This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Wish you a Happy New Year.BobClive--BobClive (talk) 07:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)--BobClive (talk) 07:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid. You turned down my request at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shustov on the basis of drop dead WP:DUCK obviousness (which I'm fine with). Now I've got another IP editor who's making the same revert to the same article, in the same way, and with the same lack of discussion. I still haven't had any (logged-in) response from Shustov (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) to pointed requests to discuss the issue.

While I still suspect that WP:DUCK holds, the new IP is from a different ISP. The first revert ([1]), yesterday, was from 76.87.107.54 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)), which whois says is a Road Runner IP. The second IP revert ([2]) comes from 69.227.189.80 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)), which is nominally owned by AT&T Internet Services.

Could I ask you to consider applying some of the CheckUser-brand Magic Wiki Pixie Dust™ to the situation now? I don't know if this is just a user-at-home versus user-at-work issue, or if I'm dealing with multiple anons and need to call in the cavalry.

Many thanks, and happy new year! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:53, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for having a look; I'll be over on AN/I with it shortly. Have a good 2009! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nishkid64,

Wishing you a happy a new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

Majorly talk 21:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Regarding this, please check out this IP as it seems to be in the same range as the other confirmed ones and is immediately jumping into MfD and ANI threads. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 03:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nishkid64, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Day, and that 2009 brings further success and happiness! ~ YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for all those CU lookups and copyedits again. Here's to Fanboy! YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This account was created immediately after I blocked User:Ontopofcosts, and its first two edits were reversals of User:Algebraic123's edits, i.e. a continuation of the edit war. Later you blocked User:Ontopofcosts indefinitely as a sock of User:Hkelkar. May I ask you check User:Barracuda_the_song as well?

I also noticed another interesting account User:Panunkashmir, which may also need a CU.

Thanks in advance, and Happy New Year! Ruslik (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishikid. Thanks for your interest in the Noah's Ark article, but as a newcomer to it there is a certain amount of background you need to know. First, the section you say is about "scientific evaluation," isn't. It's about the literalist pov. I should know, because I wrote it. When I came to the article, about 2 years ago, it was entirely about the literalist pov - the whole article. You think that section is long now, well it was far longer then, and had no critical evaluation of the literalist pov whatsoever. So a group of us cut the literalism right back and added a lot about the treatment of the Ark as a piece of literature. And that's what the Ark really is, literature. Religious literature, but literature. Right now I'm trying to add something about modern biblical criticism of the story, but to do that I need to cut back the literalism section so that the two will be about the same size. Otherwise, the idea that the Ark is real will just continue to dominate the article, to the exclusion of other points of view. PiCo (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on this RFCU Nish, but as he's in a RFAR now, we've decided on a conditional unblock. I posted this on his talk page: "You have been unblocked by arbcom but are limited to participation in your arbcom case pages, own user page, and own user talk page. Edits to other pages during the next two weeks will result in immeditate reblock from that point for a full more two weeks." — Rlevse • Talk • 20:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a reason why I didn't ask the ArbCom to CU GMC... and you ran the CU. :p - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 21:18, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've made a suggestion at Noah's Ark that you should be asked to revise the section/subsections on literalism. I did this because I understood you to have earlier expressed an interest, and because, as a new-comer, you'll be outside the mutual antagonisms that infest the page and its editors. But I thought I better tell you about it and not let it come as a complete surprise. PiCo (talk) 03:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:HolidayHome (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Happy hunting! This user reverts right back to the last version of another sock.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 06:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sockpuppet accounts? And why don't you people just let me do my job? And claim that a public computer ID is a sockpuppet of mine is simply moronic! Unblock it!... Or do you think I can't get another computer?... It's contraproductive!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 10:44, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you restore the Aticle lead to Normal before edit-warring..... Dharmasthala (Kannada: ಧರ್ಮಸ್ಥಳ) to Dharmasthala (Tulu, Kannada: ಧರ್ಮಸ್ಥಳ)

As per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dharmasthala&diff=261257074&oldid=261110454 C21K was the first one to remove Tulu. Actually, South Canara is diferent from Karnataka. The dominant language is Tulu there, and not Kannada as the rest of K'taka. Dharmasthala has been a holy town for Mangaloreans since many centuries. Tulu has a lot of significance for the temple town. C21K claims that he visited the town and found it's a city only for Kannadigas and hence removed Tulu. What nonsense is this? Does Wikpedia work on oral statements or does it work on published reliable sources. Unless and unless it is proved that it's a town only for Kannadigas, may I request you to restore the article to normal and readd Tulu. Thanks, Kensplanet^T_C 06:21, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above guy is tulu fanatic. Tulu was first added on Dec 22,2008 by some IP check here, i was in wikibreak at that time. from the date of creation of this article till Dec22,2008 no one added tulu there. but on dec22 some IP added tulu in it without providing Relliable source.

Tulu is not a local language of dharmasthala click here. Dharmasthala is a temple not a place. Dharmasthala is a holy temple for Shiva worshippers not for mangalooreans alone(POV statement by Kensplanet). and the above user failed to prove his POV. and he assumes that tulu is local language of dharmasthala and refuses to provide reliable source for his claim. Please check the above source which i provided, in languages spoken section tulu is not mentioned there. when i provided this source in dharmasthala talkpage , kensplanet says it is a dumb reference .because he dont know that newspaper is published by worlds largest publisher Times of India.

The above user says Dharmasthala(temple) is in south canara, tulu is dominant language there, so it should be placed there. it sounds like churches and mosques are in Karnataka since many centuries, kannada is dominant language in karnataka and so kannada should be mentioned. This is surely POV statement. I request you to deny the above users request. Thanks C21K^talk 12:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, please check (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dharmasthala&diff=229968943&oldid=229968825). Even Kannada was recently added on 5 August 2008 by a IP. Kannada was not present before 5 August. On what basis was Kannada added then? Did anyone provide a reliable source. Really Kannada fanatics like C21K and other people are spoiling all Mangalore and South Canara related articles by unnecessarily adding Kannda. Dharmastala is in South Canara where the dominant language is Tulu. So by default we assume the local languge to be Tulu. Suppose you create an article on a Portuguese town, by default you also add Portuguese. You won't add French there. Regarding http://www.bangaloremirror.com/index.aspx?page=article&sectid=38&contentid=2008101620081016205847295aa4c16ed it just mentions the languages used for religious and commercial purposes. It has no relation with native tongues. Dharmastala has been for centuries been in South Canara and is influenced by Tulu. Kensplanet^T_C 14:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dharmastala has been for centuries been in South Canara and is influenced by Tulu. (by kensplanet)

POV statement. C21K^talk 14:20, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simple ,Kannada is a local and official language in dharmasthala. C21K^talk 14:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, take this to the talk page. I'm not restoring any previous versions of the page, since that appears to be part of the dispute. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid64! Happy new year! May this year bring to you immense joy and peace!

→BTW, can you please do a check whether this user and this user are related? Though not likely I have some reason to believe so! --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 13:15, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well before I say much I must admit I don't have clinching evidence...99.99% the two may be unrelated (actually maybe from totally different countries! ie. India and South Korea). However, I suspect there may be a connection as user:Lakshmix who seems to work mostly South Korea articles added this image to India article here a not so positive image of Indian economy and later mass changes were made to the economy section by Lalit Jagannath (talk · contribs) who made this interesting edit comment the two sentences contradict each other. absolute figures explain the situation without ambiguity. "a large pool of educated" is deceiving, india is not quite a south korea yet.. well thats all I can say. I know it can be a co-incidence and I am just imagining too much. Whatever you wish! Regards, --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 17:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm...yes I agree. --KnowledgeHegemony ^talk 09:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 45	24 November 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: 200th issue
ArbCom elections: Candidate profiles	News and notes: Fundraiser, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Dispatches: Featured article writers — the inside view
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 46	1 December 2008	About the Signpost

ArbCom elections: Elections open	Wikipedia in the news
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 5, Issue 1	3 January 2009	About the Signpost

From the editor: Getting back on track
ArbCom elections: 10 arbitrators appointed	Virgin Killer page blocked, unblocked in UK
Editing statistics show decline in participation	Wikipedia drug coverage compared to Medscape, found wanting
News and notes: Fundraising success and other developments	Dispatches: Featured list writers
Wikipedia in the news	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Ice Hockey
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...User:Mitigate & Satiate? The pattern of edits seems a lot like BaT. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 23:36, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know as to why the IP 216.211.0.0/17 was banned from editing. I personally do not edit Wikipedia without logging into my account and I am quite curious as to why there was a ban because I have do no recent editing or any "vandalism" as is suggested by this ban. I expect to here a clear reply. Thank you for your time. Goldengun80 (talk) 05:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you very much for the clarification. But does this mean that someone has hacked my IP? (Goldengun80 (talk) 05:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Wow Ok I fully understand. Thanks for explaining. Didn't mean to rattle your cage at first. I was just curious. Thank you again. (Goldengun80 (talk) 05:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Goldengun80 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldengun80 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some editors are planning a possible DC Wiki-meetup in mid to late February. If interested, please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC 5#Another date? (If you’re no longer interested in getting these notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 5#Nope, but let me know about future events.) Thanks. — Satori Son 16:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nishkid, I just blocked a huge crop of User:Hamish Ross sockpuppets. Wanna see if I missed any? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 16:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You blocked User:Somody a few days ago but didn't put a notification on his talk page. In addition, now he's blanked his talk page. I don't know if a blocked person is allowed to do that, but even if not, I don't know whether the rule applies when the person hasn't been notified. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Nishkid64 ...

Just thought I'd ping you to say that I'm still around, and that the Flag templates for deletion warnings appear to have been well received, as witness the size of Category:Flagged articles ... I patrol it ocassionally, and either remove the category (if it has improved), or else I PROD the article. :-)

Happy Editing! — 72.75.108.10 (talk · contribs) _{17:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)}[reply]

Hi, I have added a section 'How to use this list for effective collaboration' on User:Tinucherian/Indians WP page to see if we can put this list to really good use, pl give your thoughts on the same and we can take it further from there. Thanks. Vjdchauhan (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

You were the admin to extend the block of Bayrak recently. This user 212.43.4.1 appears to be him and is editing a little here and there (for instance [[3]]). A minor annoyance, and not sure what if any action needs to be taken (and not worth the AN/I drama). Well, now you know. Go well.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rosetta House and User:Margyset. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 03:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

W00t w00t! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 68: Wikipedia's Nicotine High has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes and even subscribe to the RSS feed at wikipediaweekly.org. – wodupbot – 12:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nish. Mind sending me http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost_historical/access/166548142.html?dids=166548142:166548142&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=MAR+15%2C+1968&author=&pub=The+Washington+Post&desc=Dahomey+Referendum&pqatl=google ? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 02:57, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday January 18th, Columbia University area Last: 11/01/2008 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, look at our approval by the Chapters Committee, develop ideas for chapter projects at museums and libraries throughout our region, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the November meeting's minutes and the December mini-meetup's minutes).

We'll make preparations for our exciting museum photography Wikipedia Loves Art! February bonanza (on Flickr, on Facebook) with Shelley from the Brooklyn Museum and Alex from the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

We'll also be collecting folks to join our little Wikipedia Takes the Subway adventure which will be held the day after the meeting.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good day Nishkid. I was thinking that you might want to take a look at this unblock request. Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  14:20, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 2	10 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes:Flagged Revisions and permissions proposals, hoax, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: December themed Main Page	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 20:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your help with him. At the moment, his drive by IP reversions are a minor annoyance; he seems to change one or two things a day that can easily be reverted. However, he seems to have a vendatta against me. His last reversion was of a redirect i did for an article that followed a "merge" AfD; this AfD was a little heated and involved a number of new users. I'm concerned if he reverts this again it could lead to drama. The diff is here: [[4]]. If you have a second when your online would appreciate semi so that IPs can't edit that redirect. Thanks and best.Bali ultimate (talk) 15:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This IP was caught in a rangeblock you threw to deal with Alpinist ... any chance it could be fixed? It's a Tiscali range. Blueboy96 21:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note, same as #Notice above. Woody (talk) 00:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's another unblock request for you on User talk:88.108.76.212. It seems to be suffering from the rangeblock[5] on 88.108.0.0/16. Thanks, - auburnpilot talk 20:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Following up your previous checks ([6]) on

• Shustov (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

could you have a look at

• Lhosuna (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Shustov is currently under indefinite block for a pattern of plagiarism and self-promotion. Meanwhile, Lhosuna's sole contribution was to remove a PROD from one of Shustov's articles — an article on a not-apparently-noteworthy device patented by Shustov. Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got another one:

60.241.115.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)— Dædαlus ^Contribs 09:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recently went to edit and did not notice that I was not logged in. I found that my IP address (162.83.128.0/17 according to the notice. I'm not really technical, so I couldn't say.) was disabled by you until next Thursday because something called "CheckUser" determined it has been used abusively. I was a little surprised that this was all it said (it seems to me that notifying someone of what they did that was considered abuse - the charges against them - is just minimal decency) and I honestly can't recall ever doing anything anyone could regard as abusive. It isn't really a problem for me as my registered account is not blocked and I always edit and talk from there (except occasionally when I absentmindedly failed to notice I was not signed in) anyway. But I am wondering why I was blocked? If I did something that is considered abusive, I would like to know specifically what so that I can watch my behavior (or alternately, challenge the characterization) in the future.

Although I am not the only person who has ever had access to this machine, it is not public (it is in my home), and it seems unlikely (though admittedly not impossible) that someone else used it in an abusive manner. Do IP addresses change? I have several problems with my ISP account and to reset various things on the computer. Are you sure you are talking about me?

On another note, I would like to recommend that the notices and "what to do" and "how to appeal sections be rewritten. The directions are not at all comprehensible and when I tried to follow them found that as a blocked IP - you can't (at least I couldn't). I know that all the technical vols. are way overworked, but it might be an idea to just put a simple button for "appeal" on the notice. 162.83.175.178 (talk) 22:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

(When I tried to post the above, it gave me an error message and said that it could not process the edit. It also kicked me out so I was signed by my IP rather than my user account. So I am reposting. Sorry if this appears twice as a result, but at least it will have my registered name.) TheCormac (talk) 22:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 3	17 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: New board members, changes at ArbCom	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: Featured article writers—the 2008 leaders	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Pharmacology
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Ummairsaeed (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kälvesten Runestone, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Kälvesten Runestone and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Kälvesten Runestone during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 22:36, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,
I've finished rewriting and proofreading the article above, for which you had made a contribution.
Should still be interested in the topic, please take a look at the translated page and let me know if there is anything else I can do. Regards,
--Campelli (talk) 04:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nishkid64. As you checked on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eichikiyama and range-blocked underlying IPs of the Sockpuppeter for 3 month, could you look at another sockpuppet named Pkakita (talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log) who self-claims as 210.175.255.217 (talk · contribs)? The IP is designated to internet cafe in Japan, and the sock has appears to avoid scrutiny after the blocking. Now the IP user creates his account, Pkakita (talk · contribs) and I believe this one is the same as Eichikiyama, Azukimonaka or other indef.blocked Sockpuppeter given the timing and same writing patterns. The sockpuppeter has been harassing me based on my ethnicity rather focusing on arguments. That can be seen at Talk:History of Japan#Caspian blue's Proposal and Talk:History of Japan#Caspian blue's Proposal (the second).

I aso found that the way of argument and format are very similar to

• Talk:Kofun period#Korean's hypothesis by Kamosuke (talk · contribs · block log) (indef.blocked and I believe he is Azukimonaka)
• Talk:Kofun period#To Spamer of Korean by KoreanShoriSenyou (talk · contribs · block log) (indef.blocked Azukimonaka's sock)
• Talk:Kofun period#Talk:Rebuttal against Appletrees by Princesunta (talk · contribs · block log)(Appletrees is my former name and he was indef.blocked for obvious socking and harassment against me

Could you take a look at this? Thanks.--Caspian blue 14:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Caspian blue is demanding to add "The ancient Japanese emperors was Korean descendant" to the history of Japan. To the best my knowleg, His insistence is not common sense of the history of Japan. I requested him to present grounds of the insistence. He said "Could you provide diffs that I insisted that "Ancient Japan was being ruled by Korean."? Many scholars claim as such though. I think I restored your blanking of "rulers of Japan seems to be Korean descendants". Anyway, don't worry. I'm preparing something to please for you. Well, here is just for a quick preview." And, he presented a lot of sources. [7] I reviewed this source one by one. His sources were not all "peer-reviewed". [8] I expected the next step of the discussion. However, he did not object. Instead, he said to me "sockpueppter","racist attack","clear harassment". [9]

Imperial House of Japan is a Japanese symbol. I think that I should carefully discuss this problem. Can you mediate him? --Pkakita (talk) 11:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, Pkakita (talk · contribs) is the one distorting my words, and has attacked me from the first because I'm Korean, and contents regarding Korean blood line which was inserted by somebody and I don't see any problem at all is not favoring his support of the fringe theory that ancient Japan ruled some part of Korea. Pkakita also mispresents that those claim are "my proposal" and denounced every sources that I brought up. Pkakita admits him/herself as a sockpuppeter of the Ip address designated in an internet cafe 210.175.255.217 (talk · contribs), which constitutes "sock". He even quotes and said the same to indef.blocked sock's argument. On contrary to his registered date, and appearance, his "new user" knows many complex Wiki rules and request a RFC. Pkakita also forum shopping to editors to gain his side. Pkakita threatens me to report to Administrators even though two admins already visited and commented the page. One admin said he has no problem with the content that Pkakita dislikes so much. Moreover he has attacked me with his following so-called proposal based on my ethnicity which is a "racist attack". Even another user erased Pkakita's such attack from the RFC. Nevertheless, I request the Checkusedr to examine the account, Pkakita for the suspicious circumstance and same writing habit of "being written" and "Rebuttal to Sombody". I also demand Pkakita to retract his attacks against me from the talk page. --Caspian blue 19:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed as Azukimonaka (talk · contribs)/Eichikiyama (talk · contribs). Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I see that you have not blocked the new account and ip yet, could you block him to prevent further damages by him? Thanks.--Caspian blue 01:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you look at GeorgeNotBungle (talk · contribs) and his IPs. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And this User_talk:YellowMonkey#Checkuser_and_sockpuppetry as well - my geolocate has gone bung. Ekajati is in Texas. YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 00:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank you very much for your swift action in blocking socks of User:Nrse--from all of us at the nursing and medicine projects. Cheers, Basie (talk) 02:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you see the images referenced at User talk:JKBrooks85 and confirm that OTRS ticket # 2008120910013531 applies to them and, if so, mark the images appropriately? Thanks. --B (talk) 01:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I once again found myself blocked until tonight, I have never been the cause of any problems of any description. I am getting a mite fed up being blocked because my server is the same as your troublemaker.The email address given to object to being blocked does not work, emails are returned.Nackienoo (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)NackienooNackienoo (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lord Sciagraph -- could you see if there are more rats in this nest? Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 02:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Also User:Vitaloffer. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, could you confirm if this Grawp ip is an op? ~ Troy (talk) 03:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• User:PakhtoonPakistani
• User:EtemadiPukhtoon
• User:Muxlim
• User:Abdulalimazari

I don't think checkuser is required because it's too obvious, he chose similar names as his former socks and edits same articles with same edit summary and similar POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uzbak (talk • contribs) 17:06, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The edit war on Physician assistant seems to have died down from a month ago. Can you please unprotect it? NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 22:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]