User talk:Deskana/Archive 26

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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.


Betacommand Check

There was nothing wrong with how you handled the situation. Synergy 19:20, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. Most of the time from what I can see CUs simply report the results and leave it to others to decide what to do with them. Therefore you were bang on with your handling. ViridaeTalk 20:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. These are our best practices. Cool Hand Luke 21:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi there. You have email from me. It isn't extremely urgent, but I would appreciate it if you could take a look at it as soon as your duties and health permit. Thank you, NuclearWarfare (Talk) 22:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the e-mail. I'll handle that ASAP. --Deskana (talk) 23:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sluming it? :)

[1] Good to see you there! I thought you were inactive at the moment so it was good to see your name Pedro :  Chat  23:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not inactive at all. I've been doing all sorts of things. Is that the only page on your watchlist? I've not edited that page in a while so maybe that's why you thought I was inactive? ;-) --Deskana (talk) 23:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If only that was the sole page on my watchlist..! Probably got the idea from ARBCOM stuff - clearly I'm wrong. Either way, good to see your name. Pedro :  Chat  23:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:LOLthulu and User:GrendelLover

Just out of curiousity aroused by your comment on LOLthulu's Talk Page. Why do you think User:LOLthulu and User:GrendelLover are related? Is there something going on that I don't know about? --Richard (talk) 01:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser. I eagerly await his explanation. --Deskana (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK... thanx. I will now back out of this as I am clearly in somewhere that I need not be involved. --Richard (talk) 01:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Thanks

No problem. I wish we really could get people to start reporting Grawp socks to CheckUsers. This whole wave of page-move vandalism could have been prevented yesterday! Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 19:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOLthulu/ CheckUser

Am I still waiting for you to finish checking me out? Will I ever see your investigation over here? LOLthulu 06:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm still trying to get a consult from another checkuser. And no, you won't be at SPI. --Deskana (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I expect speedy resolution of this, as well as a more apparent effort on your part to WP:AGF. I intend to take this to the Administrators Noticeboard for review shortly. LOLthulu 15:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:AGF is one of the worst defenses you can invoke. I suspect it would have been better if you'd said nothing. Feel free to take it to the administrators' noticeboard but I'm not sure how they'll help given they don't know my reasons for checking, nor the technical results of the check. --Deskana (talk) 16:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Infact, I'll do it for you. Better to get other admins to act on this than other checkusers. --Deskana (talk) 16:15, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I expect you to recuse yourself from the continuation of this CheckUser investigation. It is clear that you are not neutral. LOLthulu 16:48, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because I have an opinion on your guilt, having seen the technical evidence? No, I don't think so. You're getting the wider review that you wanted. --Deskana (talk) 16:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your technical evidence is a sham. Browser User-Agent strings are not uniquely identifying, nor are they trustworthy. What browser am I using now? LOLthulu 16:56, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well aware of the ability to fake useragents. --Deskana (talk) 16:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC) I saw this on ANI. Is LOL making constructive edits. If so, he should not be blocked. If not, he should be blocked. There are many, many possibilities. Maybe the person is a different person. Maybe he has mental illness and a split personality where LOL is the good editor. Maybe they share a computer. Is this possible? If he is good but is living with bad people, Wikipedia should not block because of one's living arrangements. Not everyone is rich. Ipromise (talk) 02:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've randomly chosen 4 edits to evaluate. They are http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nottingham_Cooperative&diff=prev&oldid=264084433

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Human_rights_in_North_Korea&diff=prev&oldid=266992883

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=IDN_homograph_attack&diff=prev&oldid=267777488

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=East-West_Schism&diff=prev&oldid=269340677

Most of them are pretty good but a few are odd. Ipromise (talk) 02:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be that this other person is editing from somewhere else and got mad so he goes home and attacks others and is not LOL?

Looks like to me that someone wants to punish this other person real bad and will do anything to make sure that this person is punished even at the risk of punishing someone else. Maybe we should warn LOL and say "look, you've been associated with a bad person. If you are the same person, stop. If not, you better be on your best behavior because you are this close to being punished"

I have gotten spanked for something my brother has done so I don't like it. Ipromise (talk) 02:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt you read the thread in its entirety, given most of your questions were answered in my post. --Deskana (talk) 02:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you said he had some good contributions. Anyway, he is not blocked yet and I told him to be good. Everything else is up to him and the administrators. I've added the uninvolved users request for good editing. Ipromise (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for messing up your user talk page with this discussion! Ipromise (talk) 02:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Albrecht

why have you removed my additions to the Alex Albrecht page they were totally relevant.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbzor (talk • contribs) 01:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Given this is your first edit, I have no idea what your additions were. --Deskana (talk) 02:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

they were his quotes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbzor (talk • contribs) 02:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Long lists of slightly rude quotes are not relevant. --Deskana (talk) 02:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lol it wasnt a long list it was one... and he said on episode 186 of Diggnation he wanted it on his page

It's not his page. It's an article about him. And slightly rude quotes are not encyclopedia worthy material. He doesn't get to say something rude, say he wants it in his article to people watching, and have it inserted in the article. It's that simple. --Deskana (talk) 02:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes, it's an article about him and that was a fact about him you cant remove it because you dont like it while you're at it you may as well remove the WHOLE article about the word Fuck because its kind of a "rude word" too...

When you're not just going to waste my time with nonsense, I will start paying attention to you again. --Deskana (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help?

Can you move WWE Extreme Rules back to WWE One Night Stand. Some one did without consensus. Also, can you move-protect it. A request for my fav admin. I'm kissing up SimonKSK 02:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, this is based on a consensus to wait for a name change formed here.--TRUCO 503 02:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You should be able to move it back. I don't want to move anything without reading the discussion if there's been a dispute, and I don't have the time to read it right now. --Deskana (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 5, Issue 6 8 February 2009 About the Signpost
News and notes: Elections, licensing update, and more Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's future, WikiDashboard, and "wiki-snobs" 
Dispatches: April Fools 2009 mainpage WikiProject Report: WikiProject Music 
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) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No show/hide boxes plan implemented.

Its official! You can go to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Subpage - Open CheckUser cases to see all cases awaiting checkuser, they are listed without the show/hide boxes. Now get to work! —— nixeagleemail me 22:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic :-) --Deskana (talk) 22:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mttll/Archive

Thank you, Deskana. Mtt11 wasn't exactly a very constructive influence on the Middle East. Your contributions are appreciated. :) Master&Expert (Talk) 16:43, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WSC 2

Were you just waiting for that 100th !vote to close that one ;-) !vote 23:13, closed 23:15 ;-)---I'm Spartacus! The artist formerly known as Balloonman 23:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would I do such a thing? ;-) --Deskana (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never ;-) and I think the answer is yes... as would I---I'm Spartacus! The artist formerly known as Balloonman 04:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

edit war

i am sorry. i will not revert again. but please take note that the anonymous ip was causing this. i had maintained everything in uniform prior to this person coming and purposely invoking this. i will not revert again. i am sorry. please help me though. - Zarbon (talk) 01:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am the other person that was involved in this edit war. Would it be all right if I replaced one of the pictures on the action figure page with this one? It would not be a revert and when I asked Zarbon about it he didn't say anything against it. It also meets all the qualifications that he set for the lead image so there would be no reason for the edit war to continue afterwards. If it would count as a revert when will I be allowed to make the change without being banned? Thank you. --71.130.93.2 (talk) 19:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Would Bold text get a response? Can I edit the page again since a couple days have past? Thank you. --71.130.92.97 (talk) 23:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JB196 == Kalajan?

Hi Deskana. This is interesting. As you blocked JB196 (talk · contribs) indef nearly two years ago, a checkuser has provided a link between him and Kalajan (talk · contribs) who you were involved with week or so ago. Please comment over at the SPI here. D.M.N. (talk) 22:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is very intresting. I always thought that there was something bigger than Kalajan and his socks. SimonKSK 22:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Responding there. --Deskana (talk) 22:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

The Signpost
Volume 5, Issue 7
Weekly Delivery
2009-02-16

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.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 06:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice regarding User:ChristianMan16 at WP:ANI

Remember when you proposed a community ban on CM16? I've proposed that the ban be undone. Cheers! --Dylan620 Hark unto me · Ping me @ 01:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for informing me. --Deskana (talk) 01:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:23, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-emptive unblock decline

Awesome. [2] An inspired move if ever I've seen one. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And given his revolting response, I guess his movie date didn't work out. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet during the Ming Dynasty

Hi, you may not know me but I'm the guy who made one year ago a small edit war on Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. One year's absence makes me quite unfamiliar with English Wikipedia since so many people have gone, like User:Clicketyclick, User:Steve Crossin who taught me much as their administrator's role.

Now I'm back. I'm sorry to not have held my words (no more edit on English wiki) that I made a small edit on Tibet during the Ming Dynasty.[3] I suggested some paragraphs should be spilt, and added the true authors of some sources. I consider my act to be totally legal under Wikipedia's laws, however this is quickly undone by User:Bertport.[4] So I hope you could give me an explaination for this. Thank you. --LaGrandefr (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup

A reminder that the Manchester meetup is this Saturday. Hope to see you there! Majorly talk 18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Foswiki page deletion

Hi Daniel,

my name is Martin Seibert. I am an active member of the Foswiki Community. I just saw, that you deleted the Foswiki-article on wikipedia. I would like to ask, what needs to happen to re-establish the article. Do you see a path to fulfill to come to such a situation? When I read these comments I did not really understand, why the deletion was carried out. Does my comment here help anyhow? --Kalyxo (talk) 22:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of people showing up saying "Keep, I use it and it's great" isn't a reason to keep it. Or "Keep, it's really good". A somewhat reasonable analogy is that "my mother is great, but she doesn't deserve an article". Your (now deleted) comment doesn't really help either. I suggest reading things like WP:N and WP:WEB. Your involvement in the FosWiki community probably means you're not capable of being objective, too. --Deskana (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS

I was going through the articles listed in Wikipedia:Suspected_copyright_violations and I found one of them that says that it permission given by OTRS, and want to make sure this is so. Can you check this for me? Thanks, NanohaA'sYuriTalk, My master 23:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is allowed per the message on OTRS, though it hardly reads like an encyclopedia article. --Deskana (talk) 23:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester 5

Hey there. I notice you were interested in attending [[Manchester 4; we're in the process of organising another one for some time in April. Hope you'll pop along to the page to organise a time and date appropriate for you :). Ironholds (talk) 23:17, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Open Proxy check?

Hey, I got your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/verified users; the admin that placed this block is no longer active. Could you look into this block: User talk:Dl2000 and see if it is still an open proxy? Thanks!!! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 03:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

comment requested

I have opened an Unban request on behalf of Jvolkblum and others, which also includes a ban request on Orlady, at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Proposal for unban, apology, amnesty for Jvolkblum and related others, and topic ban for Orlady. User:MBisanz expressed interest in hearing your views. doncram (talk) 00:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your reviewing FT2's private reanalysis of the Erin_cali70 account, and your commenting in the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Long-running problem with respect to New Rochelle area articles. I don't know if you are watchlisting that or just responded to a private email or other request from FT2. However, I responded to your and FT2's comments there, and wonder if you could comment further. As I attempt to explain, I don't think that your finding Erin_cali70 is linked to other linked, blocked accounts addresses the issues that i am raising. I would appreciate your further involvement. One approach that might help would be to begin to separate out the different sets of accounts, and to clarify that the whole mess is not one person. I believe that a complete review of all past history, with more attention paid, would show the cumulative analysis of widespread wrong-doing failed at several points (namely where new persons got linked in). It seems at least technically wrong that all of them are lumped together with sockpuppet label, as if they are all one person, when evidence suggests there are different persons. doncram (talk) 07:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smile!

Xclamation point has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! '
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:55, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

J.delanoy

Let him come to the realization first, and then I'll de-bot him. I discussed this a few days ago on IRC as a joke. That's all I'll do. Happy April 1, bibliomaniac15 00:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

nerd

Nice sig. ;) rootology :  Chat  02:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're just jealous. :-p --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 02:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You no take candlewiki! --Izno (talk) 03:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you'll find that Snowfall, is in fact, mine. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 03:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I logged out of WoW, opened Wikipedia, saw your signature and snorted my drink out my nose with surprise-laughter. Well done. ~ mazca t|c 22:19, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Equation for happiness :)

User:Deskana + =

:) Steve Crossin :  Chat  02:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

edits to my talk page

You left a comment on my talk page that I did not understand because I have only been on WP for 2 months and I don't know a lot about the terminology. Could you please explain. Griffinofwales (talk) 03:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 03:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unified login

Hi Daniel, my name is Sergio. I am known as Blackcat it on this wiki and simply as Blackcat in several xx.wikis (including it.* which is my home wiki). As there's already a Blackcat registered here, but in spite of being registered since 2007 that username has done just one edit, is it possible to get that username usurped and the whole history of Blackcat it moved to Blackcat?

You can contact me on my talk page on it.wiki to get my identity confirmed.

Thanks in advance. Sergio † BC™ (Write me!) 16:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for arbitration - Unjustified ban of users

I have filed a request for arbitration regarding recent bans of user accounts from which no activities could be found that dispupt Wikipedia. The arbitration request can be found here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Block of editors related to sockpuppet Jvolkblum You are not mentioned as an involved party, I send you this message as a courtesy for your information, and I hope that your opinion there can contribute to solve the issue. Thank you! doxTxob \ talk 23:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester 5

You've expressed interest in Wikipedia:Meetup/Manchester 5; I'm just coming to give you the details and a reminder. We will be meeting on 4 April at The Manchester & County near Picadilly train station at around 1:00pm (although some will be turning up an hour early). There will be a Wikimedia sign to identify us, I believe. Ironholds (talk) 05:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Games (band)

Why didn't you click the references and external links before deleting the article i created? Restore it!!!!!! It has references, see [5]!!!!!! Francodamned (talk) 03:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did. Blogs aren't reliable sources. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 10:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unified login / 2

Hi Daniel, btw of this, what can you tell me? Have I posted the question to the right person, or there's a specific page where I must ask for it? Thanks in advance, Sergio † BC™ (Write me!) 18:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for missing your request. The proper place to make your request would be WP:CHU/SUL. Once you've made the request there, I'd be happy to carry it out for you. The reason I'm asking you to jump through the hoops of making a formal request is because when you make the request there using the template it provides a lot of handy links for me to look at to make sure your request is handled properly. :-) --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 19:01, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks, I'm leading there. Sergio † BC™ (Write me!) 20:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I always assume good faith. Thanks for the renaming :) Sergio † BC™ (Write me!) 21:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackcat (talk • contribs) [reply]

RfA Orlady - Your accusation against me

Hello Deskana,

In the current RfA for Orlady you mentioned in a comment that User:Doncram and I, User:doxTxob, share similar wrong edit patterns. It seems that you refer to indentation of paragraphs. I was not (and I still am not) sure how to do it right with the #::'s in the lengthy sections that include more than one paragraph. Maybe you can explain to me how it is done right.

But this is not why I contact you. Your remark - in my opinion - would imply that Doncram and I are not contributing to the discussion properly and to readers it might imply that there is something going on that could mean that doncram and myself are the same person using differnet accounts to voice an opposing opinion, what they call "sockpuppetry".

I find your implied accusation very disturbing and very personal. I am active on Wikipedia for a few years with thousands of edits on my back and I do not like to have this stain on my record. On the RfA I asked for a check to clear this very bad accusation against me and for an apology for this. I would like to repeat my request here: You brought that accusation up due to format errors, I want you to check this case, report your results and I expect an apology at the very spot you mentioned your accusation first, the RfA for Orlady.

Thank you and take care, doxTxob \ talk 06:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[6] It is curious, I had the exact same thought when I noticed it. Particularly given the other unusual similarities. Probably nothing, just a strange coincidence? Avruch T 13:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is no stain on your record. I haven't accused you of anything. It is strange though, no? --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 04:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why is it that you are so quick confirming alleged sockpuppets reported by Orlady? And here, you and Avruch just use lame accusations and rhetorics instead? Isn't that strange behaviour on your side? You like to accuse me and doncram of sockpuppetry in an RfA but do not care to investigate this? Hmmmm, what might be the reason for that? Would an accusation of sockpuppetry related to an RfA not be reason enough to investigate or do I have to file a case against myself to get that cleared? You prefer your accusations to be pending while the RfA is ongoing, right? I wonder why? By the way, I detected unusual similarities with the support voters in Orlady's RfA, is that worth investigating? doxTxob \ talk 01:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a request for a CU... Hiberniantears (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Hiberniantears! Your support here is very unexpected given my recent comments regarding your joke, and I appreciate your involvement very much! This is more than a request and more than a humble request, I am begging for days in the RfA in a desparate attempt asking for a Checkuser to confirm that me (doxTxob) and Doncram are not the same person. I am trying to get my and Doncram's reputation on Wikipedia cleared of Deskana's accusations in Orlady's RfA but the user does resist to check that case. The original accusation was about common "unusual" formatting errors in my and Doncrams opposition on Orlady's RfA, implying some sort of sockpuppetry. I was also questioned on my talkpage about an involvement in an attack page against Orlady. I am very frank and straightforward in uttering my opinion sometimes, I guess you have gotten a taste of that, but I am not using inappropriate means on Wikipedia nor any place else. I never did, I never will. I said that at another place, if I have something to say, I will say it and it will have my name under it. If I think you are wrong I will let you know, if I think Orlady is wrong I will let her know, but I will always do that with my name under it. If I have an axe to grind with anyone, they might not like my opinion but they will know it is mine and they can respond to me and discuss it with me or they can hate me. ... but they will always know who to repond to or whom to hate. Would you please insist on my behalf or check it yourself if you have these rights, or find someone else you trust who can do the CU? Thank you very much! doxTxob \ talk 03:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I meant a CU on you, DoxTxob. Hiberniantears (talk) 11:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
DoxTxob... No one accused you of being a sock, the strange similarity was merely noted as interesting. I don't imagine you will find a checkuser willing to run a check on you and Doncram unless more compelling evidence of a link comes up, and they don't perform self-requested checks to "clear" users. As you can imagine, the technical data of a checkuser request isn't sufficient to prove that you are not socking (which is just as true for me, or Deskana, or anyone else). Avruch T 14:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What Avruch is said is correct. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 00:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the time for this right now. In addition to the "standard" health problems that I have, I'm suffering from a dental infection. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 14:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch... hope you feel better soon---I'm Spartacus! NO! I'm Spartacus! 16:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It actually doesn't hurt. I've had so much root canal work done on my teeth for this ever-present infection that there's not many nerves available for it to attack to cause me any pain. My immune system also seems to somehow be managing to fight the infection reasonably well until I can get treatment for it.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock investigation

Thanks for investigating. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 21:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

What was this diff in response to? I have not made any oversight request. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Same question as the previous poster. To the best of my knowledge I have never in my life made an oversight request.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 14:22, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LOTRrules

Are they on the same IP range (78.144.0.0 - 78.147.255.255)? As this appears to be only range they have operated on so far.--Otterathome (talk) 19:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see no need to say at this point. Suffice to say if there was something simple I could do to solve the problem, I'd have done it. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 19:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The user has decided to continue his idiocy, see
78.150.180.249 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Is there anything else that can be done?--Otterathome (talk) 22:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needed

I just saw that you're online, and as I need someone with your userrights, I've sent you an E-mail. Thanks. Acalamari 23:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledged. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 23:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Deskana/Archive_26&oldid=1166520063"