Jump to content

User talk:Luk/Archives/2009/05

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

This Archive Page goes from 1/5/2009 to 31/5/2009 (dd/mm/yyyy)

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

Deleting images available on Commons

Hi, Luk. I notice you recently deleted the local copy of File:SWS.jpg, because it was also available on the Commons. However, at the time you deleted it, the entirety of the description on Commons was "permition granted by the creator, in the English Wikipedia". There was no description of what the image is, no licensing tag, and no reference to User:MrSandman, who created the image. I've added that information, so everything's fine now, but this is something you might want to watch out for in the future. (See also the various notes under WP:CSD#F8.) —Bkell (talk) 15:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jcmenal

Hello Luk. This is a reply to your request at User talk:EdJohnston.

This is a guy I am assuming to be Corticopia: User-216-234-60-106 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a registered user who has chosen a name that sounds like an IP, filing the new SPI case of April 20 against Jcmenal.

The guy who we think is Jcmenal, editing as 201.143.220.153, per this edit, filed a 3RR case with a 'forged' signature of another IP: 216.234.60.106, (i.e. impersonating Corticopia's IP) alleging a 3RR violation by 69.158.150.169.

Here is what the April 20 SPI case against Jcmenal looked like just before it was archived.

It is conceivable that 69.158.150.169 is a third edit warrior, separate from Jcmenal and Corticopia. I haven't stepped through the article histories to sort out the respective POVs. (Slow-moving edit wars on these articles have continued for more than a year). The 69.158 IP has discussed 3RR matters with William Connolly on the latter's Talk page.

I don't know how much attention from checkuser would be deserved by Corticopia's activities. The forged 3RR report appears to be from Jcmenal, not Corticopia. The most we have against Corticopia is avoiding scrutiny. He has a registered account which he chooses not to use. He edits articles using IPs, and files noticeboard cases with throwaway accounts. EdJohnston (talk) 16:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


Hello. I can assure you Corticopia is in fact the guy who discussed with William M. Connolley, because he got blocked for 3RR breach. Corticopia has used several accounts in the past, some of them discovered by me, mostly because he always mantain the same edit pattern (Canada related articles, Asia, North America, Africa, Europe, Mexico, Central America, Dominion of Canada, Star Trek, Issac Asimov, etc.). In the last year and a half, he has been engaged in edit wars with people in Mexico related articles as he always wants to push his POV (mostly that Mexico is not part of North America but of Central America). He's hightly uncivil, uses profanity and personal attacks. It is very easy to detect his accounts, both anonymous and registered, because when he's gone he always return to install the same POV. The Mexico related articles are always stable when he's away.
Also, when he edits anonymously the IP always are from Toronto, Canada. I have gathered all the information about Corticopia and his past accounts in my talk page (since months ago), waiting for an admin to put attention in this complex case. Corticopia always abandon his accounts when they get too blocked, because that way he can't start edit wars without being blocked. Lately he has been using anon. only because he never gets blocked and that way he avoids scrutinity from the community. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 04:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
If you ever suspect him to engage in edit warrings using multiple accounts, don't hesitate to fill a SPI. I couldn't find any blatant SOCK violation, so I won't reveal more. -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 20:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

You know who

It appears "you know who" is getting through the range block you imposed. You had blocked 90.206.224.0/19 range but he used Special:Contributions/90.206.205.226 which is outside that range you blocked. I'm not sure if the range block should be changed to reflect that IP he used? He also used Special:Contributions/94.3.167.205 as well. Momo san Gespräch 20:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The range is big. I think rangeblocking the whole ISP is not such a good idea so he'll always manage to get through rangeblocks. -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 20:42, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

thankyou

thankyou, atleast someone here is friendly and actualy tells me what to do —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.126.165 (talk) 07:29, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edit.exe (talk • contribs) 17:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Qweqwewert

Not having checkuser, I can't confirm the IP. In any event, he's a disruptive editor so I don't think any harm is done by not letting him edit. Daniel Case (talk) 13:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You win and I should type more slowly ;) -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 13:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Block

Did you mean to block User talk:Tonthetomman?, I can't see anything worth blocking for, even for 3 hours. --Jac16888Talk 19:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Nope, that was intentional (he was warned each time he tried to edit). -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 20:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Ah, my bad. Didn't think of that--Jac16888Talk 21:25, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
To be honest, I should have added it to the block reason, I have tweaked it now :) -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 21:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
For future reference, never hesitate to unblock someone I block for 3 hours. The aim is to make them stop and think. Otherwise I indef :) -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 21:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Sure thing, will remember that if something comes up again, although I imagine I'll still talk to you first--Jac16888Talk 21:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Check user case

Hi Luk, just following up on a CU case. I wanted to make sure about there wasn't anymore we could do about implementing a range block (if it's not possible, I understand of course). Anyway, I first brought this up on Nathan's page, here, in case you would like to comment. R. Baley (talk) 22:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's not feasible. I suggest we block his behavior using the abuse filter. -- Luk talk (lucasbfr) 06:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for looking into it. R. Baley (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

User talk:82.71.229.37

Just alerting you of this unblock request (it's obvious enough who it is, from old checkuser log comments). Behaviorally, looks to me like it's probably the same person as before. Also posting this to functionaries-en, just fyi. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok.

Ok, I get it now. Thanks for the tip. --Abce2|Howdy! 21:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

File:PhilosciaMuscorum.jpg

Hi. I just uploaded the image at a time when there was no commons. The EN-Wiki image source gives the danish wiki as the source. We can delete the image on EN since it is now on the commons -- Chris 73 | Talk 19:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

My IP stalker

Please leave a note on my talk page once you have, thanks.— Dædαlus Contribs 05:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Please note, I also posted this message on several other involved admins' page, so that it can be dealt with swiftly.— Dædαlus Contribs 06:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 14:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Why did you change the block settings on User:207.237.230.18 to something less than a year? Is it because you blocked the range?— Dædαlus Contribs 18:49, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Because blocking a random IP on a dynamic range makes no sense, since they can flush their IP at will. -- Luk talk 19:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your AIV report on 86.7.11.140

I'd dare say 11th and 12th of May is recent activity... His vandalism occured on the 11th of May... I fail to see how that is not 'recent'. - Mike Beckham (talk) 11:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't have time to go back and forth but within 24 hours of vandalism is perfectly reasonable as that person continues to edit after that vandalism. I would prefer it if you consulted another Admin, as this is the first time anyone has ever made this sort of comment since I began editing in 2005. If you don't block someone after the last warn, whats the point of warning or blocking somebody in the first place, it isn't days since the edit or his last edit, it still is within 12 hours. - Mike Beckham (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Replied on this user's talk page - 12:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

I answered your question [1]. It is getting pretty ugly there and I am not sure how long I can deal with the disruptive editing, can we close it already with the result? Please. :\ I don't even care about the outcome anymore. -Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 07:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:TV5 Monde.png)

Thanks for uploading File:TV5 Monde.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Blocking 195.194.238.110

Please shorten the alloted time for the block on 195.194.238.110 to expire as the individual in question has now left the organisation. We wish to appeal against the decsion made to by yourself to block the IP adress until 25 May 2010. Please consider our appeal. Thank you, we await your decision Sithlord642 (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 16:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Request for deleted page/article

I would like to view the deleted page "Steve Farris". He is an excellent musician and I find him to be notable, but a user (Skier Dude) did not. Any help will be appreciated.Alscalini (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 12:02, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Shameless thankspam

Hello Luk! Thank you so much for your support in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. FlyingToaster

Congratulations and good luck :) -- Luk talk 11:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
formatting removed, it messes up with MW somehow
Yeah, figured out too late I was missing a </div>. Utter fail.  :) FlyingToaster 11:57, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:08, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Military aviary2.jpg

Do you have any evidence that this file is public domain in France? I haven't found any, which is why it was uploaded locally to en:wiki under pre-1923 US PD license. Please explain. DurovaCharge! 16:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

The license doesn't claim otherwise. Am I missing something? I encountered the image because it was tagged as a duplicate. -- Luk talk 16:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I saw it now. I reuploaded it locally, you can delete it on Commons. I think this is a complete heresy to have files considered PD here and not on Commons, though... I'll keep that in mind if I want to break French copyright laws. -- Luk talk 16:46, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

In re AdirondackMan

I am appearing on behalf of User:AdirondackMan to say PurpleRoses is not one of his accounts. Even I don't know who it is. And I am appealing the block of AdirondackMan and his other accounts on his behalf as he has taken ill and cannot do it at this time. He wishes with your agreement to unblock the AdirondackMan account and start fresh or create a fresh account and leave the old ones behind to start again free. If you agree, let me know and would you tell User:Scientizzle not to interfere with it? Thank you. Goodnight sir. 68.236.155.108 (talk) 04:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Let's see. No? I don't think anyone in the community is missing him, and I'm pretty sure we'll do just fine without his "help". In fact, tell him to get lost, Ok? ;) -- Luk talk 17:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

AIV

Thanks for the personal message, I may have reacted.. badly to that. I need some sleep, goodnight.. Well, I mean, how can someone miss that that is a page for discussing Wikipedia Image Syntax? How do you arrive at that page and not know you're there?— Dædαlus Contribs 07:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

No worries, we all have our bad days :) (I admit I was puzzled by the report though, since I know you patrol quite often). -- Luk talk 07:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

o rly deletion..

Any thots?(Estoniankaiju (talk) 16:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC))

Err, what?! -- Luk talk 22:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

ThankSpam

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.
I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:05, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

~~~~~

Well, back to the office it is...

Rec for deletion

Thanks for your notice and for your suggestion. However: I used the link suggested on the Commons page for those who wished to translate the text. I gave the translations and the picture appeared on the English WP with the text misplaced. So I also downloaded it manually, changed it with Paint and uploaded it as a png file according to instructions which then arrived again on the English language Wiki. Once I found where the picture was I tried to use Commonshelper, but it could not transfer it to the Commons, so I had to ask a colleague to do the job. Now it is where is should be, and I hope that from there it will not be deleted. I am still puzzled why the program misdirected me this time, but not on any previous occasions. Any ideas? LouisBB (talk) 04:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 06:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Block on User:Nick Rizza

I noticed that you indefinitely blocked User:Nick Rizza for "abuse of editing privileges" after only five total contribs (2 deleted, 3 not). Since he's a newly-registered user who didn't receive any warnings, and since there's no prior pattern of redirect vandalism on that page from any other registered or unregistered user, I think that an indefinite block might be a bit too BITE-y. If you don't have any objection, I'm going to reduce the length of the block to 48 hours - enough to let him cool off and learn what's acceptable, but quite a bit less than forever. - Jredmond (talk) 22:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Replied on this user's talk page - 06:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding User:Lucasbfr/CommonsImages_(Ok)

Hi Luk, On that page at commons you have a bunch of files that I have transfered and renamed, is there some problem with these transfers/renames? (Off2riorob (talk) 23:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC))

Replied on this user's talk page - 08:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Luk/Archives/2009/05&oldid=1083959447"