User talk:A. B.

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Femto (talk | contribs) at 14:45, 26 May 2007 (→‎Admin). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:A._B..

     I'm busy off Wikipedia and may be slow to respond; e-mail me if you need a faster response.

A quiz

Spammers and critics can't agree -- is User:A. B.:

A. "She (because clearly she's a bitch) is just doing her thing up in New Jersey. No one likes you, mother of three. No one."[1]
B. "Worst of all this user is very offensive to females."[2]
  • Later in the same edit: "It makes us females seem very unhappy to think wikipedia.org has something against all females."
  • Same user also edits as Tony.dean[3]
C. A stalker "from birmgingham england".[4]
D. Just a "rogue".
E. Hiding a fire-parrot in Wikipedia's sandbox?[5]
F. All of the above.
G. None of the above.
H. Somedays one, somedays another

You decide. --A. B. (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Updated by A. B. (talk) 03:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LEVEL 1 INTIMIDATION WARNING NR 2

This is a first degree formal warning out of a set of 3 levels.

You have also added comments on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist#workforall.net_linkspam. These comments are unappopriate as the qualification "Spam" is still in dispute in these cases. Spreading unmotivated of disputable accusations can be considered as spam and can seriously harm the interests, reputation and privacy of other users. Deliberate attempts to harm the interests, reputation or privacy of other users is both a criminal offence and is incompatible with Wikipedia:5_Pillars and Wikipedia:Etiquette. In order to interrupt the escalating and ongoing damage allready done You are kindly requested to remove unappropriate and disputed comments within 24hours. In order to keep the discussion together you are kindy invited to participate in discussion at the appropriate location where the discussion is still in progress. Please try to reach Wikipedia:Consensus there. Please do keep to Wikipedia:Etiquette there as well. --Bully-Buster-007 22:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Bully-Buster-007, see the following:
  1. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive May#workforall.net
  2. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive May#Requestion
  3. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#The workforall.net spammer meets the sandbox fire-parrot -- for everything else, there's Mastercard (Permanent link)
  4. User_talk:Requestion#workforall.net_linkspam (Permanent link)
  5. User_talk:Requestion#Please_stop_indiscriminate_mass_destruction (Permanent link)
  6. User_talk:Ioannes_Pragensis#Can_You_help_against_vandalism_.3F (Permanent link)
  7. Talk:Economic_data#Workforall.net_external_link
  8. User_talk:Kuru#ciber_bullying (Permanent link)
  9. User_talk:Bully-Buster-007#Welcome.2C (Permanent link)
  10. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2007/04#workforall.net linkspam (Permanent link)
  11. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Freedom of speech (Permanent link)
  12. User talk:Jitse Niesen#80.200.73.228 (Permanent link)
workforall accounts:
  1. 217.136.84.49 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  2. 217.136.87.32 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  3. 217.136.89.14 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  4. 217.136.93.7 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  5. 217.136.94.66 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  6. 217.136.95.116 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  7. 80.200.64.143 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  8. 80.200.70.132 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  9. 80.200.73.228 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  10. 80.201.177.106 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  11. 80.201.18.252 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  12. 80.201.19.94 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  13. 80.201.212.87 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  14. 80.201.213.67 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  15. 80.201.24.135 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  16. 80.201.26.155 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  17. 81.240.150.59 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  18. 81.240.157.210 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  19. 81.241.68.119 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  20. 81.241.68.247 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  21. 81.241.70.243 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  22. 81.241.71.62 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  23. 81.241.74.121 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  24. 81.241.75.18 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  25. 81.242.54.149 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  26. 81.242.58.154 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  27. 81.242.61.227 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  28. 87.244.130.114 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  29. 87.64.93.128 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  30. Bully-Buster-007 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  31. 81.241.69.230 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)
  32. Advocates For Free Speech (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs • status)
See WP:CONSENSUS; editors warning you about inappropriate workforall spamming and/or uncivil behaviour:
  1. Requestion
  2. Matteo
  3. Nlu
  4. Kuru
  5. Hu12
  6. ErikWarmelink
  7. Ioannes Pragensis
  8. A. B.
  9. BozMo
  10. Femto
  11. Beetstra
  12. The way, the truth, and the light
  13. Daniel
  14. Meta:Eagle 101
--A. B. (talk) 02:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Later updated with additional accounts and links.--A. B. (talk) 16:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Workforall, I think you should reconsider your actions. It is true that they are annoying to myself and the many other editors who have told you not to use Wikipedia to promote your web sites and I sense that is a source of gratification for you. At the same time, though they may also begin causing problems for your sites off-Wikipedia.
Every time you use another account we document that fact. Since I listed the accounts above, you're now up to 30+ accounts you've used. Between all of these user talk pages plus your complaints and "warnings" on editors' talk pages, you are gradually creating an interlinked group of 40 to 50 pages discussing workforall, spam and disruptive behaviour on Wikipedia. You're in danger of creating a perfect storm of search engine anti-optimisation, especially given Wikipedia's high page rankings with the major search engines. Consider whether you want these discussions to start appearing near the top of the results for any search on your site or organisation.
Furthermore, the Meta-Wiki spam blacklist is used by all language versions of Wikipedia and all other Wikimedia Foundation projects such as Wikiquote and Wiktionary. Beyond that, many (but not all) of the hundreds of non-related sites that also run their sites on MediaWiki software incorporate this blacklist in their own spam-filtering. --A. B. (talk) 14:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

workforall.org repudiates any connection to workforall.net

See this disclaimer posted on workforall.org:

WorkForAll as an independent thinktank maintains the website www.workforall.org
WorkForAll.org has nothing to do with workforall.net...

--A. B. (talk) 22:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but do they repudiate any connection to a certain mysterious parrot? Ahhhh, it is all starting to make sense now. (Requestion 05:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Your recent Images for Deletion nominations

Hi, I notice your nominating a few images for deletion at the moment, however these images will be deleted within the next week as they have been moved to Commons and fall under our speedy deletion criteria. -- Nick t 17:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

..Oh. Darn -- I just wasted a ton of time. The watermarked images should probably be deleted from there as well. --A. B. (talk) 18:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Bhagwatkumar‎

Hi A.B. I noticed your recent edit to User talk:Bhagwatkumar. I did a previous backlink search on this user, and came across User talk:Mukeshprajapati. I was just going to leave it deleted as spam, but some of the domains look familiar. You might find it interesting, and you may be able to add some context if it was to be reported to WP:WPSPAM. I will leave it with you. I should add that I've checked all the backlinks, and we're clean. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about being an admin?

Hi A. B., I want to nominate you for adminship, I'm pretty sure you would be a good sysop.
Please take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators to check what are admin's roles, and let me know if it's ok for you ;-)
«Snowolf How can I help?» 03:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks -- I'd say I'm very interested. A recent family emergency, now over, has left me behind on my work off-Wikipedia, so I need to catch up on that first. --A. B. (talk) 16:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, you can't nominate, because someone else already did. All we can do is pester him until he accepts. Femto 18:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed with SEO article

1. I think you'd make a great admin.

2. If you are very busy, feel free to ignore the following request. I hope your situation resolves in a good way.

3. I've nominated search engine optimization for featured article status. Could you possibly look at the references on the article and then leave your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Search engine optimization as to whether you think the blogs and forums cited as references qualify as reliable sources. In order to achieve featured article status we need community consensus that the references are reliable. If you know any other Wikipedians who have expertise in this area, we welcome their comments. Thank you! Jehochman ☎ / ✔ 17:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update on "The workforall.net spammer meets the sandbox fire-parrot -- for everything else, there's Mastercard" - ROFLMAO! I've been selected to speak at the American Marketing Association's convention in October, so save any good stories about marketers sabotaging themselves with their own Wikipedia spam. I'll start a work page in my user space. Jehochman ☎ / ✔ 18:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Para-Ordnance

I removed the +tag, the company is quite notable. PianoKeys 11:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

208.116.41.13

[6][7] not you I presume? Femto 12:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not me! I suggest you block that IP pending open proxy check. --A. B. (talk) 12:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Femto 12:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was just testing www.php15.com as you blocked it -- it does use the IP I listed (208.116.41.13) --A. B. (talk) 12:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See meta:WikiProject on open proxies/Blocked on frwiki -- list of IPs blocked on fr.wikipedia but not en.wikipedia as of 13 May 2007. If you get the chance you may wish to block them as you have time. I've listed them at User:A. B./Sandbox10 complete with blocking links (I used {{IPvandal}}). --A. B. (talk) 13:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have to pass, I don't have much regular experience with the proxy projects. (emergencies and obvious stuff, anytime though). Femto 14:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

Why aren't you an admin? —Centrx→talk • 04:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, this is a damn good question that deserves an answer. You could at least try to come up with an excuse. :) Femto 14:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notices

Yeah I've been leaving notices... I'm working on that nasty backlog you guys have at WT:OP —— Eagle101Need help? 13:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note I'm leaving the notice on the talk page, and redirecting the userpage there. —— Eagle101Need help? 13:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes -- and at some point in the future, that talk page will be deleted. Then the user page may get deleted, too, as a redirect to a blank and/or non-existent, depending on how Wikipedia's conscientious, diligent, literal-minded bots see the whole situation. That's why it's good to put a notice on the user page. Some open proxies aren't blocked indefinitely but rather for several years, so when the account unblocks, if there's more mischief, nobody knows it was an OP. Alternately, someone protests the block, not understanding why the account is blocked.
From looking at 100s of open proxies in the last several days, notices on user pages seems to be the more common approach.
Thank you so much for working on the backlog. If you're working off my user subpages at User:A. B./Sandbox10#12,640 open proxies from fr.wikipedia, feel free to mark up the sections as you finish them. There are several other people working on these lists and this will prevent duplicated efforts.
If you're not working off my list, you may want to, since I left block log and block buttons there for admins' convenience.
Again, thanks for all your work -- I see you've hit 500+ already!--A. B. (talk) 14:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Hello A. B., I've also been helping out with the backlog. About which page the {{openproxy}} notice should go on though: Most blocked open proxies I've seen around have the notice on the user talk, such as the ones at WP:OP#Blocked, or the vast majority of Category:Open proxies blocked on Wikipedia. It may be an idea to ask the bot owner to fix the bot in this case. Which bot was removing the notices? --Michael Billington (talk) 04:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

random tutor2u.net connection?

One of my special cases (spammed, blanked, unciviled, AfD'd, blacklisted, and now vanished) added a random tutor2u.net link [8] and I didn't think anything of it until I ran into this User talk:80.176.10.66. I think they might use boston-house.co.uk or be neighbors. Just thought I should send you a note and say thanks for leaving such a detailed description for me to find 5 months later! (Requestion 21:51, 25 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

My RfA

Hi A. B. I'd like to thank you for your support of my RfA. It was closed at surprising 75/0/0, so I'm an admin now. MaxSem 22:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A._B.&oldid=133646961"