Wikiquote:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/016

Recent edit wars
I am requesting that another admin review my interactions with User:Poefan as well as User:66.99.219.2 (whom I suspect is the same person). After lengthy back and forth, I have now infinitely blocked User:Poefan. As you will see, this user continues to berate me after the block. Please feel free to comment and/or change this if you feel I was too harsh. Thanks. ~ UDScott 20:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I am unfortunately no longer an admin, and have thus been unable to assist much lately in the endless battles against trolls and vandals, but the block seems entirely warranted, based upon the rather glaring appearance that this is a cross wiki troll/vandal simply attempting to amuse his/her small mind here for a while. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 20:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * This is the same user as, , , and any editor coming from 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and several others (pretty much any IP starting with a "6" yesterday). He's globally banned, and has been a cross-wiki abuse pest for years now (beginning in late 2005).  There was formerly a long-term abuse page on him on en: which we deleted.  Contact me on en: if you want more info, but I strongly suggest you block all of these if you want to stop this relentless, hateful, and endlessly abusive person.  Please look at the cross-wiki blocks and contributions of Oliversbio for just one example of hundreds I could post here.  Thank you, Antandrus1 20:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC) (admin "Antandrus" on en:)
 * I concur that this appears to be the same person, and endorse indefinite blocking due to a pattern of using sockpuppets for trolling, harassment, incivility, and inserting false or irrelevant information. I doubt that will put an end to it because most of this troll's edit warring is via dynamic IP ranges without logging in. (64.107.0.74, 64.107.2.106, 64.107.3.6, 64.107.3.52, 64.107.3.126; 66.2.70.2, 66.2.70.7, 66.2.70.9, 66.2.70.23, 66.2.70.34, 66.2.70.47, 66.2.70.66, 66.2.70.67, 66.2.70.76; 66.99.0.42, 66.99.0.251, 66.99.1.36, 66.99.2.148, 66.99.3.159, 66.99.219.2; and possibly 69.219.216.130, 198.22.122.123, & 205.157.110.37.) ~ Ningauble 01:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Your last three are spot on -- I missed those. This person uses public computers; the 66.99.0.0/22 and 64.107.0.0/22 are the Chicago Public Library, and the others are display computers at Office Depot and Best Buy.  He also uses Triton College and Dominican University IPs; everything is in northwest Chicago.  Most of these I've blocked numerous times on Wikipedia.  If anyone wants more info come to English Wikipedia and shoot me an e-mail; I'll send you the contents of the deleted long-term abuse page on this person (Jimbo himself deleted it -- long story -- there's more here than meets the eye).  Further caution:  if (and when) he e-mails you, do not respond unless you use a service that masks your IP in the header.  If he learns your IP address he can and will do serious damage (he forges "death threat" emails from YOU to him and sends them to your ISP -- it works).  This individual stalks and harasses people in real life; be careful. Antandrus1 01:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC) (Antandrus on Wikipedia)
 * be careful what this guy says, we had huge problems with him, this person antandrus, he is suspended on wiktionary:
 * http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Antandrus also ed has article on him

www.encyclopeediadramatica.com/User:Croboy_Man/Atandrus_OLD savedtruth
 * we had huge problems with this individual for long time;

death threats and much more, everything above is pure lie. It is antandrus who is under fbi investigation, now trying to put blame on others so he looks innocent later on, there were no problems before he came here, sure there were reverts but not as much as they are now, so be careful with this individual, who causes nothing but problems, as above links indicate, including antandrus.tripod.com. Death threats & everything else was made up by king of vandals antandrus. Also deleted page is old, full of lies, who else created in the first place but antandrus who else, he is ongoing problem since 2005 & 100%+ of everything he says is something he dreams up when he is on illegal drugs, so be careful, antandrus has personal problem with the above person, so he will look for every opportunity to get even, if you simply did not revert things, none-of-this would have happened, we knew antandrus would come here around this time, so we expected it, antandrus aka david has no real job in real life so editing and bothering people on internet is all he knows how to do, unfortunately, it's shame, it's very sad he has no life at all!
 * I can certainly assure you nobody will fake any death threats on your behalf, even jimbo told antandrus to stop his vandalism, but antandrus always finds way with excuses he is the king of them, it's a shame such people are administrators, they never contribute, as you can see he revets things with simple explanation, who is real vandal then but he never proves what's right or wrong!
 * I assure you, all of you will be safe & you will not get any emails, however that does not mean you are neutral or fair, but we knew that from the beginning, reverting articles without first talking about them, clearly breaks rules on any wiki page, calling people names just to justify something is out of line, way down dirty!

The Antandrus account on Wiktionary is not part of the SUL so is likely to be a different person.--Ole.Holm 18:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * likely is not good enough and our course he will never admit,yes that's him, he will only point out who he is when he is not vandalizing, keep in mind he was suspended 3 years ago and that's a very long time. Antandrus is expert with excuses, he has tons stores for every sorry situation!

He's editting since 2004 so he knows his way around, not to mention others who help him with evil deeds!
 * He goes around accusing people they go to best buy to use internet, but never mentions fact that if you are close to the area you can log on via wifi!

Could someone please block this person's sockpuppets?
This is the banned user/troll you have had running on this project for a while now. You've already blocked and. His one stable IP was globally blocked yesterday on all Wikimedia projects. Here are the others I have seen so far:


 * (where he is right now) -- I just hardblocked this IP on English wikipedia -- if there is a checkuser here, it wouldn't hurt to root out any others he may have created. His usual ranges are 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and a couple of others.  I would also highly suggest you revert all edits from these accounts, as he adds subtle misinformation, typically in the form of minor date changes, ungrammatical original research, usually just a few words at a time.  Sorry to be a bother, but I noticed he was active here and starting to harass your users.  Thanks, Antandrus1 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * (where he is right now) -- I just hardblocked this IP on English wikipedia -- if there is a checkuser here, it wouldn't hurt to root out any others he may have created. His usual ranges are 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and a couple of others.  I would also highly suggest you revert all edits from these accounts, as he adds subtle misinformation, typically in the form of minor date changes, ungrammatical original research, usually just a few words at a time.  Sorry to be a bother, but I noticed he was active here and starting to harass your users.  Thanks, Antandrus1 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * (where he is right now) -- I just hardblocked this IP on English wikipedia -- if there is a checkuser here, it wouldn't hurt to root out any others he may have created. His usual ranges are 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and a couple of others.  I would also highly suggest you revert all edits from these accounts, as he adds subtle misinformation, typically in the form of minor date changes, ungrammatical original research, usually just a few words at a time.  Sorry to be a bother, but I noticed he was active here and starting to harass your users.  Thanks, Antandrus1 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * (where he is right now) -- I just hardblocked this IP on English wikipedia -- if there is a checkuser here, it wouldn't hurt to root out any others he may have created. His usual ranges are 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and a couple of others.  I would also highly suggest you revert all edits from these accounts, as he adds subtle misinformation, typically in the form of minor date changes, ungrammatical original research, usually just a few words at a time.  Sorry to be a bother, but I noticed he was active here and starting to harass your users.  Thanks, Antandrus1 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * (where he is right now) -- I just hardblocked this IP on English wikipedia -- if there is a checkuser here, it wouldn't hurt to root out any others he may have created. His usual ranges are 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and a couple of others.  I would also highly suggest you revert all edits from these accounts, as he adds subtle misinformation, typically in the form of minor date changes, ungrammatical original research, usually just a few words at a time.  Sorry to be a bother, but I noticed he was active here and starting to harass your users.  Thanks, Antandrus1 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * (where he is right now) -- I just hardblocked this IP on English wikipedia -- if there is a checkuser here, it wouldn't hurt to root out any others he may have created. His usual ranges are 66.99.0.0/22, 64.107.0.0/22, 66.2.70.0/24, and a couple of others.  I would also highly suggest you revert all edits from these accounts, as he adds subtle misinformation, typically in the form of minor date changes, ungrammatical original research, usually just a few words at a time.  Sorry to be a bother, but I noticed he was active here and starting to harass your users.  Thanks, Antandrus1 21:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for heading up. Just for your information, 64.107.220.0/24, which contained already an indef-blocked account, is now hardblocked for one month. We'll later have time to other ranges you've suggested. Cheers, --Aphaia 02:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Quick reviews compelled me to block all those accounts. Ranges may be reviewed later by me or other CUs. --Aphaia 02:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of User:Quillercouch (Poetlister/Cato et al.)
In case you are not aware, User:Ole.Holm is a sockpuppet of Poetlister/Cato, who is still actively editing on this site. He was blocked on the English Wikipedia as a sockpuppet of a banned user, one who had impersonated several females and used images depicting them without their permission. I propose he be blocked. See also:


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ole.Holm
 * http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=15636 - Wikipedia Review account formerly associated with User:Ole.Holm
 * http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=28751&st=20 - discussion where "Trick cyclist", who was then claiming as his "WP username" Ole.Holm, is revealed as a sockpuppet who used an automatic translator to make posts in broken Danish
 * http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?act=Search&CODE=getalluser&mid=15636 - last posts of "Trick cyclist" on Wikipedia Review, when he was responding in embarrassment to comments about him being a sockpuppet, after mentioning esoterica related to sexual deviancy.

--Jonas Rand 18:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The observation that Ole.Holm has been blocked as a suspected sockpuppet of Poetlister/Cato appears to be valid. I am reserving and developing my own assessments on the matter, knowing that people have been wrongly suspected and accused of being even more obviously pernicious vandals and trolls. The poster of this message also seems to be a blocked entity, because of pervasive harassment elsewhere, and I am not personally inclined to look into the matter more than I have to, as I am no longer an admin who might be expected to do further investigation, but merely an editor who seeks to know just a little about those I work amongst.  ~ Kalki 19:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for addressing this, Kalki. The user is certainly Poetlister/Cato, and on his talk page on English Wikipedia one can see that users Alison and Jpgordon, both of whom have checkuser abilities, confirmed by IP evidence that this was indeed Poetlister. Additionally, see his postings on Wikipedia Review mentioning various topics that only Poetlister can be associated with, such as sexual fetishes, praise for Wikiquote's superiority over Wikipedia, etc. Also, Wikipedia Review moderator Herschelkrustofsky, after discovering this, began calling him "Mike", which is the real name of the person behind these accounts. I would appreciate it for another administrator to assess this as well. --Jonas Rand 19:42, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Regarding the comment "the poster of this message also seems to be...blocked...", yes, I was rightly blocked on the English Wikipedia for some rude and unkind behavior, though I don't seek to pursue this here, where I have never been blocked. --Jonas Rand 19:46, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I assume the report of trusted checkusers at Wikipedia is correct. It may be noted that community action at Wikiquote was to de-sysop, not to ban. It might be considered more appropriate for the contributor to have self-identified upon rejoining the community as an editor – is that the basis for requesting a block? ~ Ningauble 23:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The absence of self-identification on "Ole"'s part is the least of what went on with the Poetlister group of accounts, including this one. To start, there was the choice of "Ole.Holm" as a user name, which has the air of a real name, and also carries the air of a Danish one. Another example of misbehavior with this persona was when he first arrived on the English Wikipedia. He edited the article on a deceased woman with the surname "Holm", presumably to come off with the impression that he was of some relation to that woman. If the original edits by Ole.Holm were not those of Poetlister, it would indicate that something more malicious has happened, namely that the account was somehow unscrupulously obtained. Then, there was the use of an automatic online translator on Wikipedia Review to fraudulently imply that he is a speaker of Danish, going so far as to use a historical map of Denmark as his avatar. --Jonas Rand 00:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

The checkusers here are already aware of this. I had already informed them of the block on Wikipedia and asked them to investigate. People here will no doubt wish to hear what they say. There can be no doubt that they will vindicate me. In any case, I invite people to examine my 3,000 edits and decide whether I am some dangerous vandal. Compare my edits to those of Ionas68224, who is blocked not only on WP but also Commons, Meta and Simplewiki .

I have made my own investigations on Wikipedia Review. I see no evidence that this "Trick cyclist" is me beyond expressing a preference to edit here rather than on Wikipedia, which is surely also true for many other editors here. In any case, it appears that the alleged "esoterica related to sexual deviancy" amounts to no more than knowing that lycra and spandex are brand names for elastane! As for being Danish, I have lived most of my life in Britain and regard myself as British.

If Wikipedia Review is a reliable source, note that it says there that "Jonas Rand" is actually a middle-aged woman called Linda Rand who impersonates teenagers. If so, you may wonder how reliable anything from this editor is.

Meanwhile I shall not edit Wikiquote further until this matter is resolved.--Ole.Holm 19:00, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * So, "Ole", does this mean that your official position on the matter is that you are a sockpuppet of Poetlister/Cato, that you are not "Trick cyclist", and that this is justified because your edits here do not show a continuation of the behavior that originally got you blocked? In this case, how do you explain that since the time "Trick cyclist" arrived on WR, he was claiming "Ole.Holm" as his "Wikipedia User name", and, coincidentally mind you, expressed the view that editing Wikiquote should be seen as a better alternative to Wikipedia as "Ole.Holm"'s edits skyrocketed on Wikiquote?


 * Also, I have evidence that I am not Linda Rand, who is actually a deceased woman that last lived over sixty miles north of where I do, but I prefer to keep it undisclosed because I don't trust people like "Ole". If you pay attention, Somey has made more recent posts about me, referring to me as simply "Jonas". By the way, when you say "The checkusers are already aware of this", do you mean that you told them that you were Poetlister/Cato? It's interesting how you, possibly in a conscious effort to do so, use the passive voice to discuss anything that relates to other accounts. For example, "I see no evidence that this Trick Cyclist is me", rather than simply, "I am not Trick cyclist on WR". Additionally, I never said you were Danish, I said that you used an automatic translator to fake being a native speaker of Danish, as proven by The Adversary in the WR discussion about "Trick cyclist". I fail to notice that you are lacking in intelligence, so it is doubtful that you misunderstood my comment. Jonas Rand 20:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Note: User:Ole.Holm has now been blocked by Wikiquote administrator Aphaia for being a block-evading sockpuppet of Quillercouch/Cato, despite his attempts at evasion and repeated non-denial. Thank you, Aphaia. --Jonas Rand 00:11, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Talk:The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension
Any thoughts on what is written here? It has ramifications on our quotation limit policies. I'm not sure where to begin with it, but I also don't want to get into an edit war on the page. My experience is that plenty of discussion has occurred and there is much history that led us to where we are today with respect to the limits in WQ:LOQ. Obviously, this user would disagree, but this is not just a baseless objection. The user has some specific and well thought out objections. It might be good to consider them and perhaps reopen dialogue on the policy in question. ~ UDScott 00:54, 28 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not going to address all of the points Perspectoff raises, but I would like to make a couple general observations, with recommendation:
 * I am not a lawyer, and neither are most editors, nor should they be expected to be. Wikiquote is a project that anyone can edit, so we must use a simple guideline that anyone can understand and follow. I don't think the community can fruitfully engage in case-by-case legalistic analysis of issues such as potential impairment of commercial use or the subtleties of qualitative substantiality. Nor, as suggested on my talk page, is it incumbent upon administrators to do so. As remarked at Template talk:Checkcopyright and elsewhere, we should probably change the checkcopyright template to avoid language that smacks of expertism.
 * Is the current Limits on quotations guideline ideal? Probably not. Is it arbitrary? Yes, it needs to be simplistic for the reasons in point (1) above. Should it be more permissive? Perhaps, but not very much. The guideline is expressly not just about respecting copyrights, notwithstanding that the original impetus for drafting it was a motion to disband the project for violating copyrights. The primary purpose (stated first and discussed at greatest length in the lede rationale) is to maintain the quality of our pages. This I believe is as it should be, and we should probably change the checkcopyright template accordingly.
 * (As an aside, the linked site noting references to the film does not support an argument that the 76 quotes in the article are in the public domain. However, observing that the creative work is largely a patchwork of common vernacular phrases might support an argument that most are unquoteworthy clichés and banalities.) Incidentally, this discussion probably doesn't belong at AN: it is a general policy issue and ought not be construed as entailing administrative expertise. ~ Ningauble 17:42, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Template:Spoiler - help removing links?
I have just closed this long overdue VfD as delete, but since this template is linked in so many articles, could we have a bot do the job? Or does anybody wanna help manually do it? It doesn't seem that it's linked in too many places, so if we can't get a bot, any help would be appreciated before I delete this as I don't want many red links scattered everywhere... &mdash; RyanCross (talk ) 21:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * These are now all done. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

11 April 2010 QOTD
A permission error has crept up on me again — I've been focused on too many other things, and I had thought I had been ahead of the wave of auto-protection of pages... this will have to be transferred to the Quote of the day/April 11, 2010 page by an admin. I will probably work on updating a few more days within the next day or so. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 20:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ ~ UDScott 20:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 20:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Two Philosophers
I will probably be creating a couple pages here for Zeno of Elea and Parmenides within the next week or so, and was surprised there weren't any pages for them as yet. I no longer can see if deleted pages even existed or not, and if someone could check on this, and if there are deleted pages for them the code could be pasted to my talk page or User:Kalki/Chalkboard as a starting point. Also that Chalkboard page needs its protection level reduced to established users so I can edit it. Thanks for any help on this. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 07:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Protection level of chalkboard reduced. These philosopher titles were not previously deleted. (Deletion logs are visible to all users, unless "oversighted.") ~ Ningauble 13:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Malicious slanders
The nonsense being posted from IP 173.161.2.238 has gone on far more than long enough to earn a long-term block of this IP. I am quite patient with many forms of idiocy, but I am not patient at all where malicious intentions are quite apparent, whether they are openly asserted or camouflaged by disingenuous niceties or officious mendacity — and there has been far too much attention payed to fantasies of non-existent authorizations to make rules or impose rules that would not be of any great benefit and don't actually exist, either here or elsewhere, and too little attention payed to enforcing and exercising such rules as actually do, and are clearly useful and necessary — like blocking IPs and names when it becomes quite evident that their user's primary intentions are almost certainly vandalism and harassment. When I was an admin, even when I couldn't take time to edit here, I usually tried to check in as often as I could, and blocked such idiots within a few edits, and erased their pollutions of the wiki as swiftly as possible. There has been much more of this nonsense go on far longer than it used to since I lost use of admin tools, and I find this regrettable. I am not yet prepared to justify all my reasons for being inclined to use all the names I have in my life, or on this project — but I will state, once again that my reasons have never been either criminal or malicious, and despite the extra time I now have found through not feeling a responsibility to be quite so attentive to this site as I once was, I do get a bit irritated when I see such clearly malicious activity go on without any vigorous response for so long. I just meant to notify some admins of this one IPs activity, but I clearly remain a bit irritated at some situations here. That's all I have to say for now. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 04:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks for the heads-up. I had not noticed the pattern. I appreciate the work you do patrolling this sort of vandalism. There has been a rather sharp decline in participation by administrators since last year for various reasons, and I don't think edits are being reviewed as thoroughly as they might be. I have been busier than usual off-wiki for the past few weeks, but expect to have more time for Wikiquote again now. I would prefer to devote more of that time to contributing quotes rather than performing maintenance, but I find myself prioritizing according to perceived needs that detract from time available for core interests. ~ Ningauble 12:56, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Your help, like that of anyone, in taking care of truly necessary matters, has been greatly appreciated. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 21:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

QOTD for 16 April 2010
I was late again on selecting QOTD and layout before the rolling protection occured, this will have to be transferred to the project page Quote of the day/April 16, 2010 by an admin. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 21:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

IDIOT ALERT
One of our more prolific vandalizing idiots has been at work again, wasting my time, and because of other forms of idiocy I no longer have tools to do anything about it. N   00:27 	User talk:Kalki/Manifesto‎‎ (2 changes | hist). . (+16) . . [Flicabic‎; Kalki‎] 00:27 (cur | prev). . (-74) . . Kalki (Talk | contribs) (IDIOT ALERT) N   	00:20 (cur | prev). . (+90) . . Flicabic (Talk | contribs) (Do shorts stink?) N   00:26 	User talk:Flicabic‎ (diff | hist). . (+789) . . Kalki (Talk | contribs) (IDIOT ALERT) N   00:24 	Help:Do shorts stink‎ (diff | hist). . (+2,061) . . Flicabic (Talk | contribs) (Yes.) 00:16 	(Move log)‎. . [Flicabic‎ (2×)] 00:14 	 Dr. Seuss‎ (diff | hist). . (+158) . . 69.236.168.31 (Talk) (→Disputed: ) N   00:14 	User talk:Cowhump‎‎ (2 changes | hist). . (+834) . . [Flicabic‎; Kalki‎] m  	00:14 (cur | prev). . (+45) . . Flicabic (Talk | contribs) (+cat) N   	00:12 (cur | prev). . (+789) . . Kalki (Talk | contribs) (IDIOT ALERT) N   00:13 	User:Kalki/Manifesto‎‎ (2 changes | hist). . (+16) . . [75.127.67.216‎; Kalki‎] 00:12 	 Paris Hilton‎‎ (4 changes | hist). . (-1,251) . . [210.212.53.211‎; 75.127.67.216‎; Kalki‎ (2×)] N   00:11 	User talk:75.127.67.216‎ (diff | hist). . (+808) . . Kalki (Talk | contribs) (troll warning) 00:08 	(User creation log). . Mysie2it (Talk | contribs) New user account 00:06 	 Benjamin Franklin‎‎ (2 changes | hist). . (0) . . [75.127.67.216‎; Kalki‎] 00:06 (cur | prev). . (+4,018) . . Kalki (Talk | contribs) (revert idiocy - Undo revision 1113452 by 75.127.67.216 (talk)) 00:04 (cur | prev). . (-4,018) . . 75.127.67.216 (Talk) (rvv) 00:04 	 Patrick Henry‎ (diff | hist). . (-419) . . Kalki (Talk | contribs) (revert idiocy - Undo revision 1113440 by Cowhump (talk))

Please take care of this particular form of idiocy as soon as possible. ~ Kalki 04:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

User:G-Spot+Moan
Someone may wish to do a clean up http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=G-Spot+Moan The account has been globalled by Stewards. Billinghurst 09:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. ~ Ningauble 13:50, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Additional note: and  are likely a same person with the user concerned. Both two accounts are blocked. --Aphaia 12:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

28 & 29 of April 2010 QOTDs

 * 28:
 * 29:

These need to be placed on project page Quote of the day/April 28, 2010 and Quote of the day/April 29, 2010 by an admin ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 20:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. ~ UDScott 20:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Checkuser request: Iamsaa
Compare sockpuppet investigation case at Wikipedia, where this user is banned. ~ Ningauble 22:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

They don't share any IP address, but likely belong to one same person: all use a same network which is quite rarely on this project. Another technical evidence supports this presumption I think. --Aphaia 02:56, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Results are posted to the list and other CUs are welcome to review. --Aphaia 03:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. On the basis of this circumstantial evidence and the conspicuous behavioral pattern, I am blocking the sockpuppets and issuing a final warning to the puppet master. ~ Ningauble 15:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Vandal

 * - crosswiki vandal. --Dferg 22:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, and please review the contributions of too. Thanks, --Dferg 22:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked AsshoIe here. This username is also blocked at Meta as unacceptable. Should we hide it with oversight? All edits by 99.19.66.104 seem to qualify for speedy deletions.--Jusjih 22:27, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I agree with blocking as an inappropriate username. Oversight doesn't seem necessary, but I wouldn't object. I will clean up the IP nonsense pages. ~ Ningauble 23:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Global ban enforcement
Hi. Please enforce the global ban on Thekohser declared by Jimbo Wales in this edit. Thanks! — Jeff G. ツ 02:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm not sure if this is a proper venue; while I personally support this idea, why not globallock the account instead of ask for enforcement to each local community? --Aphaia 02:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * And as far as I understand Jimmy has no special privilege to declare such a global ban unless he speaks on behalf of the Board. Thus your request is declined currently. Thanks. --Aphaia 02:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your quick responses.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Kohs is permanently and globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.--Jimbo Wales 04:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reiterating that ban, Jimbo. Is it fair to assume that you wrote that on behalf of the WMF Board?    — Jeff G. ツ 04:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The board isn't involved in banning individual users, for the most part. If Mr. Kohs wants to appeal to the board, I wish him the best of luck.--Jimbo Wales 04:43, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you again, Jimbo. If you have time, would you please direct your attention to the following sections where my efforts to have your ban enforced have been unsuccessful so far?
 * http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Global_lock.2Funlock_for_Thekohser
 * http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_%26_protections#Global_ban_enforcement
 * http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Admin_action_alerts#Global_ban_enforcement
 * http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Administrators'_noticeboard#Global_ban_enforcement
 * http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administratoren/Anfragen#Global_ban_enforcement
 * I was working through the list here until I found out about global lock, but I don't have time to continue tonight, sorry.  — Jeff G. ツ 05:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Note: I reverted Koh's edits on Jimmy Wales. His edits on other pages may be good to subjected to re-assessment.

I support to ban Greg Kohs from editing. As far as I know, he is a liar and merely shabby self promoter. Letting him spread false information both on him and on the others is a pretty bad thing, I think. --Aphaia 22:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Jeff has been going about stirring up a fuss over this, as he acknowledges above. See Wikisource:Administrators' noticeboard] for another example, that has more information. The decision to ban an editor is a local one, and that an account is globally locked is an account block, not a user block. Users voluntarily link their account, or they may use different account names at each wiki. Thekohser was globally locked for a time, that has now been unlocked. Stewards have the proper ability to act on each of the WMF wikis, per WMF policy; they may directly block, but local blocks are ordinarily done by locally chosen administrators in service of the local community and should always respect local consensus. This request here and the other similar requests have been wasting the time of many, and that should be considered. --Abd 22:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

All of this concern for the wellbeing of the wiki would be gratifying if only there were more to it than wiki-omphaloskepsis and wiki-drama. But seriously ... has anybody read any good quotes lately? ~ Ningauble 17:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Since it didn't seem to go noticed, I'm briefly interrupting here. Did anyone see this?  Might I receive a response or a community ruling?  By the way, we can add English Wikinews to the list of Wikimedia sites where I have been unblocked and participating productively.  On English Wikibooks, the issue appears to be coming to a vote soon.  Thank you! -- Thekohser (using 68.87.42.110 19:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC))

QOTD for 18 May 2010
This will need placement at Quote of the day/May 18, 2010 by an admin. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 00:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

✅. ~ UDScott 02:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

RevisionDelete has been rolled out to admins
Administrators will have noticed new options (show/hide) on log, history, and revision pages. This is the MediaWiki RevisionDelete feature, which has been rolled out to sysops on all Wikimedia projects (Bugzilla:18780) as announced at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). In a nutshell, this allows administrators to hide deleted revisions and parts of log entries in a manner similar to certain "Oversight" functions with some limitations, chiefly: information hidden by an administrator remains visible to all administrators and log entries cannot be completely suppressed. For further information, see Wikipedia's policy on this at Wikipedia:Revision deletion and its talk page. ~ Ningauble 16:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Great feature, thanks very much. -- Cirt (talk) 19:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I didn't have anything to do with it, and was so baffled when this stuff showed up unexpectedly that I prodded the stewards. I got a helpful explanation there, which enabled me to track down the 'pedia links above. ~ Ningauble 20:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just tested it on an abusive comment in the edit history of this page. Admins can see it in deleted edits. BD2412 T 20:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Awesome, this also lets me know what it looks like on the projects where I do have actual Oversight. :) EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 20:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Great to see it work now; it was two years ago it appeared first on testwiki ... I've been waiting for since then. Well, so now we need a procedural policy ... it's just okay for us to import Wikipedia ones? It's slightly different from oversight (any sysop can look the hidden revision) which enWP one sees to intend, and in general WP procedures may be overwhelming for us, a much smaller community. --Aphaia 07:32, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Update
There are still some unresolved bugs with this new feature. In a nutshell: if you attempt to show/hide more than one revision at a time, or if the ordinary delete/undelete and the new show/hide are both used in the same history, then the revision log may be mangled beyond recoverability. It may be best to wait for the dust to settle before using this feature. ~ Ningauble 17:53, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Usurpation request
I'm trying to unify my accounts under the name "Herostratus". But User:Herostratus is using that name here. He has only 3 edits, all in 2006. Would it be possible to delete him so that I can have this user name? 24.62.227.76 13:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is possible if you are the same person as w:User:Herostratus at Wikipedia. Please post your request at Changing username/Usurpation. ~ Ningauble 13:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * It could be 99.9%possible, but not automatically in theory. Retaining a SULed account doesn't grant you an automatic usurpation, you therefore have to ask him first if he is fine to be usurped. On the other hand, I haven't seen this kind of request challenged. --Aphaia 18:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

userboxen
For those who like userboxes, I have templatized User Wikiquote admin and User Wikiquote bureaucrat. ~ Ningauble 16:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Very nice - thanks! (I like the footnote stomping one too) ~ UDScott 17:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

17 June 2010 QOTD

 * An admin will need to post this at Quote of the day/June 17, 2010. ~ Kalki (talk &middot; contributions) 22:30, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 22:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)