Archives 2009 2010 2011 2012		2013 2014 2015

Hi. 94.240.208.148‎ (talk · contribs) made a bunch of questionable edits this morning to Georgian people, Svan people, and various other Georgian-related articles. I know you blocked both GeorgianJorjadze and his sock შეჩემა (Shechema). Do you believe it's possible that this same user is using this IP address now? I see that the blocks on GeorgianJorjadze and Shechema have the "Prevent logged-in users from editing from this IP address" option set, but does this flag do anything when the entity being blocked is a username rather than an IP address? Is it possible that the user is using a range of IP's that should all be blocked (though I'd obviously be hesitant to block the entire 94.240.208.0/20 subnet corresponding to the ISP)? What would you recommend? — Richwales 17:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For now I would just keep an eye out with the reason being that GeorgianJorjadze has been using static IPs for some quite some time. I'll be also monitoring though. Elockid ^(Talk) 18:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. — Richwales 18:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for your help in blocking a possible sockpuppet of the banned user User:Fragments of Jade. Keep up the good work. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Elockid ^(Talk) 01:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Elockid, I noticed you blocked some of his socks recently and was wondering if ABDEVILLIERS0007 (talk · contribs) didn't turn up on the radar as it appears to be him. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 16:53, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't turn out in any of my checks. I have doubts that this is Mr P per this edit and this edit. Elockid ^(Talk) 00:06, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks, but I'll say there's something funky going on here Elockid. I'll put my thoughts together on this one and let you know. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 09:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely agree with you. Elockid ^(Talk) 11:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a look at this SPI, it was filed before I could put together the listing, but the thing is he seems to have taken a liking to the other master -- Mughal Lohar now, so I'm finding their two socks on a lot of pages! —SpacemanSpiff 13:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see we were investigating at the same time. Since you tagged it first, I'll let you finish up. Cheers! TNXMan 14:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just tagged this account as Nangparbat based on the email I got from it, another phishing attempt. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Account blocked with email access revoked. Elockid ^(Talk) 01:19, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, as you are online cod you go to Magogs talk page, section titled another violation and either block me or let me know if I should not be blocked, I hate having this hanging over my head, stresses me out. Thanks. Darkness Shines (talk) 01:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The two IPs editing this article before Nangparbat came along are proxy servers, can you do a block on them also please. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't think they're OPs. Could be wrong though. I'll have a chat with someone. Elockid ^(Talk) 02:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, could you let me know if they are not, whatsmyip says they are. Darkness Shines (talk) 06:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

115.248.114.51 is a confirmed proxy according to this but the service provider is a reputable company, Reliance Communications. Any thoughts? Darkness Shines (talk) 06:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even reliable ISPs can have open proxies on it (compromised systems). I don't tend to believe what whatismyipaddress says though. The advice I was given from proxy checkers is that it's more or less reliable. I haven't been able to chat with the person I want, hopefully they're not busy tonight. Elockid ^(Talk) 18:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to talk to 86.159.117.71, but then noticed you've blocked them for evasion. Who are they? William M. Connolley (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certain that they're either banned user I know (Realhistorybuff) or serving as their meatpuppet. Elockid ^(Talk) 18:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK, thanks William M. Connolley (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to say Elokid but you've been misinformed. You seem to have a hidden agenda, following me around and undoing my comments on talk pages for no given reason. I can assure you that I have no affiliation with Realhistorybuff whatsoever. This was probably the reason why my block was reverted.

Hi, I have noticed a user I reported atWP:AIV was reblocked for 3 days. May I ask what he has to do to get a longer term block? I have spent quite a bit of time on him today after he triggered an alert on my WP:GLOO session, and all his warnings have been by me. Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 18:54, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the IP is 87.254.93.20. Mdann52 (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generally if the IP has long history of abuse, usually dating weeks to months, they are blocked for an extended amount of time. The primary reason why that IP was not blocked for an extended period is that it's a dynamic IP. Hope this explanation helps. Elockid ^(Talk) 19:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for answering. I guess I'll have to keep an eye on him. Mdann52 (talk) 19:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in case you didn't notice, I've rangeblocked this person. Looks like their latest plan to vandalize with 87.254.82.121 (talk · contribs) failed. Elockid ^(Talk) 20:07, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The best I can give you is a closed proxy, there is something that is password protected that none of the default passwords match, and my systems are only guessing at the OS that I'm working with. Though it does look like a monitoring system of some sort. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 20:26, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks for checking. Elockid ^(Talk) 20:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted this edit of yours, where you removed an IP's comments from Talk:Indo-Aryan migration, only to be told in an edit summary by SpacemanSpiff that the IP you had reverted was a banned user attempting to circumvent a block. In that case, fine, but when you pursue such a reversion, please say so in the edit summary so this sort of misunderstanding doesn't occur. Also, I don't see anything either User:86.159.117.71 or User talk:86.159.117.71 that would suggest that that IP has been blocked at all, let alone the reason for the block, any link to a sockpuppet page, etc.. RJC ^Talk_Contribs 22:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could add the following to your page (forgot what the page was called where you put the scripts) to tell if someone is blocked or not:

importScriptURI('http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-markblocked.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript')

I'll make an effort so that there's less of a misunderstanding. Elockid ^(Talk) 01:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:VT#IPv6 schoolblock question. We need to be able to stop Mikemikev socks, and it appears that IPv6 is going to make this more difficult. Dougweller (talk) 09:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I tried to rangeblock him the other day. Unfortunately though, we can only block up to /64 ranges for IPv6. Basically single IP addresses when you convert it to IPv4. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be easier once the software is upgraded within the next 9 days. You'll be able to block /32.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear. Elockid ^(Talk) 16:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even better. you'll be able to block /19.--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or did you just use Google Translate?--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3 languages with good enough proficiency (used to be 4). The Russian and Japanese goodbyes are from good friends who taught me a couple of greetings and common phrases. The French and the Italian goodbyes are from classes/organizations I was in. Elockid ^(Talk) 23:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know why you've started removing comments I've left on talk pages and why you've tried to block my account. The reason given was due to constant block evasion/sock puppetry, although this seems to be uncalled for considering I have only one account.86.163.14.254 (talk) 17:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another one -- Riftshell (talk · contribs). This edit was virtually identical to the one made today by Riftshell[1]. I guess there may be more, I see you've dealt with some already today. Dougweller (talk) 14:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's him alright. Blocked his proxies. Unfortunately though, he's creating accounts on different proxies so it's hard to find sleepers. Elockid ^(Talk) 18:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. It's getting harder to block socks, IPv6 looks like a bit of a nightmare. Dougweller (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for protecting the article. I just stole a glance at the article talk page [2], and saw that this has been going on for months; it may justify indefinite protection. Thanks, 99.156.68.118 (talk) 20:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've extended the protection to one month. Hopefully this will work out. If not I can protect the article for a longer period next time if the problem continues after the protection expires. Elockid ^(Talk) 00:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated. The vandalism from '174' IPs appears to go back at least as far as December 6, 2011 [3], which suggests a rather single-mindedness in screwing with the article. Best, 99.156.68.118 (talk) 00:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Elockid, hope life has been treating you well! :) Just have two questions for you.

1. This case here, would it not be better to WP:DENY since we've blocked Grawp at infinitely different places, users, and IPs? (aka just let it archive as is without a move)
2. In this case, is there a relation with the case you linked? (If you can) and should it not be merged into, instead of to?

Thanks, -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:20, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey DQ! Anyways for the clarifications:

1. I suppose we could delete the report.
2. Yes, there is a relation. Based on the evidence at both SPIs/account contribs, I think that Harlow1937 = 1962monroe. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:30, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken care of the second one but will leave the denying to DQ. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The user, whom you blocked, has contacted me at the Indonesian Wikipedia. S/he says that the IP address is shared and that s/he is unrelated to the spammer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:01, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I haven't had much interaction with the user otherwise, so I cannot guarantee his/her edit history outside of what is visible. However, the edits using Dede2008 have all been generally productive. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the CU evidence, it would appear that he is operating good hand, bad hand accounts. I can't really go much into detail due to privacy concerns, but what I can say is that based on the CU evidence and the timing of the edits between the spam and him suggests he was either partaking in the spam himself or deceiving us with his edits. Just looking at My username22222 (talk · contribs) and Allah Subhanahu wa Taala (talk · contribs) at glance for example, those are both odd, especially the second. Also, if you took a look at Spamming links account (talk · contribs), RFA is not exactly a page a new contributor would go to. I also took a look at his UTRS request, he didn't say that he was editing from a shared location. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Looks to quack, assuming the same IP. Alright, thanks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:59, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Hi Elockid! You my friend have done an incredible and great work of reverting disruption, trolling and vandalism and are always ready to protect Wikipedia! :) With the help of CheckUser and Administrative tools you help the project keep running smoothly and efficiently. Thanks and Happy Editing! :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 15:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) Elockid ^(Talk) 19:37, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a sock of a Nangparbat [4]. Can you explain the signature. regards --DBigXray 08:09, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nangparbat used to solicit other editors in the past to edit on his behalf. I was warning Kashmirspeaks that the IP is Nangparbat that this isn't allowed (WP:MEAT). I guess he didn't like the advice or the request. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:03, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with your observation above. But I was wondering why the diff showed the signature name as Nangparbat instead of Kashmirspeaks.--DBigXray 12:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. It looks like he was linking Nangarbat and then signed with five tildes instead of four causing his name to not appear. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thanks a lot for explanation. Thats exactly what I wanted to know :) --DBigXray 12:57, 23 June 2012 (UTC) (test 12:57, 23 June 2012 (UTC) )[reply]

Special:Contributions/Ronaldchow76's initial comments and his interaction with others clearly show he is another reincarnation of User:Nangparbat--DBigXray 12:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have set protection to a page so I contacted you ,Could you please today's rocket and mortar attcks ?

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4246080,00.html http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=274901

till when the protection is going to be ?109.226.26.133 (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. But what text do you want to be added? Regarding the protection, it ends in a month. If you want, you can register an account and come back here. I can set your account to confirmed status which will allow you to edit the article. Also, in case you come across other protected pages, you could also try to add the following text on the article's talk page: {{edit semi-protected|answered=no}}. Be sure to clearly state what you want. For example, I want X change to Y per this source. Hope this helps. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

A new ip keeps pushing the version of Origin of the Bagratid dynasties put forward by User:Gergea1 before you blocked him, and left me a message on my tp defending it ([5]) with an airily similar command of the English language. I strongly suspect we are dealing with the same person here. Can you have a look and take appropriate action? Thanks a lot!--Susuman77 (talk) 12:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hum, just realised I forgot to include the ip itself. Stupid me. Here it is: 176.73.208.159‎ (talk · contribs).--Susuman77 (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked the IP. Elockid ^(Talk) 13:33, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a highly disruptive editor, and he has taken to making racist remarks on article talk pages[6]. An IP, probably Lagoo Saab has tagged the account as a possible Mrpontiac1 sock[7] His talk page is littered with warnings, and he never responds to them. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeffed. Elockid ^(Talk) 00:13, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Elockid, You protected my user page a long time back Here, I I'm requesting the same for my public accounts User:Mlpearc Public & User:Mlpearc Phone. This is just a "User request within own user space" situation. Thank you for your time. Mlpearc Public (Powwow) 21:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Let me if you want any of the protections removed/modified. Elockid ^(Talk) 23:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, have a great day Mlpearc (powwow) 23:24, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Nangaphobia your comments as a CU familiar with the topic will be welcome. --DBigXray 07:14, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I missed it. :( But I have to agree that the page is not very helpful and would advocate an immediate delete. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, It was indeed disappointing to see editors joining hands to glorify a sockpuppeteer and harass a user. One can only imagine who..., against whom... and where the WP:NOTNANGPARBAT shortcut was going to be used. Closing statement by the admin says it all. Thanks for the reply --DBigXray 13:07, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed FRANKKKK (talk · contribs), another obvious sock. Why did CU miss him, and does this mean there might be more sleepers? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Missed him because those socks were editing from the a different range from the other socks Only Charliettery (talk · contribs) found. Same ISP, location, and useragent though. I can do a rangeblock, but will wait to get more data to minimize the collateral. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You said For the next three days, so you must insert an expiry time of the page Egypt. You protected it and will not expire. Adjkasi (discuss me | changes) 09:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My protection method is a bit more unique. If there is another protection already in place, I will not change the protection length because this will eventually remove the first protection/end it early. Instead I will just change the protection settings then manually change it back when the intended protection time is over. For example, see African American. Elockid ^(Talk) 12:13, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I thereby award you with this Admin's Barnstar for single-handedly clearing out the backlog of the Request for page protection process. Keep up the good work. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 15:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Elockid ^(Talk) 17:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elockid, thank you for responding to my request to protect the Michelle Fields page. Safehaven86 (talk) 15:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Elockid ^(Talk) 17:47, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further to your comment on WP:RPP, Bridge Boy shows no sign of accepting the principle that you discuss things in order to reach consensus - as evidence by his once again re-purposing the article despite the active discussion on the talk page. His continuing bad behaviour, and borderline abuse of other editors needs to be addressed, and protecting the page might be a good move. --Biker Biker (talk) 16:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protected. Elockid ^(Talk) 20:37, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one, thanks. Now for the user block ;) --Biker Biker (talk) 21:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this edit is offensive and insulting. Will you do something about it, or do you think I should take it to WP:ANI? --Biker Biker (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First it was just me who was "out to get him." Then it was all SamBlob. Then it was a "little gang of 2 or 3 people". And NuclearWarfare isn't allowed to speak, apparently. Now it's back to just me again, and my "unconscious sibling rivalry". (WTF?) Oh, wait, now Biker Biker is in on it to, "keen to try and discredit" him. It's pretty clear that anyone working on the same article as him is bound to get attacked and accused of stalking him. He doesn't realize that others edit articles for reasons other than a personal grudge against him. It's difficult to refrain from a sarcastic reply. It's also a waste of time to read 600 word talk page comments where two thirds of the content is off-topic recriminations against the other editors. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding Violation of WP:OWN, WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. The thread is Bridge Boy.The discussion is about the topic Straight-two engine. Thank you. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fellow editor, I have now backed off. I don't want to get drawn into an edit war. Its looks like there is some sockpuppettry going on. I've left it to Mathew to take care of. There were multiple issues with the edits including WP:Puffery, WP:Soapbox, WP:Reliable, WP:NPOV, etc etc. I will leave it to you and other editors to take care of the situation. Thanks SH 21:08, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The anti-Indian comments show DS is right DBigXray 13:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP hopping vandal known at 87.110.6.206 71.17.117.228 81.234.102.73 112.175.52.130 82.226.219.114 94.14.136.155 81.233.126.178 173.64.222.100 User:Dutyaxisss Fifelfoo (talk) 22:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the sock case btw so I'm in the dark here. Fifelfoo (talk) 22:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Inline-twin engine is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inline-twin engine until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this page Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#South Indian Jingoism. I have expressed certain concerns connecting a certain user you have blocked. Please see to it if you get time. Snowcream (talk) 12:06, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]