Jump to content

User talk:Daniel Case

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.179.106.212 (talk) at 22:30, 19 February 2010 (→‎Error: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hi, welcome to the thirteenth volume of my talk page.


DYK for Reformed Dutch Church of Claverack

Updated DYK query On December 26, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Reformed Dutch Church of Claverack, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 19:42, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Stephen Miller House

Updated DYK query On December 27, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stephen Miller House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 11:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Quick question regarding NRHP

Hey, quick question. I've recently created Strawberry Hill (Rhinebeck, New York) with plans to eventually expand it, but I'm unable to find the NRHP reference number. Is there a standard source for that? Looking forward to working on the TSP, BTW, when I get a bit more free time to start researching it. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:30, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Harmon Miller House

Updated DYK query On December 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harmon Miller House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Stephen Storm House

Updated DYK query On December 29, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stephen Storm House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

62.68.174.243

"Insufficient activity"? Please have a look at the revision history of ITER. There have been nine identical vandalous edits - with the first back in November of this year - and three of which were in the last 24 hours. Just because the vandalism was not reported until this morning should not be taken as a reason to allow this repeated behavior. -RadicalOne---Contact Me 18:44, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daniel Case. You have new messages at RadicalOne's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Remember this guy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.102.175.102

I'm him!!!

I also made 2 articles Pop Island, and Robot Rescue

Happy now, I'm actually contributing!!! YAY!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheClerksWell (talk • contribs) 05:31, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Would you mind addressing this subsection of the User:BKWSU's bogus immigration applications ANI thread? - NeutralHomer • Talk • 06:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MetroStar

Hi there. I wanted to follow up on the AIV request I made regarding MetroStar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).

I gather that sysops are somewhat constrained as far as when they can block a user relative to how fresh their vandalism is, and with respect to how frequently they've been warned.

I'm wondering how best to deal with users such as this one, who appear to be gaming the system. By conducting their vandalism at off-peak hours and on poorly monitored pages, they are able to avoid consequences because their edits can fly under the radar for hours without notice. Further, despite a history of edits that include little more than vandalism, they are able to disguise themselves as good-faith editors by blanking numerous warnings.

I've made a log of those warnings and posted it to the user's talk page in hopes that future admins will be able to see it, but do you have any suggestions for how to deal with editors like this?

Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 06:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Best Wishes for 2010, FloNight♥♥♥♥ 13:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked IP?

This block log does not jibe with your edit summary for this edit. Not sure which one of us is mistaken... TheJazzDalek (talk) 16:37, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Van Rensselaer Lower Manor House

Updated DYK query On January 3, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Van Rensselaer Lower Manor House, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overlook Mountain

I was surprised to find that there's no article on this mountain - unless maybe it's listed under the name of the old mountain house up there? I have some pictures I could upload unless you're aware of any - mine would take a bit of editing to make them less touristy so probably something existing would be better.--otherlleft 22:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the one near Woodstock - I'm surprised your DYK machine hasn't found it yet.  ;) I'll see what pics I have and let you know when they're up - but I might have to wait until it's nice out to go back there and look at the tourist signs to start looking for sources.--otherlleft 01:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing you visit Commons enough that you don't need me to tell you I left a message for you there?--otherlleft 02:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I left myself a reminder to get some pictures in the spring. In the meantime I'm going to try to lay my hands on the book cited in Kaaterskill High Peak because it sounds like a good secondary source about the mountain itself. Given the unreferenced state of the Catskill Mountain House article, I don't know what sources might be out there about the hotel.--otherlleft 22:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am planning on picking the brain of one of the fire stewards who tells me he can give me some reliable sources and images. If you're willing to take a look it would be appreciated - I've never worked on a mountain before.--otherlleft 22:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats, I think you've managed to master the art of typing dry humor. I stared at my screen blankly for a moment, looked at what I had written above, and smiled. You're a loon. Is there a barnstar for that?--otherlleft 03:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You've got a pretty good handle on how to handle Flickr images, don't you? I found this using the advanced search for Creative Commons-licensed files that use derivative works. Is that the only criterion for making a Flickr image acceptable? (Of course, I also want to verify that the photographer didn't take a picture of Plattekill by mistake!)--otherlleft 03:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the image advice. All that alphabet soup makes my eyes bleed. Someday the naming of things like this will be wrested from lawyers and computer programmers and given into the charge of people that wish to make it clear what it means! (I dream of the "Use It However You Like" license.)--otherlleft 15:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

I sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 04:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time and consideration. As a gesture of appreciation, may I share a rhetorical question from the Analects of Confucius: "Is it not pleasant to learn with a constant perseverance and application?" --Tenmei (talk) 20:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi daniel

About SPI and AVI, I had a question to ask if you have the time. user:bonadea recently posted a string of three accounts which appeared to be socks by implanting 'joe castillo' in articles. My question is how to handle these doctor users correctly. [1] has already been created at long term abuse and the individual behind these is has been confirmed a sock puppeteer. Should myself and others report these accounts to AIV as they come, or should we go ahead with another SPI as you mentioned on the AIV page? The user though clearly has ways to circumnavigate blocks and persistantly is coming back every few weeks or so (even after a check user). I hope i was transparent with my wording, let me know if you need anything clarified, thanks for your time. Ottawa4ever (talk) 17:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm answering here since you indicate that you like conversations to remain together.

It sounds for this guy like you're going to need a rangeblock, which someone with checkuser will have to determine since there are only registered accounts involved. Or an open proxy block, which again will require checkuser.

We generally prefer, at AIV, that any suspected sock issues be dealt with at SPI if there hasn't been one already, and those that are posted at AIV be really obvious. Daniel Case (talk) 20:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Daniel Case. You have new messages at PMDrive1061's talk page.
Message added 02:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Since you declined the first unblock request I was wondering if you wanted to weigh in on this. Thanks Valley2city‽ 02:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DELETED PAGE?

You deleted my content for HMCS Malahat, saying it was "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" - what is the diff between what I tried to post, and what HMCS Discovery has on their page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdnnavyhistorylover (talk • contribs) 22:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block Request: newish user asking for help!

Hello Daniel, first, I'm sorry if this isn't the way to ask for these things as I've never needed to ask before but I'm getting a little desperate and exasperated with a user who is known to be a repeat offender of edit warring. I haven't used Wikipedia long enough, only about a year of only small edits, to know how to handle these types of disputes but I noticed you had handled a block of the user in question, Doctorfluffy, before. The dispute in question is the revision of the plot section of the Trick r' Treat movie page. He has made major editing changes without discussion or consensus and has ignored repeated requests to enter the discussion on the talk page and reverts any contradictory edits to his own. I'm trying to find help from an admin. now before this gets out of control. Please help! Thank you! (Deftonesderrick (talk) 07:32, 10 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I responded within minutes of you coming to my talk page. Why even bother with that if you were immediately going to do this? Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 08:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Daniel! This is being resolved. (Deftonesderrick (talk) 08:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

RitL-Steering

Only asking because I'm curious, what was wrong with the username "RitL-Steering?" -- Scarpy (talk) 01:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AIV

Thank you for responding to what I reported at AIV. However, I feel that, in light of what you said to me, I need to explain to you here. I'm a little taken aback that you would suggest that my reporting it was potentially disruptive, although I now understand why you said it. I certainly was not trying to be disruptive, and I want you to understand why. There has been a long history at that page of single purpose accounts coming from Something Awful and deleting any material of that sort, as a sort of prank, and of making personal attacks against me for defending it. (My user page was blanked just a little while ago, in fact.) The material the IP deleted had already been discussed in the article talk, and the decision seemed to be not to delete it, and the IP deleted it multiple times without a substantive edit summary, and continued after I templated their talk. I did not, and do not, perceive that they were really disputing content in a responsible way. I'm not disputing your conclusion, and have learned from it, but I want you to understand my intentions. Thanks for reading this. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:52, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response at my talk. Water under the bridge. It's already had multiple AN/I threads, in fact, but just keeps popping up again and again. I just wanted you to understand. Best, --Tryptofish (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Enax99

How many hoaxes, vandalisms, BLP violations and final warnings does one editor get? Woogee (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely wrong. Vandalism has to be ongoing when the vandal is an IP editor, but when it's a person with a User id who can be identified, it doesn't matter if the vandalism is months ago, they should be blocked. Woogee (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Enax99. Woogee (talk) 22:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taconic State Parkway article

Amazing work! (I've been kibbitzing while you've been building and thought I'd let you know!) --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 03:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. I tried to keep up and see where I could jump in, but you were always a step ahead and got it done quite efficiently. That's an article to more than proud of. –Juliancolton | Talk 19:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day NYC

Wikipedia 9th birthday coin

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 9th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Sunday January 24, 2010 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vivacoupons

Thanks! Rees11 (talk) 16:14, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD HMCS Discovery

I would be interested to know what article you are referring to when you say "Brought to my attention by a new editor after I deleted a similar article he'd created". I am trying to hunt up sources lacking in the Discovery article before weighing in on your AfD. I have found some, but haven't stopped digging. My own sense is that the article should stay but of course that doesn't much matter. The result of this may affect the others in the CFNR category as well and it would seem to me to be a shame to see them all go but I suppose if the sources for Discovery don't substatiate notabilty they could be merged into a single article. Cheers. --KenWalker | Talk 20:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK question

Hey there, thought I could tap your considerable DYK experience. I found a nice little stub I want to expand, but I don't know if I can get enough info within five days or not. I thought of just userfying a copy of the article to work on as I've seen other editors do, but if I do so is just pasting the new content into the article going to cause havoc with its history or anything like that? I expect that there won't be any changes while I'm working but I certainly would check that, but is there anything I should know how to do to avoid screwing anything up for you good adminites?--otherlleft 21:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:JD Salinger.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:JD Salinger.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 23:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NODRAMA/2

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 01:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Expired block

Hey, I'm just wondering if my block has expired, should i remove the block notice or leave it? Many thanks, ToxicWasteGrounds (talk) 16:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Opening a username RFC

Hi Daniel,

If you think it would help prevent further problems a username RFC would be OK to open. Thanks for the help! Sydtrolls (talk) 19:20, 21 January 2010 (UTC)sydtrolls[reply]

Huh?

Where is it written that a user only gets 3 unblock requests and then they should be locked out of their talk page? When they are being entirely civil?–xenotalk 03:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work

The St. Peter's Presbyterian Church article looks great. Thanks for all of your work on providing extensive information and sources for the article. Swampyank (talk) 04:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any connection to the church that I know of. I was stubbing various churches on the NRHP in the Northeast and happened to come across St. Peter's. Looks like a nice old meeting house. Swampyank (talk) 04:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Kalam Azad

Good evening dear Daniel Case,

I want to complain about some Users who vandalize many articles on Wikipedia and push their own POV´s on them. Some of them are Users like User:Ketabtoon who begin to edite all articles that is somehow related with Afghanistan, it´s people or culture, despite he has no knowledge about Afghanistan and it´s history. If you look on his contributions, you will see that he is always pushing unsourced and unreliable datas on articles and delete scientific and reliable sources, mostly scholarely. Be it about Ghurids, Persian language, Afghanistan, Ghaznavids or Tajiks and many more. He corrupts many articles which is a break of Wikipedia´s law (f.ex. here 1 or 2, 3 only three of many hundred of examples). He was many times reported but somewho he still occur on Wikipedia, although all his edites were banned by many Admins. The further point is, that he is known for beeing an ultra-nationalist Pashtun from Pakistan, who do not accept western, mostly scholaric and objective sources, except sources were terms like Afghan are used, so he can jump up and use it in a wrong context. For example as for Ghaznavids or Ghurids he was keeping the term for Pushtuns, while the term Afghan was used in Britannica for the Tajik people of modern Afghanistan who are also known by the law of Afghanistan as Afghans. He makes use of this point to claim and falsify all articles about culture, history, languages, countries etc. I ask you, as a member of the Admin-Team of Wikipedia and as a represant who is doing this job to provide the world the knowledge it needs, to do something against him. He and the User:119.73.4.199 (who is a banned User and a sock of many banned accounts; User:Khampalak, User:NisarKand etc.) are known for working with eachother. All edites of both Users are not only similar, but to 100% exactly the same, the kind of their writings and the kind how they push their POV´s and even the choise of their not reliable sources. As I mentioned they work together...or User:Ketabtoon is a sockpuppet of NisarKand, User:Khampalak etc. Wikipedia would be exonarated when the Admins would block and ban them from editing. As long Wikipedia accept them, articles will turn to slippery goods on Wikipedia and lose their accurate values.

For ca. 1 year ago, I was reading an article about Abul Kalam Azad, an Indian Muslim politician of Tajik origine. However, the article was using the term Afghan to tie him with Afghanistan, since his ancestors were from Herat, Afghanistan, a Persian/Tajik city. I was looking for sources on library and on the Net to exchange the term Afghan with Perian (Tajik). When I found them, I used a few of them. But some days later, the article was falsified by the User:119.73.4.199 and User:Ketabtoon from Persian to Pashtun, but not even back to Afghan (see on the state definition of Afghan, citizen), as you can see here. He claimed that the term Afghan mean Pashtuns and not Tajik. He did not want to understand the term was used to tie him with Afghanistan, as Britannica and other not scientific and reliable sources do, when it comes to regional heritage or origine of someone or something. For Abul Kalam Azad, I had the following sources where it was stated the person´s Persian origine:

http://www.bharatadesam.com/people/biographies/freedom_fighters/maulana_abul_kalam_azad.php

  1. India Wins Freedom; Orient Longman Book-Institute
  2. ^ Die politische Willensbildung in Indien 1900-1960; 1965, von Dietmar Rothermund
  3. ^ http://www.whereincity.com/india/great-indians/freedom-fighters/maulana-abul-kalam.php His mother was an Arab and the daughter of Sheikh Mohammad Zaher Watri and his father, Maulana Khairuddin, was a Bengali Muslim of Afghan (Tajik) origine. Khairuddin left India during the Sepoy Mutiny, proceeded to Mecca and settled there. He came back to Calcutta

The last source give in addition to the term Afghan as someone who comes from modern-day Afghanistan, his national ethnicity. But it is even interesting to see that User:Ketabtoon uses the same sources that grip on his Tajik ancestory for his Pashtun origine click here. They just jump over the sources and the sourced terms and exchange them with no opponent sources. I want to ask you, if you can give me the permission to correct the falsified paragraph in the article. I appreciate every help from your side. I am going to create an account for myself on Wikipedia and I would thank you very much if I could stand near to you. With best regards, dear friend--94.219.218.209 (talk) 23:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject New Jersey Newsletter (January 2010)

Hey

Not sure if you still check that e-mail, but I sent you something at the address where we discussed our buddy Sean. frontier. Cheers, Enigmamsg 00:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From whence my furor?

I'm not sure why I jumped all over your "from whence" the other day. Kudos for your handling of the situation. I did notice that you are a Russian speaker - the great, mighty tongue certainly has some cool words along this line: otkyda, kyda, tyda, syda.

Could I ask you to take a look at my Star Gazers' Stone article? Any suggestions would be appreciated. Smallbones (talk) 13:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-- -- --

 Bureaucrat note: The name was judged acceptable and the change was put through, so the user should not be blocked. -- Avi (talk) 21:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:-- -- --

Morse code as a user name is hardly reason appropriate to block someone; it falls under the Non-English user names. Also -- -- -- was approved at WP:CHU already by Avi; you cannot self-create a user name without a letter in it these days. Between ACC and CHU i spend quite a lot of time on user names. As a hobby i also read unblock requests. Your block of -- -- -- is very close to WP:ITBOTHERSME, evidenced primarily from the lack of a violation of the message in the block notice template. "A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account."

I do not dispute that -- -- -- is a bit of an odd name and hard to pronounce by most people who do not realise it is Morse code. The same could be said for Шизомби (which i also dealt with a CHU) or any other user name written in a script one can not read. Шизомби had been using that as his signature for years now without it being his user name. He was asked to change to the Cyrillic user name or change his signature.

Also it seems that while i was drafting this Avi declined the rename from -- -- --. [2] delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 21:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your notes on my talk page. See now that Avi responded here while i was revising my initial posting. Extreme regret for the choice of linking method that i also used which upon rename implied that there was bureaucrat concern with the new user name. Also let Anna know that it is not her fault for reporting -- -- -- to UAA based on the notes on his talk page at that time. Never again will i use that type of linking. I have changed it in my CHU clerk note at the top of his talk page for future reference, added a note that -- -- -- is the new name, asked -- -- -- to update his signature to include links. From this has come the realisation for the need to re-design (some) CHU templates as they can not be PAGENAME dependent. delirious & lost ☯ ~hugs~ 02:03, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
Thanks very much for your peer review and all of your additions to "City of Blinding Lights". The article looks a lot better now and it would definitely be lacking were it not for you. Thank you so much for all of your work! MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 07:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually not sure that we even need to link to iLike. The sourcing reviews thus far, using the album for that part, have all been positive. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 18:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help with my user name

Hi Daniel,

Thank you for all your help with my user name!!! Sincerely, Sydtrolls (talk) 15:55, 27 January 2010 (UTC)sydtrolls[reply]

Hey...

Any final words for User_talk:StevenMario and his unblock? I'm tired of watching him abuse the trout :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, did you consider the discussion carefully? He did not even attempt to address the concerns raised in the unblock proposal. He simply made random edits for the last two days. Would you please re-examine the unblock, as he did not address my concerns, or the concerns raised by the other editor on his page? Thanks, NJA (t/c) 18:24, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm willing to assume good faith on his last comment, since he doesn't have a long history of block and unblock yet (and, either way this turns out, he won't). You weren't the only contributor to that discussion. If you want to re-block, go ahead, but I ask you to consider my reasoning first. Daniel Case (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well hopefully whatever 'he gets' is what the actual concerns were. Regardless of who was party to the discussion, I would have hoped that there'd be a pause until my legitimate concerns were addressed, however life will go on. NJA (t/c) 19:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm keeping an eye on him, and I'd lay even odds that other editors will too. I'm not entirely convinced he's changed his spots - this AfD he just started seems to be one more based around WP:POINT than any real concerns about notability - he seems to care more about his own opinions than any other concerns. TheRealFennShysa (talk) 21:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I would not hesitate to reblock him if he can't get his act together. Nor should you. Daniel Case (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an administrator, tho - the only blockage I get is if I eat a lot of cheese... :) TheRealFennShysa (talk) 21:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

uw-ublock

I wonder if uw-ublock is really the right thing to use in cases like User talk:BlindlightLLC, where the user not only has an improper username but also has obvious COI contributions already... It seems more confusing than anything else (to the user in question.) --jpgordon::==( o ) 21:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to say the same thing. It's kind of a crappy thing if we tell someone they are blocked only for their username, and then when they propose to change it, we tell them they actually have another, bigger problem that wasn't brought up yet. Although in this case the new username also implies representation of a website. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In case both of you are watching my page for a response ... Yes, as presently constituted {{uw-ublock}} is inadequate to the message we need to send when an editor is making obviously promotional contributions with a clear connection to the username. I consider {{uw-spamublock}} to only be appropriate when the user is actually spamming, i.e. inserting links to existing articles rather than creating a new, self-promotional one. {{uw-softerblock}} really isn't appropriate for this, either. I really think we need a new username block template that covers self-promotional editing connected to the name. Daniel Case (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have something there. I only wanted to bring it up because I've seen this same scenario a lot lately, where one admin blocks solely for the username and another admin declines the user's good faith request to change it. Ok, so who's got the template-fu to whip us up a new one? Beeblebrox (talk) 22:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are deeper problems, too. For example, we have a highly specialized use of the concept of "spamming" on Wikipedia, which is only vaguely related to what the rest of the world thinks of as "spamming". Likewise, we use the term "promoting", and I'm sure many of us have run into the same thing repeatedly: "I'm not spamming! I'm not promoting! I'm just trying to tell the world about my company!" I think that's more than we want to go into now, though. Anyway, if someone would come up with the right language, I'll happily build the template. (See, I always pick the easy jobs.) --jpgordon::==( o ) 22:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to be banned for disagreeing with you

Decline reason: "Sure, like this edit] wasn't a personal attack, an impermissible refactoring of a talk page comment, and just plain disruptive. — Daniel Case (talk) 19:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)"

Well, obviously personal attacks against myself are by far quite against wikipedian rule. If you, in any manner, had checked the history rather than looking for an excuse to deny; you would have seen that I had edited a comment added by myself. --173.171.222.251 (talk) 22:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:JD Salinger.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:JD Salinger.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 20:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elaine May on location during Ishtar.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Elaine May on location during Ishtar.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 20:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:November 1988 Vogue cover.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:November 1988 Vogue cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 20:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

In timely follow-up, I sent an e-mail detailing a mentorship plan. I wonder if critical commentary or helpful questions about this plan might be within the ambit of your expertise and interests? --Tenmei (talk) 07:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Username User:Woodsy dong peep

Woodsy dong peep (talk · contribs)

Hi Daniel. Before taking this up with the user, I wanted to get your opinion on whether this is even a username of concern. As you can see, User:Woodsy dong peep has the word dong as part of his username. In recent years, dong has come to be used primarily as a synonym for the word penis. See the entry at Merriam-Webster’s here.

Before taking up the matter with the user, as required by WP:BADNAME, I wanted to first see if there was even an issue. If there is no username concern, perhaps because WP:NOTCENSORED <smile>, then I can avoid taking it up with him, especially given that his responses to other wikieditors on other matters can be a bit odd, to say the least. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 07:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Daniel Case. You have new messages at SpikeToronto's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fair use-in general

Hi, After reading a number of your comments-especially on the "delete Salinger thread", it seems to me that you have a breadth of knowledge about fair use. I am seeking to understand it as I am about to loose to some files at the request of Damiens. Damiens says that under fair use one can use a copyrighted photo "in a commentary about the photo itself, or in a text about photo-journalist, or in a text about photograph techniques, it does not allows us to use the image in a text reporting the news event the image captures." He further says, 'We can't freely use it to show what that man looked like." Now I was just looking at the historical images template and it says, "Use of historic images from press agencies must only be used in a transformative nature, when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts." which I guess is Damiens argument (he doesn't really explain much). When I read that the first time, when I uploaded using that rational, I took it to mean that the picture I uploaded of David Carradine accepting his star on the walk of fame could be used to identify Carradine (the image) and not the event (the accepting of the star). Am I just not understanding English? Thanks in advance for any help in understanding this subject.--DorothyBrousseau (talk) 21:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AIAV

Hi Daniel, could you please re-check the report you declined from me at WP:AIAV? I think either you might have misread my post or not realized that the related contributions are now deleted (so you should check deleted contributions). If you have any questions that need answering please feel free to ask, or if you have any concerns against it, please feel free to let me know. Thanks! --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 03:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice.

Hi Daniel, I just thought that I'd let you know that there is a discussion at ANI about an editor you just softblocked. It's not about you, exactly, but I think your input would be helpful. Thanks! (And sorry if this is dragging you into drama.) -- Atama頭 01:15, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Steepletop

Updated DYK query On February 3, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Steepletop, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for St. Peter's Presbyterian Church

Updated DYK query On February 4, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article St. Peter's Presbyterian Church, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Tremper

Nice job on that. You really know your way around using maps! Is it hard? --otherlleft 05:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Emile Brunel Studio and Sculpture Garden

Updated DYK query On February 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Emile Brunel Studio and Sculpture Garden, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lace House (Canaan, New York)

Updated DYK query On February 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lace House (Canaan, New York), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:inuit18

This User:inuit18 is valdalisme the article Jamal-al-Din Afghani, but not with his account but only with ip-address and talks bad and he is scolding in his own language and you didn't understand it. Ask it to User:Ketabtoon to translate it for you. look here [3] and here [4]. If he can't talk like a gentlemen, than he has no rights to talk bad and scolding, and hide his face by editing this post without his account (he did it also in the past, look and read my talk page User talk:Abasin). I think is not right and wikipedia most do something against it. If you (User:VirtualSteve) are the one who has blocked me 2 times. I will see what you are doing with this. I will see your justice and of wikipedia. May justice triumph.Abasin-اباسین (Tofaan-توفان) 16:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Mount Tremper

Updated DYK query On February 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mount Tremper, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thank you from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MoS on quotes

Or mostly right: it appears you were correct about the double-single matter. In using undo, however, you also undid the LQs, which was the main purpose of the edit, which I must admit to some momentary vexation concerning.

I'm currently trying to work out just how much "allowable typographical alterations" one may (or must) carry out on quoted material. Presumably if it's OK to flip single and double, it's also appropriate to conform direct quotes to LQ, which I'd previously avoided doing. Smartiger (talk) 19:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

24 Waterfall salute!

Waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, waterfall, and waterfall.
Thanks for all your help with picking images. Waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park made Featured Article today! Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MA in English at UB

You got an MA in English at UB in the 1990s? You probably met my dad.. Prof Richard Fly. He retired around when you were there, so maybe so, maybe not. Just stumbled on your page and read this, is all. Night! Pfly (talk) 08:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note

See User talk:Rhiannon5577, thanks.  fetchcomms☛ 00:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dealing with the UAA report

G'day, thanks for dealing with the UAA report on me before I even knew it existed! As I state on my userpage, I have no interest at all in religion, it's just a name I first chose in the early 90s on IRC and I've stuck with it ever since on most forums/sites that I go on. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 12:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on writing articles about historic districts?

I'm planning to write about the Firstside Historic District in Pittsburgh before too long, but I'm really unfamiliar with writing about districts of this sort. Unlike the few districts about which I've written before (either residential or residential-and-commercial, and always composed of dozens of contributing properties), this is a small group of commercial buildings, and (unlike others that I've written about before) the only in-depth source I have is the nomination form. Could you give me a few points of general advice on how to format the article? Nyttend (talk) 01:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Do you think it's appropriate, then, to give a detailed description of each of the dozen-or-so buildings, even though all I have on each is the nomination form? I didn't want to use it to the point of possibly paraphrasing, since I think it's better only to summarise our sources. Nyttend (talk) 06:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:80.2.15.1

I recently had a minor run-in with User:80.2.15.1, and noticed some of his contributions do seem to lack good faith.

You had previously given the user a temporary ban and I thought it worthwhile to bring the user's edits to your attention again.

Edit war, then waited nearly a year before trying to reinsert the statement: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Angel_of_the_South&diff=prev&oldid=340964697

Vandalised article three times (on this occasion with an disingenuous edit summary): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=9/11_Truth_movement&diff=prev&oldid=335183574

Why you gave him a temporary ban: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_H._Fetzer&diff=prev&oldid=271840174

Best regards Memphisto (talk) 13:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Galli-Curci Theatre

Updated DYK query On February 14, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Galli-Curci Theatre, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your blocks

Are you aware of the fact that the complaint to the wrong venue (it should've ANI, not ANI) filed by Je suis tres fatigue (talk · contribs) out of grudge for his recent block? I'm not defending their edit warring, but you should know that Fatigue is suspected as a sockpupet of a banned user for his disruptive and suspicious behaviors, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Michael Friedrich. He violated 3RR, and nearly violated 3RR three more times over multiple articles ever since he registered in English Wikipedia for his SPA purpose. Kuebie was harassed by the banned user back then, and presented evidences for the case. Kuebie's contribution is not a SPI unlike Je suis tres fatigue who also did the same disruptive behavior to another language Wikipedia so got blocked for one month. He also forum shopped to AN3 at the same time even though he reverted the same much. Admin EdJohnston said this as declining his third unblock request and blocked his talk apge

I think your block can give a wrong sign to the disruptive SPA. I suggest you to review the case again. Thanks.--Caspian blue 19:52, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked him indef because he's blocked four times before for the same behavior. Whatever the issues with the other user who reported him, his edit-warring was disruptive enough to warrant another block. Yes, it probably should have been on AN/I, but I reviewed Kuebie's history and found clear grounds for a block. Yes, JSTF may be a sock. But the issue at AIV is not who reports the conduct but what the conduct is. Daniel Case (talk) 19:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think you really need to review the contribution of Je suis tres fatigue and Kuebie's contribution since you choose the hard way. The block of Kuebie instead of the SPA can give negative aspects to the contentious area. If you have a time, could you take care of reviewing the backlogged SPI case which has not been reviewed for over 10 days? Thanks--Caspian blue 20:02, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, KoreanSentry was never warned nor reverted more than two times.-- Caspian blue20:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this probably was complicated enough (and, unfortunately, it just got more complicated) that it should have been reported to AN/I. But ... someone took it to AIV. I tend to leave SPIs to the clerks and Checkusers as I don't consider myself as having sufficient expertise in those.

I admit I was unaware of the ongoing sock investigation, which does put these reports in a slightly different light. But I felt KS's conduct was contentious enough that a block was justified, Warnings are desirable, but not necessary. If he requests unblock and someone else grants it, I will not raise any objections. It would be their judgement call as an administrator as it was mine. Daniel Case (talk) 20:11, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question for you. If I posted a block request to Fatigue at AIV, would you block him indefed? Of if I commented there that Fatigue's ill intention is related to his block just getting off his block, then you would block Kuebie and KoreaSentry instead of blocking Fatigue? This is Kuebie's edit counter[5] while this is Je suis tres fatigue's edit counter. You can see who is indeed a "SPA". Kuebie should've more calmly behaved, but most of his blocks were related to "sockpuppeters"'s disruption from off-wiki forums like 2channel. (I've been Wikistalked and hounded by them as well) So your block of Kuebie, almost 2 and half year old editor who made edits out side of contentious areas to the extreme length without reviewing the complaint's recent activities gives the edit warrior a wrong sign. I think reducing the block length of Kuebie to a common block length (24 hours was latest one, so 48hrs, or 36hrs would be appropriate) would be wiser since you did not know the complaint's malicious intention and grudge. I also strongly recommend you review Je suis tres fatigue's contribution regardless of the him being suspected as a banned user. He has ignored my numerous suggestions to take his issue through WP:DR, and insists that his endless reverting and edit warring are valid even though many editors do not think so.---Caspian blue 20:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, don't think of AIV as "requests for blocks". We reviewing admins see it as merely behavior presented for review, without any context. Not all AIVs end in the reported user being blocked ... I declined a couple this morning that the bot had reported.

So now this involves off-wiki activity too? groan ... I may yet commute Kuebie's block, but I remind you as well that he had been blocked on for previous occasions for similar behavior. I can't easily overlook that.

I've noticed that JSTF has been seeking help from other admins as well ... the sort of thing we want people to do.

I am certainly aware that AIV reports can be made in bad faith. If someone had made a comment, I allow that I might have looked at this differently, but I still saw bad behavior. As the American saying goes, even a broken clock is right twice a day. Daniel Case (talk) 21:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The diffs are about edit warring past more than 24 hours, and since his AN3 file has not got any response yet, he chose the AIV. I think the AIV was a just bet in his thin hope that he could lead them to be blocked, and it worked because you blocked them without knowing the context. The block is punitive not preventative since the edit warring was stopped one day ago. I'm boldly saying that you were deceived by the SPA's WP:GAMEing the system. I once reported him to AIV because his obvious vandalism and repeated personal attacks: blanking my small note to notify that his message to an talk page is duplicated, and his targeting to one particular editor. He falsely called the edit as vandalism, and called me a stalker because I've warned him for his disruptive blanking campaign over and over nearly violating 3RRs. However, he followed me to AIV page and attacked me there. The request was rejected because an admin said the matter is not a direct AIV case. I considered commenting to AIV page as opposed to Fatigue's ill-faith report, but since he is keeping falsely accusing me in order to avoid the scrutiny, I did not comment, and I believed that reviewing admins would throw out it. I'm sure if I commented there, you would've blocked Fatigue instead of blocking them with the extreme charge. However here we are. I've strongly recommended you to review the contribution of Fatigue because your accuse Kuebie as a SPA which is not true while the very SPA is getting a free way. I'm waiting for your reply to my question regarding your view on his contribution with agenda.--Caspian blue 23:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Kuebie is requesting for unblock.--Caspian blue 23:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) OK. I think I've decided that what I'm going to do is unblock them both (at some point in the near future; I'm busy right now) on the condition that you all take it to AN/I right away and don't darken AIV with this crap again. Daniel Case (talk) 23:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've not requested you to unblock them, but just to reduce "one editor's block length" and to review the Fatigue's contribution. The situation is a crap, but since your block of the two editors without knowing of the intention of the SPA to a wrong venue is why we're wasting our time, I don't think I darken AIV with "crap". Caspian blue--23:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking the action. I've tried to avoid further drama, so that's why I'm trying to talk with you here. But if you still feel the strong need for the block/unblock review of the three editors, I will.-Caspian blue 23:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Sorry for being so intemperate. In my humble opinion, any complicated instance of people filing AIVs on each other when the situation is clearly beyond the scope of that page is crap, regardless of who the instigator is and who's in the right. Nothing ticks me off more than AIV reports like that ... we've had a few other ones lately.

You will be happy to know that I have put an end to the current situation by blocking Jstf indef as a sock, among other things, per the comments from the other people reviewing the unblock requests he made. But please, in the future, find ways to keep situations from getting that far. There is no reason this all had to happen the way it did. If you get tired of waiting for an admin to close the SPI (and believe me, I'm not sure who really would have wanted to close that one), ask on AN. This only got to AIV because you didn't take the initiatives you could have taken to get the SPI closed earlier. Daniel Case (talk) 23:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if I made you feel offended with the messages here but I did not really mean to look down your judgment nor the AIV system. This situation is too complicated and the block evading sockpuppeter just knows very well of how to game the system for years. I agree that I have the responsibility for not taking the backloged SPI case to AN. I contacted a SPI clerk, and he said SPI cases have been delayed for workloads and lacks of active SPI clerks. Kuebie also convinces that Fatiue is the same sockpuppeter who harassed him, so he seemed to lose his temper. Both of two editors obvious saw my SPI request, so the "brazilian sockpuppeter" (well I did not say such thing though) seems to be from their observation on the SPI case. On the other hand, I really wanted to reduce the drama level and strongly believed that any reviewing admin for the SPI case would be convinced over the sockpuppetry of Fatigue, so thought it is not worth fighting with the sock. I just needed more patience. That is the reason for my part of problems in the situation. I hope all this matter would be sorted out at this point.--Caspian blue 23:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just one more thing for clarification, in the diff you seemed to lift Kuebie's block, but he is still blocked. --Caspian blue 00:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, forgot to actually do the unblock :-). Daniel Case (talk) 00:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again. No worries. The user is unblocked now.--Caspian blue 00:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About the block of JSTF

May I have the grounds that you judged that JSTF is a disruptive sock of Michael Friedrich.[6]--Arstriker (talk) 14:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for District 10 School

Updated DYK query On February 15, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article District 10 School, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

If you are bored...

given that the pg is empty, can I ask you to review a requested block that was denied? Only if you have the time/inclination ... it is here--Epeefleche (talk) 04:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tx for responding. The reason I raised it is that I have seen sysops block editors who commit flagrant violations (like these last two were) after receiving level three warnings. In other words, if I had just reported the ip, and not given a level four warning as well, I've seen blocks applies for this level of vandalism (leaving profanity on two editors' talkpages) ... the fact that a level four warning was applied as well should not (imho) matter.... though sometimes (to me, without it making sense) that is the approach taken. Just my thoughts. If all sysops on that page took that approach, I would never give a warning to an ip as to which I was seeking a block ... but that would lead to a less helpful record of infractions on their talkpage, and seems not to me to make sense. Anyway .... No need to reply, but if you do you can do so here. Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 04:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's really an admin's judgement call. In a case where the IP does not have a prior block record (this one didn't), most of us at AIV give good faith on a vandal who stops when warned. The point of AIV is to prevent vandalism first and foremost, not block people (although that usually is how we accomplish our main goal). And as we always say, blocks are preventative, not punitive. In this case we had prevented further vandalism without recourse to a block.

Granted, there are situations where I might have blocked with less than a full complement of warnings. I admit that, after having checked the timestamp, I didn't review the edits. Really egregious (i.e., profanity and hate speech, or BLP violations) vandalism would probably get less than the usual four warnings the first time ... as long as it was recent. And if a vandal shows a history of walking up to the wire and stopping, then repeating that sometime later, s/he should be blocked temporarily because they can't keep getting away with that.

So keep giving warnings ... they do have an effect even if they don't lead to a block right away. Daniel Case (talk) 04:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfair Block - Will report this Admin (you) for abusing power

First I received a warning about an action that I took, which I believe to be legit, and I firmly heeded that warning and demanded an explanation from Ioeth, who warned me (and I never did get an explanation). Then shortly later I was blocked, even though I seized activity.

Here is my warning and your block information below. I still DEMAND an explanation from Ioeth for the unfair warning, and yourself for abusing blocking privileges.

Your only warning

Hi. If you continue edit warring against the use of DMOZ links in articles I will block you for disruption. You may consider this the only warning that you will receive from me. Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 22:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

This IP address has been blocked temporarily, because suspected sockpuppet evidence has determined that this IP address was used abusively; the address has been blocked to prevent further abuse.

If you are a registered user and you're seeing this message, then please post {{unblock|reason for unblock here}} on your talk page, with a note referencing this message. Please be sure to include this IP address in your note.

Administrators: Please consult with the blocking administrator who placed the block before unblocking.

Daniel Case (talk) 14:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Wickland (talk) 04:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note that this user has placed an unblock request here: User_talk:Wickland, which you may want to comment on. Happy editing, --Taelus (talk) 11:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


==Ivy Page==

I am, in-fact, Ivy Page. You asked that I contact you?

Ivy Page Ivylpage (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add a "public interest" clause to Oversight

A proposal to add a "public interest" clause to Wikipedia:Oversight has started at Wikipedia_talk:Oversight#Proposal_for_new_.27public_interest.27_clause. SilkTork *YES! 10:27, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Immunise un-block request

Hi Daniel, thanks for the message. Immunise is an enthusiastic young editor, but he is stubborn and will not listen to advice and strongly worded criticisms. He has been a real nuisance these past few weeks, particularly by creating poorly —and often erroneously sourced—lists of medical conditions; most of which either have been nominated for deletion or have been deleted.

If you have the time to read his long Talk Page, (which you might have already read), you will see the problems he has caused. He does not seem to understand the damage caused to the project by saying that a relatively benign viral infection is "closely related to smallpox" for example.

I and Pdcook finally felt that we were getting through to him when he agreed that a week's Wikibreak would be good for him. But shortly after, he continued to add unsourced content. I don't like to block editors and I rarely do so. But on this occasion I think it was justified and that one week was in order given that Immunise had already agreed to stop editing for this time.

I am still not convinced that Immunise understands the importance of our policies and I think that conceding to his request will undermine all the efforts that have been made by me and others to get him to read and adhere too them. I blocked him to protect Wikipedia and I think the project still needs this protection. I know this is a cliche but, if Immunise is as serious about Wikipedia as he says, he will thank me one day for this. My very best wishes to you, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 19:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Agudas Achim Synagogue

Updated DYK query On February 18, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Agudas Achim Synagogue, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK hook

DC,

Thanks for the comment on the hook. I was (and am) obviously struggling with it. Surprise has something to do with DYK hooks, so I finally went with the most surprising thing there - that it was named after the grandfather of a saint. But relevance is also important. Let me just give you the one sentence story of the article, and maybe you can suggest something.

Working class education in Philadelphia was supported by one of the richest families of the age of Robber Barrons, and part of that has been destroyed.

Well now I see that this set of "facts" is not well developed in the article - more work to do. If you have any ideas, please let me know, or go ahead and change the hook yourself.

As always, Smallbones (talk) 01:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


block

Maybe you can look at my unblock thing again, since I've already "evaded" you guys, there's no point in having that other ip blocked (ps. i can't help when my ip changes, i was just explaining) other129.133.142.87 (talk) 05:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like some homework?

Hi Daniel, I recently completed a bunch of articles on buildings designed by Frank Freeman, some of which still exist. Trouble is, I don't have great images for some of them. I know you live in New York, do you ever get down Brooklyn way? If so, there are a few buildings I could really do with a nice shot or two of. Let me know if you can help and I'll give you a list. Gatoclass (talk) 08:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, well I'd have to take a look at his photos first. I think most of the ones you've done look pretty good, which is why I asked you :) Gatoclass (talk) 14:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...

Next time assume good faith of the other, regardless of rules. I was right! see User:Wikipeacekeeper --TheFEARgod (Ч) 10:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just reading over Hudson River Historic District and found this great map of Livingston Manor. I want to try to get a different crop myself for a project, but the source link (citation #4) isn't working. I still don't really understand the nps website. Could you get that link live again, please? Thank you very much! upstateNYer 02:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Beaverkill Bridge

Updated DYK query On February 19, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Beaverkill Bridge, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—Ed (talk • majestic titan) 06:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Error

Just came across your blocks of User:Wickland and User:68.191.163.74

I don't know where you get the idea that these are User:Sumbuddi, the behaviour is entirely different.

For one thing, 68.191.163.74/Wickland appears to be in the US whereas Sumbuddi appears to be in the UK.

For another, there is no agreement between the editors. If you see here:

[7]

there is a discussion between Sumbuddi and 68.191.163.74, and the two have opposing views.

Secondly, article edits are also different. See at Casino

edits by 68.191.163.74 - all inserting Yahoo links:

[8] [9] [10]

edits by Sumbuddi - inserting a link to Casinocity. [11] [12] [13] [14]

The third edit by Sumbuddi is actually to replace the Yahoo link inserted by 68.191.163.74, same thing happens here:

[15]

and here [16]

There is no evidence that the two users are the same, and given that they don't agree about anything, plenty of evidence that they are NOT the same user. I don't believe there is any basis for suggesting that they are the same person. Please take more care. 86.179.106.212 (talk) 22:30, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Daniel_Case&oldid=345103917"