User talk:Elockid/Archive 12
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Elockid. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Beloki
I could do with an indepedent admin looking into the behaviour of Beloki (talk · contribs), which has become extreme very quickly. It might be a coincidence but the TheShadowCrow (talk · contribs) came to mind very quickly once the abuse started, which is why I'm asking you as you recently blocked him. If it is him, I would support an indef. block because he has had more than enough chances now. Many thanks in advance. CT Cooper · talk 20:52, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- I'm a little doubtful right now. Some of the pages like the African pages don't seem to be within their article interest. I'll monitor and see if anything develops. Elockid (Talk) 13:21, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Some else has had similar suspicions but has reached a different conclusion, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Findblogging. CT Cooper · talk 18:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- I'm concerned about E4024's evidence. Beloki and Kotsia2 don't look like the same user based on behavioral evidence. Elockid (Talk) 20:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Happy New Year, Elockid
Pratyya (Happy New Year) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! Welcome the 2024. This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2024 goes well for you.
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:User:Pratyya Ghosh/Happy New Year}} to their talk page with a Happy New Year message.
- Thanks. Happy New Year to you too! Elockid (Talk) 20:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, and a question
I do a lot of anti-vandalism work here, but tonight I ran across a pattern that I haven't seen in a long time - multiple rapid edits of a user talk page (User talk:NawlinWiki) by a host of IP's (which you suspended, hence the thanks). My question is how is this happening, and is there a better way to handle it than using Huggle to do one revert after another? I did end up reporting and asking for temporary semi-protection, but this was an odd incident. Is this one person who is somehow jumping IP's or a bunch of people somehow coordinating? Mostly, I am curious. Thanks for any information! SeaphotoTalk 07:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- This is probably one person (or occasionally one person tricking lots of people). There really is not a good way to stop that except RBI (+protect the page). Prodego talk 08:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- This was Grawp being his usual self. Elockid (Talk) 13:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- FYI, he's been stalking me last couple weeks, lately reverting anything I do on any article and I have to revert it back, noting stalker vandalism. Not sure if that's best way to note the revert. CarolMooreDC 15:29, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- If things get worse, feel free to ask me to make protections and such. Elockid (Talk) 20:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- These aren't looked at by others who can revert them and he obviously intends to just keep reverting them, so maybe you can protect for a couple weeks: Israel–Gaza conflict casualties 2006–2008, Barrett, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (which he did after you protected it, or it ended, not sure). He's reverting a couple people here: Stop Islamization of America. CarolMooreDC 04:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've put Israel–Gaza conflict casualties 2006–2008 on my watchlist. I've put the other pages on 1 week protection. Elockid (Talk) 17:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. I-G casualties is rarely changed, so I'm obviously suspicious of any AnonIP changes there - even the one that actually had an edit summary! CarolMooreDC 20:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- FYI, I think he's back to socks. See Wikipedia_talk:Long-term_abuse/JarlaxleArtemis#User:Shegetz_deleted_tag - Grawp's other ID as I'm sure you know. CarolMooreDC 03:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- JarlaxleArtemis is at it again as AnonIp on Islamophobic incidents. FYI. Thanksd. CarolMooreDC 02:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- FYI, I think he's back to socks. See Wikipedia_talk:Long-term_abuse/JarlaxleArtemis#User:Shegetz_deleted_tag - Grawp's other ID as I'm sure you know. CarolMooreDC 03:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. I-G casualties is rarely changed, so I'm obviously suspicious of any AnonIP changes there - even the one that actually had an edit summary! CarolMooreDC 20:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've put Israel–Gaza conflict casualties 2006–2008 on my watchlist. I've put the other pages on 1 week protection. Elockid (Talk) 17:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- These aren't looked at by others who can revert them and he obviously intends to just keep reverting them, so maybe you can protect for a couple weeks: Israel–Gaza conflict casualties 2006–2008, Barrett, Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (which he did after you protected it, or it ended, not sure). He's reverting a couple people here: Stop Islamization of America. CarolMooreDC 04:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- If things get worse, feel free to ask me to make protections and such. Elockid (Talk) 20:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
I apologize if my absence caused some inconvenience. I'll try and step up it next time. Elockid (Talk) 21:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Florencia Peña
THere is no video of her on wikipedia.Video de florencia peña hot (talk) 19:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for unblocking. I hope my reputation can be better in 2013. --Dede2008 (talk) 09:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- New year, new start. All the best to you. Elockid (Talk) 13:31, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 04:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- Replied. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 06:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 06:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
RTPking
You said that this editor was blocked, but they are still editing as far as I can see. BollyJeff | talk 01:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- They were blocked but the block expired. I've reblocked them for 3 days for continued edit warring. Elockid (Talk) 01:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Sock
Could you look at Special:Contributions/Stealbared? Should be fairly obvious. nableezy - 01:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Blocked and page protected. Elockid (Talk) 01:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Prolific sock
Hi, I've got a self-confessed sock on my talk page. In that thread, I name two other accounts used by this rather prolific block evader, whose master is Austereraj. There have actually been quite a few sock blocks of related accounts since those listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Austereraj. Should these have been noted anywhere? I ask because it is getting to the point where there are so many that I cannot recall them all! - Sitush (talk) 08:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've blocked both Rajwikipedian and Legalaidclinicssdlc as suspected socks. I would probably file a reference SPI since the archives go all the way back to last February. Elockid (Talk) 14:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- And there's the rub! When you say a "reference SPI", do you mean file a case at SPI even though they are now blocked? And perhaps just note in that case that they are now blocked? I realise that this would then be added to the archives but it seems like additional work for the clerks and SPI always seems to have a backlog. I just want to be sure that I'm doing the right thing and, of course, you know a lot more about this than I do. - Sitush (talk) 15:01, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yup, just like the one I did here. Having more recent reports can be helpful if CU is necessary in the future (helps CUs have a reference point). Elockid (Talk) 15:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, I hadn't considered the CU aspect. Will do. Thanks for your help. - Sitush (talk) 15:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! - BilCat (talk) 19:05, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I've provided the diffs in the page. Would you mind having another look at it? —Vensatry (Ping me) 05:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- Based on the edit from this IP though, it does look like RTPking is
Unrelated to Padmalaskhmisx. Based on what I know, 2001:420:4:EA02:4DAE:3835:E2C3:C76F (talk · contribs) appears to be Unrelated. I might have overlooked something. Elockid (Talk) 18:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- As a side note, I did block Rightjuncture (talk · contribs) as a suspected sock. Elockid (Talk) 18:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
HerutJuram
Hi Elockid,
I think he is back again : User:Wolfgang Fontaine.
Kind Regards, Pluto2012 (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
- Blocked. Elockid (Talk) 20:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help. Pluto2012 (talk) 22:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
WP:DUCK Sock
User:24.13.248.100 appears to be a DUCK sock of User:Smokeablunt420 who you blocked - see this edit of Toaster and one of Smoke's. Vacation9 04:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
- Blocked. Elockid (Talk) 05:11, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
User 14.102.103.100 is spamming again
Sorry if this is the wrong place - I wasn't sure how to notify the proper admin, but it looked like you had issued a block against this IP before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/14.102.103.100
It appears the block expired recently and they are at it again, inserting commercial links randomly. I fixed a few pages I saw but thought I would notify someone about it.
Thanks.
72.225.231.125 (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
- Blocked. Elockid (Talk) 01:11, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Globaldesign
Hi. It looks like there's a huge sock farm here. Kumar1328 (talk · contribs), Nagarajanarasan (talk · contribs) (you've blocked already), Kannadarakshanavedike (talk · contribs) (blocked already) and Tamilselvanhosur (talk · contribs) (a clear quacking). — Abhishek Talk 04:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- Should I create an SPI to dig out if there are more? — Abhishek Talk 04:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- I took a look. Kumar1328 is surprisingly Unrelated to Globaldesign. I have doubts on Tamilselvanhosur though (I didn't run a check). Elockid (Talk) 16:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- I took a look. Kumar1328 is surprisingly
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aminul802
No action to be taken over the painfully obvious meatpuppet? Darkness Shines (talk) 17:09, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- You also forgot to post a block notice to Aminul802 talk. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- The thing is, meatpuppets are usually not dealt with at SPI. We usually just block the socks and suspected meatpuppets are left for another forum to decide what to do with them. Elockid (Talk) 21:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
PC2 protections
Just wanted to let you know — someone who agrees with your PC2 protections of pages like Transdev York has used them as evidence for an argument to extend the use of PC2. You can find the discussion in the "PC2 for Mangoeater targets" section of WP:AN. Nyttend (talk) 03:09, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Not urgent but...
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 17:15, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I want to know the history of Maasranga Television
At December 1 Maasranga Television was deleted for A1. But I want you to watch the article history again if there was any problem with my article. I'm requesting you cause I know that admins can watch a deleted page's history. Please can you help me? Also give me a talkback message at my talk page.--Pratyya (Hello!) 10:30, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 14:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Pratyya (Hello!) 14:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar |
| Thank you for accepting my request for Maasranga Television. Pratyya (Hello!) 14:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks! :) Elockid (Talk) 14:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Matchurine
Matchurine (talk · contribs) - sock of who? GiantSnowman 15:37, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Mangoeater1000 (talk · contribs). Elockid (Talk) 15:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Aha. I'm vaguely aware of the name but not enough for DUCK to register; what should I look out for in future? GiantSnowman 15:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
January 2013
Japan's section is considerably improved and I took out some unnecessary things like the broken link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zebusadams (talk • contribs)
- Please read WP:TPO. Elockid (Talk) 15:39, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
I am GeorgianJorjadze and I want my original account back. Please Elockid.
Hello Elockid. I never received your message back in December. I am tired of being hiding all the time but I cannot be without Wikipedia. I was creating all these socks because my original account which is GeorgianJorjadze is blocked with indefinite period without giving me a hope that in some month(s) term I can be back on Wiki. I understand I fucked up many things but cannot you just reconsider unblocking my original account for god's sake. Please give me a chance. I want my original account. At least give me a defined block term and I will know when I will be able to be back and contribute with that account. No more socks, edit wars etc. I cannot live without Wiki so please give me another last chance and give my original account back and unblock it or at least block it but not with indefinite period of time but some months and then I will know when I can use it again. I regret everything what I messed up. I will wait for your reply here on your page. GJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.49.102.90 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 27 January 2013
- (talk page stalker) You probably want to look at the the standard offer.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hi GeorgianJorjadze. The problem is that we've tried responding to you and explaining to you what you must do to edit again. However, you keep trying to come back without taking our advice. Furthermore, you deliberately lied to us with your newest account, Lovingoni (talk · contribs). I am reluctant to unblock as a result of this. Pretty much the only way now to get unblocked is to take the standard offer (see the link that Jasper gave above). Elockid (Talk) 20:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Please Elockid give me a last chance and be my supervisor. You can check all my edits. All of them will be a contribution-oriented. I promise. I will keep my word this time. Please just a last chance. I want my original account back. Tell me what should I do? GJ— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.49.102.90 (talk • contribs)
- As Elockid said, at this point you will likely only get this account unblocked by following the standard offer, which includes not editing nor socking for 6 months straight, in order to demonstrate that you truely know that sockpuppetry is bad. Elockid and other users cannot be forced to supervise every single one of your edits, so much of it will involve you demonstrating that you can hold yourself accountable to avoid edit warring or other disruptive activity.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Jasper. What does that mean exactly? My indefinite block will be changed to 6 month term block? And please don't block my current IP address as I am not going to sock any more. This is the only way for me now to talk to Elockid by this IP address. GJ
- I agree with Elockid and Jasper. Read, very carefully, the Standard Offer page (WP:OFFER). At the very minimum, it means waiting six months without any editing activity on any articles at all — no sockpuppets, no logged-out IP edits, no nothing. Some people might say this doesn't strictly apply to user talk pages, but there really isn't any need for that anyway if you're hoping to come back via the Standard Offer, so I'd strongly recommend not doing any IP-editing on anyone's talk page until the six months are done and you're ready to ask to come back. And note that the Standard Offer isn't an automatic thing; even after staying away for at least six months, you will still need to convince people to agree to let you come back. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 21:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Rich. Glad to see you here. All right. I'll do that. Name me an exact month and day when I would be able to be back? GJ
- Exactly 6 months starting with the date of the above comment, and it resets if you make any more edits. --Jasper Deng (talk) 22:09, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Rich. Glad to see you here. All right. I'll do that. Name me an exact month and day when I would be able to be back? GJ
- I agree with Elockid and Jasper. Read, very carefully, the Standard Offer page (WP:OFFER). At the very minimum, it means waiting six months without any editing activity on any articles at all — no sockpuppets, no logged-out IP edits, no nothing. Some people might say this doesn't strictly apply to user talk pages, but there really isn't any need for that anyway if you're hoping to come back via the Standard Offer, so I'd strongly recommend not doing any IP-editing on anyone's talk page until the six months are done and you're ready to ask to come back. And note that the Standard Offer isn't an automatic thing; even after staying away for at least six months, you will still need to convince people to agree to let you come back. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 21:47, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Jasper. What does that mean exactly? My indefinite block will be changed to 6 month term block? And please don't block my current IP address as I am not going to sock any more. This is the only way for me now to talk to Elockid by this IP address. GJ
- As Elockid said, at this point you will likely only get this account unblocked by following the standard offer, which includes not editing nor socking for 6 months straight, in order to demonstrate that you truely know that sockpuppetry is bad. Elockid and other users cannot be forced to supervise every single one of your edits, so much of it will involve you demonstrating that you can hold yourself accountable to avoid edit warring or other disruptive activity.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Please Elockid give me a last chance and be my supervisor. You can check all my edits. All of them will be a contribution-oriented. I promise. I will keep my word this time. Please just a last chance. I want my original account back. Tell me what should I do? GJ— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.49.102.90 (talk • contribs)
- Hi GeorgianJorjadze. The problem is that we've tried responding to you and explaining to you what you must do to edit again. However, you keep trying to come back without taking our advice. Furthermore, you deliberately lied to us with your newest account, Lovingoni (talk · contribs). I am reluctant to unblock as a result of this. Pretty much the only way now to get unblocked is to take the standard offer (see the link that Jasper gave above). Elockid (Talk) 20:59, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
OUTDATED
um...for all I know the quality of life in 2009 France was first maybe it would be nice if you updated it. thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.112.219.132 (talk • contribs)
- Obviously not. Elockid (Alternate) (Talk) 21:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
71.107.128.0/20 rangeblock
There is a request on Rumilofaniel's talk page to address a rangeblock you issued in November 2012. Please have a look at the talk page since this is preventing logged in users from editing. –BuickCenturyDriver 02:20, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification. IPBE was granted. Elockid (Talk) 02:28, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Fourchan Thread, now deleted, led to a vandal surge just right now
It involved at least a few of the pages you reverted and blocked the vandals from, it seems. 198.151.130.38 (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
The website in question has the number "4" in front of the word "chan", and disallowing edits with the page's name in it does a disservice to Wikipedia. 198.151.130.38 (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your assistance. I'll see if I can get the word out to step up on patrol. Elockid (Talk) 04:03, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Re: technical issues with blocks
Two questions:
- I looked at your log to try to find the 1970 block that you mentioned at WP:VPT. Is it 75.145.8.58? The software tells me that this IP isn't currently blocked.
- I noticed that you'd blocked a few IP addresses (e.g. 216.101.203.7) for odd periods of time, such as 3 years, 6 hours, 32 minutes and 24 seconds. I can't figure out the significance of blocking for 94,631,544 seconds; was it just a random number that you chose?
Neither of these questions are at all pressing (I'm more curious than anything else), so feel free to ignore this question if you're busy or you don't feel like answering. If you do answer, please leave me a talkback. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 01:43, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes it's 75.145.8.58. The block expired almost 2 hours ago (set it to Saturday 0:00 UTC). For the other IPs, I didn't input any random times (probably the most odd would be the one I put for Saturday). Elockid (Talk) 01:49, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- Surely it's simply that if you set a fixed expiry time the sofware calculates the time involved?--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:46, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- The software time appears to have been calculated correctly, but I think it's a display error. Elockid (Talk) 13:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Surely it's simply that if you set a fixed expiry time the sofware calculates the time involved?--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:46, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Duplication of effort
I am sure that I am not the only admin whom this affects; not infrequently I see a nomination at AIV, or RFUB, or UAA, and occasionally at CSD; I look into it to verify the accuracy of the nomination, confirm it, and come back to find another admin has done the same investigation and beaten me to it. Do you think it would be possible to change the software so that when an admin sees a nomination we wants to investigate he could flag it with a notice saying "I'm doing it" or something similar? Ideally a one-click entry would be best; I am not a software expert. I suspect that this is not worth taking to the village pump - I'm just seeking an opinion, and I picked you because you just beat me to a block at AIV.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:44, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- It might be possible, but I'm not sure. Maybe if we had a status thing like in SPI, that could be more helpful. Elockid (Talk) 13:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Semi-protection of article
Hi, Elockid. Thanks for semi-protecting Sexual abuse cases in Brooklyn's Haredi community a few days ago, in response to local ( near to Brooklyn ) IPs repeatedly deleting content about one of the persons named as a perpetrator in that article. Based on this AN/I discussion, I've decided to go ahead an reinstate the deleted content. I wonder if you'd also be willing to reinstate the semi-protection for a week or so, too, since I notice that another Brooklyn IP just recently reverted sigmabot's appropriate removal of the protection notice, presumably (?) as a way to try to "warn off" others from editing the article. My concern is that without semi-protection being reinstated for a short period, the IPs and new accounts who are watching the article, and who I infer are members of the affected religious community, will continue their campaign of re-deleting the content every hour or so. Many thanks; no reply necessary, but if you do want to reply, feel free to do so right here, as I've temporarily watchlisted this page. Best, --OhioStandard (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've put the page on my watchlist and will semi-protect if it happens again. Elockid (Talk) 19:15, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
- That was kind; thank you. I'm not sure what's going to happen there re the content the IPs were so eager to expunge: It turns out some established editors were willing to let the IP's last removal stand, for now anyway, so feel free to remove the article from your watchlist, if you like; I'm sure it's already quite long. I'll drop back by if consensus does eventually restore the content, and IPs show up again to remove it. Thanks again; I appreciate your response, very much. Best, --OhioStandard (talk) 05:57, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
MdPepper
He's requesting unblock and disputing that he used other accounts. I can't find any indication in the block message what the sockmaster was or whether there was an SPI. Not that that wouldn't delegitimize the block, but it's easier to review the unblock request when you have some idea what the other accounts were. Can you share that information with me (by email, if you want to keep it confidential)? Daniel Case (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- (tps) That account belongs to Sonic2030. —DoRD (talk) 21:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yup, that's Sonic2030. Elockid (Talk) 00:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've added more info on their talk page. Elockid (Talk) 00:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. Will sustain the block. Daniel Case (talk) 05:09, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
- I've added more info on their talk page. Elockid (Talk) 00:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
ACC
Hi Elockid, there is a request at ACC which DoRD would like you to have a look at when you get a chance. He's not sure who the intended target of your block is. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- Responded and deferred. Elockid (Talk) 02:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Cyberpower678 will let you know when the user first edits. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:01, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
New socks, but WP:DUCK
Hello! I am writing to you about Medvegja (talk · contribs). As far as i saw, those are new socks
- Mythbuster999 (talk · contribs)
- KosovaDardania (talk · contribs)
- Ccamilla (talk · contribs)
- Skipetari (talk · contribs)
But maybe we should use a checkuser? Those are obviously SPA account, used for a week, or so, anyway, please, help and propose what to do next. You are better informed about this, and reasons for Medvegja block. Mythbuster999 started questionable RM in its second edit using a venue and template, so, hardly a new user... :) --WhiteWriterspeaks 20:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- I have some doubts for some of the ones listed (as such, I didn't run a check on them). But the only account that I just found was a
Confirmed sock is Svirca (talk · contribs). Elockid (Talk) 21:24, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- O, my, well, what do you propose next? Just to watch? --WhiteWriterspeaks 21:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yup. They might not appear to be socks of Medvegja at the moment but they might exhibit more striking (unique) characteristics later on that could link them to Medvegja or to some other person. Elockid (Talk) 21:39, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
- O, my, well, what do you propose next? Just to watch? --WhiteWriterspeaks 21:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Help needed
Since you are experienced and active at List of countries by GDP (nominal), i would request you to please see the list again - i am not sure which is the right version, and i might unknowingly add to the mess. Thanks, Anir1uph | talk | contrib 05:46, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
- Looks like someone fixed part of it. The CIA data needs to be updated though. Elockid (Talk) 15:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
proxy blocking
I noticed you blocked 2.133.92.146 (talk · contribs) and rolled back its edit; 1.80.71.159 (talk · contribs) was probably the same person, although the latter's edits are actually valid and should not be rolled back. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. Since it sounds like you object to me rolling back the latter, I won't. Elockid (Talk) 01:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 14:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Pratyya (Hello!) 14:16, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Dewan357
The OFFER was made after the September 8th incident when Drmies saw my edits and confronted KWW [here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kww#Gota_Work_etc.]. As such I kept my word, the OFFER should still stand. I wrote August by accident. (24.184.37.87 (talk) 16:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC))
Warning misuse
I see you put warning on my page because of my edit of a nonsense page about power index. Had you had decency to check the talk page, you would have seen that there is already a discussion about deleting this POV unencyclopedic page. Since you disagree with PROD I will go through other deletion procedure, but page is certainly POV. Do not remove POV templates and DO NOT HARASS other editors because they do not share your POV!!! Pushing your edits and POV through intimidation of other editors is extremely rude and against policies as stated on this site213.198.222.220 (talk)
- If you continue this behavior making edits such as this and making petty threats such as this, you WILL be blocked. Elockid (Talk) 17:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Ministry of Defense (India)
Thanks for protecting this article. ```Buster Seven Talk 17:57, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Glad I was of some help. Elockid (Talk) 17:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
ACC
Can you please assess this request. You are involved in it.—cyberpower ChatOnline 20:10, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- Handled. Elockid (Talk) 01:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
PC2 use
Hi there, Elockid. After seeing this thread, I was looking over the list of articles with PC2 on them, and it looks like you're the source on three of them. Current community consensus is to disallow the use of PC2. Would you mind re-adjusting the protections of First York, Transdev York, and York Pullman to something other than PC2? A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 04:18, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Done. Elockid (Talk) 02:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Fused shadows13's user page
needs to be deleted since it is vandalism. --Starship9000 (roller coaster fan) 19:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Range block query
Hi there. Would you mind weighing in with your SPI/rangeblock expertise here? I'm 99% sure this is block evasion by this user, but an editor has raised the (very relevant) issue of indefinite blocks being inappropriate in this setting. I'm wary of rangeblocking IPv6 addresses, so I would appreciate input from an administrator with more experience in this area. Thanks in advance, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Jesse 8W
Blocked by you for socking, but no tag as to who it is? This "new account" is reinserting the same content the blocked one did. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:35, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. Blocked and tagged both accounts (that's AndresHerutJaim (talk · contribs)). Elockid (Talk) 19:08, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, in future would it be quicker to file an SPI or just ask you? Darkness Shines (talk) 19:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- It probably be quicker just to ask me since I'm familiar with his MO and such. Elockid (Talk) 19:11, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, in future would it be quicker to file an SPI or just ask you? Darkness Shines (talk) 19:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
HerutJuram
Hi,
He is unfortunately back : [1].
Kind Regards, Pluto2012 (talk) 19:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. Blocked and tagged. Elockid (Talk) 19:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Premasiri
Hi there. I'd like to socktag User talk:Premasiri, who you just blocked. Is he Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Masu7 or Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Panadura Royalist someone else? Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Based on the most recent info, Panadura Royalist. But it would probably seem that Panadura Royalist and Masu7 are the same person based on the comment made by Cossde in SPI. Elockid (Talk) 22:43, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'll socktag as masu7. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity...
Who was this? JohnCD (talk) 10:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
PsychKitten
Many thanks for running a CU on PsychKitten and the ipsock. Was PsychKitten operated by Mikemikev as suspected? Mathsci (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yw. Yes, PsychKitten is Mikemikev. Elockid (Talk) 15:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks again. That was a toughie. Mathsci (talk) 16:11, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Problems with an user
Hello,
I saw that you blocked this user Carnifex11 with an expiry time of indefinite at this date, for this reason.
This user looks like another person (who constantly creates new ips) to create conflict with genre warring on Siouxsie and the Banshees related articles.
The problem is he keeps on contacting administrators to block me, and each time with a brand new ip obviously like he did here. Result, I was blocked twice indeed where as I had put explanations here and here for instance.
Here's his other previous ips,
- 2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 on 12 February 2013,
- 2600:1003:B027:953D:F0B9:BBB3:BF02:AFC3 on 24 February at 20:00,
- 2601:A:4100:5A:DD7D:3A15:F73:68FD on 24 February at 22:00.
- his other previous name BEATWEAKer (now blocked) used to make the same kind of edits (always genre warring), like at this article for instance on 01:10, 9 September 2012 as later 2601:A:4100:5A:642E:1EB6:B88:2B18 at this date, what a coincidence. Beatwalker was quickly corrected 15 minutes later by IllaZilla here on 9 September 2012 .
I explained this on my talk. If an administrator received another request of a brand new ip to block me in a few days, will I be blocked again? what can I do? It's really an abuse. Carliertwo (talk) 20:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
- Next time you could say that you are reverting a blocked user. For example, say it in the edit summary that you are reverting a sockpuppe. I would advise directing the admin or other users to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheMetallican. If you want to play it safe, file an SPI, then you can proceed on reverting their edits after the investigation is completed. If you find similar behavior being made by multiple accounts/IPs, I recommend asking an admin to protect the target pages. This should in turn lower down the disruption. Hope this helped. Elockid (Talk) 21:15, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Δ
You removed IP block exempt from Δ (talk · contribs), as he's not active. The reason he's not active is that he is indefinately blocked. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:16, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yup, I noticed. I would have changed the other rights as well but there appears to be a dispute on whether or not to remove the rights of indefinitely blocked accounts so I left the other ones. Elockid (Talk) 03:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
G'day. Did you mean to remove my IP Block Exemption, or Danjel101's? Your edit to the log at diff seems to indicate that you were after Danjel101. Then again, I know that I also edit from problematic IP ranges (schools). ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 06:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I did remove it due to the admin giving a blank reason as seen here. Your userpage also indicates that you are retired but you have been editing recently. Are you planning to stay retired? Elockid (Talk) 13:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yep, just tying off loose ends that refuse to stay tied. The exemption was given because of a talkpage post a while back. It's probably somewhere in my archives, I can't be bothered looking for it. Being "retired", I have no use for the IP Block Exemption, so I'm not personally fussed for myself. Just wanted to make sure that everything was square with regards to Danjel101. Cheers. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 14:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
- Okay then. It looks like you qualify for IPBE. So if you decide to come came back, I can readd it for ya. Elockid (Talk) 15:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yep, just tying off loose ends that refuse to stay tied. The exemption was given because of a talkpage post a while back. It's probably somewhere in my archives, I can't be bothered looking for it. Being "retired", I have no use for the IP Block Exemption, so I'm not personally fussed for myself. Just wanted to make sure that everything was square with regards to Danjel101. Cheers. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 14:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Can I have my exemption back?
You removed my IP block exemption because it "no longer seems to be necessary." I got the exemption in January last year because I found myself blocked without warning due to a range block, and I had to jump through hoops to get editing again. If I have the misfortune to live in the same neighbourhood as a disruptive IP, there is no reason to believe that there won't be another range block at some time in the future. Surely that is what IP block exemption is for? There seems to me to be little point in exempting somebody from blocking after he has been blocked. I would like my exemption back, please. Scolaire (talk) 12:27, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
- I apologize but I can't re-add the flag at this time. IPBE is supposed to be given as an as need basis and the range 86.41.0.0/18 is no longer blocked. The block that prevented you from editing was very short. In general, hardblocks are rare and seldom applied. I can see that the blocks on that range in the past are softblocks. So even though the range was blocked, it was set to target anonymous users only, so registered users will still be able to edit. If by chance the range is hardblocked again, please email me and I will personally handle the situation. Elockid (Talk) 14:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thanks for your prompt reply. Scolaire (talk) 14:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
colocationwebhost?
Hi Elockid, I saw your block on the ip that vandalised Drmies's talk page, and I'm wondering what "colocationwebhost" means. I've not seen that before. LadyofShalott 17:31, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's similar to an open proxy/Tor/VPN where it helps to conceal your IP address. Elockid (Talk) 17:36, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. LadyofShalott 17:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
"Outing" problem with an SPI request (76.69.81.55)
Hi. Just FYI, the SPI request for 76.69.81.55, which you closed, contained what was claimed to the exact street address of the IP user in question. I removed this piece of info, RevDel'ed the affected revisions, and have asked the Oversight team to do their thing. I also left a word of caution on the talk page of the user who originally made the SPI request; I'm assuming here that the "outing" violation was the result of non-malicious carelessness rather than anything intending harm. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- Good catch! Elockid (Talk) 11:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Checkuser block of 137.164.120.210
137.164.120.210 (talk · contribs) is asking for account creation to be enabled because "we are doing a school wide project on wikipedia editing and vandalism awareness". I don't know that I believe them, and I was going to give the standard advice from {{schoolblock}} to contact UTRS from an email address associated with the school; but I see that the block is only 3 days old and that it was a checkuser block, so I will ask you to respond. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
- I asked them to send a request through UTRS. I'm highly doubtful that that's really an administrator though. Elockid (Talk) 23:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Lots of ips (open proxies?) disrupting Palestinian people; could someone please protect it, (and block the vandals)? Cheers, Huldra (talk) 00:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
- Looks like Mark Arsten protected the page. I blocked the vandals though (that's 4chan). Elockid (Talk) 00:11, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks to both of you! Damn irritating spending time on this, when one rather would be writing articles,,,, oh well, cheers, Huldra (talk) 00:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Huldra (talk) has given you a plate of hummus! Hummus is a specialty of the Middle East. With some pita bread, they are delicious and promote WikiLove. Hopefully, this one has added flavor to your day.
Spread the goodness of hummus by adding {{subst:Hummus}} to someone's Talk page with a friendly message! Give a plate of hummus to someone you've had disagreements with in the past, or to a good friend.
Thanks for helping! Cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Love hummus. Elockid (Talk) 23:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| May heaven reward you! CarolMooreDC 04:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks! :) Elockid (Talk) 12:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| Another one (actually two) bites the dust. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks! Elockid (Talk) 16:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Request for editing rights
Hi, could you give me permission to edit the History of Israel page? I have various things I want to add and correct. Telaviv1 (talk) 14:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- I've removed the [full] protection. Elockid (Talk) 15:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for being a vandal fighter.--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 17:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Much appreciated. Elockid (Talk) 00:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Persistent vandal 208.108.127.134
Hi Eockid. Just a 'heads up' that User talk:208.108.127.134 apparently did not learn from the IP block you placed on them on 13 March. They are up to the same old juvenile vandalism crapola again today. Perhaps a longer block is now in order? The IP's sole purpose on Wikipedia seems to be vandalism. Thanks and have a great Wiki kind of day! Sector001 (talk) 18:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. Reblocked for 1 month. Elockid (Talk) 18:31, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Ruevtsi
You said you blocked it because of checkuser evidence. Was it at WP:SPI? I blocked an editor who admitted to being him at User talk:Jimbo Wales, but I'd like to have confirmation that you found reason to block the first editor. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- No, it's not at SPI. But the accounts are indeed Confirmed matches to the socks found at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Afghan1974/Archive. Elockid (Talk) 15:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Heads up
You're mentioned here. Unless I'm mistaking the situation, you made a mistake. Which is OK, we all make mistakes and I've made very many much worse ones here, the important thing is to swallow our pride and learn to keep improving. Herostratus (talk) 18:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, I got caught up in other stuff, and didn't follow up on this, but it appears that you were most likely correct after all. So, sorry about that, and the lesson to be learned is mine: don't go off half-cocked. I was kind of caught up in some other drama in Jimbo's talk page, and I allowed that to influence that other thread that I happened to see there. Lesson learned: I need to calm down and concentrate more on article work for awhile. Cheers, Herostratus (talk) 14:18, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Are you at liberty to say?
I went to the contribution history of User:Nicolas-Didier Boguet, because I had a bad feeling about one of their edit summaries. I saw you had already blocked that ID for being a sockpuppet.
I am curious as to who they were a sockpuppet of. Are you at liberty to name the puppetmaster? My first guess would have been User:Iqinn.
Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 17:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- I blocked it as a sock of Afghan1974 (talk · contribs). It's interesting that you brought up Iqinn because looking at the SPI case, it looks like there are some similarities. I probably will ask a clerk to merge the cases. Elockid (Talk) 18:51, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
You were mentioned at AN/I...
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Premature Closure????.The discussion is about the topic Topic. Thank you. - The Bushranger One ping only 10:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for sorting it out. Elockid (Talk) 13:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Genius!!!!
Thanks for finding that sock. The created article will have be nuked as well (Germanic peoples (modern)) as created by banned. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 18:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Np. I'm about to close the AfD as a speedy delete. Elockid (Talk) 18:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Well, yeah, that works too. Again thanks, what a frickin' headache... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 18:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Socks
Thank you for the recent blocks and protections, could you please do the same with these: 37.34.7.145, 123456789000a, 209.51.65.27, 216.52.207.121, Francis1953; Sodomy law, Discrimination, Hate speech, Witherspoon Institute. Thank you. --Scientiom (talk) 12:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- I have some doubts about them. For example the IPs don't geolocate to the same area. Or were you perhaps saying that they're related to other sockpuppets? Elockid (Talk) 17:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
edit filter #541+#542
Hi!
I just saw your new edit filter rules Special:AbuseFilter/541 and Special:AbuseFilter/542. It seems that you are not very used to the syntax, so I wanted to ask if I could help you in any way. What do you want to block. -- seth (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the offer. But at this time, I think everything looks fine for now. Though it's good to know that there's someone willing to help. Filter 541 is supposed to track IPs inserting "|" while blanking the page. Filter 542 is supposed to track edits like 211.100.48.133 (talk · contribs). Elockid (Talk) 20:41, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, then your syntax was wrong. I fixed #541 already.
lcase(added_lines) rlike "|"is the same asadded_lines contains "", because "|" means "OR" in a regexp pattern. That's why e.g. this edit was matched. -- seth (talk) 20:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, then your syntax was wrong. I fixed #541 already.
Schuch
You have deleted the discussion page of the Schuch: 15:55, 16 June 2012 Elockid (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Schuch (G5) May I know what was the reason and what was the content thereof?
I have just created a new talk page and I opt for the deletion of the article itself, as a hoax. noychoH (talk) 10:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- The page was deleted under WP:GCSD, G5. Creations by banned or blocked users. The only edit made was the banned user assessing the article. Elockid (Talk) 12:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
| I thought I was going to be crazy trying to restore the Loser (film) article! Thank you! Josve05a (talk) 23:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks! :) Elockid (Talk) 01:25, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Open proxy
Thanks for blocking those open proxies! Here is another IP the anti-Stallman editor has used: Special:Contributions/117.6.72.38. --AVRS (talk) 12:27, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yw. Also blocked the IP you mentioned. Elockid (Talk) 12:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Doesn't look like an open proxy but I'll keep an eye out. Elockid (Talk) 13:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Zhoban proxy
Hello Elockid. Please review my blocking decision, and see if you think it should be extended.
I just blocked one of this user's IPs, 66.199.245.66 (talk · contribs), per an AN3 case, since he was using the /19 range operated by the hosting company Ezzi.net. This was my two-month anon-only block of that range: 66.199.224.0/19
See User talk:DarthBotto#User:Zhoban.
Since then I noticed you had put a one-year block on 67.202.64.0/18 last fall, which also seems to be used by Zhoban. So there appears to be a precedent for doing one-year blocks of Zhoban's proxies.
My own block was limited since I didn't have a second admin to review my reasoning. Does it now make sense to extend my /19 block to a year as well, and make it a hard block? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me. I would even venture to say to have the range hardblocked for 2 years given it's block log. Elockid (Talk) 14:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
List of top grossing movies
In the list of movie franchise which have surpassed the $1 billion mark, you forgot to add Kung Fu Panda. Kung Fu Panda grossed $631,744,560 worldwide whereas Kung Fu Panda 2 grossed $665,692,281 worldwide making a total gross of $ 1,297,436,841.
PLZ Update it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhamo95 (talk • contribs)
- Could you please provide the source where you got this data from? Elockid (Talk) 14:06, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
May need to block IP
Hi Elockid, I saw that you blocked IP 80.112.143.48 for being a proxy. I think you may need to block this IP as well, since it looks like the same user who's making unconstructive/disruptive edits. Thanks - M0rphzone (talk) 22:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- I'll keep an eye on it. Elockid (Talk) 23:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- The IP-hopping editor (using 83.110.144.117) has reinserted a SomethingAwful link three times so far into Google Glass after I've reverted him. Can you block him? Thanks - M0rphzone (talk) 03:23, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- The IP hasn't edited after the final warning. So I hope you don't mind but in the meanwhile I'm gonna ask a friend to do some tests on the IP. Elockid (Talk) 18:49, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
??????
|
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
|
|
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You blocked toolserver on ACC. Nobody can request an account now. :p—cyberpower ChatOffline 12:20, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Whoopsies. Meant to ban another IP. I hope this isn't STOCKS worthy. XD. Elockid (Talk) 18:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, you appear to be the second person who has done this... I think technical measures to prevent it are in order... :D [stwalkerster|talk] 20:07, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Mapping the Global Economy
Hi Elockid,
Would you be interested in helping me recreate this page for a different country:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/Economy_of_the_United_States
The goal is to complete all 196 countries. Here is the project page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Economic_Map
- Would love to but my hands are currently tied at the moment. Elockid (Talk) 23:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
World GDP
We need to get pending changes set on this article, don't you agree? little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer 05:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Most definitely. Most IPs or new users who contribute on those pages are just there to deliberately introduce factual errors to elevate the stature of their country. Elockid (Talk) 23:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- I made the request at RPP. little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer 03:15, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- I made the request at RPP. little green rosetta(talk)
Generalised query about CU
Would I be right in thinking that there is no way a CU would be productive when one account is newly-registered and the suspected sock has not contributed using the other account since December 2011? - Sitush (talk) 16:21, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- In most cases, yes. But there are some cases where even though the last account is stale, if a check was performed, it is possible that that CU saved the data from their checks (I at least do on some of the more prolific socks). Elockid (Talk) 23:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- OK. I'll see what behavioural evidence emerges because there was never a proven case of socking previously but there is already a glimmer that this person may be the same as one who was topic banned and is now contributing in the area of the ban. I'm not the only contributor who thinks so but I'll also have a word with ErrantX and HelloyAnnyong, who were involved in the past. Thanks for your reply. - Sitush (talk) 06:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
RD3 at SJP article
Can I ask why, rather than simply reverting, you've RevDeleted the "disruptive" edits at Students for Justice in Palestine? Though I've been making some here-and-there (and some more substantive) edits on Wikipedia for years now, I won't pretend that I'm knowledgeable on the more esoteric protocols and procedures of our encyclopedia, especially when it comes to administrator-only actions. Thus, forgive me if I'm asking for what may be an obvious answer. I'm just not sure I understand the logic behind redacting edits so that no one can view them, rather than simply reverting or correcting as appears to be the more common standard operating procedure. I ask only out of curiosity and desire to understand this quirk of Wikipedia which I've only just now encountered for the first time. Thanks, and take care Direct action (talk) 18:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- It's pretty common protocol to deal with JarlaxleArtemis (talk · contribs). You can find more info about him at WP:Long term abuse/JarlaxleArtemis. Elockid (Talk) 23:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Ah I see, thanks much for the info Direct action (talk) 08:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Nangparbat
[2] Obviously. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yup, definitely looks like him. Account blocked. Elockid (Talk) 19:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Question about block of IP 89.218.100.50
Hi. I noticed you blocked 89.218.100.50 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) — an IP which I had warned earlier regarding a disruptive nationalist/irredentist statement inserted at Moldova — with a note saying the IP address in question was an open proxy. I was just wondering if there was some additional step I should have taken here (or should take in future) to check for this sort of thing when I see an IP editing in a questionable way. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:52, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think that any additional steps would have been necessary. Though, I can't really think if a simple way like signs to look out for to check for this sort of thing. Elockid (Talk) 01:33, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Nangparbat again
[3] As obvious as ever. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- Dennis beat me to the block, but I've semi-protected Gilgit–Baltistan. Elockid (Talk) 13:50, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
ACC
Hi Elockid. This request on ACC in the checkuser queue needs your attention. Thanks. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 10:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 15:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Pratyya (Hello!) 15:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 14:05, 18 April 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Pratyya (Hello!) 14:05, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
Checkuser
If one assumes that a blocked user has reincarnated (together with his behavior), what does one do? -- Zz (talk) 15:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Webhostblock unblock request on hold
There is an unblock request at User talk:Pankkake concerning a webhost block that you placed in April. I have placed the request on hold. Perhaps you can have a look at it. I have also posted a report on it at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Requests. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- Responded on the requests page. Elockid (Talk) 17:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
More spambots
Just found a few more "Ray Ban" userpage spambots. Could you CU them for me for sleepers? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 16:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah sure. Just give me a sec. I'm taking care a spam farm now. Elockid (Talk) 16:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Done. Blocked the sleeper accounts. Elockid (Talk) 16:34, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! I added "Ray Ban" to filter 466, which should stop those in future. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
I am GeorgianJorjadze and I am ready to return.
Hello Elockid.
As I promised I've kept my word and done my 6 months as I took the standard offer. Now I am ready to return and to be back with good standing as I neither created any socks nor I edited any articles. I've learned on my mistakes and I never gonna make them again. I understand all my mistakes what I've done in the past creating the socks or waging into the edit-wars and now I promise that such behavior which led me to an indefinite block won't happen again.
Now, I want to ask you to unblock my original account which is GeorgianJorjadze and I will return to wiki and start contributing to this amazing encyclopedia.
Hope to hear from you soon. GJ
- I have unblocked your account. Please be more careful in the future. Elockid (Talk) 13:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Elockid. I will definitely keep my word as I've said. GJ --GeorgianJorjadze (talk) 13:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
User group reassigned by you?
Hello Elockid.
I hope I'm in the right place for this, please forgive me if I'm not in the proper place. I'm really sorry to bother you with something so small, but it appears as if you've reassigned my user group from IP Block Exemptions. I'm Remote Controlling a friends computer at the moment, because I'm unable to message from my system due to this change.
I'll jump right in. I've been very busy in life, and have not had time to get into editing Wikipedia as of yet. I do plan to do this at some point, but because of your change I'll be unable to edit when I get time to start working with Wikipedia due to the security implimented on my network. All the information is in order and I was Unblocked from "Open Proxy" Properly on my talk page.
As you can see, even though I haven't had a chance to really start editing, I do use Wikipedia and keep an eye on it. I also don't cause any issues, disobey the rules or cause any disruption. I'd be very greatful if you'd be willing to fix this, so I don't have to go through all the steps again when I get time to start editing.
I'll be sure to check back here, but it would be really great if you'd reply on my talk page so there is no confusion.
Thank you very much for your time. elnichole. Elnichole (talk) 08:55, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hi there! Don't worry, you're in the right place. :) Before I get started, let me give you some background info. Although IPBE is given to you, it may be removed if the user appears to be inactive. I'll reinstate the flag for now but I can't guarantee that someone won't remove it again in the future if you're still inactive. Elockid (Talk) 18:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you!
Hi again.
I just wanted to say thank you. I really do appreciate your time in this matter. Again, I'm really sorry to have bothered you, it means a lot. :)
I hope to see you around sometime. Happy editing! -elnichole. Elnichole (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
User:I hate Elockid
Not sure if you care, but just so you know, see here and here. Flyer22 (talk) 20:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up! Elockid (Talk) 20:46, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
move Georgian people to Georgians
Hello Elockid.
Could you please move this page to Georgians?
It's protected by you and seems only admins can do it. Thanks. georgianJORJADZE 21:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- It's not move protected, so I think anyone can move it. But it might be one of those pages where the target page needs to be deleted first before moving. Before moving though, I would like to see if any others people would object such a move. Elockid (Talk) 23:16, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- All right. Thank you. GJ. georgianJORJADZE 23:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- Hello Elockid. There is no discussion at all in the talk page of the article. Maybe you could just move it to Georgians? georgianJORJADZE 17:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- Done. Elockid (Talk) 02:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. georgianJORJADZE 08:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
AFP Modernization Act
Could you please userfy AFP Modernization Act? If you move it to User:Jamesx12345/AFP Modernization Act, I'll add a few more refs and it can be recreated. Many thanks. Jamesx12345 09:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Done. Elockid (Talk) 12:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
CIA is not reliable, so you prefer broken links?
I mean, it's better to have NO SOURCE than to have a source? The Brazilian population is 193 million according to who? I don't see any source there supporting that information. MarcosPassos (talk) 13:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- It's not broken anymore. Elockid (Talk) 13:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the links are still broken. I had fixed broken or nonexistent sources (sources) to Bangladesh, Nigeria snd Brazil, but you reverted my edit. It's ok if you don't want to let me fix the broken links, but at least have the decency to fix them yourself. MarcosPassos (talk) 13:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- They're not broken. I checked them myself. Elockid (Talk) 13:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Really? Wheres is the link backing up Nigeria's population? Can you show me? The source for Bangladesh doesn't back that population number either. It's sad that between having no sources and the CIA world factbook, you choose the former. MarcosPassos (talk) 14:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- The link is right there in the intro of the article. Where updated national data are not available, figures are based on the 2013 estimates by the Population Division of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.[7] For convenience here (page 51, page 75 on pdf). The Bangladesh source on the bottom clearly says with big bold blue font: Projected Population (On July 16 2012) Total: 15,25,18,015. That is using the South Asian numbering system. Converting it to standard numbering (it's not really the difficult, just move the commas), it reads 152,518,015. Elockid (Talk) 14:42, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- Really? Wheres is the link backing up Nigeria's population? Can you show me? The source for Bangladesh doesn't back that population number either. It's sad that between having no sources and the CIA world factbook, you choose the former. MarcosPassos (talk) 14:34, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- They're not broken. I checked them myself. Elockid (Talk) 13:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the links are still broken. I had fixed broken or nonexistent sources (sources) to Bangladesh, Nigeria snd Brazil, but you reverted my edit. It's ok if you don't want to let me fix the broken links, but at least have the decency to fix them yourself. MarcosPassos (talk) 13:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
IPv6 range block?
Hi. Two possibly related IPv6 addresses (2601:c:2b00:705:59a9:923e:e681:6371 and 2601:c:2b00:705:1cd7:77ad:e725:12c7) have been edit-warring at Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories and some related articles. Both of these IP's seem likely to be the same person (duck test), and they've both been blocked, but I was wondering if something more (such as a range block) might be appropriate here. When I hover over these IP's, I see "RANGEBLOCK" mentioned, but I'm not really familiar at all with range blocks (especially not with IPv6), and I'd be grateful for any tips. Thanks. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 23:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- I did a rangeblock. The IP is registered to Comcast. The IPv4 addresses are usually sticky dynamic IPs/they don't reassign for 6+ months (only one IP) and they're usually allocated to only one customer. The IPv6 is a bit different in terms of range. A /64 range is assigned to usually one customer for Comcast. It's pretty safe to do extended long-term blocks for this ISP if there's a long history of problems. Elockid (Talk) 23:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. In general, is it safe to do an IPv6 /64 rangeblock in any situation like this? Or only with certain specific ISPs such as Comcast? Do we have reference material for this sort of thing? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 03:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- There are some ISPs that are also /64. But there's a number of ISPs that are /48 ranges (it's not uncommon for a customer to be allocated more than one /48 range). You can see this on ISPs like AT & T and Verizon for both IPv4 and IPv6. Cell phone IPs are usually larger than /48. Unfortunately, we don't really have a reference for what kind of ranges ISPs allocations are. Most of the time, the WHOIS data on the range is misinterpreted as the actual range that customers have access too. There's also more information about IPv6 at User:Jasper Deng/IPv6. Elockid (Talk) 03:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
- @Richwales: Yes, usually, for home IPs. Some collateral might occur for mobile IPs, since in that case /64 doesn't represent one user, as is the case for home IPs, which are usually on the basis of one /64 = one user. Comcast does not generally allocate more than one /64 for customers, especially home users (business users might have an easy case for getting a /48), so a /48 rangeblock is probably not advisable most cases (unless CheckUser can prove otherwise, or it can otherwise be shown the user has an entire /48 to himself). While Hurricane Electric is pretty liberal when it comes to their tunnels, most native ISPs like Comcast and AT&T don't do much more than /56 (AT&T, from my own personal experience, does a /60 with 6rd, while last time I checked, Comcast is only /64).--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Elockid
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
- I haven't met you many days. Anyway hope this makes your day better.--Pratyya (Hello!) 04:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
User:Marxists in grave
I noticed that you blocked Marxists in grave (talk · contribs) as a sock - whose sock is it? hmssolent\You rang? ship's log 12:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
i cant use wikipedia for a source?
Sorry my bad bro! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniyal7871 (talk • contribs)
- You can find more information on sources at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Elockid (Talk) 14:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
"The sources are there"
Yeah, they are. Check this one, for example. Can you tell me what is the total population for Bangladesh? Because I can't see. "Oh, they've just messed up the commas." Yeah, but can we trust sources that mess up the commas? I think that we should not. MarcosPassos (talk) 22:05, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- I did not say that they messed up the commas. That is a cultural way. Just like in some countries two million five hundred thousand is written as 2,500,000 or 2.500.000. Elockid (Talk) 22:11, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- Furthermore, official data beats every other data any day. Elockid (Talk) 22:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
A brownie for you!
|
Thanks for blocking User:NintendoE32013! I breathed a sigh of relief after I saw they had been blocked, as I basically spent 5 minutes sitting there refreshing their contributions list reverting their edits and waiting for someone to check the AIV... At least I got to try out rollbacking! Thanks again, DarkToonLinkHeyaah! 00:52, 17 August 2013 (UTC) |
- No problem. Thanks for the brownie. :) Elockid (Talk) 00:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Why did you block an account that hasn't been used for 1 year?
Hi! Just checked my old page, and see you blocked it. Why? 93.96.148.4213:21, 17 August 2013 (UTC) L'Origine du monde (talk) 13:22, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- IPs have both logged out and log in users. Logged in abuse is the case here. Elockid (Talk) 14:05, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
move Georgia (country) to Georgia
Hello Elockid.
Can you please initiate the discussion of moving Georgia (country) to just Georgia?
This issued is frozen and it finally needs to be solved.
I understand that you are US citizen but I think everyone will agree that the country is way more important then a regional entity. This is very insulting to see article like Georgia with text next to it with country.
Can you somehow be of any help in this matter?
Thanks. georgianJORJADZE 16:18, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- There's been a number of move requests looking at Talk:Georgia. I can help you start a discussion by going to requested moves. But based on the number of move requests, I doubt that there will be consensus at moving the article. Perhaps consensus can change though since it has been awhile since the last move discussion occurred. Elockid (Talk) 17:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- I was looking in the archives of those discussions and majority of users supported the move but still it did not get the move to Georgia. When is the best time to open such move request? And would it be once again be frozen to same result like it is now? I just don't understand that this problem still exists. georgianJORJADZE 18:33, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- The most recent move request doesn't look like a majority of users supported the move. There simply wasn't enough consensus to do so. Consensus can change, however. It's been over 5 years, I suppose you can request a move at WP:Requested moves. Elockid (Talk) 00:01, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- As you are an admin your initiated move would get more attention than from me. So if you are able to make one I'd be very thankful. georgianJORJADZE 00:23, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- The most recent move request doesn't look like a majority of users supported the move. There simply wasn't enough consensus to do so. Consensus can change, however. It's been over 5 years, I suppose you can request a move at WP:Requested moves. Elockid (Talk) 00:01, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- Please state the exact reason why you want the article to be moved. I will copy and paste this on to the requested moves page. Elockid (Talk) 00:48, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- Countries come first and regional entities second if not last. So countries should take precedent over sub-national, sub-regional units.
- Georgia has its name Georgia way longer than the US State of Georgia which was just named in 18c after British monarch George II.
- Georgia is way more important globally and has an impact on the rest of the world where US State of Georgia is just part of US and it does not.
- Georgia is more read on wiki than US State of Georgia.
- Georgia is UN member country.
- Georgia has history of several millenniums.
- Georgia has more UNESCO places than US State of Georgia.
- And last Georgia is a sovereign, independent country and nation and US State of Georgia is just a region within US.
- So because of this I suggest to move Georgia (country) to Georgia. georgianJORJADZE 11:11, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- Please state the exact reason why you want the article to be moved. I will copy and paste this on to the requested moves page. Elockid (Talk) 00:48, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Done. Elockid (Talk) 13:44, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Elockid. How long will it take to get any result whether it will be moved or not? georgianJORJADZE 14:40, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Usually a week. Depends really on the situation. Elockid (Talk) 22:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hope we'll see any result as this issue is very much frozen up. georgianJORJADZE 22:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Usually a week. Depends really on the situation. Elockid (Talk) 22:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)