User talk:Iridescent

Cristin O'Keefe Aptowicz

This is a tough one. She doesn't seem to be in Contemporary Authors, which is extremely comprehensive. [1] Here's one, and I shall look further. [2]--Poetlister 10:32, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... This is a weird case, as I know from experience that she is genuinely influential on the current American scene, with multiple publications etc, but every mention I can find of her is either reviews, or passing mentions ("this work by XXX is obviously inspired by Hot Teen Sluts by CO'KA"). An odd one. – iride scent 15:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General note to TPS's – I suspect that if me and Poetlister between us can't dig up the sources, the sources aren't there, but if anyone can dig out some reliable sources on her, please point me towards them. I'm aware of the links here, but there don't seem to be enough biographical sources, as opposed to reviews, to build an unbiased article around. – iride scent 00:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin to admin question

So there I was earlier this month trying to help a newbie, User:Sloanbella to learn the ropes as she was creating what was obviously an autobiographical article. When other editors started cleaning Sloan Bella up, she and what appears to be a cavalcade of socks (User:Kristysixt, User:Margaret wendt) kept returning the questionable, poorlysourced information. User:Brilliant Pebbles managed to check all the various "references" out and found errors and omissions, including some on SB's own website. At that point, it went to AfD - SB isn't notable, the references are junk, and the AfD was closed delete. A new sock, User:Flygirl14, showed up yesterday (just after the delete) and recreated the article, with few variations. I deleted as a CSD recreation, but she has now recreated again (after a major edit to the AfD, since fixed by someone else). Should I AfD it again, delete and salt it, or get someone else to do the dirty work? Your thoughts? Risker (talk) 22:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's enough history here to salt it – they can always appeal. If it were me, I think there's enough here to warrant an RFCU to flush out any other socks; it would probably be worth asking Alison as I never understand when you can and can't perform RFCU. – iride scent 22:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. As it turns out, on closer reading of her post on the AfD, she has made legal threats aimed at me, so I am washing my hands of it. I had done a review of the reference sources on the version I deleted, and I'll pass that on to another editor who can post it on the talk page of the article. Luna Santin and GRBerry seem to have taken an interest as well. Risker (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really say much for her psychic powers if she needs to beg you to provide her with your real name, does it? – iride scent 23:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*wipes away tears of laughter* I am going to go back and re-read the lovely "RFA congratulations" message left for me by Killer Chihuahua. It seems I've gotten to use all of her steps to being a good admin this week. As my granny used to say "I shoulda stood in bed." Risker (talk) 23:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can't call yourself a real admin until you have at least one thread like this gracing your talkpage (I make that one 50k). – iride scent 23:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every time you cascading-protect-salt a page, a server kitty dies.

(For the record) Please don't salt; it makes the kitties in the server cry -->
Oh... I just clicked WP:SALT and realised it's pointing somewhere different to before. Anyways... just use the protect tab at the top of a nonexistant page to "salt". Rant over. —Giggy 09:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't even bother to keep track of the changes to protection policy, I think cascade-protection has disappeared. At least, the "cascade protect" option has disappeared from the WP:TW toolset. – iride scent 00:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure cascade protection is still an option. (I seem to remember seeing a recent argument in some page's protection log about whether or not you are allowed to apply cascading semi-protection) It's just that, other than the Main Page, there really isn't anything that ever needs to be cascade protected, so Azatoth must have removed it from Twinkle so that overzealous admins (not you) don't use it. Don't quote me on that, though. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 04:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There certainly are potential grounds where cascading protection is necessary; if an article is under attack from /b/ or ED, they generally attack all the templates transcluded as well. (Which is why our main page these days generally looks like this). – iride scent 16:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is this "/b/" and "ED" anyways? I keep seeing it mentioned, but I cannot make heads or tails of it. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 19:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

/b/ and ED are the two main marshalling-yards for Wikipedia's trolls and vandals. (The third main attack site, WR, tends to offer more intelligent comment, even though it does attract its share of nutcases). Be aware that adding an external link to ED anywhere in Wikipedia – even on talkpages – may get you instantly blocked without warning. – iride scent 19:40, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holy. Crap. Well, I must say I'm glad I asked you first rather than searching for ED and asking you what was so bad about that website. (I know I would have posted an external link to it. *shudder*) J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 19:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General Warning: Don't believe everything you read at ED's "Portal:Wikipedia". While some of it is true, a lot more of it is either fabrications or genuine diffs taken wildly out of context. – iride scent 19:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And avoid either site if you are disturbed by pictures of naked babies and penises in random places. —Giggy 02:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neverwinter

irid, I just had another look at the Neverwinter Nights thing because Prom3th3an is questioning the validity of the block and in looking at the edit Xp reverted what you might not of noticed (neither did I originally) was that it also removed all the bottom page stuff (reflist, templates, cats, and iw links). Thus, when done without an edit summary would certainly look like a typical "chop off the bottom half of the page" vandalism at quick glance. –xenocidic (talk) 16:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there to keep the conversation together, although I suspect you won't agree with what I say. – iride scent 16:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't, but I'm not sure if you looked over my review of the block in detail. Check the timeline. We'll keep it over at my talk. –xenocidic (talk) 16:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ani

See it Iri.I'm caught up in one big mess.See "emergency"--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 19:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hang on, I'll have a look now – iride scent 19:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. (Keep the conversation on ANI, so anyone else involved can see it.) – iride scent 19:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC) I forward you the emails of Bg confessing? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 19:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if you could answer. This is a serious issue. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 20:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. As per my post on ANI, given my history with Xp54321 and the fact that I've worked with BG7 in the past, it's not appropriate for me to be the one judging this. Wait until an uninvolved admin or 'crat joins in the conversation (you can find out if someone's an admin by entering their username here). – iride scent 20:05, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Conflict of interest would be a problem. I don't think Xp put out the facts as clearly as possible, but he was in a rush. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 20:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so glad I went and read a book for a few hours, I don't know the answer but it definitely is messy. Whatever the outcome, it's probably not going to be good for someone. I wait and see. On a lighter note, bling bling, what you think of my new name sig? — Realist² (Speak) 23:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re the sig, I think it's fine, but I know there have been issues in the past with that shade of green showing up as invisible in some browsers (or maybe it was invisible to the colourblind - if J.delanoy's still watching this page he can probably explain as I think someone pointed it out to him back when his sig was that colour). Re the ANI business, I doubt very much anything will come of it other than a very annoyed BG7; anything that happened, happened off-wiki, and knowing BG7 I really can't see him pulling a stunt like this. (In fact, knowing BG7's history and the fact that he had a rather foul-tempered dispute with a known and very disruptive sockpuppeteer last month, I'd lay pretty good money on exactly who is impersonating him.) – iride scent 23:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the thread, but I think the main issue with my prior signature was the clash between the yellowish color and the florescent green. If you think it may be a problem, you could ask some of the people who said they are colorblind in that thread. (sorry for the yellow bar, Iridescent) J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 23:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happened while I was gone?:(--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a lot. But so far nobody has demonstrated how anything under discussion has any relevance to Wikipedia. (An email where someone simultaneously complains about their poor programming skills, and threatens Wikipedia with a "page move bot" – something, incidentally, which even Grawp, Oompapa and WoW never managed – is not a credible threat). Seriously, if you can explain how this affects Wikipedia then by all means do so – but people are perfectly free to troll and disrupt other sites as much as they like. Wikipedia is the eighth most powerful website in the world and we're more than capable of fending off an attack if anyone were stupid enough to try. – iride scent 00:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. I'm letting this thing drop.I don't know if the thread should be marked resolved though. --Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet; leave it open (albeit collapsed) at least until BG7's had a chance to comment. If he doesn't comment within 48 hours it will be auto-archived, anyway. – iride scent 00:15, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You declined to comment at ANI but what is your (honest) opinion?--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read my post above at 23:30. I don't for one minute believe BG7 is responsible, and given that he's spent the last six weeks being flamed and stalked by a known troll & "reformed" sockpuppeteer, I'd hazard a good guess as to who it was. – iride scent 00:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible. In fact I remember only having one "Jack" on my contacts. Someone probably impersonated him. But we wait for now. I have no idea what to believe. The "troll" mocked me while the ani thread was active. I don't think it was Bluegoblin7. He wouldn't call me an "arsehole" or threaten "chaos" upon Wikipedia. Will this just go to the "unsolved" archives?--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands, unless anything else happens it will go into the "not relevant" archives; although there was plenty of alleged misconduct, there was no allegation of anyone doing anything wrong on en-wikipedia. As I said before, Wikipedia is the eighth most powerful website in the world, and is more than capable of fending off the kind of attack alleged if anyone were stupid enough to try. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iridescent (talk • contribs) 11:29, July 14, 2008

Arbitary break: new and highly dubious activity on ANI

Since you've been wading through this irid, maybe you could take a look at User talk:Bluegoblin7 who is requesting an unblock and east's evidence that I've linked from that page. –xenocidic (talk) 15:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to get involved in that ANI discussion as I'll just get angry. As far as I'm concerned anyone coming out with shit like "indefblocked per IRC discussion" has some serious explaining to do. This whole thing reeks. – iride scent 16:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no fan of IRC either. I've used it once, just to poke some AWB devs into reading an on wiki thread about a bug. –xenocidic (talk) 16:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c)I've crossposted that particular ANI to Pedro and Nancy as, between the three of us adminators, have attempted to reform admitted socker ChemGeek/Chris19910 over the last month or so, hopefully not in vain. He was already on his last last last last last (one more!) last chance before this block. If the RFCU comes back (I think Jehochman was going to submit one as part of the BG block?) that CG=BG, he (as Chris) has already said "ban me if I do it again". And have I mentioned before how much I detest IRC? Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 16:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts on IRC are here; this is one issue I'm 100% in agreement with Giano and Bish on. In fact, the more I read of this, the more ridiculous the whole thing seems to be – even if Checkuser comes back positive, this seems to me to be another Poetlister situation where Checkuser's wrong. BG7 is in the middle of trying to get Blackpool tramway up to FA status and on tidying up assorted railway articles – why the hell would he suddenly contemplate a vandalism spree (which nobody is alleging actually happened) in the middle of that?

Incidentally, I suspect WP:RAIL isn't high up either of your watchlists, but (as the Master of the Boring Disused Railway Article) I can certainly vouch for the twin facts that BG7 has consistently worked on articles on the railways and tram networks of central England, and that ChemGeek/Chris19910 never showed the slightest interest in either area. (It's a small enough field that even if he hadn't signed up to the project, I'd have noticed him on the articles). – iride scent 16:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really really hope they are not the same person, and I support the unblock (innocent until proven guilty + IRC involvement = unblock). ChemGeek had gone quiet in the last few weeks (or I got too busy to notice him, one or the other), but BG doesn't seem at first glance to have any of CG's trademarks (he had many). Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 16:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I were assuming bad faith, I'd point out that BG7 was recently involved in a fairly foul-tempered argument with a repeated abusive sockpuppeteer on this MfD. – iride scent 16:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shee-it... BG7's supporters acting like this is not helping. – iride scent 17:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schnikey's. this and this are equally refreshing. And usually, when an "uninvolved" makes "Garuntees", they're usually not as uninvolved as they claim. I'm so ABF-ing today. Simsfan is StewieGriffin BTW, did you know that? I think SF=CG=BG=Prom, with BG being the goodhand. We've all been made fools for letting the kids play in the library instead of the playground (read the first sentence in that last link)....Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 17:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt SG is BG but if he is then he does a great job arguing with himself. –xenocidic (talk) 17:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you've seen this, but I thought you might like the sentence added at 16:30 today...Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 17:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know Sims/Simpsonsfan is StewieGriffin (I was one of the many who blocked him). Running Prom's and BG7's contribs through SQL's tool, there's no crossover in their interests. (BG7 is definitely in Derbyshire, England; quite aside from the IP, he's uploaded a number of photos recently taken in the area.) I still think there's a good chance this is another Taxwoman situation. (As Deskana says, checkuser evidence from England is always dubious as most IP's geolocate to London wherever they're actually based, and many IPs are dynamic). I still thing BG7 is uninvolved and everything else is SG/CG stirring the pot after the spat on WP:SIMS. – iride scent 17:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of CG's trademarks was "inviting" others to join his other wiki's. BG, in Xeno's link above, invited SG to join his outside "test wiki". Hmmm...so SG isn't BG, that's clear, SG isn't CG either. I'm not 100% convinced (despite BG's good contribs) that BG isn't CG. Another of CG's trademarks was asking for rollback the same day as he created a new account, after making a handful of arbitrary (and good) vandal reverts. Today, I just declined Ajh16 (talk · contribs) for rollback. Could be unrelated. Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 17:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That wiki's changes log for the last couple of days certainly makes for interesting reading, doesn't it? Something very fishy is going on here, and I wonder what else is wriggling in the net?

– iride scent 17:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another section break so we don't need to scroll through 10k of coding

Am I under suspicion? Kodster left so I removed all rights,blocked,deleted,protected so if his account were compromised nothing could happen.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 17:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prom shouldn't have unblocked those proxies.Those were the ones Chemistrygeek(Or BG7 if the emails I got were true) socked from....--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 17:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're certainly not under suspicion of being BG7. Your SSP case would have flushed out a connection; plus, your IP traces to CA while BG's traces to England, and (I don't mean to be rude here) I don't think you have the skills to spoof an IP. – iride scent 17:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well good.I live in Southern California(Great weather). Also what does "spoof an IP" mean? --Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's hax0r speak. –xenocidic (talk) 18:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spoofing means to make your IP appear to be something different. For example, your IP a couple of months ago was 71.104.200.248 (that's not me outing you, it's taken from your SSP case), which geolocates to Southern CA; if you could fool the MediaWiki software into displaying "8" instead of "7" as the first digit of it, for example, then a check would show you as in Cambridge, England. It's a lot harder to do than it sounds and frankly, I don't believe you, BG7, SG or CG could do it. – iride scent 18:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP spoofing is really easy to do. But I won't say how, in case it gives anyone who doesn't know how to do it ideas. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting....Anyways I reblocked all the proxies for 6 months each, twice the original block time.BTw the ips were:

84.13.185.183
78.150.52.191
84.13.134.205
84.13.149.149
212.219.59.241

Also my IP changes all the time... --Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the information of all concerned

Checkuser negative on the real BG7 being related, although god only knows what is going on here. I've invited BG7 to comment here if he wants – frankly, I wouldn't blame him one bit if he doesn't want to join the insane mess on ANI and his talkpage. – iride scent 18:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did Chris19910 attempt to frame BG7? Or something else? I'm very confused.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That settles it I guess. And also serves as a great example of why "Wikipedia" and "IRC" never the twain should meet. (not even sure if I'm using that pedantic phrase properly). –xenocidic (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um...question unanswered?--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A question I'm sure irid is better equipped to answer. I tried to wade through the first AN/I thread and just came out crosseyed. –xenocidic (talk) 18:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This whole topic makes me so glad my that my RfA failed. I'm much happier bumbling through Samuel Johnson than I would be chasing down socks. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trying to get Samuel Johnson to GA status?--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FA. But there's not just me, a lot of others are working on it as well. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

. Not wanting to add to any further drama, I thought I'd mention this here. The only reason I had any interest in this from the beginning was because of the supposed block evidence taken from off wikipedia and other issues with the block (no initial explanation, East718 not participating in original ANI discussion). Would it be totally crazy to ask East718 to never make such a block again with such evidence? I'm still concerned with that aspect of this. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 18:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eh...not a bad idea... I feel like deleting all those emails....I still have no idea who really sent them.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 18:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

East718 acted in good faith but with faulty information. Until the situation became more clear, nobody knew what was going on and there was a suggestion that keeping the user unblocked would be a threat. It turned out this suggestion was in fact malicious, and East718 has now apologised to the user and annotated the block log. I think part of the problem here is we started accepting information from non-WM wikis which we could not verify, and it snowballed, and IRC got involved, and all sorts of non-fun happened. Orderinchaos 19:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In conclusion

Someone, somewhere, has done something wrong, and either:

A sockpuppet has been caught and although nothing proved, will be scared off from doing it again;
A sockpuppet has been caught, will lash out on the rampage, and be indefblocked;
A weird collaboration between multiple users has been uncovered and will now stop;
Someone has impersonated someone else, everyone's massively over-reacted, and a good-faith user has now been driven off the project in disgust.

Whichever it is, you can bet the ~~cabal~~ admins will be the ones blamed for it. Situations like this are why RFA is such a vicious process, and why so many perfectly competent people fail because of a lack of policy-discussion experience; a monkey with a typewriter can do the protect/delete/block side of it, but when the real people affected come to complain, situations get very messy very quickly.

Incidentally, boys and girls, I hope this whole wretched episode has illustrated why IRC is A Bad Thing. Every single wrong-turn here – as well as the incident itself – would have been avoided without it.

Line under the matter. – iride scent 18:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who were the collaborating users?--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 19:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xp, see above where it says "line under the matter"? Means what it says. – iride scent 19:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um...I have no idea what that means...:|--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 19:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Draw the line. "To bring a matter to an end, or to change the subject." – iride scent 19:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I CBA to respond fully to everything as I have more important things to do. However, to respond to the conclusions:

The only one that is true on my side is Number 4 - I have been impersonated.

Thanks, B G 7even 09:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New welcome

Okay my last welcome didnt work out. What about this one? If I can use that one, can you please make it so that instead of my sig being at the bottom, that I only has the four tides so that anyone can use it? Thanks. King Rock (Gears of War) 20:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like that at all - it reeks of bad faith (and the Wikipedia logo is not supposed to be used on userpages without the consent of the WMF, although that's not generally enforced). Seriously, what's wrong with {{Welcome}}, which is the product of seven years of discussion? – iride scent 20:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay my bad. First, I have been using the Template:Welcome for a long time and so I just wanted something cooler. And then I found that cool image. How is my welcome bad faith? King Rock (Gears of War) 20:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"We are not here to make friends. We are not here to joke with Wikifriends. We are (mainly) here to fight vandalism. And when it comes to vandalism, there are many questions. But the most important one is: "Whose side are you on?" seems to me to assume bad faith on the part of whoever you post it to; certainly if I had that as the first post on my talkpage, I'd feel I was being accused of something.

Seriously, you're ~~probably~~ certainly better off discussing this at WT:WC. The people there are far better qualified to pass comment than I am. – iride scent 20:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And on top of that, we're not here to fight vandals. We're here to create an encyclopedia. Metros (talk) 01:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have I seen it? This is bugging the hell out of me. Damn "no email" stance....

Is it the one I asked a question on? Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 14:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Closed under extremely dubious circumstances (a WP:SNOW close with 14 supports?) early this morning. – iride scent 14:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oy vey. Am I seeing an edit war? Yes, yes I am....Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 15:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It makes unusual reading, that one. In some ways it's a shame it didn't stay up for longer as it could have turned into a genuine debate. I'm surprised a) that he didn't get more supports, b) at who didn't turn up to oppose (although it wasn't up for long), and c) just how many of the people opposing per me totally misunderstood what I thought I'd put one hell of a lot of effort into making clear. – iride scent 15:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to read the whole thing. Honest. Considering the "merits" as compared to the frequent "single bad diff 8 months ago = mass trivial opposition today" RFAs that I've seen lately, that one really had no chance at all, and should be removed. "It could have turned into a genuine debate"? You really think so? I'm much more jaded than that, and have learned (already) that there is no such thing as a good debate at RfA...only vengeance, villification, vitriol, validation (for wikifriends), and voting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keeper76 (talk • contribs) 11:28, July 14, 2008

Perhaps you could make that into a verbose treatise of vivacious v words, villifying the verification of the vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. –xenocidic (talk) 15:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very vivid, veno. Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 15:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec re to Keeper) It wouldn't have passed – 30 opposes on the first day → at least 70 opposes by the end → "no consensus" no matter how many supports (plus, the fact that at some point he's managed to insult pretty much every 'crat here wouldn't have helped), but yes, it could have been a proper debate, on how much store should be set on past behaviour, how to quantify "trust", the relevance of off-wiki behaviour to on-wiki status (see the arbcom from hell for more on that issue), where the dividing line between boldness and disruption should be drawn. There are genuinely rehabilitated problem editors and the vandalism business was two years ago – if you read my oppose (which some of the "oppose per"s don't seem to have done) I specifically clarify that I was only judging him on his behaviour after that incident. In a way, I shouldn't have been the first to oppose, as it gave the appearance of a "case for" by Giggy and SI and a "case against" by me and Majorly, which turned the whole thing into a de facto RFC. – iride scent 15:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...which means that it by definition (mine, admittedly) wouldn't be a proper RFA debate, because it would quickly (if it hadn't already) become more meta-related than SY-related. The debate, in your words, on how much store should be set on past behaviour, how to quantify "trust", etc, is a meta-discussion of which SY is a case study. Perhaps an even worse forum would be WT:RFA though, but I don't think a person's RFA should be the place for what would basically be a "precedence v policy" discussion. A key indicator of when an RFA is immediately "out of bounds" in my opinion is when it is getting compared to someone else's. (not sure if that had happened yet at SY, didn't read the whole thing, but I'm willing to bet it would have soon)...My two ~~cents~~ pence. Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 15:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can You Please disipline this Vandaliser

65.96.67.105 is his username/IP. he keeps editing pages and is vandalising them by posting RUMORS written on craigslist and youtube. I keep telling him. CRAIGSLIST and YOUTUBE are NOT reliable sources. He keeps vandalising the Luka Magnotta page as well as the Karla Homolka page and others. He had his IP blocked and I warned him not to edit pages and write down craigslist rumors on these pages. HE WONT LISTEN and he is hell bent on getting his own way and he wont stop this BS. Please consider blocking him from editing for a week. Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anisalarson (talk • contribs) 21:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotected the article for three days; I agree the content added was inappropriate (and probably a BLP violation). Given the disruption, if I see any further disruption I'll reblock the IP. – iride scent 21:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned out the rumours from the Homolka article. Risker (talk) 21:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And cleaned out the Homolka rumours from the Magnotta article, but that one is in terrible shape regardless and it has a genuine "eww" factor going for it. Will leave the rest to someone who cares. Risker (talk) 21:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We still have people who care?

– iride scent 21:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not about Magnotta, at least not me. I will probably list him at AfD for lack of notability later on tonight, being a minor porn star and male model who's had cosmetic surgery really doesn't make him notable by any standard I can see. I'm laying odds the only reason he gets any press coverage is his surname, which he shares with an extremely wealthy business family in the Toronto region. Homolka is another matter. Sadly. Risker (talk) 22:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want no original research on that article, then there are some more things that need to be removed since they have no 'reliable sources' to back them up; and for the record, I did not do anything to the Karla Homolka page except remove the vandalism by another person who erroneously added Luka as her husband - If you are going to make an accusation against someone, at least make them accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.67.105 (talk) 22:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From my position, there is no reason to keep the Magnotta article, and no reliable sources that identify Homolka's partner anywhere so it didn't matter what name was being included as her husband - all were unsourced. I'm not personally accusing anyone of vandalising, including you. All I care about is the quality and reliability of the content. Risker (talk) 22:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Risker, my comment was not to you, it was to Anisalarson who was acting irrationally towards me and what I was posting. Personally, I think the whole Luka Article should be removed completely from Wiki, there is virtually no information about this person, other than the stories on Orato.com which may or may not be written by him. Honestly, there is not a single thing in the entire article which can truely be verified or stand up to normal Wiki standards.--65.96.67.105 (talk) 22:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to be a pain about this, but there is another person who is vandalising the same 2 articles again putting innappropriate/non-constructive links to porn and putting fake/false information into the ads [3] --65.96.67.105 (talk) 23:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching that. I'm going to semiprotect The Wrong Version as this is getting silly; apologies for the fact that it means you'll be unable to edit it (unless you log on). – iride scent 23:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance you can make an edit to a page which is locked? [4] on the right side in the section with her photo, etc at the bottom it says she has 1 son with Magnotta - they have never met and certainly do not have a son together. This is the original edit they did[5] and they have continued to make the vandalistic change but it appears like this little piece was missed when other people fixed it before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.67.105 (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check out the Homolka article shortly and remove any BLP violations and unsourced info. In the meantime: trigger pulled on the Magnotta article. Risker (talk) 00:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crossposted from the AfD for the benefit of anyone watching this:
The page was semi-protected due to a recent IP editwar. As those doing the most work on this article are IPs/SPAs (not that unusual with porn articles as users don't necessarily want their "main" account associated with it, and a recognised legitimate use of a sock account), I've removed the semiprotection from the article to give the IPs a chance to improve and/or source it. – iride scent 14:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably nothing

and probably not a big deal, just need more eyes. I mentioned yesterday that I declined rollback for a user that has been here essentially for one day right? (made 3 edits on 10Jul, about a half dozen more on 14Jul, then a post to WP:RFR. Well, that user's talkpage is, um, interesting. See the third thread called "Question"... (Sorry, I would have posted this up there, but you drew a line, hafta start a new thread. :-) Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 19:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmmm... Give me a minute to go through those contributions. If you feel it necessary... – iride scent 19:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The contribs aren't bad, really though its besides the point. I posted to Acalamari's talkpage as well to see what standard he is using. Anyone that's been a Wikipedian for 5 days, in my opinion, and knows to go to RFR straight away....smells funny is all. Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 19:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that account was a Wikipedian for less than 24 hours when he granted rollback. I've removed Huggle access (although not rollback; it seems unfair to leave a permanent record in his log).

I have no doubt whatsoever that this is a sockpuppet and suspect we'll be hearing more from it. I cannot imagine any genuine new user requesting rollback while their edit count was still in single figures. – iride scent 19:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can name a whole drawer full that did exactly that.... Could be a coincidence that this user showed up right when the latest sock was blocked. Sigh. GDammit, I hope I'm wrong. Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 19:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Reconsideration of Huggle Block

I am requesting a reconsideration of the Huggle block. The edit referenced was one of my initial edits and it was a mistake with the Huggle interface. I attempted to revert my own edit, but apparently it did not go through. If you review the rest of my edit history with Huggle, I believe you will find that I have been making good use of the tool. In fact, you will also see that I did learn to use the revert own edit for one other mistake I did make when looking at a family guy article. If you could reply on my page I would appreciate it since it will notify me of the response.

Ajh16 (talk) 20:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I won't reconsider; in my opinion there's no legitimate reason an editor with less than 50 edits would be using Huggle. Assuming you're a good-faith new editor, you need to demonstrate you can use the rollback feature correctly before using something this powerful; the analogy would be, I wouldn't let you drive a semi-trailer truck until you'd passed the test to drive a car. You may be able to persuade someone else to re-enable it in which case I won't stand in their way. (In the event that you're not a good-faith new editor then there are obvious reasons not to allow you access to a powerful high-speed editing tool.) – iride scent 20:24, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, just noticed this section and would like to share a little about myself to try and alliviate concern. I am an IRCop with Dorksnet as well as the IT Director of Wiicafe.com. I have a history of working with trying to police things on IRC, forums and in my WoW guild. Upon encountering my first vandalism that I saw in Wikipedia, I started looking at how to fix it and stumbled across the Recent Changes. From there I started noticing how much vandalism there is and started trying to help deal with it. I noticed that I was consistantly having edits fixed before I could complete them by people using Huggle and started trying to build my reputation enough to get access to this tool. This is also how I learned about rollback. If providing further verification of my identity and creditials would help relieve fears, I will gladly provide proof of my identity and affiliations. Hope that helps, feel free to leave me a note on my user page if you have further concerns.

Ajh16 (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I say, I won't reconsider this one at this time – Wikipedia is not like other websites or even other Wikis, and Huggle makes it very easy to accidentally drive good faith users off the project if it's not used correctly. There's nothing you can do with Huggle that you can't do in MediaWiki; Huggle gains its speed by bypassing all the safeguards Twinkle includes (viewing the page being edited rather than just the diff, forcing you to view the talkpage of anyone you warn before you leave a warning in case the matter's already under discussion, auto-watchlisting the talkpage of anyone you issue a warning to in case they try to explain their actions). No offence, but until I've seen you in action I can't know whether you can be trusted to bypass those safeguards. – iride scent 20:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can install Twinkle by going here: WP:TW. It should help you increase your vandal-fighting speed and it's also a great way to prove that you can be trusted with Huggle. –xeno (talk) 20:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is just kind of a general request since this is where the topic seems to being discussed. Could someone review my log when they have a chance and let me know if they see anything that seems to be off base. I have been trying to follow policies the best possible and have managed a decently large number of edits in a short time, including a fairly lengthy list while using Huggle. It would be nice to know for sure if there is something I am missing or if it is just simply my timing and my being new that is the cause for concern (which I can honestly understand as I have had to deal with banned users trying to sneak back in to things before as well.) Also, on good faith, I would like to indicate that it for some reason appears that I am still able to use Huggle, or atleast it starts fine. I havn't tried pushing an edit through due to this though. Also, while I havn't tried, it appears that I would still be able to re-enable it on my own. This may not be the case, but I did not want to try it as I believe that would be in bad faith to the community. Ajh16 (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, I guess that's because irid never protected your huggle.css which is how one would usually block someone from using huggle. The reason that we're so suspicious is because we've had some fairly insidious sockpuppetry of late and one of the biggest warning signs is applying for rollback early in one's career. but I suppose huggle's adverts might allow someone to find the trail of breadcrumbs to WP:RFR. –xeno (talk) 20:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(To Xeno) Feel free to protect (or delete) it if you think it's warranted – it seems a little extreme to me given he's been warned. IMO protecting huggle.css is for certain users who don't take the hint when they've been told to stop using it (not mentioning any names, like). – iride scent 21:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so just to be entirely clear here, you guys want me to just utilize the normal interface or Twinkle for a while. How will things go as far as starting to use Huggle again? Should I just wait until someone says something or wait a particular amount of time or should I ask again in a little while? Just trying to figure out what the final outcome here is. Ajh16 (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say, when you think you're ready. But be aware that those warnings that WP:HG and the Huggle loading screen are plastered with aren't for decoration; many people take a very dim view of Huggle and mistakes you make with it that would probably have resulted in a slap on the wrist when made with MediaWiki can – and do – get Huggle users blocked. Use of automated tools is not an excuse, and it's very easy to revert a good faith edit as vandalism and/or issue an inappropriate warning with Huggle. As long as you only use it for blatant vandalism you shouldn't have any problems. – iride scent 22:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thank you

		Thank you!
		Iridescent, it is with deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust that I am honored to report that in part to your support, my request for adminship passed (87/14/6). I deeply value the trust you and the Wikipedia community have in me, and I will embark on a new segment of my Wikipedia career by putting my new tools to work to benefit the entire community. My best to you, Happyme22 (talk) 03:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Millennium Items

An article that you have been involved in editing, Millennium Items, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Millennium Items. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? ZeroGiga (talk) 04:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good god, one of the suckiest articles I've ever seen has been edited by myself, David Gerard, Tony Sidaway, Stifle, Sceptre and John, among many others, and is more than four years old. Congratulations, you have found the Cabal's secret page! Award yourself a barnstar. – iride scent 19:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

How did you get the odd figure in this edit summary? It's neat. Acalamari 20:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Playing about with unicode – just cut-and-paste ๏̯͡๏ or ಠ_ಠ. I think that particular one started on 4chan of all places. – iride scent 20:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, there's a similar thing on Ryulong's talk page I think. Acalamari 20:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Award yourself a barnstar

LOL! —Giggy 10:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Shalom Yechiel

Please respond to an RFC I have filed about my conduct. Please evaluate my responses to false statements about me during my recent RFA. Yechiel (Shalom) 20:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...

Where did you go? Holiday? If you've retired, I fully expect a massive flame from you to land somewhere "on your way out." Hope you're well. Keeper ǀ 76 20:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment, in some unrelated thread here a few weeks ago, Iridescent mentioned that s/he sometimes goes off for weeks or months at a time with little or no notice. I would assume this is one of those times. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 00:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's part of her job if I recall. —Giggy 01:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question:Is Iridescent a man or a woman? I never found out...--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 01:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's for me to know and you to work out. Hint; she likes pink. —Giggy 01:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self; that really would have worked better if you previewed. —Giggy 01:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, tough girl. I always thought so Iridescent did sound girly(And her symbol of a flower....) but somehow other users referred to "her" as "him" so i thought "she was a"he". Guess i won't make that mistake.:)--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 01:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]