range

Hi, could anything be done about it? There's constant vandalism and sock puppetry from that IP range. Sometimes the accounts get quickly blocked when I report (as you happened to do), sometimes I get sort of reprimanded for not 'proving' enough (though a quick look into contributions list concerned would reveal it was recently obvious sock puppetry again). What this user has been doing for months (since September 2008!) is introducing deliberate errors: sometimes [1] they can be qualified as extreme POV/OR, sometimes patent nonsense [2], [3]. The person behind that IP range is unwilling to discuss or substantiate his changes in any meaningful sense, instead, he is as persistent as an idiot: [4], [5]. Having to revert his nonsensical changes in those infoboxes is like pain in the ass. --Miacek (t) 19:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The range is 87.61.160.0/19, which appears to be broken down as several /22 (87.61.172.0/22, 87.61.176.0/22, ...) but there'd be some collateral so don't block if they're not a major pain. -- lucasbfr talk 09:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:AN

There are new message for you at this noticeboard here.— Dædαlus Contribs 22:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I replied on the /16 vs /24 issue. Did I miss anything else? -- lucasbfr talk 09:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

157

When fighting an IP vandal targeting articles, it is nice for the rest of us if you include those conditions in the filter so it can keep the runtime down. Wikipedia:Abuse filter/Performance provides comparative statistics on normal performance. This report shows data from just before you disabled 157. Dragons flight (talk) 12:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

PS. Adding 200 ms isn't the end of the world (and I would have fixed the filter if it were still running), but it is still a good idea to try to have good habits in filter writing so we don't create unnecessary load. Dragons flight (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 13:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Dirsmith1

Hi Lucasbfr, since you were the unblocking admin in the case of this user, would you please take a look at his talk page, user page, and contributions, and re-evaluate the situation? Note that he created the user page with the spam material after he got a level 4 warning about adding it to articles. Thanks, LadyofShalott 21:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Luk/Archives/2009/04&oldid=1141847762"