Jump to content

User talk:Spellcast/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Yes, I understand, Jamalar is reverted quite quickly, mostly due to the fact that I have watchlisted all related articles lol. Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Glassedphase will interest you however. I would like to say thanks one again for putting up with my constant posts, your help has been appreciated, it's a shame you aren't around more :-) — Realist2 22:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, at some point I think Jamalar will get tired of being reverted as a sock and will try to get the Jamalar account unblocked again. Thus I am regularly updating this list to ensure that admins know that Jamalar is still messing around regularly. — Realist2 20:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I will do. Cheers. If we have quiet for a few weeks then we know the block was successful. — Realist2 12:23, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, User:Jamalar tried and is still trying to get unblocked, despite sock puppeting 15 minutes before trying to get the Jamalar account unblocked. Clearly we got the last of her accounts and she can't use IP's since you blocked them. I have made edits to Jamalar's talk page, trying to inform Admins of the level of Jamalars deception but she reverts my comments. I have a feeling she might get a lighter sentence by hiding what I know. She says that she has learnt her mistake, however she was socking 15 minutes prior. Its more a case of she's tired of her socks being reverted and has run out of accounts and her IP is blocked. She also claims that not all the socks were her (absurd, the edit pattern is identical). All the messages I left on her talk page are available in the history. I also have her talk page watchlisted so I'll notice anything you add. — Realist2 12:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Jamalar is still editing. Could you introduce that range block again, it worked for the two weeks it was active?. Yours — Realist2 13:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Let's try a different approach. Perhaps he/she will concede if it was sourced. R&B isn't currently sourced, so it can be removed if challenged. Is there a source to support that? Spellcast (talk) 22:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Solving issue

Hey, me and Gimmetrow (talk) are arguing over which style of discographies should be used. Could you please tell me where I should take the discussion, as neither of us agrees with the other? Thanks! Daniil Maslyuk (talk) 13:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

"Filthy Ice Cream..." etc.

Hi Spellcast - didn't mean to undercut your decline of unblocking that account, but by the time I went to post to the user's talk page I'd already clicked the "unblock" button. It took me a moment to puzzle it out but I assume that what he/she means. Cheers, MCB (talk) 05:35, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Song samples

Hey, I just noticed that you have one of those talkpages where you reply on others' pages... a failing that I also used to possess. :P Anyway, you've got a reply on mine. east718 // talk // email // 16:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Spellcast

A fellow Australian, i have seen numerous times in administrators block reasons through the edit summary that they use the hidden message <!-- -->, what is the point of this when its going to show up anyway just like you did here. Is it just a habit that people have gotten used to? I was always curious in this regard. On a different note altogether i want to say thanks for all your hard work on the wikipedia. I have seen you have made a habit of picking up proxies and blocking them, that must take a lot of skill i assume. I dont know much about computers myself but im sure not any old admin can do it. Are you a specialist in this regard? I assume you must/must have studied this in real life. Best, from one Australian to another editing from the Harbour City :) 211.30.111.105 (talk) 10:01, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi...

My schools IP address (170.185.76.19) has been blocked for quite sometime now and I was wondering when is that set to expire since the kids who did that are no longer here anymore. I created an account last year thats the only reason I can still get on. I go to the Alternative Learning Center, sir. Thank you and Happy Editing.

HairyPerry 15:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thats fine. Sorry there was so much vandalism. So is it blocked indefinetly, a year, or what?

HairyPerry 12:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: why not simply use your normal ISP?

[...] Out of curiosity, why not simply use your normal ISP? You were able to edit last year and early this year while the block was in effect. Spellcast (talk) 23:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I recently underwent a transition from a rural to a urban setting. Here, I use a lot of Wi-Fi hotspots, as well as a university network. Neither is secure, being that my ISP is generally my university, and often a random coffee shop. Michael R. Rose (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Question about revisions deletion

You deleted revisions of MV Faina ([1]) and Talk:MV Faina ([2]). Your comment was "G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup". This puzzled me enough that I'd like to ask you what the actual reason was for these deletions. __meco (talk) 10:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

In the edit summary, he gave his article on Encyclopedia Dramatica. I didn't want to give him the privilege of having an eternal "advertising spot". Spellcast (talk) 04:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Commendable, I suppose, however, you should have chosen a more suitable description of this reason. G6 isn't really it ("Technical deletions. Non-controversial maintenance, such as temporarily deleting a page to merge page histories, deleting dated maintenance categories, or performing uncontroversial page moves.") __meco (talk) 07:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I have to thank you for the unblock, It was indeed a misuderstanding and I thank you for understanding that point unlike who blocked me. Once again for the third time, Thank you, Your friend User:JazMc.

Smile!

RoryReloaded (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Come join R.E.V.E.R.T

Come join my new organization of anti-vandals - Rancid Editing Vandals Eating the Reverter's Talc. Where we patrol the recent changes in all directions and revert any bad things.

So come, Come, COME! RoryReloaded (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

'Right, I'm fine with that. RoryReloaded is in the process of R.E.V.E.R.T (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Twilight

Twilight ROCKS!!! TWILIGHT IS AMAZING!!! If you haven't read it yet, head over to your nearest bookstore and buy the Twilight Saga today! Available internationally, by Stephenie Meyer.

Stephenie Meyer and associates, Seth, and Emily. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.137.211.133 (talk) 22:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Trying to understand what happened to one of your blocks

You blocked 4.154.0.0/21 on August 25 as a result of this discussion. Today, I noticed Readyseason (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who smells somewhat like a Soccermeko sock (Hello Control is helping me evaluate his edits).

I thought the block should still be in place, so I went looking. When I use the rangeblock finder, it seems that this range is no longer blocked (see, for example [3] and [4]). Yet, the block log seems to show that your block is still active. Is this some kind of cockpit error on my part, or has this block become inactive for some reason?—Kww(talk) 01:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Flickerwashing on Angel Locsin's page by Gerald, again...

Can you like, check that page out? It seems as though our old friend is doing his tricks again... Blake Gripling (talk) 07:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for unblocking me. I was a little bit confused with the IP block, since I was signed in, but now I understand. Thanks again for the unblock. Inks.LWC (talk) 21:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Monavie

Noticed you blocked the page. An anon IP/SPA has been vandalizing the page today and a warning was left on their user page.[5] Could you please revert to the previous unvandalized version before blocking again. Thank you.Rhode Island Red (talk) 20:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Rhode Island Red (talk) 20:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for answering. I'm trying to follow the letter of the law as well as the spirit of the law. In regard to my request to block IP 62.30.96.113, two aspects of this?
1) Point 10 in WP:LINKSTOAVOID specifically says MySpace is to be avoided. I think you're saying: well, there aren't any other links claiming to be "official", so that will have to do? (If that's the case, then XLinkBot has a problem, because it automatically deleted that link.)
2) The IP is ignoring a variety of rules, and I was really hoping to stop their behavior with this, which I thought was indisputable. However they have also a) added a link to a photo scheduled for deletion for copyright violation [6], b) Removed a notability tag without explanation [7], and c) added a political appeal [[8]].
It seems to me they aren't paying any heed to the rules, and refusing to explain their actions. Piano non troppo (talk) 23:08, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Technical question

Does the block that you placed on 75.125.163.128/27 address all IPs in the 75.125.163.xxx and 75.125.166.xxx ranges? If the following IPs are now blocked, I will delete them from my watchlist:

  1. User:75.125.163.139
  2. User:75.125.163.146
  3. User:75.125.163.149
  4. User:75.125.166.28
  5. User:75.125.166.3
  6. User:75.125.166.6

--Orlady (talk) 01:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, and especially for the block. I'm glad to remove some debris from my watchlist. That sockpuppeteer uses several anonymizers, AFAICT. --Orlady (talk) 05:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

{{anonblock}} template

These IPs are have a {{anonblock}} template in the block summary but appear to be hard blocked:

They are tagged as sockpuppets of User:Gerald Gonzalez. I assume the template is for use in the {{unblock}} template; if it is, then you may want to change the block summary as it suggests logged in users can still edit. Also, Mashedpotatowithsomegravy (talk · contribs) cannot edit as a result 121.54.108.42 being blocked, I don't know if it is likely to be the same user; if not then it may be a shared IP. —Snigbrook 14:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Responded at User talk:Mashedpotatowithsomegravy. Thanks, Spellcast (talk) 21:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Block of vandal

Shouldn't this user user:70.190.151.209 be blocked as well since he also used the same vandalism tag a few hours after he was blocked (which is related to User:24.251.209.129 who you have blocked). Jay Pegg (talk) 13:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

That IP hasn't edited in a few days. If you see it resuming, drop me a note. Spellcast (talk) 13:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
He has done it again and isn't editing whilst banned an offense, just check it out here. Jay Pegg (talk) 09:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Blocked for a month. Spellcast (talk) 09:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm back because he has shown no sign of giving up, check out some of his recent vandalism on user:67.165.69.84, most recently on user:32.171.228.63. Because of his history, I would like to request to have him reported to Wikipedia:Abuse reports since he have a long history of vandalizing since August and is showing no signs of giving up, trouble is how do I file a complaint and what do you think of it. Jay Pegg (talk) 17:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I've blocked the first IP as he's used it for the last month. He's a pest, but I don't think an abuse report is needed yet. Just drop me a note if you see more. Spellcast (talk) 08:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Controversy Section

Hi, I thought you might be interested in the issue of controversy section to all Filipino actors' and actresses' articles. The said discussion is to have coherence on all the said articles whether they should have a controversy section or the information be merged into other sections of the articles to achieve a more neutral presentation. If you are interested kindly visit User talk:Shoowak. Thanks! Axxand (talk) 05:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Replied there. Spellcast (talk) 07:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

72.14.204.136

Good day, Spellcast. Do you believe the ip can be a possible Google Web Accelerator? --Kanonkas :  Talk  15:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Given the related IPs in Category:Google Web Accelerator proxies and being listed on a spam database, I wouldn't be surprised if it was. Spellcast (talk) 16:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Yep I was right, it's now blocked. Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  11:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Was it simply luck that GWA assigned you that IP or did you try something else? When trying to find GWA proxies, it gives me the same IP for long periods. Spellcast (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I guess a little bit of luck :) When I tried today, I got 216.239.50.136 (talk · contribs). --Kanonkas :  Talk  18:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

24.16.116.14

Just making sure you didn't forget: you blocked 24.16.116.14 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for two weeks, but didn't leave a block notice.—Kww(talk) 10:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I usually don't leave block notices as there's the MediaWiki:Blockedtext. Spellcast (talk) 11:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

202.156.14.74

Blocking this IP (202.156.14.74) is the same as blocking this IP address:218.186.8.10. It is a shared proxy used by a Singapore ISP. If you need to block this IP consider an anonymous block. A total block prevents a lot of legitimate and registered users from editing any page. Blindwaves (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC).

How were you aware of the block? Were you blocked under that IP at some point today? Spellcast (talk) 17:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I was trying to edit a page using the normal wikipedia login and have this warning message shown:
Editing from 202.156.14.74 (your account, IP address, or IP address range) has been disabled by Spellcast for the
following reason(s):

This IP address has been blocked because it is believed to be an open proxy or zombie computer. To prevent abuse,
these proxies may be blocked from editing Wikipedia .....

: likely open proxy / open port 80 / see also cospbbb.org/blog/archive/2008/09/29/202.156.14.74-singapore-spam
harvester-amp-comment-spammer.aspx

Regarding the spam-harvester link in the comment, all Singaporean users have to go through a government-mandated proxy. So I'm not surprise that the IP address will be listed as a spam-harvester.

To bypass the restriction, I had to log in to wikimedia's secured login, then retrace my steps as wikimedia does not redirect me back to the page I was, just to be able to edit any page. So I was just wondering if you are able to change the block to an anonymous block instead of a total block. Blindwaves (talk) 17:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Since there's a lot of non-disruptive edits on this highly shared IP, I've unblocked it. Potential abuse is easily dealt with anyway. Hopefully those spammers won't edit on this address. Spellcast (talk) 17:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. Though looking at the history for some of the Singapore's proxy IPs, most of them have have tons of spammers. And most of the IPs do have anonymous-block. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blindwaves (talk • contribs) 18:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

92.62.160.3

Regarding this blocked IP: it belongs to Cyberia, one of the major ISPs in lebanon. Like all other ISPs in the country, Cyberia uses proxies to connect all of its users to the internet and this is one of them. Blocking this IP also blocks legitimate users such as myself from editing wikipedia requiring us to login to the secured server. I already added a SharedIP template and a notice on the talk page of that IP. Please reconsider the block against it, thank you. E.R.UT (talk) 10:02, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Unblocked. I didn't give the port number in the block log, so it probably meant I thought it was a likely open proxy at the time. Spellcast (talk) 10:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, appreciate it. E.R.UT (talk) 10:24, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank You.

I won't be doing any more stupid redirects. btw, I was checking your user page history (sorry, I know I am a stalker haha), it was a really good one why did you redirect it? I understand it was a target for vandals, but you could have protected it. Cheers Iamcoolerthanyouyepthatsright (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I'll probably make a userpage again, but for the meantime, I'll let my contribs do the talking. Cheers, Spellcast (talk) 15:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Open Proxy Found

Hello Spellcast. Ah, I was thinking about this. May be my test edit from that proxy should have been deffered to someone like yourself instead, because the automatic reports don't really do anything. Should it just be blocked and that's it? ~ Troy (talk) 05:31, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Blocked. I actually watch WP:OP, but don't usually tag blocked IPs. The page should be reformatted in the future. Spellcast (talk) 05:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah it should. Thanks! ~ Troy (talk) 22:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

Check your inbox. Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  18:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Fusionopolis tenants revert

Any reason you reverted the change I made to add our company to the list of tenants at Fusionopolis (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fusionopolis&diff=245652451&oldid=245650832) ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.75.7.184 (talk) 02:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

On second thought, the link may be legit. The IP was listed at WP:OPD and it's generally not a good sign for those IPs to be adding external links. Spellcast (talk) 08:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

…for keeping an eye on my userpage! DMacks (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Without the WP:OPD page, I never would've seen that edit. Spellcast (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Intar G

Hmmm...I wondered when this user was going to come back. Thanks for blocking them. :) Acalamari 15:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Looks like you have a fan. Spellcast (talk) 15:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Schoolblock

Ah, thank you. Missed a step there ;-) Tan | 39 15:55, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

No probs. Spellcast (talk) 15:59, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Article deletion

Hey, could you please delete The Art Of Dying (album)? It's a copy of Loose Cannon (album). Thanks. Daniil Maslyuk (talk) 15:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure. Spellcast (talk) 15:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I am able to edit now

Yeah, I just logged in and I am able to edit now. I don't know the IP I used yesterday, they are assigned so randomly. Anyway, I've mailed the admin who blocked. Can I start editing now or would it be wiser to wait for a reply and clarification from the admin before starting to edit. I also wish to apply for an IP-block-exempt. This is the second time that I had been blocked for the same reason. I don't know if I had been hard-blocked the first time around (that was in March 2007) but the blocking admin unblocked me on receiving my mail and I started after I was unblocked.-RavichandarMy coffee shop 02:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

It's good you got around the block, but IP block exemption should only be granted if there's no other way to edit through a block. Spellcast (talk) 05:41, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you take a look at these?

OK, so I'm into de-POVing an article of actress Sarah Geronimo, and found out that the images used in the article were copyvio, lacking a fair-use rationale, and are tagged for speedy deletion:

Image:Sarah concerts.jpg
Image:Sarah theotherside.jpg
Image:Sarah sweetsixteen.jpg
Image:Sarah popstar.jpg
Image:SarahGeronimo BituingWalangNingning.jpg
Image:Sarah inmotion.jpg
Image:Sarah disco.jpg
Image:Sarah nextone.jpg
Image:Sarah dvd.jpg
Image:Sarah movies.jpg
Image:Sarah awards.jpg

Judging from the overly peacock tone of the article, it looks like we have another fanboy to deal with. The name's Geniusdream - I'm not sure if he as anything to do with Gerald Gonzalez, but I think we need to warn him about his actions, since he's turning the article into a dump of unnecessary cruft. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Those pics will be deleted in time and he bears a striking resemblance to him. I've blocked for 48 hours. The next will be indef. Spellcast (talk) 05:41, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I suspect that the user Korokorobubu‎, and the IP 68.224.16.23‎ are Geniusdream socks. Also, it seems as though Gerald's back with another account and 4TV Ph, based on his habit of marking edits as minor when they aren't. Blake Gripling (talk) 05:53, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
The last two are definitely him, so they're blocked. I'm not currently sure about Korokorobubu‎ and the IP, which leads to the US instead of Manila. Spellcast (talk) 06:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Geniusdream

Take a look at Sarah Geronimo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Looks to me like Geniusdream is practicing a bit of block evasion with 68.224.16.23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).—Kww(talk) 01:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am reviewing your article Paid in Full (album) for GA and have added some comments on Talk:Paid in Full (album)/GA1. Please feel free to make comments or ask questions. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 22:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

from Geniusdream

The issue about the copied text from a website, I already revised it. And regarding the introduction, it is a summary of what will be presented on the succeeding contents and since the contents are too long, its summary would probably be long too, read it, the introduction is very generalized and not detailed and it only emphasizes on the profound details of the page. --Geniusdream (talk) 07:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but the reason why I removed it is because it is redundant is because of the fact that the text in the lead section has much the same content as the rest of the article. Spellcast already told you not to add all your info in the intro. Blake Gripling (talk) 08:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks Spellcast, for the good work. Cheers, JNW (talk) 05:37, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Spellcast (talk) 05:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/199.104.191.24

I'm not going to wheelwar, but can you reconsider the above block. I was in the middle of posting a comment to WP:AIV to the effect that their last edit was at 18.24 or so, and the final warning was at 19.00...so there was nothing past final warning. GbT/c 19:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Final warnings aren't necessary for long-term vandalism - especially when there's no useful edits ever - otherwise we'd be playing whack-a-mole for months. Spellcast (talk) 19:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Fine. GbT/c 19:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Request for undelete

Spellcast, according to policy, I ask you to restore the article on Quentin Fiore, that you deleted on January 22, 2008. Not only was he a notable graphic designer in his time, but also co-author, with major media theorist Marshall McLuhan, of an influent book of the 1960s. He certainly meets WP:N. The PROD was evidently misguided. Thanks, RodC (talk) 23:08, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Ask and ye shall receive. Spellcast (talk) 23:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Block for 192.139.27.18

I see that the CBE has been blocked. Just how severe is the vandalism? Ginbot86 (talk) 17:42, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, the IP has been blocked about 30 times and it's hardpressing to find constructive anonymous edits, but the block won't affect you since you have an account. Spellcast (talk) 17:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Ginbot86 (talk) 22:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

ϢereSpielChequers is offering you a Wiki Beer! Liquid refreshment promotes WikiHarmony and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the harmony by offering a beer to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Best served refrigerated (not applicable in UK). Temperature and Alcoholic strength varies according to age, religion and geographic location of recipient, US residents below the age of 21 are best advised to keep this beerstar until travelling in a country with less ageist drinking laws. NB This Beerstar is compatible with all known fake IDs

Thanks for wiping that vandalism off my user page, ϢereSpielChequers 17:50, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help out. It has unanimous support on ANI.[9] Spellcast (talk) 17:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Much belated reply

[10] east718 // talk // email // 06:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Blocking

[11] - Six months may be a bit long for a 1st block. I know the IP has a history and I have no intention of reducing the block myself. Just a comment. --GraemeL (talk) 18:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I base my block durations on how frequently the IP vandalises and the likelihood of the next edits being vandalism. I usually wait for final warnings unless there's long-term vandalism. In this case, there's been no useful edits for over two years, so I thought a long-term block was appropriate. I wouldn't be surprised if that IP was a school. Spellcast (talk) 18:27, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. You seem to have it well thought out. --GraemeL (talk) 18:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
First off, thanks for the block here. Second, can I ask you who the mouse is? Cheers. TREKphiler hit me ♠ 15:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
'Twas nothing. And the mouse is none another than Transi, of course. Spellcast (talk) 15:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

User talk:203.177.108.132

Just a courtesy notice, a user on this IP you previously blocked is currently requesting unblocking. Any comment or insight would be appreciated. In particular, do you feel this block is still necessary, so long after the fact? – Luna Santin (talk) 07:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Since the user has created lots of accounts since then, the block doesn't seem to be serving much preventative purpose anymore. So unblocked. Spellcast (talk) 10:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for having a look. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 23:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

208.64.229.237 and 64.18.142.130

So that's what those were... how do you tell? --Rschen7754 (T C) 20:09, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I watch WP:OPD. Not all IPs listed there are open proxies, but those ones were. Spellcast (talk) 20:15, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN

Hey Spellcast. :) Could you perhaps have a quick look at this? :) Best wishes, —αἰτίας •discussion• 03:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

To answer your question of how to check them, you can change your web browser settings. For Firefox, go to tools > options > advanced > network > settings > enter "125.46.23.82" next to "HTTP Proxy" and "3128" next to "Port" and save. You should be able to load a web page. But with that spammer, I block on sight without checking first. A Google search of those spamming IPs will likely show them on proxy sites. Spellcast (talk) 04:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation, Spellcast. :) Best wishes, —αἰτίας •discussion• 13:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

thank you

for the long blocks on the vandals I reported. I had a question. An admin turned down my rfr last week. What would I have to do to get rollback? A lot of my edits are fighting vandalism. AlioTheFool (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You only have a little over 100 edits, so I don't think it can be granted just yet. But with more anti-vandal work, you should be able to make a successful request at WP:RFR. Spellcast (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Proxy block

Thanks. It was really slow. Took me ages to check it out, when I finally got it to proxy and went to re-block, you had beaten me to it. --GraemeL (talk) 20:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Because that spammer has used so many proxies this year, I don't even test the IP or run portscans because Google always shows them on proxy sites. Spellcast (talk) 20:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I'd assume any with the same modus operandi can be 6-monthed on sight in future? Sorry I didn't spot the open proxy nature of it myself: didn't think it through. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 23:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, if you see other spambots adding that link with the same automated edit summary, please hardblock for six months. Spellcast (talk) 23:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Will do. Cheers! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 07:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Proxy block

Hi, an unblock request has come in at User talk:Cubbieco, evidently related to the proxy block of bluehost.com. Since you're the blocking admin, I thought I'd let you know so that you could take a look at it. --Elonka 22:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Registered users can now edit from that IP. Thanks for the notice. Spellcast (talk) 23:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the block. Everything else in the range of IPs should stay blocked since they are web servers that customers might abuse. Thanks again. Cubbieco (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem, and happy editing. Spellcast (talk) 23:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Tor block

Hiya, 70.65.192.118 (talk · contribs) has apologized for using Tor, and is asking to be unblocked. He seems to have a couple good edits, so I wanted to let you know. Your call though! --Elonka 04:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. It looks like you're on a hatrick here. Spellcast (talk) 05:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Saw your Cu

On 75.126.36.154. check the block log 220.239.47.163 (talk) 11:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I've hardblocked directly, so no-one should tweak the block now. Spellcast (talk) 18:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Baseball Card Guy (talk · contribs)

I blocked him indef, and left a comment on WP:AN. Heads-up Secret account 00:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Endorsed. Good block. Spellcast (talk) 05:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Protection of User talk:Darren 'Doc Nebula' Madigan

I'm puzzled by your protection of this page for, "unblock abuse from multiple accounts" when I can see no such thing from the history. Additionally this is a controversial block, with socks running around and lots of allegation of bad faith actions by editors and admins alike. There's an obvious risk that protecting their talk page as well can be seen as an attempt (however unwarranted) to stifle the blocked editor's one means of communication.

Most relevant comment seems to be happening here: User_talk:Luna_Santin#Block_of_User:Darren_.27Doc_Nebula.27_Madigan I'd appreciate your comments. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

See his userpage for sockmaster and User talk:What's The Buzzoff?. Spellcast (talk) 13:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
So why the protection? It's claimed to have been for "unblock abuse", not for being a sock. If it's for socking, then say so - mis-representation otherwise brings wiki adminship into disrepute. This is especially true when things are so secretive and hidden from non-admins.
Sock allegations are one thing (if the user is a sock, then tar and feather them by all means) - but that allegation of widespread socking is far from convincing. I'm sure some of them are, but to claim that Wroth of Groth, DollyD, CK fanclub and Doc Nebula are _all_ socks of the same person is either stretching credibility, or a remarkable subtle piece of set-up beforehand where a large number of socks have argued mutually contradictory points between themselves just to establish cover. It also needs us to believe that "Doc Nebula" (an established figure outside wikipedia) is being spoofed on wikipedia by someone else. On the whole, I'd guess at a false positive long before socking (although I can't see Checkuser to comment further). Andy Dingley (talk) 14:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
When I said "unblock abuse from multiple accounts", I didn't mean multiple accounts were targeting that talk page; I meant that sock has made past unblock requests that were either vandalism or made with false pretenses. He knows he was blocked for socking and I didn't want to give into his game by treating another one of his unblock requests as legitimate. It's entirely plausible that Wroth of Groth is behind those users based on behavior, interests, and checkuser evidence. He's previously imitated and spoofed real life names before such as Alan Light, Carol Kalish, Murray Bishoff, and an admin. Unless you can provide diffs, I've never seen any of those accounts argue "mutually contradictory points" from each other. Spellcast (talk) 14:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't doubt sockpuppetry here, but what evidence is there that Doc Nebula is one of these socks? Does Checkuser suggest shared IPs? The cited User talk:What's The Buzzoff? for discussing this is also protected so I can't comment there, but even that page questions whether DollyD is one of them. I doubt I can product a convincing single diff on demand as (I'm short of time anyway too) I'm not an admin and can only see partial logs for these contributors after they've been zapped. Carol Kalish and its history itself doesn't seem to support Doc Nebula and CK fanclub as being the same person or having the same opinions of her. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Doc Nebula added the same negative commentary on that article as Groth.[12][13] Them sharing the same IP range was probably a factor that led to a "Likely" result. AFAIK, Groth edits from 203.194.0.0/18, which is from Australia (where I don't think the real Doc Nebula lives). The history of Carol Kalish doesn't indicate they're a different user whatsoever. All the usernames that have edited that article which are based on real life comic writers have been blocked as likely or confirmed socks (with CK fanclub being the latter). Spellcast (talk) 01:13, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
re: the similar additions - they're both quotations of the same non-wiki online ref, Doc Nebula's own web content. Now this is weak evidence that they support a weakly similar anti-CK position, but it's hardly in the same league as if two "separate" users were posting matching text that claimed to be "original". Anyone who adds anti-CK content to this article is very likely to be referencing those same two sources.
"All usernames ... based on real life comic writers", and this is in a community of one-track fanboys? That's hardly strong evidence! Sorry, but I'm still not seeing evidence here strong enough to condemn a user to an indef block. They've added nothing through this account to deserve it, there's no sufficient visible evidence to remove them purely on the sock basis. Are we really removing users entirely on the basis of a couple of lines pf Perl claiming they're "likely" to be in the wrong? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:44, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
I also note that DollyD has now been removed from the list of alleged socks as an acknowledged false positive. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:44, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

User talk:TreadingWater

I've gone ahead and AGF'd and unblocked this user. I believe that "Silent hippo" is in a school along with some good faith editors and got them caught in an autoblock. Just thought I should let you know. -–xeno (talk) 02:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Eddie Wood

He's requesting unblock. What, exactly, led to labeling this a VOA? Looks like a new user trying to contribute in good faith to me. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at his contributions since the unblock and he's seems to have begun what could become an editing war on The Simpsons and also had reverts to his edits made to Batman. In addition, he's leaving argumentative responses to the editors who have reverted his edits. OwenSaunders (talk) 05:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I'll be keeping an eye on his edits. Spellcast (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Hip Hop Is Dead

Hey, I didn't know where to take what I have to say, so I decided to talk to you. Please take a look at Hip Hop Is Dead (album) article. First, I think the article should be moved back to Hip Hop Is Dead per WP:PRIME and WP:D#Disambiguation page or disambiguation links?. There is a link to disambiguation page with an inappropriate title and a link to Hip Hop Is Dead (song) on top of the page. If you go to the disambiguation page, you'll see it only has two links: to the album and to the song, so the disambiguation page seems to be redundant. Could you please take care of all that? Thanks. Daniil Maslyuk (talk) 12:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Spellcast (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Albums by producer

I noticed that you commented on the categorization of albums by record producer a while back. You might want to take a look at this discussion, where we have a category for a red link producer who has almost no chance of having an article. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

82.194.62.220

You recently unblocked this IP and he's started going back at me. Can you reblock? And please see this page. --Enzuru 08:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Elonka has taken care of that. Spellcast (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Smith888

You blocked Smith888 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for 24 hours for spamming. It's a spam only account and he's been hopping IPs to add the same links. Would you mind if I converted the block to indefinite as a spam only account? --GraemeL (talk) 15:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

By all means, go ahead. You can add the link to the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist if he persists. Spellcast (talk) 00:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. It's on XLinkbot's list at the moment. --GraemeL (talk) 00:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

User caught in a hardblock made by you

Hi Spellcast.

Tis_the_season_to_be_jolly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been caught in a hardblock of his IP address, which is apparently 209.34.168.36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log).

I checked the IP for open ports, and only port 80 was even possibly open. When I tried connecting with 209.34.168.36:80, it returned an HTTP 400 - bad request. What port did you find open? J.delanoygabsadds 16:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

nmap shows at least five open ports including 80. The IP belongs to a web hosting company (not an ISP), so it's likely a web-based proxy rather than a HTTP one. Also, the IP is from the US, but Bsrboy (who I suspected was him before blocking) is from the UK. To me, all this evidence indicates some anonymizing service. Spellcast (talk) 00:47, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I've added a few relevant facts to his talk page.  —SMALLJIM  20:16, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

65.113.120.166

Dear Spellcast, thanks for blocking 65.113.120.166. You should have added a block template on IP's talkpage. I reported the IP to AVI after you blocked it. Have a nice day. AdjustShift (talk) 15:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem, but block notices aren't necessary because those kids will see why they're blocked when they try vandalising editing. Spellcast (talk) 15:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

202.28.27.3

This IP was blocked. Request to recheck this IP.

I can't using 202.28.27.3:8080 outside Chiang Mai University's network. If you think 202.28.27.3 is an open proxy, what is the port for using it as open proxy? --Love Krittaya (talk) 06:03, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I've unblocked for now, although the block log suggests an on and off proxy going back since 2005. If I can confirm it's a proxy again, I'll reblock and give you WP:IPBE. Spellcast (talk) 17:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Unblocking of 62.24.251.240

36 minutes after being unblocked, the same IP blanked the article, Jehovah's Witnesses.[14]--Jeffro77 (talk) 20:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

True, but it's very highly shared IP. See AN thread. Spellcast (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. Thanks. If vandalism continues (whether from this user or others, which is pretty frequent for the JW article anyway), I might request a partial protect.--Jeffro77 (talk) 03:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

User :62.24.251.240

Get ready to block this person again; he vandalized my user page. Gabr-el 04:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The vandal will have long moved on. Spellcast (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
it looks like there is a problem with IPs since wikki is reporting my ip as 62.24.251.240 and my ip is 78.145.215.125 62.24.251.240 (talk) 05:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
The issue will be solved, it's just a matter of time. Spellcast (talk) 22:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Open proxy spammer

This has been going nuts, I suggest you block this spammers open proxies. I haven't seen one of those ip's from that spammer which haven't been an open proxy somehow. --Kanonkas :  Talk  13:01, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

This should be of interest. A system for pre-emptive blocking would be useful. Spellcast (talk) 01:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Proxy check

Hi, could you tell me if 209.62.62.58 (talk · contribs) is an open proxy? I noticed that you also blocked another IP from the same ISP. Are all IPs from Theplanet.com open proxies? Thanks, Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 08:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

It sure is an open proxy. WHOIS shows 209.62.62.32/27 is from My Privacy Tools (who run hide-my-ip.com), so I've blocked the range. Although not all IPs from ThePlanet / EV1 are open proxies, there's a high probability the next edits will come from a server that is an open proxy. User:Thatcher/Ev1 should provide useful info. Spellcast (talk) 09:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

92.236.246.150

Hi Spellcast. I saw the ip at WP:OP and after some checking I have some concerns. I think this is one of Virgin Media's transparent proxies, but at the same time see WP:IWF. I wonder why the ip doesn't have so many edits. What do you think? --Kanonkas :  Talk  15:55, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

All those UK IPs didn't have edits before December 4, but this one has edits since last month. I don't think it's one of those IPs. If it is, there should be multiple unblock requests. Spellcast (talk) 16:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, as I also thought it would have come more complaints/vandalism from that ip. Thanks for the help. --Kanonkas :  Talk  16:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Block Account

Hi Spellcast. As I've seen you're an Admin. I would like you to ask if you can block my account as a deletion isn't possible on Wikipedia. The reason for it is that I just don't find time for it and that I have more important things to do.

First I wanted to get this request here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism

but the 3 reasons for a deletion wouldn't fit in there. That's why I ask you I hope this doesn't make any trouble for you. Anyway Thank you in advance for it! --P223 (talk) 17:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

If you want to stop editing, simply do so. A block isn't needed to enforce that. Afterall, you never know when you might want to make the odd edit every now and then. Spellcast (talk) 17:30, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course you are right about that Spellcast. Maybe then I will just get a template on my userpage then. But of course I would still like you to block it as I don't think that I'm going to edit in the future anymore. So if it really takes more than a few clicks you don't have to do it. Otherwise I would be happy if you could do it. So I will listen to your last decision and will act after that. :) --P223 (talk) 18:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi again Spellcast! Just like I said I put the template in it (on the user and discussion page of my account and won't use the account anymore.

But the decision to block is still by yourself. Greetings --P223 (talk) 19:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I think a better option is to set a permanent or long-term break using the WikiBreak Enforcer. Blocks really aren't needed for this. (BTW, I've been inactive this week, so apologies for replying so late). Spellcast (talk) 23:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that vandal's talk page

Title says all. Chocolate Bar 02:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Ranges

I have replied to your question on my talk page. Raul654 (talk) 11:20, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

121.9.230.162 open proxy?

Hello Spellcast. Nishkid64 sent me to you as more competent than he is for checking proxies. The original question was:

Nishkid says he got interesting results on his Nmap scan, but he 'couldn't make heads or tails of it.' A Google search for this IP gets 76 hits on helpful lists of proxies, but perhaps there is some trick needed to enable the proxying function. ClueBot made this negative report. Thanks for considering! EdJohnston (talk) 04:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I've previously blocked the user behind that IP. It would've been an OP at the time of editing (probably on port 80 judging by the Google results). But because the IP currently seems secure again (as that port is no longer open), a block isn't needed. Spellcast (talk) 11:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. EdJohnston (talk) 14:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Repeat-vandal on open proxy

Hello Spellcast. Could you take a look at 195.229.241.173 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)? It was detected on WP:Open Proxy Detection and is listed here (apparently on port 8080). PS: The IP has been blocked previously and is still active. Thanks! ~ Troy (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

It's a highly shared IP, so the vandalism isn't surprising. It only takes one person to misconfigure the address to spoil it for everyone, but it isn't currently a workable OP though. Spellcast (talk) 18:40, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. ~ Troy (talk) 23:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

2009 time!

To a good 2008 and to an even better 2009. Happy New Year! Acalamari 21:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
And to you too :) Spellcast (talk) 13:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Take a look?

Hi Spellcast. I was wondering if you could check this IP as some research you'll see it looks to be some former kind of botnet. However, I'm not sure if it's still a zombie/open proxy so I was wondering if you could do a check. (See honey pot, robtex, spamhaus, etc). Best regards, --Kanonkas (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

The site in the block log no longer exists and nmap showed nothing suspicious, so that should be a good sign the IP is safe. Spellcast (talk) 03:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion of a proxy block of yours

FYI, there is a discussion here at WP:AN about your proxy 5-year block of User talk:67.159.50.130. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

How to Request Un-Block?

Hi Spellcast - Can you please let me know how to request that my username be unblocked?

Short version:

I recently created an account because people dislike seeing only an IP*. When I did, the name I chose in humor ("The Boss of Collect") offended an user who's behavior on the article I'm interested in is rather notorious. I was asked to create a new name. My new username was created, per admin request. I linked my old username to it in order continue my user history, SPECIFICALLY so I wouldn't be mistaken as a sock puppet. Without even being requested, I also posted on my Talk page, the other user's talk page, and the other user's friend's talk page, an explanation, an apology (of sorts) and that I would refrain from anything further to do with the allegedly offended user.

Despite all, the user's friend took the opportunity of my admin-requested name change, to report my new name to you as a sock puppet, and my new account was summarily blocked. Please help. Thanks.

  • BTW, my IP changes everytime I restart my computer. It is not an attempt to avoid creating a history. I created my user account specifically to avoid that impression, but cannot currently log in because of the block.


Long version:

[edit] User:TheBossOfCollect TheBossOfCollect (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) TheBossOfColect (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) Wurzel-Eating Grin (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) 71.35.119.40 (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) 71.35.119.186 (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) Some of the accounts above have already been blocked, but user creates single-purpose accounts apparently for the purpose of harassing User:Collect over a prior dispute at Talk:Joe the Plumber. Kelly hi! 17:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


User talk:Wurzel-Eating Grin From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Hi - Can someone tell me where I can appeal to have my username UNblocked?

I posted a Request For Help on User:Kelly 's talk page, but unfortunately Kelly mis-interpreted my request.

I am NOT a sock puppet. I had the previous names "BossOfCollect"/"...Colect". I was TOLD to change my name as it offended user:collect, even though no contact or debate with that user had even occurred.

As requested, I changed my name. In addition to dropping any reference to "Collect" from the new username I created, I have made an effort to link my previous username to my new username as a method of tracking history, SPECIFICALLY so I would NOT be mistaken for a sock puppet.

Lastly, without even being asked, I posted on my Talk page, User:Collect's and Kelly's (Collect's friend), an APOLOGY & explanation, and that I would not be using any such variation of Collect, nor any interaction with collect whatsoever.

Despite all these efforts, my new name, which Admin requested I create, was blocked for being a sock puppet. Help!

Previous message posted:

FYI, I am TheBossOfCollect & "...Colect". It's not sock puppetry or anything else, nor am I in collusion with any one else.

I felt Collect has made himself such a persistent nuisance on JTP by preemptively deleting opposing opinions, continual edit-warring, biasness in selective rule-citing etc. that I engaged in a little mirth-making to lighten the situation up.

Collect habitually uses his familiarity with WP’s rules and careful timing to cleverly screen his continually egregious behavior from Admin sanctions that, I feel, should have occurred earlier.

I actually made heartfelt suggestions to Collect, asking that he kindly play well and objectively with other editors and maintain a better sense of fellowship, but alas, he deleted my simple suggestions and continued the edit-warring, etc.

Despite Collect’s efforts to wield Wiki’s regulations like a mace in order to cow newbies and opposing editors, I see WP admin have at last noticed Collect’s persistent behavior. They have warned and sanctioned Collect as they deem appropriate. There’s no need for TheBossOfCollect to persist in raising a red flag about User:Collect.

(Funny that Collect would rather believe in a global conspiracy of complete strangers against him, rather than consider the more reasonable possibility that his persistently negative behaviors on WP have incurred the same degree of ire in many other individual editors.)

There’s no offline collusion (at least that I’m aware of). It’s just a matter of one person finding persistently disagreeable behavior tiresome. I realize by allowing myself to be baited by User:Collect that I too have grown tiresome, so will voluntarily change my silly user name.

Happy New Year, Everyone. 71.35.119.40 (talk) 16:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.119.186 (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.226.209.7 (talk)

You can post {{unblock|your reason here}} on your talk page. I recommend doing it on your main account, The Boss of Collect. Unless it's a big coincidence, I find it hard to believe the name isn't targeted towards a user you seem to be disputing with. If there's consensus to unblock, you can change your username at WP:CHU. Spellcast (talk) 19:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

192.139.27.18's vandalism

Hi Spellcast,

192.139.27.18 has been vandalizing other Wikipedias, like bug.wikipedia.org (usually Jason Gin or a variant, of which I have tried to tell them in person to stop several times). Is there a way to get a block on all Wikipedias? Ginbot86 (talk) 04:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

You can find all the info at m:Global blocking. Spellcast (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Spellcast! Ginbot86 (talk) 15:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Punk Rock Song deletion

I noticed that you have deleted Punk Rock Song with the explanation that it didn't chart. However, as you can see from the official Finnish chart page, it reached number five on the Finnish singles chart. It also reached number twenty-one on the Swedish singles chart. In both countries these are the highest chart positions Bad Religion has reached. For this reason, I think article restoration should be considered. YuckieDuck (talk) 12:41, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Adding the charts should address the original nominator's reason. Spellcast (talk) 15:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Ping

Thanks for voting in my RfA, Spellcast. I was wondering if you could check this: [15], and contribs. Looks like some webhost. Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  19:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah it has to be an OP, but I can't pinpoint the site. It's good you mentioned that because I found another one within the same /24. Spellcast (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The Game discography

Do you mind taking off the the protection on the article, I got really important edit to do on it. Also what's the reason for the protection, who's been vandalising the article lately? Hometown Kid (talk) 09:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC).

Never mind don't reply there was just something wrong with my mouse, I already made the edit. Hometown Kid (talk) 09:17, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Inferno

Is there a reason you decided to reblock Inferno after I unblocked him without discussing it with anyone? --Smashvilletalk 17:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I gave the reason on his talk page. If I blocked purely for disagreeing with your unblock rationale with no new evidence and no discussion, it would be wheel warring, but that's not the case. I gave evidence showing obvious socking and no reviewing admin even looked for editing similarities across the accounts. It wouldn't of made any difference if I discussed the diffs beforehand. Spellcast (talk) 16:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry that came off as so abrasive...have a bug that's going around, so a little moody. I know you were working in good faith, so I apologize for that. I'm fine with you reversing me. --Smashvilletalk 17:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Hi, please move The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (film) back to The Curious Case of Benjamin Button per WP:PRIME and WP:D#Disambiguation page or disambiguation links?, thanks. 83.149.49.219 (talk) 12:46, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done Spellcast (talk) 16:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Inferno, Lord of Penguins

Hi, this user has requested that you look at their helpme request. Thanks, — neuro(talk) 20:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Question on rangeblock

Hey, Spellcast. User talk:Sam Barsoom has been hit by a rangeblock you placed against 75.101.128.0/17 to stop editing from the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud. He says his company uses this network for their internet connection, and it's the only way he can log in while at work. His editing history does seem to be good - do you have any objection to an IPBE in this case? Thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. It's good you emailed me otherwise I wouldn't of responded as swiftly. Spellcast (talk) 15:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Move revert

Hi, please revert this move. The user didn't make a discussion and the title became more complicated. Thanks! 130.216.30.234 (talk) 07:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I also prefer the first title, but both should be ok. There doesn't seem to be standard naming conventions for award lists, but you can bring it up with the editor. Spellcast (talk) 16:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The Return of 98E/XxJoshuaxX?

Do you think it's a possiblity that User:Chocolate Bar is actually another sockpuppet of 98E/XxJoshuaxX? I say this because the two editors made the exact same edit as each other on Scout's Honor… by Way of Blood and they seem to have similar editing habits. Live and Die 4 Hip Hop (talk) 21:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll look into it. Spellcast (talk) 17:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of I Ain't No Joke

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ZooFari 03:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of I Ain't No Joke

I have nominated I Ain't No Joke, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Ain't No Joke. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

"Jockin' JAY-Z"

Please check this out. It's hilarious. Could you please revert that? Thanks. 130.216.30.234 (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

If you know a more official source, drop me a note. Spellcast (talk) 17:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

User:ABSCBN Interactive

This blood clot's messing with us again, this time with another username. Axxand and I immediately pointed out the user's similarities with Gonzalez, since he had the same old userbox style and signature template:

The similarities of his signature ABS-CBN Interactive (talk) with I ♥ Love Philippines (talk), who is a blocked user and is identified as Gerard's socks. Their userpages are also similar , look, I love Philippines and ABSCBN_Interactive. Haha! Huli ka! (Gotcha!)

Informing the sockpuppet noticeboard might not be of much use, since some of the mods aren't really that aware of the situation. Can you take care of this guy, please? Blake Gripling (talk) 07:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Taken care of. Spellcast (talk) 17:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism IP. Reblock request

[16] [17]. Cheers, Enigmamsg 18:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. Spellcast (talk) 17:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Urgent message!!!

174.34.141.38

[18] I'd be interested to know where you found this one. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

And this one. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:11, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
At the moment, I'm going through some past archives. When I'm active, I usually check through the updated lists for the latest unblocked IPs. Spellcast (talk) 13:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, these passed the duck test with flying colours when I blocked them, part of a much larger batch of abuse, but I couldn't pinpoint them and I was curious where the source was. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The Game (rapper) GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed The Game (rapper) for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of In da Club

I have done a GA Reassessment of In da Club as part of the GA Sweeps project. Everything about the article is fine except for some dead links. My review is here with the list of dead links. I have held the article pending the necessary fixes. I am notifying you as the primary editor about the dead links in the hopes that they can be repaired. If you have questions please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 04:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Old revisions of image

Hi Spellcast, may I ask you to delete old revisions of Relapse colver? Thanks! Daniil Maslyuk (talk) 03:50, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done. You can leave me a note if there's others. Spellcast (talk) 06:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

50 Cent GAR

Hi, 50 Cent is currently undergoing a GAR, thanks Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 07:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

User talk:58.160.162.175

I reblocked with talk page editing disabled. Would it be ok if I set the semi-protection expiry for three days? Enigmamsg 21:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

He's been vandalising for months, so it's better if the semi-protection is shorter than the block. If the protection expires the same time as the block, he'll continue vandalising without warning. But if the protection expires before the block, he could signal he's still active on the talk page (as he did today) and we could thus extend the block, especially if he vandalises the talk page shortly before the block expires. Spellcast (talk) 21:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
A little odd, but feel free to restore protection to the way it was. I prefer not semi-protecting pages unnecessarily, even IP talk pages. Also, according to what you're saying, it would seem to make sense to implement a longer block than the current one. Enigmamsg 21:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I see, but the point I'm making is that by allowing him the ability to edit his talk page before the block expires, we could extend the block preemptively. His previous block would've expired one week from now, but if his talk page was disabled, we never would've seen his intent to continue vandalising. As for the length, 3 months should hopefully be ok. If he vandalises his talk page after the 2 month protection, it's probably a good sign to extend to block. Spellcast (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
It's really not a huge deal either way. His behavior pattern is pretty simple: the moment his block expires, I know exactly where he will go, he'll go vandalize Dinosaur Comics as usual, and will immediately be blocked again. Regardless of whether we extend the block before he vandalizes or right after, the end result is the same. He does occasionally vandalize that page through other IPs (I've had it semi-protected before, I think, because of that), but this seems to be his primary one. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 23:56, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for exempting me from IP blocks. I hope that you did not think me out of place in my interpretation of policy, after a few months reflection "The wording of Wikipedia:Open proxies does not allow for this block" may have been a little too judgemental. If there was indeed an actual case of someone using the cloud as their own private proxy farm(how clever) to avoid repercussions then the large range block would be well within the spirit of the policy if not the wording. I appreciate you that were able to release me from this block with a minimum of procedure.

I have been terrifically busy over the last 4 months doing exciting and innovative things in the field of software and have not had much time to devote to Wikipedia, but I will see if I can squeeze in a few hours a day here once in a while. Sam Barsoom 23:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help out :) Spellcast (talk) 14:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Accidental block

Hi there; I got your message. I have been offline all day, so did in fact not see your accidental block/unblock (within one minute) of my account until just now. So not to worry. These things happen; if you look at my logs you will see that I accidentally blocked myself for six months some two years ago, shortly after gaining the mop and bucket! Not everyone has succeeded in doing that!. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 21:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

list of towns in rsk

The list of towns in RSK has had a very long and lengthy discussion involving the administration a few times. In all those times the ruling was that it shall STAY as a separate page. (LAz17 (talk) 01:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC)).

After afd discussion, the ruling was that the page STAYS. Thank you for understanding. For more information go here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_July_29#Category:Former_Towns_of_RSK_1991-95 , and please stop forwarding that page to the regular RSK page. Cheers. (LAz17 (talk) 13:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)).
The consensus was to keep it as a separate topic. It is true that consensus could change, but there clearly has not been any consensus. If you want it moved then list it for deletion or something. There has been an AFD for the page. Just look at its talk page. Croats have tried very hard to delete the page. Administrators went in and clearly said that the page STAYS. (LAz17 (talk) 16:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)).
The consensus was for the Geography of RSK, not towns of RSK. Make a new articles for deletion if you want. There was no consensus for that separate page. GO through the rules. (LAz17 (talk) 20:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)).


I can not unblock. Again, the page is not a copy or a duplicate like you suggest. (LAz17 (talk) 19:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)).

I understand - apparently the availability of things like that must vary from place to place. Guettarda (talk) 11:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Western Slavonia in RSK census

Hello and sorry for the belated answer- I visit wiki rarely these months. Anyway- the discrepancies between UN and Croatian censa re the Western Slavonia region (1992-1995) arose from the fact that UN had incorporated (in their tally) some areas that had been under Croatian Govt control, while Croatian sources didn't. Croatian sources are numerous Croatian books on war, most of them available at http://www.centardomovinskograta.hr/index_en.html Best, Mir Harven (talk) 09:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

117.55.242.2

About a year ago you blocked 117.55.242.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as an open proxy. Does it remain an open proxy today and on what ports? Someone using it is asking on unblock-en-l for it to be unblocked so he can edit. Fred Talk 16:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

It should be fine now. Spellcast (talk) 02:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Opinion.

Hello Spellcast, I was wondering if I could obtain your opinion as a member of "The Hip Hop WikiProject" and Wikipedia in general. Do you believe "last.fm" is a reliable source? I haven't seen anything on this, but I thought I'd bring it to you as several editors over my time here have commended you on your editing skills and such. Thank you and happy editing. --HELLØ ŦHERE 16:32, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi J, last.fm shouldn't be used as a reliable source (except for interviews with musicians, if they do them). And while I'm still part of the wikiproject, I don't really focus on mainstream acts as much as before because it's hard to maintain the quality of those articles in the long-term. Spellcast (talk) 08:59, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

kosovoliberationarmy.com

Can you just tell me again why you removed this link? Inside you can find valuable testimonies and documents about adem and KLA. And those are just parts of the international sources and links? That is main idea of posting this link. What's wrong with that?? Tadija (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that the site is used as a POV link rather than as a database of useful documents. War crimes were committed by all sides in the Balkan wars, so imagine if someone made a site called serbianarmy.com, added gruesome images of people killed by Serbian soldiers (while deliberately ignoring the crimes of soldiers of other countries), and then added that site to Wikipedia. I'm sure you can see the POV in that. So if there's testimonies or other worthwhile documents that you think can be used as a reference, feel free to cite that document itself. And besides, if there's valuable sources and international links, they should easily be available elsewhere. (Also, I think it's clear that providing documents isn't really the main purpose or focus of the site). Spellcast (talk) 21:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, you are right. I'll do that. All best, Tadija (talk) 11:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Block on User:85.214.0.0/16

There's an editor in this range affected by this rangeblock who wants to edit and is trying to make sure there's no proxy service on his IP. You had blocked this IP range as "Strato Rechenzentrum web hosting service," so maybe you can talk it over with him and figure out what can be done; perhaps the rangeblock could be restructured, or perhaps we could give him a new account with WP:IPBE? Mangojuicetalk 17:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

He should be able to register an account now. Spellcast (talk) 19:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

G-Unit

  • 17:40, 2 March 2008 Spellcast protected G-Unit ‎ (Perpetual vandalism [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop])


I've started a review to see if this semiprotection is still considered necessary. Please see talk:G-Unit. --TS 16:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Replied there. Spellcast (talk) 16:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Phuza Faced

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Phuza Faced. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Stifle (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Archives? And other stuffs...

Don't you Wikipedians know about archives? or just delete you T page and start again... anyways. this article says Belgein, and I changed to Belgium. Just wondering if I am wrong by this; feel free to undo or yell at me. Ajraddatz (Feel like talking?) 20:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Should be fine now, methinks. Spellcast (talk) 05:41, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

IP range 138.88.0.0/16 block

Hello, Spellcast … you neglected to provide a reason for the block on this IP range … whazup? Happy Editing! — The Bipolar Anon-IP Gnome (talk) 19:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

There's been a rather disruptive sock recently,[19] but anyone can still register an account. Apologies if you were affected. Spellcast (talk) 01:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Spellcast/Archive_4&oldid=1208502670"