Wikipedia

User talk:Deskana/Archive 27

< User talk:Deskana
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Deskana in topic Foswiki deletion
Learn more about this page
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


more personal info outting

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

it looks like the sock puppet who posted my personal info wasn't done when he was blocked, as he has reposted it at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shir-e-Iran..your help is appreciated. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 23:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorted. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 23:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Rollback permission

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Wow, that was quick. Cheers - Chrism would like to hear from you 00:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

So quick, it had already been done by someone else when I said I'd done it. :-) --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 00:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to hear

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

you're unwell. If it's not inappropriate to do so, I wish you better. If it is inappropriate, then I wish you as well as can be expected. --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. :-) --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 13:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Myownusername

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I am concerned about the block of the above user. He was blocked indefinitely as troll. There was a claim that he was a sock, but there was no investigation that revealed the sock. If the user was blocked as a troll, then it is improper to simply indef block them, especially when they asked for a second chance. If he was blocked as an abusive sock, we need to know who the sock master was as the master account would receive a block (but not an indef block like the sock account). If this was simply an old user using a new name, there is a precedence set forth that they could use a new name in certain situations. Can we please have this resolved in some other manner besides just letting an indef block for "trolling" stand while there are claims about sockpuppetry and other things left, and the only action he did was an action performed by a user who isn't deemed as warranting a block for trolling? Sigh. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I did perform a checkuser on the account and found nothing. However, checkuser is not capable of proving innocence in that manner. Most internet users could easily evade the kind of check that has to be performed on an account like that. Unfortunately I can't elabourate more on that. That said, the account was clearly being used for trolling, so I have no problem with the block. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 20:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:42, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Freedom fighters

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You may be interested in [1]. I've blocked the account.-gadfium 23:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I'm not sure what we're doing about this at the minute. I don't think there's really anything we can do. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 10:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

shared ip

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I might just use my account so that the other guy on this IP does get me fully blocked.--144.131.75.14 (talk) 10:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Problem solved, then. Happy editing. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 10:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

WP:OP

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Greetings, I'm just trying to get a current feel for who is still active in the project and if anybody would object to cleaning out inactive users of the verified user list. Thank you for your time. Q T C 03:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

You can remove me, if you like. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 14:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Regarding User:Corneadoc

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. Corneadoc (talk · contribs) came into #wikipedia-en-help today asking that an SPI case he was involved in be reviewed again, and that he was not given time to defend himself. I don't know much about SPI but I realize that a confirmed CU leaves little hope for him. He claims he has only used one account. He just requested that I leave you a message imploring you to look into it again. I'm not vouching or advocating for him in any way, as a disclaimer. I'm just being kind and posting you a message like he requested. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:55, 20 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the notice. The user has e-mailed me, and I will hear them out. I am looking forward to her convoluted explanation of why the technical evidence is wrong. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 14:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

LHvU RFA's closure

Latest comment: 15 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Really not important but there's a silly typo in your closing statement: "This will hopefully reslove your doubts". Reslove? Yintaɳ  00:38, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I thinks you need to expandify you're vocabulaire. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 00:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
I bet the new messages bar had you worried for a second there, eh? :) Majorly talk 00:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
I was thinking "I said raise the concerns on WP:BN", actually. Though for this concern, my talk page was appropriate. :-) --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 00:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
That's what I htougth thought. Yintaɳ  00:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Oh, and sorry for even more notifications but 'intendeded' and 'enouraged' are misspelled as well. ;-) -- Mentifisto 12:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. I was very tired and running on caffeine. I blame that :-p --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 13:06, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

ThankSpam

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
My RfA

Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 154/39/23. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record.
I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

~~~~~

 
Well, back to the office it is...

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Happy Wiki-birthday!  
Guess what? You've been on Wikipedia exactly four years today! Thanks for all you've done around here, and all you continue to do. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 20:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Wow, thanks. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 22:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Block review

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please see User_talk:General_Cui#Unblock. MBisanz talk 05:48, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Matt. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 09:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:28, 9 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Question

Latest comment: 14 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Since my opposes are discounted anyway as stated, am I allowed to still post them or will that just open me up for the same kind of ban talks like DougsTech? If I move them to neutral and state that I would strongly oppose but keep them in that area, would that protect my ability to have a say? I would like to know how to proceed so I can avoid the unseemly discussions that have plagued the WT:RFA page in the past. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've extended this query, but it should be obvious that I value your opinion over many, many others, so I would like to hear from you in the matter. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
You can always have your say. Your !vote is judged on the merits of the argument you make. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:53, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
And I have been informed that quite a few Bureaucrats feel that my argument lacks all merit. Therefore, I would like an answer on how to proceed from one of the most respected individuals in the area. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'll get back to you shortly. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 21:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

If you want, you can also email me a response. Feel free to take your time. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
In my opinion, the main reason that people had a problem with DougsTech's votes were because they were blanket opposes, and not specific to the candidate in question. That's certainly the biggest problem that I had. "Too many administrators" is easily interpreted as meaning "Even if you'd be the best admin in the world, I do not want you to be an administrastor". From a quick review of some of your recent votes, there is no such blanket opposition in your votes. They are specific, and irrespective of whether I agree with them or not, I see no problem with you casting them. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 21:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oversight

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

There are a lot of personal details and telephone numbers in prior revisions of Methodist High School (q.v.) that I think would benefit from removal. Uncle G (talk) 15:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Quite busy right now but will definitely take a look at this later tonight for you. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 20:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've just done 27 supressions but there are still more and I can't do them right now. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 09:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 08:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC) Reply

Meetup

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

A meetup is taking place in Manchester if you are interested. Majorly talk 18:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ooooh. I'll take a look. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 22:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply
Do it! I hope you can drink this time! Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:36, 30 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 24 August 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Application of WP:NLT

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

User:Scott MacDonald was not blocked for issuing this legal threat. Should he have been blocked? If you say "no, that would have been insane", please have a look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive560#Legal threats by Milomedes, and weigh in as you deem appropriate.  --Lambiam 19:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

See AN thread

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You were a checkuser involved in the investigation of Landmark Education related socks at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Eastbayway. As such, I thought you should be aware of Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Proposed_topic_ban_on_Landmark_Education_SPAs. Cirt (talk) 12:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

History merge?

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was wondering how this would work. I edited Charizard to article status at Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Charizard, and then C+P'ed the new page there. Is there any way my history of working on WP:Charizard could be merged over to Charizard? Its about 20 revisions. I was also wondering if this could be done with Jynx and Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Jynx. Thanks. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Has someone fixed this for you already? If not, I can look into it. --Deskana, (talk) 23:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 31 August 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 16:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your opinion

Latest comment: 14 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Deskana: since you are the only other administrator on Navajo wiki, I am contacting you with a grave concern. I am currently working to translate most of the system messages into Navajo on transwiki.net (and have requested adminship for this purpose on Navajo wiki). While working through the list of internal system-messages and building a table of proposed changes that I intend to publicly present before implementing them, it has come to my attention that the other admin, User:Node ue, included a rather misleading link into the localization of the site.

Under every edit-window, a link pops up that says "contact us", yet I now see that it leads directly to node.ue@gmail.com

I do not think that a single administrator should be allowed to receive all messages on his/her private email-account, esp. when it purports to be "contact us," e.g. wikipedia.org. The way I understand it, wikipedia and Node_ue are two different entities and one should not represent the other. Moreover, wikipedia isn't owned by a single person.

Do with this information as you like, and feel free to contact me or reply. Your talkpage is on my watchlist. Thank you so much. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 13:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ooh, I forgot about that wiki. Yes, I do think that's a problem. It definitely shouldn't be that way. Can you speak to the person and ask them to change it? --Deskana, (talk) 23:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
I have become an admin/sysop for a month and changed it myself. I have already translated a quarter of the interface and will try to use that given time-frame efficiently. (Also cleaned up quite a backlog of deletion-requests).

If you won't see any abuse of those powers over that time-period, would you support my becoming a permanent sysop? (The reason why I was only given a month is because no-one responded to my post at the Community Portal :(...) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sure I would. :) --Deskana, (talk) 02:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
So do I have to make that request over at the meta-wiki people again, or can another admin (like -- you) change that? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
I left a quick note on meta. Incidentally, I've worked on this wiki with the steward that carried out your request, so I don't expect there will be any problems with you getting permanent admin status! --Deskana, (talk) 02:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks!

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for the suggestions, i plan on doing that. -- ♠ Dwayneflanders' Talk 23:17, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism Level

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

How do i know what level i am for moderating vandalism, because i have done alot. I just rolledback a page 30 minutes ago, because someone posted something inappropiate on a page. -- ♠ Dwayneflanders' Talk 23:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply


When i tried to apply to be rollbacker they said i need more experience, how do i know where i am with my experience now?-- ♠ Dwayneflanders' Talk 23:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I am not asking, i was just wondering where am i with this.-- ♠ Dwayneflanders' Talk 23:46, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Peter damian, Mr Kohs, et al

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Look at this... [2] They are meat puppeting for banned users using WR as coordination. I think this user should be banned. Triplestop x3 17:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oversight?

Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, would it possible for you to oversite my talk page to remove some Haggr vulgarity? Its had over 5000 edits so regular admins can't delete the history. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've done it for you. --Deskana (talk) 01:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, greatly appreciated. :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:21, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Hate to have to bug you again, but apparently the first admin who protect my talk page only did a very short span, so its been hit again with the same stuff. If you have a moment, would appreciate more cleaning. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 07:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Not a problem. I've done it. --Deskana (talk) 16:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks again :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 16:29, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Foswiki deletion

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Deskana, I'm just wondering about the [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foswiki|Foswiki deletion]. Regardless of whether or not there was a claim of notability at the time, and regardless of whether there was a flood of newbies, I think there is (now) notability - Google websearch currently returns 132,000 hits. Google news also returns hits, eg http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/319313/five_enterprise_open_source_wiki_apps_watch Regards, Ben Aveling 12:31, 25 September 2009 (UTC) example struck - was not mentioned in body of article, only in commentsReply

If you feel like you can create a worthwhile article out of it, go right ahead. :-) --Deskana (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Does that suffice? --Kalyxo (talk) 07:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Firstly, I get the feeling you're involved with Foswiki? You should take a look at WP:COI. Secondly, it's not for me to decide whether or not it gets recreated or not simply because I deleted the original article. I see you posted the same message on the DRV, so I'll them all decide. --Deskana (talk) 11:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:31, 30 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Rollbacker permission request

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi, I would like to request rollback permission. I regularly undo any vandalism I come upon but have not, in the past, regularly done any vandal patrolling. I think rollback is a good option, especially for some vandalism where the vandal should not become memoralized in the history of an article even if their vandalism was removed from the article itself. Cheers. N2e (talk) 17:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Kww 3 - Bureaucrat discussion

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kww 3/Bureaucrat discussion

I've opened a bureaucrat chat in relation to this RfA as I don't think the outcome is particularly clear cut. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your input. WJBscribe (talk) 20:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've weighed in. Thanks for informing me. I'll keep my eye on it to see if there's more I can add. --Deskana (talk) 08:03, 19 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

RE:

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

That was a mistake, i have no idea what they are talking about!--Dwayneflanders ☺ 18:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Deskana/Archive_27&oldid=1166515755"