User talk:J.delanoy/Archive 27

This is an archive of past discussions about User:J.delanoy. 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 20

←

Archive 25

March 1, 2010 — March 31, 2010

Thank you

Thanks for blocking that IP vandal that was edit-warring on The Thing That Should Not Be's talk page. You should give yourself a barnstar for your hard work. You're truly an amazing Wikipedian. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 02:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

God, I love semi-protection.

Keeps the little shits right off my page. HalfShadow 03:02, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Someone should explain to this chucklefuck that all he's doing is raising our edit-count... HalfShadow 03:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I tried out a short rangeblock just to see what it will do. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 03:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Eh. To me, he's just dessert. Not the brightest lightbulb in the package, either. Hello out there. Yes, I mean you; you're just making our job easier, not vice-versa...Half Shadow 03:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Bureaucratship

Hello, J.delanoy. You are receiving this message because I think that, based on your edits and experience, you could become a bureaucrat. I was wondering if I could nominate you for bureaucratship. Let me know if you can. Thank you. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 23:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I really appreciate the fact that you would trust me in this role, but I think I am going to have to decline your offer. I don't have a lot of experience in crat areas: I vote in RfAs, but I rarely discuss them abstractly. I also don't usually hang out around WP:CHU, and I basically never do anything involving bots. Also, I just stood for the steward election, so I don't think I should run for two positions so close together. Again, thank you very, very much for your offer, but yeah... J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 23:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Brucejenner

Hi, what can be done about this user, perhaps in the form of range blocks so they can't edit ever again? CTJF83 chat 17:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 17:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Well I asked at ANI and the admin said maybe some rangeblocks can be done? Isn't it possible to block a range of IP addresses? I know this is probably only done in extreme circumstances, but what other options are there to prevent brucejenner from editing and disrupting Wikipedia? CTJF83 chat 18:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, rangeblocks are possible. What I was asking is, what pages and with what IPs/accounts is brucejenner vandalizing or whatever? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

None currently that I know of, I mean since you know what IPs he has been using, can't you just block them all? I'm totally new to this sock stuff. CTJF83 chat 18:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, I don't actually know what IPs he is using. I was just saying that in general, it is possible to block ranges of IPs. I am a checkuser, so I could find out what IPs he is using, but checks are not generally done unless there is a concrete reason to run them. Also, running a check against just one account or IP is more or less a random shot in the dark. If I have behavioral information, or many accounts to compare, I can usually get better results. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you go through Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Brucejenner and see what IPs there are, and block them? CTJF83 chat 18:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I blocked one of his ranges, but he may be able to access more. User:Dominic had blocked one a few days ago, and he apparently managed to get around that. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:26, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll just have to see how it goes....is it wise to report any new users that continually vandalize WP:LGBT pages, or is it not AGF to report people as a sock. CTJF83 chat 18:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

← If their patterns of vandalism match some know vandal, then you should probably report it. If not, don't bother, unless you see several accounts/IPs doing the same thing. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I just don't want to end up reporting a bunch of false accusations. CTJF83 chat 18:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Great Marlow School

Hi, I'm afraid I don't know the correct process so I'm approaching you as I know you are an admin. A user appears to have moved Great Marlow School to James tucker and then to Great Marlow school. Any chance you could sort it out?

Thanks - Scribble Monkey (talk) 17:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, my previous edit had the wrong edit summary. - Scribble Monkey (talk) 17:23, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Should be sorted now. There isn't really any established procedure for things like this. You can either find any admin who is on (checking Special:Log is probably the fastest way to find someone) and ask them on their talk page, or if you want, you can just leave a note on the administrators' noticeboard. Cheers! J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 17:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - Scribble Monkey (talk) 17:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

3RR Violation on German Empire

Good day. Since there do not appear to be any admins monitoring the 3RR Noticeboard, do you think you could help us out with anonymous IP user 65.1.3.105 who keeps reverting German Empire (7 or 8 times now, by my count)? Thanks. Uncle Dick (talk) 19:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Possible socks

Hi! I noticed you placed a block on the vandalism only account 70.16.52.104. I suspect that it is the same user as 71.247.248.23, both of which have vandalised the talk page of The Thing That Should Not Be, within an hour of each other and have the same IP provider of Verizon Internet Services Inc. Richard Harvey (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk: 75.136.136.191

See this edit by the user after you blocked him. Is this considered a violation? Bramble claw x 01:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

He did it again, so I removed his talk page access. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Greetings again - and sorry!

Greetings J.delanoy - I've just slapped db-hoax on a page that you were deleting George stockle - and the template is still up. Could you check it out. This is the 2nd time it happens to me tonight! Sorry for any inconvenience caused! --Technopat (talk) 01:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

After preview, it's redlinked above. Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 01:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Incoming Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I've seen your contributions many times and you seem to put quite a bit of effort into fighting vandalism. There's also been many cases where I've tried to revert vandalism only to be beaten to it by you. Keep up the good work. Cody⁵⁷⁴ 08:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Possible sock puppets of User:FLPTrainor, Again

Hi J. Would you please determine for me using CHECK if User:Bentley Smiths and User:TryMeLater are yet more socks of User:FLPTrainor?

I think he’s trying a clever new gambit in which he made his usual edits under one brand-new account (User:TryMeLater), but also added obvious vandalism (see here). He then came along mere seconds later with another brand-new account (User:Bentley Smiths) and reverted his own edits (assuming CheckUser confirms this) using the vandalism component as a pretext for the revert.

I see this two-stage process as his clever attempt to establish bona fides for the second account in the hopes that a much cleverer CheckUser like you will not unearth it and block him. The giveaway, however, was that he used an inaccurate edit summary (see here) on the revert claiming to have made it with Huggle, software for which he does not have the privileges, nor would any hours-old, three-edits only account (see his privileges here).

A further giveaway is that the talk page and the user page for the User:Bentley Smiths account have been set up almost exactly as he had set up those pages for others of his User:FLPTrainor sock puppets!

So, the combination of all of the above is the basis for my CheckUser request for these two new accounts: User:Bentley Smiths and User:TryMeLater. Thanks so much J.! — Spike Toronto 21:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed, as well as a mess more. I rangeblocked the range he was using. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I took a look at your contribs to see just how many there were in total. Holy aliases Batman! I cannot believe how many new ones there were. If I used all my fingers and all my toes and … ummm … whatever else I couldn’t count that high! That’s quite a harvest from his sockfarm. I hope that all those blocks plus the rangeblock will take care of him for a while. To think, if he would expend that much energy making fruitful contributions to the project how much better he could make Wikipedia … <sigh>

Would you like me to help add the {{sockpuppet|FLPTrainor|confirmed}} template to any of those accounts? There’re so many I’d like to help reduce your workload in any way that I can. In the meantime, I’ll take a look at their various contribs and see if any of them are in need of reversion. Thanks again J.! — Spike Toronto 17:45, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hah, yeah, he has a bit of time on his hands. (...said the kettle to the pot) Anyways, checkusers get a cool toy to play with that lets us automagically block-and-tag accounts, so they're all done already. Thanks for the offer, though. (If I had to do that by hand, I'd probably use AWB). J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 17:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I have AWB privileges, but haven’t had occasion to use it yet. As for User:FLPTrainor, if it’s any consolation, the accounts you blocked the other day seem to be good blocks. I am, at a snail’s pace, working through the list, and if the first three are any indication, the overlinking edits seem to fit his usual pattern. I think with the huge number of them that you blocked, plus the rangeblock, you have hopefully put him out of commission. Thanks again! — Spike Toronto 04:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

98.100.219.130

Sorry to bother you, but do you have any idea what is going on here? 98.100.219.130 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) shows as blocked, but they were just making vandal edits today (see deleted contributions). Syrthiss (talk) 14:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, three months from November 3 is February 3, so I have no idea what is going on there. I'll contact a dev and ask them if they can figure it out. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 01:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep, the weirdness wasn't that he was editing...it was that the block log was giving me the notice that he was blocked when he wasn't. I think I've seen that before, when I was looking back in a user's contribution list to a point where only their edits to their talk page from when they were blocked were in the list. I thought at the time it might be a feature, but now I'm not so sure. Thanks for pinging the dev about it. Syrthiss (talk) 15:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus signature

Hi J.delanoy. A new discussion on the Miley Cyrus talk page questions the authenticity of the signature you uploaded. This conversation is not new, and a search in the archives shows it's been brought up frequently. I almost think it looks like a re-creation of an image. However, once I found your user page here, it seems pretty obvious your upload would be in good faith. Do you think you could provide us with verification of the signature, like where it was obtained or scanned from? Feel free to swing by the talk page as well. This discussion has never been settled properly, and it doesn't seem like anyone has ever contacted you regarding the signature before. This would be greatly appreciated, thank you! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:19, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I was the one who uploaded the present image, but I merely vectorized another image. You will need to ask whoever uploaded commons:File:MileyCyrus_signature.png where they got it. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 17:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Good point, I should have noticed that. Thank you. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:57, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:94.193.46.77

Can you have a look at this users contributions please. You recently blocked them but they've returned from the block and gone straight back to removing referenced info from the Tarifa article. Valenciano (talk) 06:34, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Your guestbook

Where is it? NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 23:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't have a guestbook. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 16:13, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

198.237.49.211

In May of 2009, you temporarily blocked this user for repeated vandalism. The user is back, and doing nothing but vandalizing articles at random. So far as I can see, all the recent acts of vandalism have been reverted, but it wastes peoples' time (as I am sure you know) to have to watch for this...and I always have the concern that multiple edits may hide some real garbage...anyway, while I am an editor (lower case) with some experience, I do not know the process for blocking or requesting a block, so I am asking you ;-)
William J. 'Bill' McCalpin (talk) 00:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for three months. Probably wouldn't have been blocked at AIV, but I take a bit harsher stance on vandalism than most admins. NW (Talk) 00:57, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

William J. 'Bill' McCalpin (talk) 01:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Can we Oversight this edit?

Can we delete this edit? While untrue this could have damaging effects to me in my real life and I would prefer to be safe then sory then let something like this just stick around. [[1]] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:18, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Done by Risker. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 02:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

BTW, J.delanoy does not have Oversight permissions. NerdyScienceDude :) (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 03:19, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, Risker got it. You probably shouldn't request oversight onwiki. You can email User:Oversight to send a request to the oversight mailing list. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 03:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for the confusion and thanks for the help. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:20, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Serial vandal

Hi J.delanoy I've just come across an IP address that seems to be a continual source of vandalism. What can be done about 150.101.159.171? Many thanks Ozdaren (talk) 14:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Sunday, March 21

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikipedia Day NYC, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia at the Library and Lights Camera Wiki, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects, for example User:ScienceApologist will present on "climate change, alternative medicine, UFOs and Transcendental Meditation" (see the November meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back. And if the weather is good, we'll have a star party with the telescopes on the roof of Pupin Hall!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Check user

Is it appropriate to ask for a checkuser check if I see two vandals with similar usernames performing similar vandalism on the same page? Bramble claw x 20:18, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Quick CU needed

See [[2]] -- I'm confident that this is TAWT, but could you check and make sure? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 16:11, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

unblock on hold

At User talk:SchfiftyThree. They are owning up to what they did, and this appears to be their first block ever, so I'm leaning in the direction of a second chance, but checking in with you as blocking admin. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Sending you an email about this. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:19, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if you're talking to me or J, but if it's me I didn't get that email. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Way too many redacts in your talk page history

You really need ClueBot or some other bot to patrol your talk page. mechamind 9 0 22:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

"Fanfare" more than anything, but

(J.delanoy ^gabs _adds) could be an inside joke signature if all you think about is how many users probably view your user page or user talk page. In the typical world, #800080 is the color for a visited link. Also, the ordinary user probably never clicks the Contributions link, so maybe it would make sense!

I believe the colors are also websafe just like your current G/R/B format. mechamind 9 0 01:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

93.174.138.245

Need a cork over here. Being a typical little oik. HalfShadow 19:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes, and apparently we 'sicks'. Whatever that is. HalfShadow 19:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Putting out 64.228.130.126's flame

Maybe semi-protecting Modest Mussorgsky for an hour will keep User:64.228.130.126 from getting too determined? —Mono·nomic 03:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Seems to have calmed down. Nevermind... —Mono·nomic 03:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

NawlinWiki blocked him apparently. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 04:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

ACC

44531 Thanks for letting us know. I was hunting for a CU! Chzz ► 17:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Cus are rare - even more, those who actually can help with issues regarding rangeblocks, puppets and suchlike. I fairly often have something that requires this kind of knowledge. What is the best way to get timely help on such matters? I don't want to 'hassle' people, but, on the other hand, I know how important it is to be circumspect in processing something that 'smells socky' - not just ACC, but other things that I may stumble upon. Is the mailing list the way to go? Thanks, Chzz ► 09:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't really say. Before I was elected a checkuser, I would usually wait on IRC until one showed up, or I would look at their contribs to see if any were making edits, and if they were, I would shoot them an email and poke them on their talk page. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 15:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough - that's pretty much what I do. Thanks, Chzz ► 06:35, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Lesserextent

Lesserextent is aparently caught behuind your block of 65.92.124.0/22, and has made an unblock request. Should the useer be given an IP block exemption? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 23:38, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Answer to your question about my RPP.

You told me that if the page is fully protected, then I wouldn't be able to to edit it. If that's the case, then I'd like it to be semi-protected. I just don't want vandals to edit my page. Μαστ3ρλινκ-έξ (Ταλκ|Κοντρίμπς signed this page on Friday, March 26^th, 2010 at 5:18 PM (EST).

Semi-protected indefinitely. NW (Talk) 21:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Used Nobody blocked on Welsh Wicipedia

Hi, I'm an admin on thw Welsh wicipedia. I notice you blocked user:Nobody, possibly due to the erratic nature of his edits (eg swapping letters and leaving lots of comments on talk pages) but he/she was correcting typos and points riased in talk pages were, I believe, all in good faith. So I think I'll revert the block (if I work out how). Thanks for your work though.--Rhyswynne (talk) 09:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC) edit:--Rhyswynne (talk) 10:59, 27 March 2010 (UTC) I beg your pardon, it seems it's a recurring vandal.--Rhyswynne (talk) 10:59, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism reversion thanks

Hi J.delanoy, and thanks for reverting the vandalism to one of my userboxen[3]! (Which long-term vandal was it? Since that user had only the one edit, it must have been a sock of somebody else.) Cheers, bonadea contributions talk 10:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a vandal whose main purpose is to spam links to rapidshare files and other files on various file-sharing sites. I think he's getting frustrated... J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 15:45, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

for this Wknight94 ^talk 20:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:J.delanoy/chess

User:J.delanoy/chess, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:J.delanoy/chess and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:J.delanoy/chess during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msg • changes) 22:13, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

User:J.delanoy/chess/game1, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:J.delanoy/chess/game1 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:J.delanoy/chess/game1 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msg • changes) 22:13, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Both kept Chzz ► 09:22, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Done

Need your call on a particular sock case

I see that you did the last CU on the Pwningall case. Since you know about the IP behind the case it was recommended to me (by NuclearWarfare) that I ask you to comment on it. Thanks, Auntie E. (talk) 00:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Halest0rmr0cks

Hi, I'd like to know why you blocked User:Halest0rmr0cks on March 5. The block summary and notice on the talk page says that he's a sockpuppet of User:FLPTrainor, but I don't see any evidence suggesting that. He's not listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/FLPTrainor/Archive, his edits don't match the pattern, and no pages link to his user page. I have unblocked him, by the way. TheCoffee (talk) 01:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

This was brought to my attention at an external site, by the way. The guy seemed clueless as to why he was blocked. TheCoffee (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know why I blocked him. The only thing I can come up with is that I accidentally checked a box on the checkuser mass blocker by mistake. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 03:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Alright then, thanks! TheCoffee (talk) 10:47, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

A request at ACC needs a checkuser

This request: http://toolserver.org/~acc/acc.php?action=zoom&id=44951 is rangeblocked. Could you please check it? Btw, the acct has been created already. (I shall monitor this user and see what he does). I posted here because you have ACC access, and are a checkuser. ManishEarth^{Talk • Stalk} 11:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)