Jump to content

User talk:Dennis Brown/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

Talkback

Hello, Dennis Brown. You have new messages at Talk:1950s American automobile culture/GA1.
Message added 20:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TBrandley (what's up) 20:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Best wishes for the New Year!
Here's wishing you and yours a joyous, healthful, and productive 2013!

Please accept a belated thank you for the well wishes upon my retirement as FAC delegate this year, and apologies for the false alarm of my first—and hopefully last—retirement; the well wishes extended me were most kind, but I decided to return, re-committed, when another blocked sock was revealed as one of the factors aggravating the FA pages this year.

Maintaining standards in featured content requires vigilance, dedication and knowledge of people like you, who are needed; reviews are always welcome at FAC, FAR and TFA requests. Somehow, somehow we never ever seem to do nothin' completely nice and easy, but here's hoping that 2013 will see a peaceful road ahead and a return to the quality and comaraderie that defines the FA process, thanks to many dedicated Wikipedians!

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

AutomaticStrikeout's Hall of Fame Barnstar
Congratulations, Dennis! You are the fourth editor to be inducted into my Hall of Fame. During a period which has seen its share of ill will and turmoil, you have been a voice of reason that has kept things from getting worse. There is a reason you are one of our most respected admins and you certainly belong in my Hall of Fame. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 17:39, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm flattered and appreciate the wikilove that goes into it. We need to find a way to find the real, unsung heros around here, like we talked about at WER. I'm so booked up right now, I can't give it the time it deserves. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
  • We just need to figure out a fancy way to thank those quiet heros. check out the discussion. I just popped in to work on my GA (my first, and about done!!) and now I have real world work to do. I'm about to be busy around the clock for three months, but that is the price I have to pay to goof off the rest of the year :) Staring my 20th year doing it, so I'm used to it. So if you don't see me around as much, understand it is just an occupational hazard. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:35, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Belated Happy New Year with a Toast!

float
float

Here's a toast to the host
Of those who edit wiki near and far,
To a friend we send a message, "keep the data up to par".
We drink to those who wrote a lot of prose,
And then they whacked a vandal several dozen blows.
A toast to the host of those who boast, the Wikipedians!
- From {{subst:TheGeneralUser}}

TheGeneralUser (talk) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!


Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at ~~~~~


TheGeneralUser (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! 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!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A Very Happy (belated) New Year to you Dennis! Enjoy the Whisky ~ TheGeneralUser (talk) 23:02, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

The famous chauvinist Wiki-troll, Banned User:Iaasi returned alias User:Carpathians

The famous chauvinist Wiki-troll, Banned User:Iaasi returned alias User:Carpathians — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bingler (talk • contribs) 13:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Open proxies

Dennis, is there a way to figure out if the IPs editing Robert Agostinelli are doing so using open proxies? The information reported by geolocate was unusual (in my experience) and seemed suspicious to me. Because you're so busy off-wiki, is there someone else I can "bother" with these sorts of questions? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I have some time this morning with my coffee, and besides, I enjoy checking for proxies. I wrote a Perl script to help with proxy testing and working on some other automated tools to make it faster. The first one I just checked did look a bit odd, maybe a webhost proxy. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Dennis. I know what VPN stands for (virtual private network, I assume), but I don't know what a VPN proxy is; nor do I know what a webhost (I assume webhot is a typo) proxy is. Rhône Group just came off of semi-protection (imposed by me) and hasn't had any activity since. It's on my watchlist; if there's any unusual activity, I'll protect it again. I'll file the SPI report sometime today. Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • You can VPN into a box securely, then use the box as a proxy to hide your real location, a closed proxy, which is normally ok. I have my own closed proxy I use for testing/education. The webhost is another type of close proxy, you have to have an account on that system. They are often blocked if they pose problems. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Leedezine

Hello Dennis, I thought you might be able to give some insight on something Leedezine posted on my talk. Leedezine has blanked Brandi Hawbaker twice, and done nothing else. Their claim might be legitimate, but I wanted someone else's input. Should this edit also be RevDel'd or Oversighted? When you can, input would be nice. Vacationnine 22:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah, yes, as it stood it contained personal info and was a BLP vio. Vacationnine 12:56, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Belated happy New Year, hope all is good across the pond. Sad to see you've got a busy period coming up (I've been almost radio-silent for the last week or so myself). Just glanced at SPI and my heart sank... Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 00:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

  • SPI is a bitch, no other way to put it. You have to be a glutton for punishment to work there as they make new socks as fast as you can wash the old ones. It is all about maintenance. I still like it. And happy new year to you as well, I hope you are adjusting to the new tools. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:00, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Postnoonnews

Hey Dennis. Can you kindly look over this case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Postnoonnews and give your reviews/comments ? Regards. ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 01:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I've endorsed the CU request. Let's see what it throws up. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 01:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar from Sue Rangell

The Admin's Barnstar
for your comments at Wikipedia_talk:Non-admin_closure#Non-admin_closures_should_be_discontinued. You have hit the nail on the head. I have been a Wikipedian for YEARS. I have privileges that some admins will never get...but I do not have the mop. Thank you for knocking one in for those of us who are made to feel like second class citizens everytime we close a discussion that sorely needs to be closed. Your words touched on the exact problem, and your attitude is pure gold...PURE GOLD...and wish you the very best from the bottom of my heart in spreading it around. Wikipedia needs more Admins like you. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 03:45, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

And another...

The Admin's Barnstar Because...if it were not for you I would be just another angry voice shouting into the void. You changed my perception of Wikipedia, admin, other editors and myself. You guide a small group into a larger community. I am thankful I was lucky enough to gain your ear and your trust. If there is a model for admin editors people to follow...it is you. No one is perfect...but perfection is not the point or the goal.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:08, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Holy cow

Three barnstars in one day, I'm floored! Thank you Sue, Gtwfan52 and Amadscientist, and of course Gerda Arendt for sharing the good news that my first GA was just passed. Kindness this great is valuable enough to be stored in my Ronco Barnstar Value. Woke up at 3am (ugh..sinuses...) and was greeted by a flood of wikilove. It is a great way to start a day, particularly when it is from a group of people I genuinely respect. Thanks again. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 08:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis you've worked very very hard to earn this kind of respect - so it is well deserved. — Ched :  ?  20:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

GA

The Good Article Barnstar
Congrats on your first GA! *Wiping tear from eye* It's just so beautiful when an admin does content work. Welcome to the dark side. —Torchiest talkedits 14:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the kindness. It feels good to have finally earned a GA. Of course, I had a lot of help along the way: Malleus, Ihardlythinkso, PamD and others really helped put the polish on it and deserve credit for taking it from "a good idea" to "a good article". Kiefer.Wolfowitz is still working on it, fixing my errors, not settling for "good enough". Of course, TBrandley gets some credit for doing the review as well. By any measure, it was a group effort. I'm just glad I could be a part of it. It was a fun article to build with all these people. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
    It's a great feeling, isn't it? Most of the GAs and FAs I've ever been a part of have been a team effort, a great collaboration is one of the best parts of working on wikipedia; I particularly enjoyed the process of getting Appaloosa and Yogo sapphire to FA. Often, you meet some terrific people, too! It is always great to remember that actually creating content is why we are all supposed to be here!  ;-) Montanabw(talk) 19:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
    It is a good feeling. I have a companion article "American automobile manufacturing in the 1950s with the technical info, including the birth of American Motors, etc. in the 1950s, in user space, but on the way, plus several others. I have a couple of articles that I made a while back but think I could get them to GA status, such as Lexington Barbecue Festival and one I expanded, High Rock Lake that need a lot of work but have enough material to get there with some help. I may recruit some friends from Wikiproject North Carolina. I'm also working on Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin with another editor, and I need to get working on that one this week, already got a DYK out of it. Since that is why we are here, to create good articles, it does satisfy. Its like a drug, once you have one hit, you want another ;-) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Reminds me of collaboration with another admin, moving his GA to German and make it a DYK there ;) - you get many hits because an article stays on their Main page for 48 hours, - right now and tomorrow "my" de:BWV 40 (bottom right, "Darzu ist erschienen ..."), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:43, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations, Dennis! Is there anything here you can't do? Maybe you'll take over for Jimbo when he leaves whatever position he has. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 21:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
You are all much better writers than I am. Unquestionably. I truly believe in the stone soup method of article creation. Most of my prose experience has been writing for radio ads and ecommerce sites, which made me a good living but really is terrible for encyclopedia articles, so I'm having to completely relearn writing. Besides, I'm better at raw prose, chasing sources and getting people cooperating together to polish it than I am at proper writing. And no, Mr. Strikeout, I'm not applying for Jimbo's job, no thanks. ;-) There is much I haven't done here, but I'm working on it. The key is having fun doing it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
What's this about fun? Back to work. The Yadkin Pee in Dee River article won't write itself. ```Buster Seven Talk 00:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

A pie for you!

We can share this pie under that rock together ;) v/r - TP 02:28, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
  • My favorite flavor, humble. Really it shouldn't matter, but I just felt bad and staying out is best. I would have had I known. I'm still floored and still not used to seeing others quotes me like that, so that caught me off guard. I was humbled in several ways. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:IP addresses are not people

Wikipedia:IP addresses are not people, 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/Wikipedia:IP addresses are not people and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:IP addresses are not people 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. NReTSa (talk) 02:44, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

  • That is almost comical. Someone complains that it is used in bad faith, yet the "what links here" clearly shows no such thing. This is a silly waste of time and resources, and I think nominating, by proxy for the IP or on your own, shows a poor understanding of policy. And odd choice for only your 25th edit to Wikipedia. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:21, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

MMA WikiProject consensus apparently changed with one vote

Hey Dennis. If you think this should go straight to ANI, particularly with the general sanctions on the MMA space, I have no problems doing so. A couple weeks back Willdawg111 (talk · contribs) started a discussion to change the format of results tables. There wasn't a lot discussion or input on the issue. However, this week Willdawg111 decided to 'close the discussion' stating that his preferred format was the one decided by consensus (with only his vote) and is changing the WikiProject page and a few articles as a result. A couple of us have reverted his edits (mostly me) stating one !vote is not a consensus. Since he made his changes there has been more input and !votes from others on the issue which have not been for his desired format. It appears to me that Willdawg111 is not going to relent in their 'closure of consensus' and will be willing to edit war over it if someone (likely me) keeps reverting his changes. Willdawg111 is a new editor (nothing to suggest a sock) and is still learning the Wikipedia ropes. What would you suggest the best course of action would be? Thanks and don't work too hard. --TreyGeek (talk) 14:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

  • If I wasn't working so many hours, I would go try to talk some sense into him, but I barely have time to pop in. I haven't looked at the situation but have no trouble taking you at your word. You may need to take it to ANI, but you need to point to diffs showing you have tried to work it out first. What is it about editors in general over there? MMA has the highest percentage of combative editors it seems. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:30, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks Dennis. There's been more warnings to this person on the MMA WikiProject talk page from another person as well as myself. If they persist, I'll take it over to ANI. --TreyGeek (talk) 17:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
    • Just to note on this, I posted a request at WP:ANRFC for someone neutral to review, offer an opinion and suggest next steps on this. Hopefully this can short-circuit what's happening and get things moving smoothly again. Ravensfire (talk) 18:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
      • You guys do know that special sanctions are in effect for MMA? See the bottom of my user page. Any admin can topic ban him if he has been warned and will not stop. I will look at this other later, got a meeting to go to. It is that time of year when I actually have to work. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
        • Bleh - work. Know the feeling. To the main point, yup, know about the sanctions. I'm hoping, really hoping that he's not going to push it any farther because he's right on the edge. He's passionate about the subject and I'm hoping with someone neutral reviewing things he'll go with the decision even if it's not his preferred approach. Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 01:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree Dennis about you not worrying about it. If Willdawg persists (and it looks like they've decided to just argue the point on talk pages for now), there will be an ANI report filed (it's already written, ready for a copy/paste) and will be handled appropriately. Like I said when I started this section... don't work too hard.  ;) --TreyGeek (talk) 02:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Wilddawg is pushy because the lot of you less informed mma "fans" over at the wiki project stonewall whenever anyone wants to make progress, and cling to inherited notability rationale that starts at WP:NMMA and ends with people treating WP:MMATIER as the gospel. No matter how many news articles I dig up on fighters that would create presumed notability under the WP:GNG people still say "Oh, he has not had 3 top tier fightsd". That's just not fair. I can't compete with the numbers who disagree with this. You've got sockpuppets flooding the afd nominations with fighters, and then boatloads of people who only have ground to stand on because of that god forsaken guideline about the 3 "top tier fights". It is really almost not worthwhile to put in the effort for some of these borderline fighters. It is a pain to root out these sources and then create citations for them. JUst look over at Matt Ewin's AFD at all the refs I pulled out of thin air. On the issue of formats I have seen an outright refusal to compromise over at the Wikiproject. It's like Thunderdome over there PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 20:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis, I'm going to slip this here rather than create a new section for potentially one comment. I have invoked your name at ANI at this thread here. Specifically it is regarding the "MMA notability Thunderdome" and your past attempts at being referee. --TreyGeek (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You epitomize the saying on a plaque I saw once. "Tact is the ability to tell a man to go to hell, and have him happy to be on his way! Gtwfan52 (talk) 07:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
;) - I came to congratulate on the GA "1950s ...", great collaboration, well deserved, GA, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I came here to give you a barnstar but you've already been spoiled. Congrats!♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:50, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Maybe a "Car-star" would be more appropriate: [1]? Well done on a great article. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Referred here from another admin.

Hello. I was wondering if you could take a look here and then click to view all of the recent AFD's. You will see there is this very long pattern of deletes by the same two users. It alternates between JakeJr and Jadesnake back and forth. It seems very odd. Their comments at the AFD's for these articles are also simiilar, yet different. I was hoping you could tell if there might be more to this than just the pattern, or how Jakejr plays professional wrestler "Jake the Snake Roberts" to Jadesnake's Damian. Now, maybe that is little bit too crazy to believe. But, if you could find time to investigate that'd be swell. There's no rush. Or if perhaps you could point me in the direction of another admin that'd be ok too. If you feel inclined, pleased read the referral from MBisanz's talkpage. Thanks. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 07:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis, FYI there is already existing existing SPI report about a possible link between Jadesnake and JonnyBonesJones. --TreyGeek (talk) 14:06, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
I found another possible sock and added it. I'm considering the links as we speak. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
When I first got referred here images of a famous Brown were conjured up in my mind; with good reason it would seem PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Ottawahitech

It's time for something to be done about Ottawahitech's actions at WP:WER. How to do something about those actions without inhibiting our goal, I don't know; however, he can't be allowed to continue to use the project for his personal vendettas (along with other silly disruption). Ranging from "twinkle, twinkle little star, how I wonder what you are" because he won't read a link, to constantly complaining about deletions due to his misunderstanding of what should be included in an encyclopedia (and often to complain about his own articles), to the most recent case, where I have taken some action, of an attack against Alan Liefting completely unrelated to the topic of the section. Ryan Vesey 16:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Note

Very likely, I'm going to be very scarce (or completely absent) for a few days. Our entire database system barfed this afternoon, and I'm the closest thing we have to an IT dept. so it falls on me to make the problem go away. It is 10 year old software designed for 1/4 the load we give it, patched up with gum, duct tape and several Perl scripts. Be glad you aren't me this week. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Good luck .... do leave details of where the search party needs to be sent if you have not resurfaced by the weekend! ✍ Mtking ✉ 03:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Try gaffer's tape instead of duct tape - stronger and it comes in lots of pretty colors. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Or you could do what I did several years ago when the company owner refused to spend the money on IT hardware. Dump a couple of well-placed boxes of steel needles in the mainframe and find the fire extinguisher. Gtwfan52 (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Just walked in after running maintenance all night, no bueno. The hardware is actually pretty good, twin Dell servers, dual quad core with SAS drives, mirrored, CentOS 6/64bit and 16GB of ram, etc. The software uses a Btreive database designed to run on Win9x, not Win7 with a Linux server. Back to work... Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Ouch, that hurts hearing about it. I think it's time to face it: She's dead, Jim. Time to upgrade to a modern day database software.  ;) I know, convincing the pointy-haired bosses it's worth the time and money is the hard part. Good luck! --TreyGeek (talk) 13:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
It isn't even about money, he just doesn't want to learn new software. New software is less than $5000, but the lost productivity while learning the new package is 10x that. I'm in the middle of a final attempt to rebuild the entire database, for the 4th or 5th time. I literally have 30 working backups, trying all kinds of tweaks and tweaks on tweaks. My head hurts. I'm not a full time IT guy, and really a marketing guy, so it has been a challenge to remember all this stuff. Back to the grind... Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Ouch ... that's not pleasant. Been in the same situation and finally got the upgrade approval when the server crashed and we couldn't get the database software to load on any contemporary OS. Even duct tape can only go so far. Good luck! Ravensfire (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Btrieve? Wow, that's a blast from the past – I haven't used that since the 80s, back in the DOS days, but I can still picture the "UPS truck brown" manuals. Good luck Dennis. Mojoworker (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Pound4Pound

Per the results from the checkuser at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BigzMMA/Archive#Clerk.2C_CheckUser.2C_and.2For_patrolling_admin_comments_8 I call for a block on Pound4Pound as a sockpuppeteer. Hasteur (talk) 13:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks like P4P is already blocked as a puppet of BigzMMA. Or am I missing something? --TreyGeek (talk) 13:54, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the dustup. it appears that the user was blocked but no Indef block notice is on their page. Hasteur (talk) 13:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
There is a notice on the user page, nothing is needed on the talk page. Just shows my initial block months ago was correct. I did notice DQ had to do a lot of research, and I certainly understand. I had done the same thing, it was one of the harder cases. I had to do it last time without CU data, so the fact that he would with CU data reinforces the findings. Bigz had changed a lot of his methods, but he didn't change who he was. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Question about sock puppet case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/JonnyBonesJones
There were 3 other accounts that appear to also be sockpuppets of JonnyBonesJones: TreyGeek, Poison Whiskey, and LlamaAl
Can you tell me if they were looked at also, confirmed as not being sockpuppets, or just not enough evidence either way. Willdawg111 (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

  • They were not listed in the case, they were only mentioned. If the CU had found linkage, he would have listed them in the appropriate template. Very likely he didn't check since no evidence was presented. I know TreyGeek fairly well as I've seen his work at MMA for a long time and familiar, he isn't a sock. Can't speak for the others. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. That gives me a little more confidence in the project. Willdawg111 (talk) 01:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2013

Multiple account problem

Dennis, I came within one click of filing this as a SPI, but I truly don't feel she's using multiple accounts to be abusive. If you have a minute, I wonder if you might give her a hand:

What would have been the SPI evidence if I'd clicked "Save page": Let me start by saying that I think that this is just clumsiness more than any attempt to deceive and that the best and proper remedy here is to advise the editor to only use one account, to sign in rather than edit from the IP address, and perhaps to help her WP:VANISH on the personal name account if that is what she desires. Evidence: In this edit the IP editor removed information which the Corrina Caudill account took credit for in this edit. The Dnbr23 account removed information in a series of edits beginning with this edit which the same IP responded to and took credit for in this edit. The IP editor signed this edit with the initials "CC". The Lemko Project account made similar edits until it was blocked as a role account. I have to wonder if the editor came to realize that most editors here avoid identifying their real-world identity and tried to move away from her original account, first with the Lemko Project account, and then with the Dnbr23 account and might appreciate being informed about the right to vanish and/or have a clean start. In light of what she's said about me at Talk:Bukowsko, I doubt that she will take kindly to any of those admonitions and suggestions coming from me.

Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Dennis. It now appears to be all fixed. She's started editing with her proper account and we've worked out some issues on the article talk page. Just for the record, she now claims that Dnbr23 wasn't her and having talked some, I think she's more than likely telling the truth, and that the edit in which she appears to be taking credit for Dnbr23's edits was based upon a false assumption on her part. I appreciate your help very much. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I won't debate who is linked to who, all that matters is that discussion is taking place ;) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Merchandise Nomination

A Tshirt!
I thought that you deserved something a bit extra for all of the amazing work you've done for the project.
I've nominated you for a gift from the Wikimedia Foundation!

Vacationnine 19:35, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I appreciate the kindness, but if you check here, I was already nominated, tried to refuse it, got talked into accepting the t-shirt and made a donation to cover the cost :) You guys are already too nice to me, but I am flattered by the thought. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm happy to have gotten a shirt as well. I've known about the existence of the program, but haven't endorsed anybody for the same reason I don't keep wikifriends lists. To add one person means to not add another, in this case to endorse one means not to endorse another. I don't like that idea, but also don't plan on endorsing all editors for the sake of endorsing them so I've stayed away. Ryan Vesey 19:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
It is tough. I've endorsed some, but I've stayed away from endorsing several that I think are deserving, but I feel a positive conflict of interest with, ie (wiki-buddies). I did endorse DGG, whom I consider a mentor, but jeez, that is DGG. His accomplishments aren't exactly a secret, and once I take away everything he has done for me, we are still left with enough reasons to provide his entire wardrobe. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh... maybe I should have checked first. I'm new to the Merchandise Giveaways program. Sorry about that. Vacationnine 19:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
No apology necessary, it is the thought that counts, and I genuinely appreciate the thought. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I submitted the formabout a week-and-a-half ago, but it still hasn't gotten here yet . Oh well. I've nominated two people for shirts, but did so anonymously both times; I agree with Ryan, it's a really fine line. Go Phightins! 20:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, I spoke to soon. My shirt got here a half hour after I posted that it wasn't here. Go Phightins! 21:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Well, I can't get you a t-shirt, so here's a barnstar. Nothing Dennis does doesn't deserve a barnstar. Constantly helpful, always kind, gives advice in any situation, and all around helpful. Oh, and did I say helpful? Vacationnine 19:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Would you allow me to add the "Oh, and did I say helpful?" part in your vault? And is that a reference? If so, I don't get it. Vacationnine 20:08, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Ronco is a reference to the company owned by Ron Popeil, and don't feel bad if you don't get it, many wouldn't. I'm an old guy and grew up with his products advertised on TV in the 1970s, like the Ginsu Knives, the Pocket Fisherman, spray on hair in a can and the current best seller Showtime Rotisserie[2]. He invested the phrase "But wait, there's more!!". You've probably seen him if you've ever watched any US TV, selling his stuff. To be even more obscure, the "Barnstar vault" is a references to the "Ronco Album Vault" from an episode of Futurama, "The Luck of the Fryish" I believe. I guess you have to be an old nerd to get some of my odd and convoluted humor :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Ah, ok. I'll check it out. You didn't answer my question though; can I add the amended barnstar to your collection? Vacationnine 22:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Sure, and thanks for asking. :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:44, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to decline

I was brought into a rather complex RfC (multiple options) on my talk page. I'd like to find one or two people to do two things. First, close the RfC (in the future). Second, monitor the page and the talk page. I believe Ahnoneemoos is done edit warring his version of the article in, but he has repeatedly cited the fact that BRD is an essay as an excuse to do so. In any case, I'd like to have someone lined up beforehand. If you don't want to close it, can you pass it on to someone you think is able to? Ryan Vesey 20:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Ryan, he came to my talk page as well asking roughly the same thing. I also saw him on several watchlisted talks; he's bringing quite a few people into this. Go Phightins! 21:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, I noticed that. For what it's worth, I am under the impression that it is not canvassing as a) he didn't actually ask people to take part in the discussion and b) he doesn't appear to have been inviting others based on a thought that they would agree with him at the discussion. Ryan Vesey 21:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
As an aside, I'm not sure he would even be familiar with canvassing. He didn't even mention an RfC to me, I mentioned it to him on my talk. We shall see, I suppose. Go Phightins! 21:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
(Also messaged about this) It's not canvassing, he's just pinging people who are Teahouse hosts, asking for advice on what to do. I'm hoping Ahnoneemoos picks up on my subtle, hey, diplomatic hinting in the conversation on Ryan's talk page and realizes that he's edit warring. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
On that point, BRD needs to be rewritten. In practice it is used in cases where an edit is made with no previous discussion, reverted, then discussed. According to the essay, it is used during ongoing discussion if the discussion isn't going anywhere. Ryan Vesey 21:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
  • BRD is treated as "near law" because it encapsulates so many other policies and guidelines. It has been at a vote to become a guideline and has gotten a lot of support, but not enough to promote it yet. Ignoring it is always optional, but so is an admin deciding to block for edit warring without requiring 3rr being strictly violated. I'm more inclined to block an editor who is just reverting once a day for weeks than someone who violates 3RR in a single hour. Doing it over weeks shows a willingness to ignore the community, doing it over an hour just shows a temporary lack of judgement and getting caught up in the moment. As for closing, I would probably decline just because I'm so swamped at work most days, and I don't like closing something unless I can take the time to really study it adequately. It shouldn't require an admin to close anyway unless it is very, very contentious. (note: and I say that not because I think admin are smarter, but because admin are expected to deal with the backlash that comes with closing contentious issues). I might have the time, but I might not, so I would have to pass. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Sounds good. Do you have a particular admin or non-admin in mind who would be ready to close it? I'm taking part in the discussion (and need to get back to clarify my statement) so I can't close it. Ryan Vesey 22:43, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

Hello, Dennis Brown. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 01:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Glock17gen4 and JonnyBonesJones

It has come to my attention via some off wki communication that there is a very good chance the two indef blocked accounts Glock17gen4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and JonnyBonesJones (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are one in the same, there is a SPI for JBJ what should I do to have this looked into, should I open a SPI for Glock17gen4 or should I tack it onto the end of JBJ and request if found the same then have the SPI moved to the correct name ? ✍ Mtking ✉ 21:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

From my experience, you should tack it on to the end of JBJ. A clerk will do the necessary moving. I think they'd need to confirm that JBJ was a sock of Glock17gen4 to move it around. Ryan Vesey 21:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Actually, I would ask a CU to look into it, to see what the odds of a link are. You can ask on the main WP:SPI page, and if they link it, one of the clerks (like me) will fix up the paperwork and do the history merge, which does require the admin bit to do since you are deleting/undeleting a lot of edits to merge. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 22:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Am about to post a SPI, is CU stale ? ✍ Mtking ✉ 23:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JonnyBonesJones. ✍ Mtking ✉ 23:51, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I meant to ask at the bottom of WP:SPI, but since you started, someone will look. Sometimes, even when it is stale, one of the CUs will have a good enough memory or access to previous data that isn't generally available, and can make the connection. The key is, I don't like merging cases unless a CU says to do so, in case there is some reason they want to not merge them. They have access to info that clerks don't. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:27, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry I miss understood; I had drafted the SPI following Ryan's comments just got interrupted by real life before I could file it and came back here and did not fully understand your suggestion. ✍ Mtking ✉ 00:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
No biggie, it will get looked at one way or another. That is what we clerks do, just shuffle papers, so once a CU makes a call, that is what we will do :) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 24, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, (X! · talk)  · @813  ·  18:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Checkuser

Uncle G (talk) 19:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

E4024

Hi Dennis. I know you are busy these days; so no hurry to reply. I also need some time to observe better a situation. I am evaluating the possibility of requesting the opening of an SPI concerning a couple of users in the very controversial (AA) area. I noticed that not everybody is a common editor like this scribe but some people have titles, say "sysop" or whatever. When you have some time can you please tell me if there is a special way for asking SPIs concerning users with titles like Bureaucrat, Admin, Sysop or whatsoever hierarchy or nobility we might have in WP.... Thanks a lot in advance. --E4024 (talk) 12:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Merger request WikiProject: NC

Dennis, back in December I posted a merger request to the WikiProject NC page concerning two articles: Province of North Carolina and Royal Colony of North Carolina. To date, only one other person has joined the discussion, supporting my request to merge the superfluous Royal Colony article into the more correct, and slightly more substantive Province article. You told me to ping you when it'd been a month, which is now up. Thank you for your help! Cdtew (talk) 04:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Enrico_Delves/Enrico_Delves

You previously nominaed User:Enrico_Delves for deletion, so I wanted to draw your attention to the copy-paste subpage the user created to attempt to get around the deletion process. I've nominated the subpage for deletion. Hasteur (talk) 17:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Obnoxious

Good to know we can count on you to be obnoxious! Jester of the court (sock) 23:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Socks

Hi Dennis. I just came across this article, which appears to refer to a paid editor involved in this sockpuppet investigation. I noticed you were involved in the sock issue and thought you may want to know. Specifically he claims to have more socks and that some of those blocked were not socks. CorporateM (Talk) 18:26, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I'm familiar with Mike. He's actually a nice guy to chat with, but has a bad taste in his mouth over some issues, and yes, he has done a great deal of socking here. In that article, he miss reads several points badly, makes a few good points, but as you know, paid editing is inevitable here: There is no way to stop it. I can accept that. What frustrates me is the Pollyanna attitude by some that we can stop it, when in fact we can not. As a community, we should be trying to manage it and setting acceptable standards for paid editors to participate in. I've seen Mike's work, which isn't bad, and could actually benefit us if people would stop treating paid writers like the enemy, and treat them like what they are: A mixed bag, that can add content but must be monitored. As it is now, the number of paid editors exceeds those actively looking for them, so they are winning the "game". They will continue to win until we change the rules, and stop making it a "win or lose" game, and just remember that we are here to build an encyclopedia, not to regulate whether or not someone is compensated for editing. Tolerance doesn't require agreeing with it, it only requires putting up with it within reasonable guidelines. The community simply is ready to face that reality, I fear. Thanks for pointing that article out to me. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Hrm. Well... whether a paid editor has more or less time than a volunteer I think is unique to the article.
Editors that disclose and use Talk pages can actually get editors more involved and potentially increase participation on articles that are ignored and/or have major problems.
On the other hand, those articles that are not closely monitored give paid editors a free reign if they do not disclose.
I think there is honorable work to be done doing PR with Wikipedians, rather than astroturfing through socks, that is very valuable to Wikipedia. It's like any journalist will say "good PR is helpful" but you never hear someone say astroturf is. CorporateM (Talk) 21:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
The problem is, if you treat every paid editor like a pariah, then they have no incentive to try to work within the policies. You reward those that are honest and disclose their COI (and don't hammer them unnecessarily), then you encourage engagement. The vast majority of these paid editors come in, create, leave and avoid engagement because it always ends badly for them. Forcing paid editing "underground" doesn't make it go away and certainly doesn't encourage ethical editing. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Amen. CorporateM (Talk) 22:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
It seems like you have a very balanced and calm approach to well... everything. A lot of my work literally takes a year to get approved by the client, so I'm usually a better editor by time I share it on the Talk page, but I have some stuff in the queue that I think is quite good and with a bit of elbow grease and help from experienced editors, I think I could standardize on GA-quality work.
Anyways, I went to read your comment on the post and also noticed the viewpoint of "The Guy" but there doesn't appear to be a user:The Guy. Do you have any idea who that is? CorporateM (Talk) 01:02, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I wondered the same thing. Have a guess or two, but they would just be conjecture. Appreciate the compliment as well. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at WP Brands – Lists compiled for project banner tagging using AnomieBOT

A discussion is occurring at the talk page for WikiProject Brands at Proceeding with automatic project banner tagging using AnomieBOT regarding moving forward with automatic talk page tagging with the project's banner using AnomieBOT. All members of this project will be notified with neutrally-worded notifications about this discussion, and please feel free to contribute to it. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Negative nominations

Negative nominations should be added to pages. On the Jab Tak Hai Jaan talk page, after tons of arguments and whatnot, it was decided that they were needed in an article to maintain a neutral point of view. Bol Bachchan hasn't been nominated for any positive award that I know of but it has been nominated for a ton of negative awards as it is considered to be one of the "worst films ever made in Bollywood", according to critics in India (Raja Sen, Rediff). Zeku has a habit of stalking my contributions and reverting edits. Negative awards are important and they can't be ignored. Just like I added negative awards to the Jab Tak Hai Jaan page I wanted to add them to all the major films that came out from Bollywood in 2012. Zeku ignored the discussion on the talk page and went ahead and reverted the edit because of a personal vendetta I can go in more detail about. He basically made a comment on how Rotten Tomatoes was biased and was ridiculed. He's been angry ever since. Please advise me what to do next. Ashermadan (talk) 23:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

This user [3]send me some premature warnings without considering facts,you can see my talk page history.Thanks---zeeyanketu talk to me 23:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

You have a history of reverting edits. You have reverted many of my edits over the court of many weeks. The warnings were not premature as your history speaks otherwise. The warnings were the best way to make you stop and were in no way premature. Ashermadan (talk) 23:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


Let me be perfectly clear: I don't care about the content to that article. I don't know the subject matter, and my actions were that of an admin, not an editor. You need to work it out on the talk page, get a third opinion, or go to WP:DRN, like I said before. Not here, not on each other's talk pages. I will not offering an opinion on the content. I will offer guidance on behavior. Edit warring or templating people for "vandalism" when their edits are not vandalism are both grounds for blocks. That is why I gave you a polite but clear warning. Blocking for edit warring doesn't require you break 3RR, and again, I am not taking any sides on the content, I have no idea, didn't read it fully, I just noticed the behavior was a problem. And again, admin have ZERO authority on content, we don't decide content at all (thank god). We only act on policy issues, like civility, warring, etc. Both of you go work it out on the talk page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:43, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Chili burger

Noting your comment at the top of your talkpage and in your edit notice... A month has passed, and chili burger still has no WP:SIGCOV to give it notability independent of other subjects. Besides a little bit of historical trivia, the initial flurry of activity to improve the article did not produce anything to pass GNG and has died down, leaving the article a stub. Whenever you get a moment, resetting the merge discussion would be the best move. Cheers. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 15:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Chili burger is a difficult article to write about because there are very few academics willing to sit down and write a book about the history of chili burgers; however, it is an article that Wikipedia is able to have and expected to have. It is averaging over 60 views a day. I also don't understand your "leaving the article a stub" comment. The article is not a stub. Per WP:Stub, "A stub is an article deemed too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject". This is a short article, but it provides encyclopedic coverage. Ryan Vesey 15:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
(1) Whether the article has been the subject of scholarly research is beside the point as that is not required for notability. Besides the absence of scholarly research, there is also a general absence of coverage in, for example, news media (Google News gives 6 hits for the phrase "chili burger", most of which are irrelevant to the subject). (2) the number of watchers is not mentioned as a notability point in any policy about which I'm aware (in fact, I'm aware of other articles that had significantly more visits per day getting deleted at AfD), but, in any case, it's possible that a lot of that traffic is spider traffic due to the extra links added to the page, just judging from the statistics. (3) The lead is a dictionary definition, the history section is more relevant to Ptomaine Tommy's than the subject at hand - that's a stub. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 15:33, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
I've not spent as much time as I would like, but I have tried and it is a hard topic to find research material on. True to my word, I will put it up for a merge discussion and not vote in in myself as it hasn't gotten to the "obvious" stage of improvement. Give me a couple of days, I'm swamped, but will put it up Monday or Tuesday at the latest. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 17:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Take your time. I don't think the article will magically improve between now and whenever, and therefore my perspective won't change. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 17:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
By the way, I genuinely appreciate your patience. This is one of the things I try to encourage here. About half the time, the article is improved, thus we are enriched as an encyclopedia. The other half of the time, the information is merged but was still improved at least a little. Patience, when combined with a reasonable deadline, is often the best solution to keep tempers from flying and giving us the best chance for improving the place, regardless of the outcome. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

New at Editor Retention

--Amadscientist (talk) 07:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh..and for you:

Project Editor Retention

This editor was willing to lend a helping hand!
For founding Project Editor Retention. Amadscientist (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you! That looks very good. I've noticed a lot of activity on the pages, just haven't had time to really look. So swamped this time of year, but I do appreciate the fact that the show goes on when I'm tied up. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:30, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Outer Banks

Whenever you get a chance, please look at the edit history of Outer Banks. It appears that it is continuing to be vandalized by some socks. Might be related to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Daniel L. Barth. Some of the socks and IPs used have been blocked already, but user keeps editing on a few different articles. I haven't warned or done anything with the talk pages of the newest user yet, HowtoSwooosh (talk · contribs). Wasn't sure how to add to an SPI page (will look into that), but wanted to go ahead notify someone. Should this page be protected somehow? Thank you for your help. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 17:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Help Please

Can you take a look at the history on my talk page. IP address 194.14.179.5 and 141.0.175.197 admitted to being JonnyBonesJones, was personally attacking me, and posting personal information. He also addmitted to using multiple proxy servers. Is there anything that can be cone to put a stop to this person? Willdawg111 (talk) 15:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Wood

Hi, Dennis. Could you please take a look at the above for socking? I find it highly suspicious that a brand new editor can find AfD on their first edit, especially since they directly echo another editor (who has been here a day and all edits have concerned the subject of the AfD). Thanks. Gtwfan52 (talk) 17:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

we don't punish people

Tell that to Malleus, Dennis! Drmies (talk) 18:24, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

We really do punish people though. The common practice of incremental block lengths, when applied to accounts, is really not what we would be doing if the goal was entirely to protect Wikipedia, and not to punish. Monty845 18:36, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't entirely agree with that. The reason we have incremental blocks is to act as deterrents without jumping straight to indef. There has to be an incentive not to act disruptively, or we'll end up in the situation where troublemakers will happily call the community's bluff over sanctions for behaviour. It's all ultimately a protective strategy. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 18:45, 14 January 2013 (UTC)�
I think it is really impossible to distinguish a sanction designed deter future conduct from a punishment, at least as commonly understood. I guess I'm just rehashing my position from this essay, but the only non-punitive reason to issue a timed block is if we had some reason to believe that the behavior necessitating a block would change on its own during the block duration, if the block is supposed to change the behavior, its a punishment. Monty845 18:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
I was just thinking about the human aspect, how it feels to be blocked. Drmies (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Unquestionably, there is a punishment aspect to any block, but that shouldn't be the goal. Retribution isn't the goal, adding an incentive to future good behavior is. Obviously, in some cases, like vandals, it is purely to stop the behavior as well. We can't see inside the mind of the blocker, but if anyone that enjoys blocking is suspect. I get a lot of hell for being slow to block, but I really believe in it being the last resort, and I view blocking as a failure of communications on my own part, not a success of tools. It is amazing some of the negative feedback I get for having that perspective, but I'm not persuaded. I still count my successes by the number of blocks I can avoid giving out, not how many I log. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
    • That's cause you have alternate sources of income. My three kids depend on the $5 I get for every block, and $10 for every indef block. I still owe the WMF for having unblocked Neutralhomer, and I'm expecting a bill for Alan Liefting as well. Drmies (talk) 20:39, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Also, yes. I haven't seen it yet, though it certainly is possible. What we need is some editors who can weigh the Romanian sources (I have faith in the reliability of some of them, like this one and others from that site) and who can turn this list of poorly written snippets into an article. I'll ask Biruitorul if he's busy. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Here's a conundrum very loosely based on a real incident: a defrocked admin with an impressive block log for incivility/disruption is warned by a non-admin for gross insalubrious language in edit summaries. The warning user is reported by the ex-admin to ANI for issuing an inappropriate warning. A friend of the former admin, another admin of possibly dubious integrity, closes the ANI with 'Either you apologise, or I will block you'. Comments please, Denis... Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
    • If people acted less like "admin" and more like fellow editors, half these problems would go away. I've already been branded for having my own opinions on things and not towing the line. Any admin that uses that tone to close causes problems for us all and needs to reexamine why they are here. There is potential for everyone in that scenario to have overacted, however. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Another possible MMA Sock: User:Mmajim

Hey Dennis and his talk stalkers. User:Mtking has taken a wiki-break for a month (only declaring it on his talk and user page as far as I can tell). Mmajim (talk · contribs) registered for an account today, proceeded to grave dance about it at the MMA WikiProject (while throwing around wikilinks and language about the MMA AfDs and RfCs suggesting they are not new to Wikipedia), and giving out barnstars to others. Smells like a sock to me, just uncertain who it could be (we've got too many of them) so I don't know where to file the SPI. Anyone willing to look into it? --TreyGeek (talk) 01:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps Bigzmma but probably one from the ugliness 5-6 months ago that chased me off for a while. Even if not a sock, I've got serious issues with their attitude and wouldn't mind seeing an MMA general sanctions warning left for them. Ravensfire (talk) 01:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

  • The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code that was emailed to you.
  • To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
  • If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
  • A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
  • HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
  • Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
  • When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 18:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Blocked IP

Hi. IP editor at this address appears to be blocked; you might like to drop in at their registered account, here, which is currently blocked. FiachraByrne (talk) 09:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

My first try at an essay/WikiProject -Tell me what you think

User:TheOriginalSoni/Rolling Ball.

Do leave your feedback on the talk page. TheOriginalSoni (talk) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Heya Dennis

Hey Dennis I just found out about DYK nominations and I wrote one for a page I've been working on recently and I was curious if you wouldn't mind giving me some feedback on how I did on it or feedback on the article. If not that's okay too, cheers —  dain- talk   05:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

Dennis, I wanted to officially inform you that the project you suggested, an editor of the week, has been started largely due to the diligence of User:Isaacl and User:Amadscientist with help and ideas from User:Buster7, User:AutomaticStrikeout, User:Gtwfan52, and User:TheOriginalSoni. We have recognized two recipients thus far: User:Kelvinsong and User:EricEnfermero. We do have a solid infrastructure set up, which should mean that the project is sustainable as long as we keep getting new nominations. Thanks for your suggestion, and feel free to submit any nominees you may have. --Go Phightins! 04:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Excellent. I haven't even been able to look at Wikipedia in order a day, and currently hanging up aux. lighting at the house, so just dropped by to see what is going on. Like I said, this time of year, I'm swamped. I'm also very thankful that so many users have just jumped in and made it happen. I prefer it, actually. You guys don't need me, I'm just the cheerleader :) I think that if you advertise the program around a bit, you will find plenty of nominees. You might even drop a note at WP:AN, asking admin to nominate some every day users they run across that are extremely helpful and often overlooked. One of the village pump pages would also be good. Personally, I would suggest one place per week, stretch it out over several weeks, so you don't get a giant flood all at one time. I'm sincerely impressed with how you guys took a basic idea and ran with it. We worry a lot about the problems here, but this is one of those positive solutions that makes a difference, too. Thanks again. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Dennis Brown's cheerleader pom-pons
    • I had made a suggestion at one of the discussion pages for this that maybe you could put something out on an administrator email list, if such a thing exists. Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:19, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
      • No admin email list exists, that what WP:AN is for, for admin notices. Finished hanging the lights, time to cook dinner and get in at least two hours of research for work tonight. I have to remind myself that I get lots of time off in the summer and fall... Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 23:50, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
        • Time off is for whimps. ;)--Amadscientist (talk) 03:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
          • Dude, the wheels are coming off. Quit your day job, man. Drmies (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
            • What's all this twaddle about cooking dinner, hanging lights and doing research?? Isnt all that mundane common-man stuff why you have hired help? ```Buster Seven Talk 21:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
              • Yeah, I agree. Who needs dinner, electricity, and income when Wikipedia is falling apart at the seams? Go Phightins! 21:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
                • Actually, hanging lights is part of my job, at least the research and development part. Looking into selling horticultural supplies for the indoor market. Recent developments in American politics make me think it is going to be a rapidly expanding market. Of course, I don't live in one of those states, so I will stick to growing veggies. Alabama is expected to be the next state to legalize medicinal marijuana, btw. That is a tiny part of the indoor horticultural market is all, but an important one nonetheless. And I used to have "help", back when we owned a couple shops and the economy wasn't in the tank. We had to take them out back and shoot them, couldn't afford to feed them any more.[5] (that link is just for Drmies, since I know that is his favorite show) I miss 2002-2005. I would even take 8 more years of Bill Clinton if I had to. As for enwp falling apart, you flatter me. I'm sure there are number of people, some with more bits than others, that are celebrating the fact that I'm too busy to edit right now. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Out of order for a few days

I've been in bed all day, can't sleep a wink. Worst head cold I've had in two decades, face is so swollen that I literally can't focus to read the computer screen. I've had it for a few days, but it took a turn for the worse yesterday PM. Not as bad as having the flu, but Mrs. Brown is drowning me in Gatorade and chicken broth. Wikipedia is going to have to do without me for a few days, sorry. I just can't concentrate. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Get well soon! Ryan Vesey 01:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Get your rest and eat the soup. Hope you feel better soon.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Finally got over something like that last week, though it wasn't nearly as bad as yours sounds. Feel better! Go Phightins! 03:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
I might take the cake on this one. I just had an ultrasound to find out what was wrong with me yesterday, it turned up nothing. Now they're checking for Helicobacter pylori and I'm on Omeprazole. Ryan Vesey 17:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
All right, Ryan. You win. Go Phightins! 20:08, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
All I have to say is, "Ryan, EWWW YUK!". This has been a rough winter for many. Personally had a monster sinus infection, followed by cellulitis in the leg, followed by a cold and finally another sinus infection. I am spending the rest of the winter under my bed! Get well soon, Dennis! Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Do we have any healthy editors left? Get well soon Dennis, and the rest of you lot too. Yunshui 雲‍水 00:03, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Hope you feel better Dennis (and the rest of you) -- A tried and true remedy for anything that ails me is three shots of whiskey. Of course, if by chance that doesn't work, try four. Lettik (talk) 13:56, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I wanna get in on the pity party! The skin on my hands is really dry and I'm kinda losing my voice! I know, doesn't exactly compete well with the above. In all seriousness, I hope you are better now (all of you). AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 22:13, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I know we don't communicate much, but I do hope you (and Ryan, and Gtw, and Automatic) feel better! :) Keilana|Parlez ici 05:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey Dennis, and stalkers with tools: glad you're reading ANI 3.0

Listen, Dennis, if you're around: I protected Charles Eisenstein due to socking concerns, filed a related SPI--and then jumped right in and started editing the article, having conveniently forgotten that I had protected it. That's probably not entirely kosher, so I unprotected it. I still think that semi-protection is warranted, but I will leave that up to the next admin. Thanks. On a brighter note, remember my human baby boy? He turned five months old a few days ago, and as of tonight he has his own Facebook page. Lots of goodlooking women flock to him. Drmies (talk) 03:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

This is ANI 3.0? Anyway, I did the semiprotection for two weeks, since I've no idea who this guy is and I haven't edited his article. The filing of an SPI (already done) should be enough justification for the semi. EdJohnston (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if Dennis wants his page to be ANI 3.0....but it sorta is. :)--Amadscientist (talk) 03:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, if ANI 2.0 gets boring, I come over here. Thanks Ed. Drmies (talk) 04:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey Drmies, when is this boy of yours gonna get an account? After all, we always need more flesh blood. If he can be on facebook, he can edit, right? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 02:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
*Fresh blood. Sorry to be the grammar nazi. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 12:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Spelling Nazi. Sorry to be the terminology Nazi... Yunshui 雲‍水 12:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Spelling fascist. Sorry to be the sociopolitical Nazi (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Spelling errorist. Not sorry though.--Amadscientist (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
ANI 3.0?!? If you are trying to talk me into spending more time here, it ain't workin' ;) But seriously, we are in the middle of both the busiest time of year for me (next 3 months, the only time of year I actually work) and I'm right in the middle of researching and developing a completely different product line, sourcing parts, etc. It would be much easier if I spoke Mandarin. Starting my 20th year here, and it never gets boring, literally working 16+ hours from the office and home right now. The joys of being a greedy, money grubbing marketing director. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I prefer working metaphorically, Dennis. Wait--20 years? They stuck it out with you that long? Drmies (talk) 02:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
That is more ironic than you know. When I started, My hair was very long, I played guitar in a rockabilly band so had to leave to travel to gigs a lot (boss was very cool about that) and I came in as a temp employee to help for 3 months, that was 1994. Since I had a background in marketing, mad computer skills, a decade of marketing experience and could work on anything with wires, he decided to keep me year round. Since I could take off just about any time I needed to play with the band, I stuck around, created a real marketing dept. and within a few years, sales were up 10x and we had bought out a manufacturer. I accidentally grew up along the way. Probably about the time the tendinitis forced me to quit playing guitar. No one is more shocked that I stuck around than I am. Now I'm too lazy to go get a real job, preferring to work 3 months a year and fishing the rest. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

Enough of this frivolity!

Assuming you can drag yourself away from the witty talkpage banter here (and circumvent your block - I'm sure a clever technical guy like you can find a way...) perhaps you'd like to voice an opinion on Johncheverly's latest unblock request - he seems to have adjusted his attitude since four months ago, and I'm inclined to think it might be worth letting him back into the fold. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

On an unrelated note, hope you're over the lurgi now. All the best, Yunshui 雲‍水 10:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Feeling much better, just a little weak. Up before 6am as usual, and see my unblock request has exploded into much fun, which I do miss. As for John, I agree with you and think an unblock is warranted, as would be monitoring and perhaps a little mentoring. I notice Anthony gave him some tips on signatures, etc. and thinking that being new is part of the problem. Finding someone to help him for a couple of weeks will help him to better understand what we do here and prevent future issues. Perhaps a talk page stalker will volunteer. Mentoring isn't a pre-condition, just a good idea. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Mentoring's a good idea; I'll recommend it. Glad to hear you're back on your feet. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I have a lull in my adoption program, so if a mentor needs to be found, I could probably do so. If you have someone else, that's fine too. Go Phightins! 11:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps just going there and volunteering would be good. I don't think it would take more than 2 or 3 weeks, and just being a "go to" person in the future. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Sense of humour

Admin Dennis, do you happen to remember the user names who had some "sense of humour" and been cleared recently at the SPI, where I had reported them? Please give one minute of your time to read this page. (I may provide more but it is enough to look at the "contributions" of the user to see why they are here, which agenda they follow and with which feelings they edit WP. Tried to write this without hurting those noble feelings.) All the best. --E4024 (talk) 21:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis, while you are at it could you possibly also investigate the behaviour of the user above who routinely uses derogatory and insulting language to describe his opponents, including insults through the use of edit-summaries, despite multiple warnings not to abuse the edit summary function for personal attacks. See here one of many warnings on his talkpage about abuse of edit-summaries where he describes his perceived opponent as blinded by anti-Turkish euphoria just because the other editor used non-Turkish names for some places, and this edit where he insults the same editor through both the edit summary and the content of his comments. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 23:57, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Mr Brown if you find me a better role model then the user in this edit summary I could follow them and be a more educated editor in time. Best. --E4024 (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Sure. Continue baiting your fellow editors and abusing edit summaries: Revision as of 12:12, 22 January 2013 E4024 (→‎Greeks: No need to sythetising. What about Cyprus events or EU accession (let us go to Greece and spend the money Germans spare) of Greece? Better write a blog.) You set a great example of collaborative editing and civility. Or rather not. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 04:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea who had a sense of humor or not. As you can guess, I'm on massive OT, so not here much for a bit. Searching my contribs might help. As for role models, I'm confident (or at least hopeful) you two can work out the snippyness on your own. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Dennis I know you are busy. The giant stop sign and your edit notice message in a fuchsia background are unmistakable. I just wanted to point to you a few inconsistencies regarding the constant complaining of the editor above who complains to admins about other editors without owning up to his own chronic incivility. I gather from your comment about snippyness that my comments were summarily dismissed without investigation. I should have expected that since I knew you were busy. I am just surprised about the "snippyness" remark which means that I should not have tried to correct the record regarding the complaints of this editor for fear of appearing "snippy" while doing so. My conclusion is that I am in the wrong place at the wrong time and with wrong assumptions. Sorry for the inconvenience. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 14:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

You'll probably say no

I noticed a statement on User:Carrot Lord's user page at User:Carrot Lord#Warning: Expert Wikipedian abusing power. He goes on to say that if any Wikipedian asks him to remove the statement, he'll leave Wikipedia forever. The warning is clearly inappropriate if used, and I'll bring him to ANI if he attempts to use it again, but there's nothing about having it on his user page that justifies anything. It was removed by a clear vandal (Farty farty poopfarts) who left the comment "I have requested the removal of this section from this user page, because it is not appropriate for Wikipedians to see." That comment was either mimicking Carrot Lord's comment "If any Wikipedian decides to request the removal of this section from my own user page because it is not appropriate for Wikipedians to see, I will most likely leave Wikipedia forever, out of shame and disgust for such a filthy policy system." or was like his comment for a reason (if my hunch is correct). Carrot Lord reverts this comment, and proceeds to use his warning like message thingy on Farty's page. (since deleted by JamesBWatson, so you'd need to look into the history) I removed it, Carrot Lord restored it, AS removed it. When I removed it, I left a note on Carrot Lord's talk page [6] Carrot Lord told me to be careful next time [7] then removed the section. JamesBWatson has warned him for the vandalism. Farty is now blocked by the way. Here's my hunch. This looks to me like a possible good cop, bad cop type of thing. I think it's possible that Carrot Lord created farty to remove the info from his own userpage so that he could use the statement on Farty's user page. What I'm curious about is the possibility that this is some type of a sockfarm in the making and if CU should be used, or if we should just wait and watch Carrot Lord to see what happens. Ryan Vesey 18:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have no doubt that the two accounts are the same person. What the purpose is, is difficult to tell. The best guess I can come up with is that Carrot Lord created a silly warning message, and then created a spoof vandalism account to give himself an opportunity to use the silly message. If so, it comes under the category of using Wikipedia as a playground, but perhaps nothing worse than that. If there is more to it than that, or if there isn't but Carrot Lord does more of the same, then it may be worth thinking of taking further steps, but at present I don't see any need for further action. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
My question is: How do we know that Carrot Lord hasn't created other socks before (assuming that this is a sockpuppeting case, which it might not be)? AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 18:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
This is absolutely a joke. A sick joke. I am leaving Wikipedia as a contributor. Forever. And I promise to bankrupt it, and make a better Wikipedia using MediaWiki software. This community is disgusting. I tried to report User:Kevin Gorman for sock puppeting. Everyone laughed at me. Now I am not a sock puppeteer. And you accuse me of idiocy. This is the worst and most evil dictatorship on Earth. Wikipedia itself, especially the admins. Especially the high level users. Disgusting. --Carrot Lord (talk) 12:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • The more I look, the more concerned I get. He has 270 edits to his userpage, I just removed a personal attack on Jimbo Wales no less here, the article he's edited most is Mozio, it looks like there were some clear conflict of interest issues that led to the article being stubbified by Kevin Gorman, I just did a minor rewrite to the lead because it misinformed the reader. Ryan Vesey 21:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
You might ping someone more active at SPI to take a look. I got up extra early today just to reply to my talk page, but not sure I would have enough time to really look at this deep enough. I did look at the page, which was soapboxy and at the limit of my tolerance. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
The more I look at this editor's history, the less happy I am. Mozio is written with an unambiguous conflict of interest, is essentially promotional in purpose (though not written in blatantly promotional terms, thus avoiding G11 speedy deletion). However, I don't really see a basis for an SPI, though Ryan is, of course, free to try one. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:26, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Apparently he has acted on his threat slightly above and left on his own. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 18:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Actually he's still editing, although perhaps only to point out how illogical I am (which may be a public service). --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Dennis, I have to block you

You have been blocked for sloth.

This blocked user is asking that his or her block be reviewed:

Dennis Brown (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Request reason::

Blocked by abusive admin. I didn't do anything. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:41, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check your block log. If no blocks are listed, or the latest one has already expired, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Wow, April 1 already? How time flies when you oversleep. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:51, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Just imagine what will happen when it is April Fools. Vacation9 01:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • By the way, it appears Drmies forgot to block Dennis after giving him the notice. I've blocked him myself using my nonexistant sysop powers. Please remember next time. Vacation9 01:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
    • That would be an "Honor System" block. Kind of like the jailhouse in Support Your Local Sheriff, which was unfinished and prisoners were expected to just stay there despite the lack of iron bars on the cells. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
      • OK, I didn't really block him. It was a threat--I don't appreciate people who claim there's life outside this armpit of knowledge. Dennis sold out to the man, totally. Drmies (talk) 02:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
        • We know, we're taking sarcasm to the highest level. Vacation9 02:04, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
          • And humor to it's lowest level ;) I do miss the fun. I'm actually doing a great deal of reading right now, in particular about horticulture, hydroponics, indoor gardening, etc. with the goal of manufacturing and buying/selling some of the equipment used. I am a marketing guy by trade, after all. I told the boss man that it is kind of funny that I'm getting paid to read how to grow indoor "medicinal" marijuana, which really is part of it. I'm hanging up a couple of metal halide lights for testing in my sunroom to grow my garden starts for this year (cucumbers and squash, not pot) and chasing down suppliers in China and the US, plus this is the busy time of year to sell our existing products. The growing plants thing I actually like, I have a big garden each year. Normally I would say that growing vegetables is good for the soul, but being an admin, I don't have one. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I thought it was hilarious! But I won't write LOL.....wait......--Amadscientist (talk) 12:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I'm sure some kind of WP:RFC is needed to decide this, I'm not sure what kind. Let's have an RFC to decide what RFC is appropriate. That will be Stage 1. Dennis will be allowed to make a statement to defend his sloth. EdJohnston (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Yes
The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to User:Dennis Brown. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

  • Does this mean I can't talk on my own page? I also liked how you linked "Final decision", good choice, as Drmies seems to be declaring me a pseudoadmin. Maybe I will go block a few new users that are just asking for help, that should satisfy him. ;-) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 18:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Is using multiple accounts just because you can a WP:POINT issue?

See User:MultipleAccountsAllowed. His edits don't appear to be anything to suggest that the second account has a legitimate purpose. They've been slightly disruptive, but not majorly so (asking questions at the Teahouse unrelated to editing), and they haven't engaged in serious sockpuppetry. That begs the question, can you have multiple accounts just because you can, or must there be a purpose to the second account. In addition, am I incorrect in assuming the accounts must be linked unless there is a privacy issue? Ryan Vesey 20:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's a sockpuppet of a blocked editor, so it's block evasion, which ups the ante. But I can't remember what the name of the master is, so I can't follow up on my hunch with any real evidence, so it'll remain a hunch, I suppose. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
User:DeFacto? GaramondLethe 22:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm considering going to Village pump (policy) with a proposal that all alternate accounts must be linked from the userpage unless the reason for the alternate account is privacy, in which case the editor must declare to ArbCom with both accounts. Ryan Vesey 23:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I'd go stronger. I've always thought that undeclared alternate accounts should simply be forbidden. The idea that someone doesn't want to taint his edits in one area by association with another has never persuaded me. If there's some hotshot nuclear physicist out there that's also an expert on some kind of fetish, I'll happily do without one group of edits: there are other physicists and other fetishists out there that can pick up the slack.—Kww(talk) 00:04, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

My sister is in a cult. I want to maintain some kind of relationship with her, so when I edit in that topic area, I use an alternative account. There are countless good reasons for editors to have unconnected different accounts. Sorry if some arse holes do it for evil but constraining all editors as proposed here would be overreach. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 00:17, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd happily just live without your edits in the area. It's not overreach at all. One editor, one main account, with all other accounts being linked to it is a very reasonable restriction. The "countless good reasons" are known only to the people that have them and are completely unreviewed and unconsented to. How would I be able to tell, for example, whether your advocacy for sensitivity towards Islamic perspectives was or was not related to edit pertaining to your sister's cult? You may be comfortable that they are unrelated, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily am.—Kww(talk) 00:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, implementing this rule would just cause otherwise good-faith editors to break it, or limit their ability to contribute, just so you can use it occasionally to catch baddies. I'm not editing that topic under my real name, and that's that. And I will continue to edit in any area I want, abiding by our content policies. I do appreciate that constraining disruptive editors is important, and I appreciate the work you all do in that regard, but in this case we have to balance the harm that will be prevented against the harm caused, and it's my opinion that such a rule would be imposing a constraint on good-faith editors that would not be justified by the benefits. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 02:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I understand your point completely, but a system where they declare to arbcom is better than what we have now. Ryan Vesey 00:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm torn on both sides, but current policy says it is allowed, which is sometimes taken as "soft", but there are really a lot of legitimate alt accounts in controversial area, more than most people realize. Likely, because they aren't causing problems so they go unnoticed, which is the whole purpose for the legitimate account. We only see a minority that are problematic, although they get all the attention. We have to be careful to not assume an alt account is a bad kind of sock (AGF and all) which is why fair SPI work will never be super fast. I have seen a great many legitimate socks via SPI and just around. This case, I'm not sure as I haven't looked close enough to have a valid opinion.Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 00:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Head's up!

Someone who knows more than I about socks should take a look at this: User:MultipleAccountsAllowed. They seem to be saying Nananana Quack Quack. Gtwfan52 (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet

Dennis and talk page stalkers, I'm pretty sure Chibanks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sockpuppet given the way they jumped right in with span tags, templates, wikilinks and so on on TeamLilKim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) which they created about 4 hours after creating an account. But I have no idea who they might be a sock puppet of, I'm hoping that you or a stalker have come across a socker who has this MO? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Does look odd, but no dot to connect to. I notice they say "protect OUR page" on their talk page. That is a red flag. I'm not here to follow up, but a calm asking if the account is being used by more than one person might be helpful. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:29, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Dennis, I've asked them. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:18, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

MMA sock

Can you take a look at ExUFCStaffer (talk · contribs)? it's a meatpuppet, at least. Poison Whiskey 13:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Hard to draw a conclusion with just two diffs. Not enough diffs to draw a conclusion without a CU, and not sure I could justify one yet. You might try asking Elen of the Roads or DeltaQuad, who have CU access and have worked with several of the MMA socks. They would be more inclined to know who it is and can connect the dots. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:43, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
I think the only purpose of this account was to send a "letter" to Jimbo. Looks like it's sleeping now, if it comes back i'll send a message to Elen. Regards — Poison Whiskey 21:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Would this interest you at all?

[8] I'm really just using you as an example of a kind of person - please don't feel dobbed in; but if it interests you, that would be good. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 06:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Just had time to look at it superficially, but it does look like he needs some mentoring or review. I'm not as quick to jump on desysoping someone when their "abuse" isn't towards other users and is instead focused on restoring content, even if it is against consensus. I would point out that Sarak is correct, that there really should be no controversy when an admin undeletes an article that was deleted by a PROD, we can do that for anyone we choose without question or consensus since it is technically a "dispute" over an "undisputed" deletion. There is a problems, unquestionably, and it is a common problem with old school admin. Some can make the transition, some can't. This is due in part to the fact that many wouldn't be willing to work by the more stringent rules that admin have to work by now. I'm tied with a lot of things right now, but this wouldn't be a huge job, so I would help if I can. It would be several weeks from now anyway. Not sure what I could do, or if I could help, however. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Cheers. He probably just needs a conversation with a knowledgeable admin to work out how far behind he is, whether he grasps the role of admins in the face of community consensus, and whether he's willing to sign up to that. Cas is busy too but will take a look when the time comes. So hopefully one of you will be able to give give him have the conversation and give him the right advice. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 10:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for your efforts in stopping another sockpuppet of Bambifan101. Keep up the good work as an administrator! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:29, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, just as a heads-up, there is a long-term abuse report describing the banned user's modus operandi and disruption to Disney-related articles, so I think it's best to keep an eye out for BF101's targeted pages and send him to WP:SPI if necessary. I think that's logical enough, eh? Also, in order to curtail BF101's disruption, I was thinking if it was possible to institute an edit filter on him if BF101 returns? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Bambi seems to get caught quick enough, not sure a filter would be needed. Sending to SPI is always a good idea. We have enough history there to determine if it is them pretty quickly. And thank you for the kindness of the barnstar. I only had time to spend 30 minutes at SPI the other day, so did a port scan of Bambi (hence the one year block) and a few other things there. Got a full day planned at home today, so won't be around much yet again. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Also, per the LTA report, "Please report all ongoing incidents of abuse to AIV or ANI." I have dealt with BF101 before, so I know what his modus operandi and the LTA protocols are. However, even though BF101's actions resulted in PMDrive1061's retirement back in 2011, I certainly don't want this to happen to me, as I often edit Disney related articles. :-) And, you're welcome. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dennis_Brown/Archive_18&oldid=1259753931"