Previous discussion: one two (Mar 21 2006-July 11 2006) three (July 20 2006-Sept 24 2006) four (Sept 30 2006-Oct 31 2006) five six seven

I want to start out by saying I'm really sorry that this happened - I did my best to stop it, but sadly I have been overruled by 4 people who are obsessed with name changing (regardless of whether or not I agree with them), and there is a new debate on the Yoghurt talk page about the move - I just felt it would be best if most people who had voted in the past knew about this.danielfolsom 23:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just read your comment - sorry for bringing it up, I just figured I should try to make sure as many people as possible know about it.danielfolsom 00:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry. I just noticed I've removed your comment(there were an edit conflict and I was copy pasting my comment and I mistakenly removed yours). I wanted to restore it but I noticed that you've already done that. Sorry again. --Aminz 04:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems user:Alison restored that. :) --Aminz 04:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your response to my WP:SSP report of FrankJones23, MonkeyOverlord4 was vandalising a few days back, so the Puppetmaster is still active. Anyway, I'm not sure how effective an IP block would be in the first place, what with the different IP's on the list, could be a dynamic IP.

Just thought I'd bring this up. Thanks, Omega Archdoom^Talk 09:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lear21 personally attacked me [[1]] in the edit summery of the Superpower page. He has a history of doing this, can you please send him a warning? User:Daniel Chiswick 18 May, 2007.

Did you make that table entirely by hand? It's insanely detailed. --Akhilleus (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's based on the one in the Daniel Brandt deletion wheel war case. --bainer (talk) 17:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather it not get lost in the evidence talk page, but you had asked if I thought Miskin was a greek pov pusher, or something to that effect. No, I don't say that, and I don't have, nor have I looked for evidence to support that. I do think he significantly edits contentious topics, that happen to be similarly related: Greek, macedonia, ancient greece etc. It's possible that he is. It's possible he isn't. In the end, it's irrelevant. The reasoning was that because the blocks were on related topics, it shows a pattern of disruptive editing within those kinds of topics. That doesn't extend as far as saying he's pushing a pov on those topics. It only says that he's got a pattern of disruptive edits on those topics. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 03:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At first I assumed that this was a newbie, but once I started looking at the details I realised that this guy had been blocked several times and was constantly deleting his talk page to hide the trail. Furthermore, his last couple of blocks followed immediately on from each other, suggesting that he was transgressing again as soon as he could.

Although I only picked up recent potential bad faith edits to one other article apart from the parrot, it was the constant deletion of messages on his talk page (including mine, which he claimed not to have read) that convinced me that this was a problem editor. However, he has emailed me, and after a night's sleep I felt that the block was much too heavy for his "offences", and I've lifted it completely. I'll obviously keep an eye on the situation, especially with regard to any edits to the 2600 pages on my watchlist.

Thanks for your interest, jimfbleak 05:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might also be interested in the history of Last stand, starting around 1 May. --Akhilleus (talk) 04:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to cover only the Battle of the Persian Gate and not any other articles, though I'm aware that these same editors edit many of the same articles, mainly because it would be too unwieldy with all that extra information, but also because administrative actions were only taken in response to edits on the Persian Gate article.

Looking at that history page now though, I may need to look into it. --bainer (talk) 06:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Akhilleous,

You say that Baby Dove is the same person as Mario Fantoni. But you are wrong. One of the three IP addresses I have used, seems to be the same as his, However, I am using three different computers in different places. The one I use at home is a dial-up. The ones at the rented offices, are broadband ones and they are used by several people, so they can show different person's contributions. You can check several edits at the same time from Mario Fantoni and myself since April 9th, when I became an editor, and you can also check the three IP addresses I say for myself. Perhaps your user-checking has not considered all the possibilities.

I hope you can clear this up. Regards, Baby Dove 16:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not user Baby Dove. Here is a list of simultaneous edits done by that user and I:

• 00:01, 11 May 2007 Talk:Fellowship of Friends (About the Fourth Way) - BABY DOVE
  
• 00:01, 11 May 2007 Talk:G. I. Gurdjieff (Aeiou's link removal - cm) - MARIO FANTONI
  
  
• 00:00, 11 May 2007 Talk:Fellowship of Friends (About the Fourth Way - + ref from Gurdjieff to existing schools in history) - BABY DOVE
  
• 00:00, 11 May 2007 Talk:G. I. Gurdjieff (Aeiou's link removal) - MARIO FANTONI
  
  
• 05:53, 9 May 2007 Centers (Fourth Way) (Other Authors - +ref, cl) - MARIO FANTONI
  
• 05:53, 9 May 2007 Talk:Fellowship of Friends/Draft rewrite (The principle of payment - gr, redundant phrase) - BABY DOVE
  
  
• 17:58, 7 May 2007 Talk:Fellowship of Friends (Proof of Advertising - typo) - BABY DOVE
  
• 17:58, 7 May 2007 m Talk:Fellowship of Friends/Draft rewrite (Consciousness and Functions - Added missing space) - MARIO FANTONI
  
  
• 05:16, 20 April 2007 Talk:Centers (Fourth Way) (Susan Zannos - personal opinions?) - BABY DOVE
  
• 05:16, 20 April 2007 m The Teachers of Gurdjieff (Corrected name of publisher) (top) - MARIO FANTONI
  
  

Mario Fantoni 17:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you underestimate Akhilleus's experience with these matters :) Aeuio 20:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You state that a number of IP addresses are "clearly me" without any stated basis. I don't think such question-begging is appropriate. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If a user has already been indef. blocked, is there any point in reporting said user as a possible sockpuppet of a banned user? I ask, well, because I have reason to suspect that OhBoyPopIsOffPeter (blocked for vandalism within the past hour) is the latest sock of Peter1PopoffNill. My suspicions only came after the former was blocked for serial vandalism to the Peter Popoff article. ---Cathal 00:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your response. You answered my question, and confirmed my suspicion. Thanks. ---Cathal 01:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Eurocopter tigre personally attacked me [[2]] in the edit summery of the List of countries and federations by military expenditures page. Can you please send him a warning? User:Daniel Chiswick 23 May, 2007.

Well a few weeks ago you said you would help me delete my talk page history? Can you please do it as soon as you get a chance. I have a really bad reputation and that is the reason I delete my talk page. As I said I am trying to improve my reputation and deleting my talk page history will really help. User:Daniel_Chiswick 23 May, 2007.

Im not editing as User:87.48.118.238 and I didn't broke the 3RR rule. If you'll count again, you'll see that I reverted his edits exactly 3 times. Anyway, you should read the talk page and see that me and other users reached a compromise that EU should stay there. I remind that Daniel Chiswick was blocked for removing the EU from such lists few weeks ago. In the future, please be more carefull when you send such warnings. Best regards, Eurocopter tigre 17:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really know when somebody is breaking the 3RR rule (so it's not necessary to explain me), and I didn't do that. So, please stop writing such warnings until you are really sure that somebody broke the rule, although your abuses will be discussed in the Arbitration Committee. --Eurocopter tigre 17:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your warning is also ridiculous, citing: I'm feeling very nice this morning, and I'm not going to block you or User:Eurocopter tigre, who also broke the 3RR. (false information). A very nice example of an admin abuse. --Eurocopter tigre 17:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's about the Japanese sockpuppets again. After a long long time of edit warring, finally a conclusion was reached on the Joji Obara talk page. Everything is fine and peaceful until User:DDRG comes along again[3]. This user keeps on violating talk page consensus, refuses to participate in any conversation for any longer period, and is yet to make a single constructive edit. Attempts to discuss things with him have been made, but seemingly to no avail. What should I do? What is the next step?　Mackan 18:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you about these things but I trust you more than other admins. I would like to report age discrimination byUser:Eurocopter tigre. On my talk page [[4]] he talked of my youth (I'm sixteen) in a rather rude way and on talk page of the Superpower [[5]] article an unregistered user made a similar remark towards me and I traced the IP adress to Europe so I am almost certain that it was him because no two users from europe would make the same insult on the same day to the same person. This is the third time in two days that he has personally attacked me, and in the most hypocritical way if I may add. According to the rules Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, ethnic, or other epithets are never acceptable [[6]] User:Daniel Chiswick 24 May, 2007.

I think I was very civil when I said that I don't need advices from an 16 years old child, that's not a personal attack because that's one of my personal opinions. Regarding the edit on the Superpower talk page it wasn't me. My home IP is User:85.186.50.133 (contribs) (note that I made one of the last edits from the IP on 1st March 2007 - the day I made the first edit from my newly created account Eurocopter tigre (contribs). In few moments I will log out and make a minor edit to this page, so you'll see my IP. Best, Eurocopter tigre 13:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's me , User:Eurocopter tigre. 85.186.50.133 13:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sinxteen year old child? That is age discrimination and it is considered a personal attack. User:Daniel Chiswick 24 May, 2007.

Guys, please cut this out. Eurocopter isn't being nice, but Daniel is overreacting, and my talk page is not the place to discuss these things. --Akhilleus (talk) 13:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you are the only one who can talk any sense to Daniel. He is currently violating consensus on Huntington Beach, California. After various attempts to plead for him to discuss it on the talk page, he has decided to attack me for using an IP rather than a user name. Please check out the article and its talk page, its a pretty clear case that he has no regard for consensus if it involves something that has to do with British spelling. I'll guarantee that half of his British to American spelling changes likely violate WP:ENGVAR. For example: [[7]], the "armour" line is part of the template and changing it has no point since nothing is in the field. There is absolutely no reason to do what he did except for his hatred of seeing British English spelling.

I created the article SS Paris and I used American english and I intend to keep it that way. Yes I do hate British spelling because I find it outdated and old fashion, is that a problem? Also if you look at the top of the article it clearly says use American english. Also Huntington Beach is an American city and I could provide dozens of scources saying Huntington Beach harbor, not harbour. if you are going to talk to me please do it on my page and not another users page. User:Daniel Chiswick 24 May, 2007.

Blatant violations of WP:OWN[8] and WP:ENGVAR, why do you even edit on Wiki if you disregard its rules based on your likes and dislikes? Your talk page? Please no one sends you messages there since they see that only those who have something to hide delete messages rather than archive them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.227.43.42 (talk • contribs).

128.227.43.42, if you want to address Daniel, do so on his talk page, not here. And please be civil when you do so, I don't think this last comment was. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I was looking around the WP:SUSPSOCK page and wondered it could do with an archival bot. All the actioning person would have to do is add a template, such as {{SSA}} (Suspected Sock Archive) to the request and the bot will search every five minutes and archive them to the current month directory. If you are interested in supporting such a bot and template process, please leave a note on my talk page and I will see what I can do. Extranet is now E ^talk 10:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that template should do. I'll take a look around and create an outline. I will let you know of the status of it, if it goes through. Extranet is now E ^talk 21:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The code has been created and when it is approved and starts, all requests there have to be tagged with {{SSPa}} when they are ready to be archived. I'll tell you when that is. Extranet is now E ^talk 22:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You closed this while it's still an ongoing problem. That guy is still creating new users and the articles he's messing with are still not protected from him. Baseball Bugs 16:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]