User talk:Enigmaman/Archives/2009/June

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Enigmaman. 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.

Go to MTF (mens tennis forums), infact a simple google search will show you that he is infact nicknamed Soderking. use common sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.8.48 (talk) 14:10, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reliable source. Enigma^msg 14:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Is there a reason to doubt the authenticity of the nickname SoderKING? afterall it is a play on his actually name SoderLING. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.8.48 (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reliable source. I could make up a lot of nicknames for players, but unless they're used in reliable sources, we don't add them to articles. Enigma^msg 03:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I understand why you put the proposed deletion tag on Winchester bus route 7 page. I fully agree for the look of the page now, but it was going to be extended. I was planning to move it to List of bus routes in Winchester, where the other articles may be put, when I noticed the tag. I hope you now understand the situation. --Adam mugliston (talk) 07:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello Enigmaman, I have been considering your continued positive work at Wikipedia especially over the period of 5 months since you last faced the gauntlet of RfA. I would like to nominate you to attempt a new request for the mop and have commenced the process at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Enigmaman 3. I would be pleased if you would accept my nomination and indicate acceptance in the appropriate part of the page. If you do accept I will complete the rest of the necessary paperwork; and given the time difference between our parts of the world I will attempt to finalise the paperwork as early as I can (later) this evening. I will also add that there may be co-nominators that wish to add their name to the nomination and they will be welcomed and free to do so after you have accepted the nomination. I will be more than happy for any co-nominators to come to my talk page to ask further questions if and as necessary.--VS ^talk 07:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I have accepted your nomination. Enigma^msg 14:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I would have to add the words "DO IT!!!" to that. :-). You should have been an admin from the previous RfA but ran across too many d**ks and p***ks. Hopefully any of the previous an*l set will be on summer vacation this go around... eh! The Real Libs-speak politely 13:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Only time will tell. :) Enigma^msg 14:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

List it on WP:RFA please. MBisanz ^talk 15:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. I thought Steve might've been intended to transclude. Enigma^msg 22:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm very glad to see you're running again, considering your last RfA. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:46, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

My take on it was that if I survived my first RfA and came back for more, I should do so again. The second RfA was rather more harrowing than the first, but that's the way it goes... Enigma^msg 22:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Enigmaman - sorry time beat me at this end of the world to await Lar's co-nom and then to assist in the transclusion. My thanks to Julian for adding the stats to the talk page. Best of luck my friend - and now I am off for a few more hours of sleep.--VS ^talk 16:09, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Good luck. rootology (C)(T) 15:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and thank you especially for your contributions to the RfA. I'm happy to see you're taking an interest. Enigma^msg 22:47, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I hope not to jynx you, but by the looks of it, 3rd times the charm! I have a very good feeling this RfA is going to go big. And you deserve it. Master&Expert (Talk) 05:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Eh, it slowed down. Not enough opposes, I suppose. It did make WP:100, though. I guess I should go list it there. Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Enigmaman/Archives/2009, I don't think we have run into each other before, never the less, I humbly request that you refrain from responding to question 16 on your RFA as I am a strong believer in a user retaining their privacy. I feel that whether or not you frequent Wikipedia Review is your concern and yours alone and should not be a factor of your RFA. If people didn't answer questions like that no one would be asking them, please consider that. Kind Regards   «l| ?romethean ™|l»  (talk) 10:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

How did I not know? I do now :) Good luck! StarM 00:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You should've had it watchlisted! :D Enigma^msg 17:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Enigmaman, I've asked a follow-up question on your RFA (question #21). Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 07:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC).

Replied. Enigma^msg 17:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You can watchlit a page that didn't exist? Or did you have a version created? I'm so bad at RfA watching StarM 00:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, check your watchlist. You have deleted pages on it. Even if it hadn't been created, like that page specifically, just enter it into your browser and hit watchlist. Even if the page hasn't been created, it'll show up on your watchlist when it does. It's a good way of tracking something that you anticipate but don't know exactly when it'll be created. Enigma^msg 00:49, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

good to know, thanks! StarM 23:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know, my offer still stands. Or alternatively you can refuse because you think you're smarter than me in WP:RFCU WP:SPI. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:26, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Good to hear. I will let you know after the conclusion of the current RfA. Enigma^msg 04:34, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Best wishes for the RFA that is approaching closure as likely successful. Congratulations -- Tinu Cherian - 04:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

About damn time. Welcome to hell. Tan | 39 15:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Yea, welcome to the suck, fucking new guy. –xeno^talk 15:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me for a moment. I'm trying to decide which of you to block first. Enigma^msg 15:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you, thank you, and thank you. Ohana, I'll take you up on your offer. First I have to take a short break. I think a day should cover it. Enigma^msg 15:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Glad to see that I'm smarter than you :P OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Prove it. I think now you're my SPI mentor. Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I had one question that is sort of off-topic from your RFA, but I was curious about, so I ask here instead. In regards to the doomsday scenario I put forth, what could checkusers do to help in such a situation? It's my understanding that their tools are limited to IP information, and so they would be unable to check if the leaked passwords are valid or not. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. -kotra (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

One would ask a checkuser to look at the IPs being used. The account is not "compromised" until someone other than the person originally handling the admin account takes an action with the account. For example, I'm not certain the RickK and Zoe accounts were ever actually compromised. As far as I can recall, nothing happened with those accounts (they had been inactive for a while) until Kelly Martin, I believe, said that she had the passwords to the accounts. This was verified, and an emergency desysop was requested. In normal cases, someone notices an administrator account behaving oddly (like I recall happened with an admin who had "Eye" in his name), it gets brought to AN/I, and it's agreed that a checkuser should see if IPs out of the ordinary ranges used are using the account to perform edits or admin actions. All that said, this is a request for adminship, and since I do not normally involve myself with AN/I, such a doomsday situation is very unlikely to involve me. If it did, I would defer to the knowledge and experience of respected members of the community. Enigma^msg 04:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I would probably not wait for actual account abuse to occur in such a situation; I'd consider them compromised accounts if the valid passwords were publicly and prominently available, even for just a few minutes. If I were able to, I would temporarily desysop them all after determining the passwords were valid, and then, once the passwords were changed to more secure ones (assuming they were achieved by guessing and not hacking), resysop. But you're right, such a scenario is very unlikely to involve either of us (even if it were to occur, which in itself is pretty unlikely). I asked Q19 to determine if there was a situation when you would block indefinitely without warning, and I was happy with that part of your response. I was just curious about the rest to learn how others would act in such a situation, so I asked here and not on your RfA. Sorry to waste your time (which is probably at a premium at the moment, with your RfA)! -kotra (talk) 16:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Consensus having been reached at WP:RFA, and the prescribed period of time having elapsed, I've set the admin flag for your account. Please be careful not to bite the newcomers, and consider that blocking and nonroutine page protection are the most frequent sources of conflict for new admins. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 15:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• Whoo! Congrats! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
• About time! Hope you enjoy the buttons – I know you'll do great things with them. Congratulations. haz (talk) 15:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
• Well done. BTW, you know the guys who said adminship isn't a trophy? They're wrong. Here's yours. Stifle (talk) 15:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

  

  • Anyone who says it isn't a trophy must not have worked hard enough for it, that's all. :D Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
• Congrats! Aditya ^α _ß 16:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
• Congratulations from me, too. Useight (talk) 20:48, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Breaking the formatting style, purely because I can. Congrats, I thought that RFA would never end :) Steve Crossin ^Talk/_{Help us mediate!} 21:44, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
    • The first two felt longer. :P Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

• Knew you would make it. BTW your margin was larger than mine. :) ++Lar: t/c 22:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
  • That's 'cuz I'm way cooler than you, duh. ;) Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
• Way to go, International Man of Mystery StarM 02:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
• \o/. Chop chop now! -- Luk ^talk 15:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm scrambling to figure out all these new tools! I took off for over a day, and now I have my work cut out for me. Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

An overdue honour for you my friend. You should have been given the mop on your first go around. But, as I've always said... never dwell on the "what if"... just look ahead to the "what now" You will be a fine administrator. Take care and have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 15:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Enigma^msg 15:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. Here is the admin T-shirt for you. You'll look handsome in the T-shirt, and you'll get more attention from pretty ladies. :-)

For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Congrats* Syn 20:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I award thee this mop and bucket!

Abce2|AccessDenied 18:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

\o/ - Dank (push to talk) 19:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Shubinator (talk) 23:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Congrats, it's well deserved.--Giants27 (t|c) 00:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Ditto on the congrats. I think what finally did it for you was getting away from my talkpage :-). (There's more truth in that than I like to admit...:0( Keeper | 76 02:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm still there in spirit! Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It's ABOUT TIME! ~*Hugs*~ I'm so happy for you. Congratulations, my dear, you have earned it! Ariel♥Gold 10:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS! long overdue! Cheers!--It's me...Sallicio!^{${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$} 17:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations. Well done!!! Alio The Fool 19:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello my friend. As you know I have been on the road for the past couple of days. I have a few short hours back at my desk which gives me just enough time to comment in relation to the following link that shows Australian and United States relations have been further confirmed following your successful posting to this esteemed position for which I was lucky enough to be the nominator. I note your fellow countryman and my co-nominator has added his congratulations above. Thus, formally my congratulations on your success also and I raise my glass to your achievements at the same time passing on my best wishes for your successful application of the authority bestowed. I think our recently departed Swedish speaking English friend would also be most pleased. Enough with my tongue in cheek. Cheers and see you on the hustings.--VS ^talk 10:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, the irony. One of the articles I edited a lot was this one. Enigma^msg 05:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep I know hence my tongue in cheek comment.--VS ^talk 07:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I never made the connection. Clever parallel drawn right there. Enigma^msg 07:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you ready to take you an additional role? Or you still need some more well-deserved rest? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm well-rested and raring to go. Where do I begin? Enigma^msg 05:05, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

You're in.[1] Here're the procedures, but I think you already know half of them since it's very similar to RFCU and SSP. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It was a long and hard-fought battle, and I guess the end result is what matters. I will endeavour to justify the support you have given me and the trust you have placed in me.

I especially want to thank my nominators from the three RfAs: VirtualSteve, Scarian, Seraphim, Lar, Useight, and OhanaUnited. I also want to thank all those who offered to nominate me at various times, although I often was unable to accept the offer. I'm sorry I can't mention all of you by name.

I'm sure some of you are glad that you no longer have to keep coming back and supporting. It was getting tiresome, I imagine. In the end, three was the charm, and now we see what lies ahead...

My situation this summer is not yet decided, but I will likely be online often. Feel free to let me know if I can assist you. Enigma^msg 04:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

... for the barnstar! Very kind. PamD (talk) 17:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

What's the purpose of allowing people to edit this page if you are going to block them if you don't like what they edit. The Radical SR8 does not belong in this list of cars. It's a track car & should be in a different class... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.239.200 (talk) 15:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You are edit-warring against the discussion on the talk page. Please stop. Enigma^msg 15:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll add my 2 cents in here. To the editor removing the SR8 lap times, I'll remind you that its time DOES belong there. It is a road-legal production car, therefore its time belongs in the list for road-legal production cars.

Please stop editting it just because you don't like the fact that it beats the Dodge Viper by half a minute. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.142.171 (talk) 00:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

1. Sorry! I'll reply to your e-mail soon. 2. Great to hear, best of luck. :) I'm going to guess that was a custom-made template... can't remember though, I usually used the standard ones. · AndonicO ^Engage. 14:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it might be one little dweeb on a dynamic IP. I can lock the article down against anonymous edits for a little while. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind...looks like you got it. If it's a local IP, I think a rangeblock would be more than warranted, especially if all the edits were specifically to this article. Requesting a block sure wouldn't hurt. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It appears that the edits have been going on for several months. This edit from March, before the current cited version that refers to this as a sham: [2]. Thanks for looking into this. Cheers, JNW (talk) 04:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I haven't ever run a rangeblock either, so I don't know how much help I can be. You might want to leave word on the AN board and see if an admin with CU rights weighs in. Good luck! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thank-you for semi protecting Laird, for that action I award you The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar RP459 (talk) 15:58, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Much appreciated. :) Enigma^msg 03:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

• There is Sockpuppet (Passportguy): He writes 1960 census, deletes 2007 census results, and many more vandalism. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Passportguy .

If you catch any other vandalism, please leave note in the above Sockpuppetry page. SemiColonInSentence (talk) 01:02, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Please look into this further. The edits done are identical to those of other banned users over the past few days. This user User:VivaNorthCyprus has used over a 83 sockpuppets over the past weeks. Passportguy (talk) 01:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

And since you said you had no way of knowing that this is a sockpuppet : The edits are identical to multiple easlier edits by confirmed sockpuppets. Even the edit summarries are identical. Please look at the page history of the respective pages. Passportguy (talk)

And finally I might also add that this sockpuppet has now been banned at Commons as well. Passportguy (talk) 01:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Blocked and rolled back here too by myself - it's just VivaNorthCyprus again and again and again - Peripitus (Talk) 02:39, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. I was not aware of the background. You are correct, Passportguy. Next time if you see this happening, I would recommend approaching either an admin familiar with this sockmaster or, more likely, going to SPI. Enigma^msg 03:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your protection of Kelly Clarkson. :) Her article needed it. Acalamari 01:38, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. That one was a tricky one. There was defamation, but some of the IP edits appeared to be in good faith. However, with a BLP, I always try to err on the side of protection. Good faith edits don't erase the harmful effects of BLP violations. Enigma^msg 03:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

You don't need any protection after July 1 because that's when he officially joins Real Madrid. Kingjeff (talk) 03:11, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but I typically don't set expiry dates (rather, I use 1 week, 2 weeks, etc.). I'll experiment with that now, since you insist. Enigma^msg 03:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not that I'm insisting. It's that there is no arguement about it after July 1. It's just that, all unregistered transfers such of Kaká's transfer to Real Madrid, will be official of that date. If that's the way you do your protection, than you're free to do it that way. Kingjeff (talk) 03:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey E_man. When you're not too busy... you might peek-a-boo at this article history. An 86.X IP (an IP sockpuppet range of genre-troll User:MetalKommandant) is being persistent in blanking content which, by his personal opinion, shouldn't be there. This despite numerous reverts from numerous other IPs and a few noble/ logged-in types. Pat semi-protected the page back in April (I miss him BTW). And William Connolly also semi-p'd the page for a month (expired Jn 11). Based on the edit history of 86.X it is my guess that he does not intend to give up his edit war. Perhaps he could have the whole summer to think about it if the page were semi-p'd for 3 months ( hint hint ) What-r-yer-thoughts? 156.34.142.110 (talk) 20:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Whoops, that t'wer me (like I needed to tell you that :-D ) Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 20:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I guessed that from the IP. :) I'd rather keep blocking his socks than semi-protect, though. I'll monitor the page. Enigma^msg 20:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Indirect link to you here. --VS ^talk 07:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

This relates to the above section. Just another IP of a known genre troll. You can tell from the AN/I post and the edits that it isn't a new innocent user. The trouble with this guy is that he quickly switches IPs when blocked. Enigma^msg 11:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

That's the way it read to me hence my asking him for his other accounts - notice the silence?--VS ^talk 11:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The IP is likely to be this guy who is a well known genre-troll and one of Sir Pat's old targets. This is an old socky category linked to Mr. Kommandant. link. You can see a very familiar 86.X as one of his aliaseses. The page that the IP edit wars over most has had a semi_p placed on it a few times before... more in the hope of sniffing out sock accounts that could bypass the prot more than anything else. So far he has always stuck to the IP and not used any accounts. In the end there are hundreds of trolls on the Wik worse than this WP:POINT pusher. But his habits make him one of those annoying little specks that Ol' Patty loved to swing the ban-hammer at. :-D Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 12:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

He's still switching IPs. This is getting tiresome. If this keeps up any longer, I'm going to have to semiprotect all his targets. I bet he starts another AN/I thread when that happens. "Admin abuse!" Enigma^msg 16:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Ahhh once a troll, always a troll. Good catch. He'll be happier back under his bridge. Tomorrow will be new IP once he reboots his modem... then it begins again. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

New IP for him already. Side-stepping his block to press WP:POINT. Still thinking about that semi-P? The Real Libs-speak politely 17:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

And now this IP. Still side stepping his block. The Real Libs-speak politely 18:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

And now another IP to sidestep his block. Semi-P awaits. The Real Libs-speak politely 19:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done But I left two reverts for you. :) Enigma^msg 19:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Perfectamundo... thank yoooo. Quick question... why'd you leave out 1971? The Real Libs-speak politely 19:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Waddya know? I'm already at AN/I. He's hoping no one realizes that he's been socking and edit-warring for months and that this "abusive admin" will be sanctioned by the community. Ugh. Enigma^msg 20:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

You might want to show up at the ANI thread and provide a little background info. Opinions seem to be a little against you, but I suspect it's because we're missing key pieces of information. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Not sure what he is reading over there??? Opinions are clearly in your favour. Killer Chihoohoo's statement is pretty blunt. There is a huge amount of wheel spinning wasting time over there and WAY too much AGF towards an obvious IP sockpuppet master. I shot a few links to help clear the wine into water. whine? The Real Libs-speak politely 15:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I replied. Floquenbeam is right. Most of the people commenting are critical of my actions because they are unfamiliar with MetalKommandant/whatever other names he uses. Enigma^msg 17:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

By this post the trolling IP user has announced his intentions to carry on with his edit war once the page prot has ended. Edit warring is one thing. Announcing it ahead of time requires the extension of the prot... if it were up to me. I have posted a response to the user to use the talk page first. His editing history shows that he does use the article talk page... however he doesn't use it correctly at all... rather than bring up a topic and waiting for a response he actually just goes ahead with blanking the content he personally dislikes and then uses the talk page as more a challenge to the editors who came to the consensus agreement to keep the content... a consensus which our little IP doesn't like. The Real Libs-speak politely 12:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my user page and anything else you happened to catch. It's really getting obnoxious now. Banning his 50th alt account for only a month is probably pointless though. DX927 (talk) 16:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I was on my way out this morning when I mass-reverted and blocked him. I didn't have the chance to check if it was a sock. I'll be happy to extend to indef. :) Please show me the socks, and I'll tag and block them. Thanks, Enigma^msg 17:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, NawlinWiki extended the block and tagged it. Enigma^msg 17:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Enigmaman. Cheers, JNW (talk) 14:06, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Enigmaman/Archives/2009. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic WP:ANI#Misuse of admin powers. Thank you. EdJohnston (talk) 20:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for watching over the Roblox article. That is really appreciated.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 21:59, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

There are plenty of us who monitor the 2009 article. It's confirmed now that Jackson died anyway. I request that you unprotect it, well at least so experienced editors can edit it. Thanks. --Tocino 22:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

See this. When those protections are lifted, another admin can lift this one as well. Enigma^msg 22:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

As you saw, I moved it to semi per the decision regarding the Michael Jackson article. Enigma^msg 00:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick update on WP:RFPP; beating me to the punch on getting the protection information updated there. Best, --TeaDrinker (talk) 00:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of article "Andreas Klamm"

Dear Sir !

PLEASE tell us why important information about a FRENCH-German journalist, broadcast journalist and author have been deleted.

Copyright owner of this text is Andrew P. Harrod and MJB Mission News, ISSN 1999-8414, www.radiotvinfo.org

Andreas Klamm is a FRENCH-GERMAN author of seven books, founder of three magazines (international), TV, radio and television producer since 1984 and a member of International Federation of Journalists, IFJ Bruessel, Belgium.

The PROOF has been provided and you will find on also other proof on www.amazon.de, www.amazon.fr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibsliberty (talk • contribs) 20:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Because it was copied directly off of another website. I see you went ahead and recreated it without a response. Enigma^msg 21:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Tx for the block of 65.202.145.244. As only his last edit was brought to your attention, I want to make you aware that the three prior to that were also vandalism. It may not change the length of your block of him, but in the event that it does I thought you should know. I've flagged it on his talk page and reverted, but that account has been a waste of good peoples' valuable time, and an ugly vandal of bios of living people ... not a good thing.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:28, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

You mean IP, not account. If it was an account, I'd have blocked indefinitely. With IPs, we generally keep escalating the block, assuming that it appears to be static (even sometimes with dynamic IPs). 31 to 72 to two weeks is as much as I can justify in this case. If it comes back again with vandalism to similar articles, I would likely block for three months. Enigma^msg 01:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Understood. And yes ... I meant IP ... didn't realize that one can't use the phrase account w/an IP address the same as with a regisered user ... but tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:36, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

This IP is back to editing in the exact same fashion that got him blocked for a week back on the 19th o June. And.. if you need a bit o history... There are lots of archived posts back on Pat's talk page related to the floating 90.X IP range and the constant reverts req'd where his contributions are concerned. If you look at the pages he frequents you will see previous IP addys that Pat swung a long term ban-hammer on. The user just moves on to another 90.X IP and keeps right on truckin' Any assistance would be mucho appreciatus. :-) The Real Libs-speak politely 15:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Reblocked. Should I revert the edits he made? Enigma^msg 16:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sure. Some might have eensy bits of validity... but the regular editors of those pages will up up and fix. You art an bootiful adminutrador. PS... since you've got the hammer in your hand Another IP back off a 3RR block and trolling the same page he blocked on in the first place As always... many thank yoos! The Real Libs-speak politely 16:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I think Pat would say to mass-revert, but I can't do it here. The first few I looked at aren't vandalism. Anyway, I reblocked the second IP. You're lucky my RfA was successful. :P Enigma^msg 16:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

NOooo.... Wikipedia is luck that your RfA was successful! You should have been crowned on the first go around. The Real Libs-speak politely 16:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I miss Pat :-( 86.3.61.125 (talk) 22:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Me too. :-( By the way, keep an eye out for MetalKommandant and his calcavade of socks. I don't think we've seen the last of him... Enigma^msg 03:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)