Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:06, 28 July 2005

Past talk:
User talk:David Gerard/archive 1 (4 Jan 2004 - 31 Dec 2004)
User talk:David Gerard/archive 2 (1 Jan 2005 - 30 Jun 2005)

Please put new stuff at the bottom, where I'll see it. ArbCom stuff, please mention what it's about in the header. m:CheckUser requests (sockpuppet checks, etc) need to be about ArbCom-related matters for me to do the check.

CheckUser is working again in MediaWiki 1.5 — so I'll have to fine time to check the backlog. Note that as per m:CheckUser, I'll only do checks if there's a plausible link to an ArbCom case, past or present (there's no consensus to go further, and I'm wary of setting any bad precedent). Leave requests here, or you can frequently catch me on IRC or via email.

Another official Scientologist editor?

Check out 205.227.165.11 - it's registered to CSI. I suspect this might be Nuview editing while not logged in. -- ChrisO 30 June 2005 19:48 (UTC)

Nuview hasn't been a really problematic editor in practice. I'm not worried about Category:Scientology getting a CoS bias from them. I think it's a good thing to have their POV on board - it's not like the subject is short of solid reference material - David Gerard 1 July 2005 16:04 (UTC)

All Pennstate U, same articles, same person?

Hello David. How's it going?

An anon IP user 130.203.202.156 (talk · contribs) is user:Deeptrivia who is using a Pennstate university IP as a proxy and the reason he/she was banned was because of vandalizing my and user:Mustafaa's user pages and other articles. He/she admits that" My IP is 130.203.202.156 Thank you. deeptrivia 29 June 2005 02:53 (UTC) " near the bottom of this page here when arguing against user:Axon.

Also recently another anon IP 128.118.126.16 (talk · contribs) has been editing the same pages as 130.203.202.156 (aka deeptrivia) and I traced him/her back to Pennstate university also.

• 130.203.202.156 =
• 128.118.126.16 =

Can you please clarify whether these guys are the same? Thanks, I appreciate it. P.S This user is believed to have used sooo many other IPs I think I should make a list. :) --Anonymous editor July 2, 2005 03:28 (UTC)

LaRouche

Hi David, I'm not clear whether the IP-check facility isn't available at all, not even to the developers. If it isn't, feel free to ignore this. If it is, would you consider asking a developer to check Cognition (talk · contribs), a new LaRouche editor, in case it's Herschelkrustofsky (talk · contribs)? There's a report at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Cognition_(II). The IP addresses known to be HK from the last arbcom case were 64.30.208.48 (talk · contribs), which resolves to Linkline Communications in Los Angeles, and AOL dial-up IP ranges 172.128.0.0 - 172.191.255.255 and 172.192.0.0 - 172.216.255.255. There are similarities and differences between HK and Cognition, so it's hard to judge by the posts alone. Cheers, SlimVirgin July 3, 2005 11:44 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal

Dunno if you've looked at this:

• Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal

It's in voting right now. To me most of the proposals look utterly beyond belief. A great expansion of CSD, with the expressed intention of removing many classes of article deletion from discussion altogether and reducing the size of VfD. Failure to assert notability of some kind is a popular criterion in these proposals and several of them could well pass. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 5 July 2005 17:47 (UTC)

That's completely batshit. I've attempted to alert the world - David Gerard 5 July 2005 23:18 (UTC)

CSD Proposal 3-B

You voted or commented on Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-B or Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-A or both. I have proposed a revised version, at Misplaced Pages:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/3-C. This version is intended to address objections made by many of those oppsoed to 3-A or 3-B. The revised propsal refers explicitly and directly to the criteria at WP:MUSIC. If you have not already done so, please examine the revised proposal and vote on it also. Thank you. DES 6 July 2005 05:07 (UTC)

The GAP Project

I've made a proposal at Talk:Southeastern Anatolia Project#Clarification and would appreciate any comments you might have there. --Duk 7 July 2005 03:00 (UTC)

Intergalactic walrus pic

A gamedaily.com user has contributed this wonderful pic related to the Xenu article.

Should we add it, do you think? I'm tempted to use it to illustrate the space opera article too... -- ChrisO 8 July 2005 20:17 (UTC)

I think that's just too frivolous and somehow not quite encyclopaedic ;-) - David Gerard 9 July 2005 13:48 (UTC)

templates for significance and importance

I've merged {{explain significance}} and {{cleanup-importance}} and rephrased the new template to use less emotional language (and soon a less emotionally named category). Antaeus Feldspar told me that you changed a lot of articles which used some previous version of the template, so I thought you may wish to know about this change. --Joy 9 July 2005 11:41 (UTC)

I'll have a look - David Gerard 9 July 2005 13:48 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Njyoder

User:Njyoder is getting into a rather large "discussion war" on Talk:Cold fusion (edit | ] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). One of his more recent comments was: Then feel free to cite some instead of making a blind accusation. I've noticed you have a tendency to try to undermine my credibility and contribute nothing of value to the discussion. I won't be suprised if you can't cite any, because you know they'd easily get shot down.

I noticed that there was an arbitration request that went against him, and wanted to know what should be done (I'm involved, so I probably shouldn't take any action). At the very least you might want to keep an eye on the page, as it is getting out of control fast. --brian0918™ 00:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

That's not quite a 'personal attack' (Njyoder is on a short-leash personal attack parole), but it's certainly an assumption of bad faith, which can quickly lead to personal attacks. Njyoder is a very analytical fellow, to the point where he's stated on wikien-l that he finds WP:NPA and Misplaced Pages:Civility difficult to follow from the policy pages in question. I suppose I would first ask him to please try harder to assume good faith, and I acknowledge how hard one has to grit one's teeth to do so with some people. I do believe Njyoder is sincere, but has noted difficulty working with others; but he has been actively trying to work better with others of late. If he slips into personal attacks, bring it to the attention of WP:ANI so that someone uninvolved can act if appropriate - David Gerard 13:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

LaRouche again

I saw your note to the mailing list that CheckUser is working now, so this is a request again for a LaRouche check. The new user is Cognition (talk · contribs), and it would be good to know whether he's connected to Herschelkrustofsky/WeedHarper/C Colden. The latter posted from 64.30.208.48 (talk · contribs), which resolves to Linkline Communications in Los Angeles; AOL dial-up IP ranges 172.128.0.0 - 172.191.255.255 and 172.192.0.0 - 172.216.255.255; and also from AOL 198.80.0.0 - 198.81.255.255. Cognition says he's unconnected to Herschel, and is posting from Florida. SlimVirgin 00:01, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Cognition edits from AOL and from another IP range that is indeed in Florida; I wouldn't presume they were the same person as Herschel - David Gerard 01:07, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Okay, thanks David. Perhaps he's moved ... ;-) SlimVirgin 01:09, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Shoes

Could you do a sockpuppet check on

• Watcher1
• Angel77
• Zell Miller
• Goodboy

I think they are sock puppets of

• Melissadolbeer

~~~~ 20:09, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration-related request

I'm sure arbitration disputes aren't your favorite thing to deal with, but could you take a look at this request for a temporary injunction against User:Alfrem? There is a request for arbitration against him, and his antics have recently resulted in the page protection of Libertarianism. Temporary blocks for 3RR violation seem insufficient. Fred Bauder recommended asking arbitrators individually for their opinions, so that's what I'm doing.

Thanks for your time, and I hope this mess doesn't keep you from the more interesting parts of Misplaced Pages for too long.

Dave (talk) 17:06, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

That's on my big list. Catching up ... - David Gerard 20:33, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Take as long as you need. He's currently blocked (3RR), so he won't cause much damage in the next day or so. Dave (talk) 21:49, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

IP tracking

I read where you caught a contributor to the Scientology article posting from a Church of Scientology IP address. That was great work! Is it possible for a non-administrator to check the IP addresses of suspicious contributors? Or is that ability reserved only for administrators?--Agiantman 17:51, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

m:CheckUser is reserved only for me and the actual sysadmins, and in my case only for particular purposes. In general, IPs of usernames are not to be revealed, per the Privacy Policy, unless someone is violating policy in particular ways, and even then we try to avoid it. I spotted the editor in question when they edited as the IP and signed their name, and the IP range was CoS-owned. At which point I gently noted that editing as such is fine, but he should probably note the fact. We do in fact have a few CoS editors on the Scientology-related articles, and they've been (to me) surprisingly unproblematic. The area is watched very closely by quite a few people, after all - David Gerard 20:33, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Trey Stone

User:Trey Stone, who is currently in arbitration, has just been blocked for the ninth time since he entered arbitration on May 12th, this time for violation of the 3RR. Three arbitrators have voted for a temporary injunction that he be banned from editing political articles pending the resolution of the arbitration (]), which is just one arbitrator vote shy of what is needed to go into effect.

I have been reading WikiEN-l and there was a discussion of how half of the current arbitrators are away or inactive. Which means that effectively, the four of six arbs needed to do the temporary ban is not really 33.33% but 66.66%. Anyhow, reading that on WikiEN-l prompted me to put this on your talk page as it seemed the wheels of justice were grinding slowly for this very disruptive user. Thanks. Ruy Lopez 15:44, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Cantus' request for arbitration

Hi David Gerard, in Cantus' request for arbitration, would you consider applying an extension of Cantus' second case, which states Cantus is limited to one revert per article per 24 hour period. Should he violate this, an admin may ban him for a short period of time (up to a week), the extension being one revert per 24hr period to any page in any namespace? I feel that the current proposed decision will once again not make it clear to him that refusing to discuss and reverting without edit summaries is not acceptable. Thanks, Talrias (t | e | c) 18:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. You were warmly welcomed when you first came here, and now it's time for your Old, or Lukewarm, welcome! Here it comes. Thank you for your contributions. Since you have been here for a while, we can pretty much assume you are not a troll, vandal, or clueless newbie. I hope you continue to like the place and don't get all grumpy and leave over nothing. Here are a few good links for newcomers, even though you aren't one:

• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• The Five Pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
• If you're ready for the complete list of Misplaced Pages documentation, there's also Misplaced Pages:Topical index.

I hope you still enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian, and won't get mad over something stupid and leave! By the way, please be sure to continue to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Bishonen | talk 21:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

:-D I feel welcomed! - David Gerard 00:38, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Yet Another London Wikimeet

Heya David,

We're organising another London meetup, for Sunday the 11th of September; specifics still to work out, but it will probably be fun as ever, and involve a few drinks and a nice chat in a pub. We'd love to see you there, if you're not too busy... Might do Wikimedia UK stuff, too.

Take care,

James F. (talk) 22:14, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I am so there and will try to deal with my simmering Wikimania envy appropriately, i.e. with pints - David Gerard 23:01, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Scientology

You listed this comment with notable critics. What does this have to do with NPOV'ing Scientology related articles? --AI 17:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Not really. I was thinking in terms of what to fill out the critics' section with - in terms of who probably deserved an article and who didn't; rather than to do with NPOV or references, which I mention in the aims as areas Misplaced Pages could really excel in in writing about Scientology. I'm sorry you don't think it's possible, but as a CoS member your POV is very much needed in some of the stridently critical articles - David Gerard 21:14, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Turning Misplaced Pages into a playground for petty authoritarians

The title says it all. You get off on throwing your weight around and excercising arbitrary authority over people trying to write an encyclopedia. You and people like you are the biggest single threat to attracting quality editors. What's worse is that in treating people with contempt, you create angry people, who behave agressively. Please, stop it. Perverted justice 18:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

I am honoured to have you spend your hit-and-run sockpuppet on myself and RickK, who I have the highest of respect for. Remember that if Misplaced Pages continues to proceed downhill, it's the work of a moment to install MediaWiki on your own server, copy all of Misplaced Pages to it and proceed with developing a fork under the GFDL. Since we make it suck so much, the whole community should follow - David Gerard 21:14, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Of course it's a hit and run sockpuppet, since anyone who criticises you or yours is immediately banned. Of course, your response is 'put up with me being a Nazi or leave', well, not all of us have enormous porn empires at our disposal to do that kind of thing. You don't have authority to insist that unless people play by your rules, instead of the ones made by the community, they should leave. For that matter, why don't you leave and start Nazipedia.org? Napoleon complex 14:38, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

My Nazi-Porn empire is fully supported by the community - David Gerard 14:45, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

What you mean is: "Everyone who disagrees with me has been banned". The cry of every tyrant. The only people left are those who have no interest in governance issues on Misplaced Pages, or the ones who share your vision of an 'open' encyclopedia policed by an unaccountable cabal. Only those who agree with you are allowed an opinion on any matter of governance. The price of dissent is immediate banning with no right of appeal, except to the cabalists themselves - you even filter what messages are allowed on the mailing list! Napoleon complexed 11:44, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Help

Please look at George W. Bush and User:134.161.244.89. A user has been fighting all day to get changes into the article to make the subject look bad. I have tried to direct it to the talk page without success. The same user is causing similar problems at Metrosexual and African American Vernacular English. I believe he should be blocked but I feel I have too much interaction to do it myself. Can you please look at the user and his edits? Thanks. - Tεxτurε 21:25, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Request for sock puppet check

David Gerard,

I was referred to you by Tim Starling . Tom Haws, a WP administrator, suggested I contact him to track down some suspected sock puppet accounts of users that have been creating problems in discussions and engaging in repeated personal attacks against other editors. Tim then referred me to you.

All three are relatively new accounts, yet the users show a great deal of familiarity with WP. Also, the activity on all three is almost exclusively related the the Jehovah's Witnesses pages. Additionally, the edits and style of personal attacks suggests they are all the same individual.

The suspected accounts are:

• Eyesopen
• Central
• Elenap

Thanks in advance, --DannyMuse 04:33, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet check (Trey Stone vs. Davenbelle)

As you may be aware, as of 14 July user Trey Stone (talk · contribs) is under temporary injunction against editing articles related to politics (cf, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Trey Stone and Davenbelle/Proposed decision). Based on editing patterns, I have the strong suspicion that he broke that injunction by editing anonymously under 70.118.68.216 (talk · contribs). Just three minutes after one of the anon's edits, Trey Stone left a message on that user's talk page. Could you check the IP number he used to do that? Thanks. -- Viajero | Talk 12:05, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Please handle or post on WP:AIV

Rn71989 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is performing some complex page move vandalism. -- Netoholic @ 18:26, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Havne't got time right now to look myself, but I've reposted it there - David Gerard 21:56, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

I've blocked him for 24 hours to give time to sort this all out, but can somebody (Netoholic?) give me some idea of exactly how he did it? -- Essjay · Talk 22:05, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Talk:David S. Touretzky#RFW

Mr. David Gerard, you never answered my question:

As such, it's from an utterly unreliable source. I suggest you need more discernment in your choice of reference quality --David Gerard 21:18, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please describe what you mean by "utterly unreliable source" and provide references. Also maybe you can provide a reference to Misplaced Pages policy to demonstrate how you decided "quality" and what is and is not a source. --AI 22:07, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please respond or I will use this as evidence in the Arbitration. --AI 23:53, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Feel free. I think the talk page of the article in question establishes that your view (that an unreferenced, undated, alleged IRC log is a good reference) is not accepted by other editors as constituting a good reference - David Gerard 00:16, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Ok that is understandable. Are you ever going to answer this question: --AI 01:22, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I'd actually forgotten about that one, thank you - checking refs now - David Gerard 14:58, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Looks like I was completely wrong - they're Microsoft-backed, not CoS-backed. Noting this on talk page - David Gerard 15:00, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting this. Aloha --AI 03:32, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/List of purported cults/2

Based on some of the past VfDs you've shown interest in, I thought you'd probably want to know that this one was happening. (It was initiated by Pjacobi, the same editor who initiated Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Criticism of Prem Rawat.) -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

A sysop protected a page where she was "warring"

I think that User:Deb has misused sysop privileges by protecting the page Lady Catherine Grey after herself twice moving the article from its original location "Catherine Grey" to her this new location. She admits having done the protection, after her own second move (see http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AJtdirl&diff=19381941&oldid=19331143). The renaming history is recent and is available easily at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Lady_Catherine_Grey&action=history
My impression is that Deb deliberately and knowingly uses the admin power in this "content dispute" to push her own opinion onto others. The article had been in its old location for long time, apparently years. Its (first) renaming came only very recently, made by Deb. Rather disturbingly, Deb had not bothered to discuss her intention to move at the discussion Talk:Catherine Grey before her first renaming (there was e.g no vote), and she did not properly discuss it even before her second move. (Relevant naming conventions are saying things that "Catherine Grey" is acceptable and the heading needs not necessarily be "Lady Catherine Grey": there are two conditions in naming convention for putting "lady", both requirements should be fulfilled. There is thus content dispute, and its outcome is actually not relevant to decide whether Deb abused the admin powers. I am for the old heading, and I believe it to be the more correct one.) One small point is that apparently Deb had not made any contribution to the article before her renaming - this speaks of an editor who is focused on, not content of this article, but making her own version of form to prevail.
I have also earlier came to see Deb's actions and style of comments. She shows a pattern of not being capable of presenting reasons, and she seems to read policies and conventions in a loose manner, not fully grasping what such guideline actually says. Deb appears to not want to answer properly, substantively, to questions or to presented arguments, rather she gives sort of platitudes. An example is "...were agreed before you arrived" which implies an attempt to prevail by some sort of seniority (though, figuratively speaking, seniority could also be e.g senility).
Anyway, Deb's said action in protecting a page she had herself been warring over seems to be such a misuse that deserves some work. May I leave this matter to your capable hands in higher administration of WP. 217.140.193.123 10:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

You may wish to know that the above anonymous user is in fact User:Arrigo. I have previously warned him about not signing his comments. Deb 11:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

User:Jeus

Apparently, LokiCT (talk · contribs) is another sock. Could you look into this? Thanks, HKT 22:05, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

User:Axon/User:Germen conflict

I agree to support the mediation effort, as long as the mediators follows Misplaced Pages guidelines and are neutral on this subject. --Germen (Talk | Contribs File:Nl small.gif) 11:30, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I think if you can find anyone reasonable who's willing to take on the effort, it'll help solve the problem and give you all useful practice in working with people you strongly disagree with. (And avoid an avoidable arbitration case, which will make the AC happier ;-) I suggest notices at WP:MC and WP:TINMC pointing at the RFAr and saying you could do with a mediator real quick.

Mediation is less about policy legalisms and more about how to work with someone you strongly disagree with - if you approach it on a very human level it stands a chance of working - David Gerard 11:53, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I think it will be difficult to find a person which is acceptable by user:Axon, because he considers a certain POV as embodied by the Runnymede Trust definiton of islamophobia as universally valid. Ok, I will post a notice there as you proposed and hope this nonsense will be over soon so we can spend our time in a more productive way.--Germen (Talk | Contribs File:Nl small.gif) 12:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)