User talk:Tnxman307/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

Deleted Wiki Page

Hi,

I'm writing to find out why the page I last created about BULLETT Media was deleted. I'd appreciate your response. I'm new to wikipedia and not understanding what I should do differently about it.

Thanks, Hslathan (talk) 19:31, 2 August 2011 (UTC)HL

I'm sorry, but the article you posted did not indicate why it was notable enough to warrant inclusion. Please review our guide to writing your first article, as that may assist you. You may want to create a sandbox where you can work on developing a draft before moving to the main article space. TNXMan 19:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

And according to the deletion log it was also unambiguously promotional. – ukexpat (talk) 19:34, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Questions about recent deletion of my article

Hi Tnxman307,

You recently deleted my article titled "1DegreeBio". This is a not-for-profit organization and intends to serve as a bridge between scientists and companies. I am a graduate student and has no affiliations with this organization. Therefore, it is not my intention to advertise it for profits, rather I am raising awareness for research community to use it as a tool to make their research life easier. If it is possible, could you please restore the page so as to allow me to make appropriate amendments? Or please advise on the reason for the deletion and I can revise it accordingly. I appreciate your help very much.

Weizhang8182 —Preceding undated comment added 19:39, 2 August 2011 (UTC).

I'm sorry, but the article you posted was an advertisement, which Wikipedia does not permit. I would suggest continuing to work in your sandbox, here. You should also read our guide to writing your first article and how to use reliable independent sources. TNXMan 19:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Block of 84.154.36.163

• Hey Tnxman307, please enlighten me as the block log stated that it was blocked the first time round as a blocked proxy (blocked for 2 months!), what does that mean? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It means ProcseeBot identified the IP as a open proxy a couple of years back. Editing from behind open proxies is not permitted on Wikipedia. TNXMan 13:53, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

• Noted, and the 31 hours block you imposed is a marked difference from the 2 months that was imposed by the bot... how come? Sorry, if I may ask this respectfully. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Nah, it's no problem. Proxies usually aren't left open for periods much longer than a year or two- the IPs get reassigned, a network admin figures out they've got vulnerabilities and close their ports, etc. etc.. So I doubt this is still a proxy and blocked it as I would a regular IP. TNXMan 14:04, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

• Now I understand... apologies, newbie here taking part-time degree on network security, hence the need to ask question when I come across something I don't understand. Thanks again! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Unblock on hold

There is an unblock request at User talk:158.169.131.14. You blocked the IP address as a proxy in April. The unblock request says "This is an European Commission proxy and definitely not an open one", and everything I have been able to find fits that claim. However, I am checking with you rather than just unblocking in case you know of evidence that I have not unearthed. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:24, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Done and done. Cheers! TNXMan 13:16, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Just one week?

I'm puzzled by the duration of your block on User:Vikingman69, but I suppose you have good reasons! --Orlady (talk) 21:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I have no problem with a longer block- I just thought one week was a good starting point. Please feel free to change it if you think warrants longer. Judging by their recent edits, I doubt they'll be back. Cheers! TNXMan 00:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Socking Jacobga

I see that you have further blocked Jacobga for sockpuppetry / block evasion. He has now created another account while still blocked The.aviation.expert (talk · contribs). --Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 08:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I did not see this earlier. It looks like the editor has agreed to edit under one account only. If there are further issues, please let me know. TNXMan 13:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Kentisbeare

I have restored the article on Kentisbeare which you deleted. I feel that it is a sufficiently large place (pop 905) and notable (E.M. Delafield lived there, the church is grade I listed) that it should be kept. Please let me know if you disagree and why.--NHSavage (talk) 12:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I deleted it as a creation of a banned editor- I have no issue with someone else recreating it. Cheers! TNXMan 13:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Great, I guessed it was something like that, but I thought it was only polite to mention it here.--NHSavage (talk) 17:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Nokhaiz Kaunpal

I'm really sorry to bother you with this, but as the editor who declined Nokhaiz Kaunpal's unblock requests, I thought maybe you can advise. At that unblock request, Nokhaiz Kaunpal made some pretty strong personal accusations against me. When he claimed I am reverting his edits from some ideological reason, I sat quiet. After all, quite a number of other editors agreed the articles he created are inappropriate, and I have a long history of actually protecting edits on such subjects. But now he claims I actually created an account and made it look like he was a sockpuppeteer. Should I do something with this personal accusation? Best regards, and thanks. --Muhandes (talk) 18:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

This is getting really annoying, he created another sock. --Muhandes (talk) 14:24, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. It looks like HelloAnnyong has blocked the account. If there are more issues, please let me know. TNXMan 13:20, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yaya222010

Hey. Can you elaborate on how Axxmans (talk · contribs) factors into the rest of the case? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 02:07, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Feedback on a deleted page

Hi,

After having edited several articles on wikipedia (fr and en) during the past few months, I wanted to create an article for the open source software Acceleo. It appears that one of your colleague has deleted the article for this software almost five years ago. I don't know what was the content of this article at the time yet, from what I can see in the deletion talk, it used to be too small and too flattering. Someone tried to recreate the article about 2 years ago with what seems to be more or less the same content since you have deleted it for the following reasons: "(G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion)".

One year ago, I have created a brand new version of the french Wikipedia article for Acceleo (which was quite small too at the time), visible here that I am keeping up to date and that I'm planning to improve again and I wanted to know if I could recreate the English version of the Acceleo article by translating this brand new french version. I didn't fill a request for undeletion and I've contacted you first since it seems to be there to get the old content back and I don't care about this out of date content of poor quality and since you deleted it 2 years ago because someone seems to have recreated it poorly, I wanted to talk about it with you first.

Kind regards,

Dyhorus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyhorus (talk • contribs) 13:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

It shouldn't be a problem. One thing I would suggest is adding more independent reliable sources. I only see one listed on the French article. If you think it would be easier, you may want to work on the article in a sandbox before moving it to the articlespace. I hope this helps. TNXMan 14:02, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your very quick answer, I'll improve the french article with more content and more reliable source and after that I'll start the translation in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dyhorus (talk • contribs) 14:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Bangladesh Student League

Just pointing out that you made a softblock (ABD) on User:Bangladesh Student League, although {{spamusernameblock}} is meant for hardblocks (ACB). — Waterfox ^~talk~ 14:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Scibaby

Hi, thanks for rooting out some more Scibaby socks. He's a real menace, and I suspect the author of even more trouble than is credited to him. Do you have any idea's what more can be done about him? Are there any options in the blocking filtering direction that can be tried and does anyone know more of the history here. What's his purpose is he just a nut-case or being paid or what?--IanOfNorwich (talk) 16:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if there's much more to do than simply blocking and tagging socks as they come up. S/He is on a very active range(s) and edits a wide variety of articles. I'm not sure who has a lot of experience with them, but digging through the SPI archive may yield some useful information. TNXMan 16:20, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Vrghs jacob

Thanks for the quick turnaround on that. You had marked Nilnone as confirmed with the other two users, but this one's a longstanding account (and didn't come up in the earlier CU) and editing interests are completely different....I'm just going to leave that one unblocked, that ok by you? Also, could you take some admin action on the Tobias Conradi sock? No uninvolved admin has swung by to the case and he's just canvassing around. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

There's very little doubt that Nilnone=GovSevt. However, if you want to leave them unblocked, that's your call. As for Tobias, I was just thinking the same thing myself. Cheers! TNXMan 17:51, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I spoke too soon, I only saw the article list, but then after look at the actual edits it's the same pattern = copyvios and editing style. I've blocked all three now. This is one of the most tedious CCI-socking that I've seen! cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 17:59, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

yes...

if you let me time to work before running a revert....--Dia^ (talk) 18:53, 10 August 2011 (UTC) ...I now added the references. By the way, you left me exactly 4 min before doing a revert. Learn please a bit of patience....it does help sometimes--Dia^ (talk) 19:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Mr Gearloose

I'm concerned about this edit - both socking and perhaps another attempt at outing? Do we really want this account to remain unblocked? Dougweller (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I left it unblocked as it appears to be mostly abandoned (one edit this month, three in the past two months). I have no problem, though, if you feel the situation warrants a block there too. Cheers! TNXMan 15:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Given the outing issue, I've blocked the account. Dougweller (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. If there are more issues, please let me know. TNXMan 20:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Distinguished administrators! Back in Åre I find these remarkable deliberations and dubious measures taken. Socking identified indeed and others have acted accordingly already. Outing is not an issue here. Who is interested in just harassing User:VanishedUser314159? He is not supposed to edit wp no more, and is probably the author of even more trouble than is credited to him.

Why are you not rooting out some more VanishedUser socks and stop harassing me? / User:Mr Gearloose92.33.151.10 (talk) 13:56, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Waithe

I have reconstituted this previously deleted article if you care to take a look. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 11:05, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem. I deleted it as a creation by a banned user- no problem with someone else recreating it. Cheers! TNXMan 13:38, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Sock IP you just blocked

I just wanted to bring this to your attention: the IP told me that the reason they were blocked editing anonymously was due to a lost password, lying about past blocks; now he has removed my comment telling him so, under the pretense of "non-admin comment" (for spite, because I called him out on using admin tags to show false consensus), tampering with evidence again. A few more stacks of lies can be found on (from the very top of) StryoFome's talk page. Indeed, some people should not be allowed to edit Wikipedia within a 10 mile radius, simply due to complete lack of ethics. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 18:29, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

You may be right, but they are allowed to remove comments from their talk page (see WP:BLANKING). In any case, we can keep an eye on them. TNXMan 13:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

regarding subject deletion

Gooday :)

What will it take to have my article permanently here on Wikipedia? It appears that my content was deleted. Still puzzled as to why since the website you are referencing to i own (including all content).

Kindly advise. thank you, Claudio Debonaire Vigilante (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

You'll have to be more specific- the only edit that you've made with this account is the message you posted here. To which article were you referring? TNXMan 13:19, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI

I've {{softerblock}}ed Brazosport College (talk · contribs), not having seen your comment. Apologies and feel free to overturn if you believe it appropriate to do so. Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 14:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem here, but you may want to leave a note for them- give it a more personal touch than the standard block note. TNXMan 14:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 14:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hey can you keep my page up i wanted to show my friends as a joke.thanx if you can if not darn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swag Duh (talk • contribs) 14:33, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place for jokes like that. TNXMan 14:36, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Pur Gum

re this comment: You didn't look at their deleted contributions. Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I did (well, it wasn't deleted at the time of my comment). The entire edit consisted of {{underconstruction}}, with no mention of anything else. TNXMan 15:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Deaf Professor's page

Hi Tnxman307!

My name is Bastien Bournet Charrier and I am the owner of the netlabel "The BBC Music". I started to offer a service to artists I'm working with that consist in the creation of their Wikipedia encyclopedic page. Most artists collaborating with The BBC Music are emerging artists, which mean there is not a lot of information on them out there on the Internet. The page might grow along with time passing by, as more informations from the artists are provided to me and relates to events, acts, gigs, honors, etc.

I am not offering this service with the intention to use Wikipedia as a propaganda or advertisement media, the main goal under that service is to provide fans and listeners with more accessible and widespread information about the artist.

The line is thin between ads and information. Ads tend to have a selling purpose when information has obviously an informative purpose. As the page I've written does not intend to improve some sort of sells, traffic or whatever, it shouldn't be seen as an advertisement.

Maybe you can give me some tips so that kind of confusion doesn't happen anymore in the future?

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely, Bastien Bournet-Charrier aka TheBBCMusic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebbcmusic (talk • contribs) 16:09, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia should only have articles on notable musicians- that is, musicians that have received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. You should also read this page as well, as I believe it pertains to you directly. TNXMan 16:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Solid State PLC

Why are you repeatedly deleting my article for differing reasons? The article is incomplete and I am trying to reference it and be factual and yet you've removed it as "(G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)" when the page is no different from any of the other 100 companies on the AIM London Stock Exchange list. jjakaalbinoboy 16:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Umm, notability? WP:PROMO? If you want to write a WP:USERSPACEDRAFT and then have some good editors peruse it, go ahead. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:05, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Public policy school

What makes you say Carleton University's School of Public Policy and Administration is non-notable? That's ludicrous. The school is located in Canada's capital and is the oldest, most well-established public policy school in the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.198.223.108 (talk) 19:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Unless they have an article on Wikipedia, they shouldn't be linked in the list. TNXMan 19:51, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

So just because a school doesn't have a specific article for it on Wikipedia means that it isn't notable? That's bullshit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.151.170.148 (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

It's irrational hardasses like you who really make Wikipedia a worse place. Carleton is a perfectly legit, NOTABLE public policy school in Canada. It hasn't gotten around to creating a separate article for its policy school yet, but that is no reason to deprive people looking for knowledge on public policy schools from knowing about it. If the lack of a link is bothering you, then an external link should suffice: http://www1.carleton.ca/sppa/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.151.170.148 (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Notability on Wikipedia has a different meaning than the dictionary definition. You can read more about Wikipedia's definition on this page. Articles that are lists should only contain links to Wikipedia articles, not external links. Finally, Carleton should not create its own page, as that is a conflict of interest. I hope this helps. TNXMan 13:09, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

TNXMAN, the usual criterion is having a p. or being obviously eligible for one, not having a page. DGG ( talk ) 15:36, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Deletetion of Article about CSWI

I understand what you claim your reason to be for deleting the article about CSWI of D.C. but seeing as how the institute itself has been shutdown due to lack of funding it is quite obviously not an advertisement and only a resource of information for those who have attended the institute who want to be able to point to something on the internet describing their education. I strongly believe this article should be left on Wikipedia as a reference for the large number of graduates of this institution who wish to have a publicly accessible resource for their alma mater. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LukeWhosTalking (talk • contribs) 15:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I left the editor a long discussion of what is needed for an article. BTW, it might have been more friendly to have tagged first, and let some other admin delete, even for such an unsatisfactory article. The deletion notice on the user talk page gives more of an opportunity for inaction with new contributors--even a chance to fix it. DGG ( talk ) 15:40, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, DGG. TNXMan 15:43, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Reg the History of South Asia template blocks

that you mentioned at ANI, I've mentioned the two masters that I track who actively use that template, are these the same? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I've tagged Tradeupper88, Bengaliindian and Just4edit as Dewan socks; are the others like American55, Fixit1989, Just4me44, Sikhmanlovesedit, Gyrobest845, Panicsense178 etc also from the same farm? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Apparently quite a few of us tackling this, there's also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dewan357‎ which has a case. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 12:31, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Please help

Please help me sir, i think he is a vandalist and aims to crash wikipedia [[1]]

Urmate #a small guy (talk) 20:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks (but...)

Ok, first of all - thanks so much for showing me that - it'll come in handy for sure and it's the first time I realised a special page (dunno technical term) linked to toolserver... but (and you knew a but was coming) ... that only seems to be showing article space. See the thing is I created a tiny essay (hardly that.. hardly a precis frankly) a wee bit back which I could pretty much regurgitate the content of (essentially it said - if lots of people tell you you're drunk, lie down) in wikispace but I cannot for the life of me work out where I put it. In this respect it is very much like my car keys

Regards,

Egg Centric 20:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

CU linking IP to username

I am aware from a past SPI that CU does not usually link IPs to usernames, although in that instance the connection was made per WP:DUCK. Is there ever an exception? What if someone has admitted to being the IP? Sure, IPs can be (usually are) dynamic but if stylistic evidence can be added into the equation then would this count as an exception? I am not prepared to say more on-wiki (for what I hope are obvious reasons) but can be emailed if you need more info. Obviously, I would file an SPI but there is no point in wasting everybody's time if it is a foregone conclusion. - Sitush (talk) 00:16, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

If someone claims an IP, a checkuser can confirm the link (since the checkuser wouldn't be revealing private information). If there is sensitive info you don't wish to discuss here, I would recommend emailing the functionaries team at functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org. I hope this helps. TNXMan 14:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Justification for blocking 8192 IP addresses

Hello. You recently blocked the IP block 24.205.64.0/19 from editing; I'm one of the users affected by such a block. Would you mind pointing me to the edits that justified such a wide-ranging block? Or just a few of them, if there's a whole bunch on a wide range of individual IPs. Adam Berman (talk) (contribs) 05:32, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

This range was blocked because it is used by a prolific vandal. The block was set to anonymous only, allowing logged in users, like yourself, to edit normally. TNXMan 14:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Decline

Could you explain this diff? It seems to me that although it was a minor case, it's worth keeping an eye on. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 15:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Pocock is a common surname, so given "Erinkpocock", it's probably Erin K. Pocock, and thus not a violation. TNXMan 15:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Dewan357

Please take a look at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Dewan357 when you get a chance. I think it's bigger than one checkuser can handle. Hell, maybe firewalling New Jersey is the only solution.—Kww(talk) 12:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Replied there. TNXMan 14:28, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

TNXMan, could you take another look please, I just blocked Proudtobeindian007‎ another sock, this one was autoconfirmed months ago (listed by Sodabottle on the SPI a few minutes back). cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Commented there. TNXMan 18:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

One more to check: Abrsinha (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Edits are limited in scope, but kicked active again today editing only his own user pages for the first time, so there's a chance that he's working around an autoblock.—Kww(talk) 00:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I lied. One more: L435534l (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).—Kww(talk) 01:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly, those two accounts appear  Unrelated to each other and to Dewan357. TNXMan 01:46, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

That's why I asked before blocking ... close enough to be suspicious, but enough different that I wasn't willing to proceed without more. Thanks.—Kww(talk) 02:14, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

IP vandalism

Hi Tnxman307. About the just closed User:Chaosname case [2], the anonymous IP mentioned in it has just reverted right back to the socks' edits (c.f. [3], [4]). I therefore believe, at the very least, that there's some meatpuppeting going on. Can you please have a look? Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind; another admin took care of it. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OSUHEY

Hey. Just letting you know that I've relisted this SPI case for clarification to see if there's a match against previous socks. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 23:49, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks like Keegan confirmed it. Cheers! TNXMan 13:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Quique Flores stuff

Hi there TNX, VASCO from Portugal here,

if this stuff about User:Scoelho86 - a user who even messaged me telling me how supportive he was about me fighting the socks - is correct (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Xxxx693), i guess i'll lose whatever shred of mental sanity i have, or leave WP for good...What are (is) these people (person) playing at?

Attentively, many thanks for the support and assistance - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:41, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

WTF

Why did you delete My Website Posting.Of coarse i am going to include the link to the site I am doing the wiki info about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmarryatt (talk • contribs) 17:52, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

What you're doing is spamming your website by adding it to other articles and trying to create a separate article. Please note, this is not permitted, as Wikipedia does not allow advertising. TNXMan 18:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

E-mail

Just a quick e-mail. Courcelles 19:00, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet account of Arnoldxmidnight

Hi Tnxman307, sorry to bother you, but I wonder if you could take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelsy Davy (3rd nomination). A new editor Iamsam56 has popped up with a delete opinion here, with a very similar rationale as the other sockpuppets. The account was created a couple of hours ago, made a few minor edits, then came onto the AfD. I think there is a chance this is another sockpuppet account of Arnoldxmidnight. I'd appreciate your opinion. I may be being paranoid, but it does seem at least a little suspicious. Many thanks, Claviere (talk) 20:15, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. Blocked- thanks for catching this. TNXMan 20:27, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Just so you know...

This edit was not vandalism. The game does indeed use a modified Age of Empires III BANG engine, though the person who added that didn't do so perfectly. Regards, Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, my fault, then. Seeing someone add "Bang!" to an article, well, that triggered my spidey-sense. Cheers! TNXMan

Yea, this is probably the one case in which adding that to an article isn't vandalism :p Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Lewisistheone1991

Hi, I see you just blocked him as a sock of Dereks1x. A little while ago, I had filed an SPI charging that he might be a sock of PoliticianTexas. Could you make the appropriate notes at that SPI case, please? LadyofShalott 19:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm working on it- there's more going on here unfortunately. TNXMan 19:22, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your efforts! LadyofShalott 19:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Abating clever sockpuppetry?

Perhaps I used the wrong process or submitted the wrong evidence to obtain the assistance I seek? If I suspect that sock or meatpuppetry is being used to win edit wars on articles I edit, as indicated here, what is the best way to verify the problem and correct it, given that persistently testy & uninformative edit summaries accompany the behavior? FactStraight (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Just because a checkuser generally does not disclose connections between IPs and accounts does not mean that no action will be taken. Usually a patrolling admin will review the case, decide if one of the accounts is logging out to edit, and take action action from there. When account is  Stale, that simply means it has been so long since the account edited that the checkuser tool is no longer able to access their technical information. I hope this helps answer your question. TNXMan 20:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Sent you a mail! Hoping for your reply

Hello, Tnxman307. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Michaelg01101 (talk) 03:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

SPI re Prince jasim ali

I wanted to draw your attention to my late review of this SPI case, which I was asked to look at from a cross-wiki perspective. I think we as a checkuser team will need to develop a broader pool of knowledge about IPs and ISPs from the non-Western countries; I was surprised to discover what a small pool of IPs this particular country has. As I noted in my message on the SPI, I don't think there's an expectation that checkusers or SPI clerks routinely review cross-wiki contributions/activity when doing an SPI, but I've got a few tools that I've found helpful when doing some of these big-picture reviews. Risker (talk) 05:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Posted over there- thanks for bringing this to my attention. TNXMan 11:29, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Pro Source

Hi. I'm not sure why this was deleted. I don't have any links going to anything. I was actually building it as information following the lead of the wiki Nike page and the wiki Apple page. No harm intended, just trying to talk about the company without any links outside of Wikipedia. Can you undelete it? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProLarryH (talk • contribs) 14:43, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the page you added appeared to be advertising for the company (using phrases like "our strengths..."). This is not permitted. I would suggest reading our guide to writing your first article and working on the article in a sandbox in your userspace before moving it to the main article space. If you would like to do this, I can put the article in your userspace for you to work on. TNXMan 15:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I'll work in the sandbox and take out that kind of info. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProLarryH (talk • contribs)

You'll find the article at User:ProLarryH/Sandbox. I've also left you a message with some links that may help you. TNXMan 15:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I'm done for now but I believe I've made all the necessary changes. It is written in an unbiased, neutral way (I hope). Am I able to post it now? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProLarryH (talk • contribs) 16:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

In order for a company to have an article, it must have received significant coverage in independent reliable sources. You'll need to add this coverage to the article. You should also remove the last section about what logistics companies offer, since your article is about one specific company, not the industry as a whole. TNXMan 16:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)