User talk:Alexandria/Archive 1

Innovasians Limited
Hey KWSN I don't understand why it's possible to create a page about Nike or Adidas company and not on a eco-friendly company, which works for decrease the carbon footprint of product. Please, explain me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deborah.aissa (talk • contribs) 02:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Kai402/SnapLock Industries
Hello Kwsn. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Kai402/SnapLock Industries, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: user is still active, there is no policy against holding unfinished drafts in user space, and no applicable speedy reason. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the CSDHelper script is not intelligent enough to sort out who first tagged the article - I will copy the message to the original tagger. When userspace drafts are nominated at MfD, the usual consensus is not to delete until abandoned for at least six months. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Shahara
I considered listing Shahara as A7 but didn't because the article did, in fact, assert the actor's importance (something about starring in a movie I've never heard of that was allegedly very successful). In the past I have found that A7 is usually declined if even the very thinnest of reasons is given. Has consensus changed on that? Because I don't mind being less timid with CSD if it has.--~TPW 15:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I could recreate it from memory if I really wanted to, but I couldn't find anything to hint at genuine notability, not even a mention at IMdB. Don't go through AfD on my account - I thought it was an appropriate deletion.  If the creator makes a stink, by all means, but I think you did the right thing in this case.  I don't consider myself a deletionist, but I do like to get rid of articles that don't meet WP:N.--~TPW 15:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: My EBT
Why was this speedily deleted? I did provide references to reliable sources establishing notability (notable since the video has been widely viewed as an example of an issue with the U.S. economy, got taken down by YouTube due to its drug abuse stuff, etc), and it was clearly a WIP. I have never seen a page with reliable sources get A7'd before. ViperSnake151  Talk  21:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Confusion?
Just curious, in what context do we get confused for one another?&mdash;Kww(talk) 01:05, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

deleted "Symbiosis Center of Health Care"
It is an organization. How I can prevent it from getting deleted? please guide. Thanks -Abhijeet Safai 15:59, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Long-term abuse/MascotGuy
— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 19:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Time limit
So what is the time limit anyway? Goldblooded (talk) 15:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

AIV
Took it for you. m.o.p  16:09, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was iffy on that because it had signs of content dispute but... I was almost positive it was vandalism. Oh well.  Kwsn   (Ni!)  16:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: Jake Johnson
I know, thanks. :)  Quasy Boy  14:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

USURP@id.wiki
Hi, i have change your user name as per your request. Cheers &mdash; TjmoelIcons-flag-id.png bicara 01:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Done also on no-wp. 80.203.71.168 (talk) 15:37, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Usurpation @ ruwiki
Requests have to be made here and the policy is written down there. --Obersachse (talk) 16:08, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The question is more or less what template would I use if one exists. Alexandria   (Ni!)  16:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Just use text. I'll do the rest. --Obersachse (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Your Abuse Response Filing
Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 24.149.127.253.  Lynch 7  20:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Usurpation @ ptwiki
Hi. Has a message for you in the Wiki-pt about the renaming of your account. Best regards, 05:42, 9 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.249.138.237 (talk)
 * Yup, that was me making the request. Alexandria   (Ni!)  14:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Erm...
I hope that was a joke :)  HurricaneFan 25  23:55, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Doesn't matter whether it was a joke or not, this user ought to be relieved of the keys to the broom cupboard. Malleus Fatuorum 00:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't panic, everyone, it was a bit of a dare, and Alexandria has been rewarded as promised: Hers fold  (t/a/c) 00:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Childish and completely inappropriate. You two ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Malleus Fatuorum 00:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * /me goes to sit in the corner... Hers fold  (t/a/c) 00:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * -Trouts Hersfold, then hands the trout over- Alexandria   (Ni!)  00:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Take a break guys. Here's some chips to go with your fish.  HurricaneFan 25  00:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Undeletion request
Hello Alexandria, could you please undelete User:Alpha Quadrant/AFC. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  22:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, the other pages I don't need anymore. The CSD/PROD log I had already reviewed, the "status" page I created by accident last year and forgot to tag it for deletion, and I remembered what I wrote in the editnotice, so I just recreated it. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant    (talk)  01:58, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Apology
Sorry about my false claims. I am new to Wikipedia, and I forgot that there were article talk pages for a moment... Sorry. I have no idea what was going on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DARKSHADOWMIST (talk • contribs) 15:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Millsstory
I think he's probably a new troll, but I'm not the best judge of these things. I know I don't appreciate what he did here. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:36, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Signature
I think part of your signature still contains the link to your old username talk page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 11:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It caught my attention since I have a script that strikeout usernames which are currently blocked (handy feature when I'm dealing with sockpuppet investigation and not clicking on socks that are already blocked). When I saw your signature, I had a double-take because your username is not stroked out but the talk page link is. You should change and fix the signature link it in your preference. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wizard (American band)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wizard (American band). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Evermore2 (talk) 08:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of User talk:Spongefrog
You should probably reconsider that deletion. RTV generally does not apply to blocked users at all, and it almost never includes deleting their talk pages. See Courtesy vanishing. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ACK! I didn't realize the user was indeffed, my mistake.  Alexandria   (talk)  19:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * And restored. Alexandria   (talk)  19:09, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) For what it's worth, personally, given the nature of Spongefrog's history with the project, I think allowing an RTV in this case would make a great deal of sense. (I also have never been in agreement with the presumption that user talk pages should almost never be deleted, although that is probably a minority viewpoint.) Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well either way I'm going to leave it up to some other admin, if they feel it should be redeleted go ahead, same with undeleted. Alexandria   (talk)  19:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't really have strong feelings about it either, but apparently the community does not want us doing that. Maybe that's something worth discussing further at WT:RTV. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Most likely, thanks for bringing that to my attention anyway. Alexandria   (talk)  19:26, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

'Ownership'
The only pages I claim 'ownership' over are my (non-existent) userpage and my talk page. You and all other administrators and editors involved in the Men's rights debacle are not welcome to contact me on any subject. You ask people to be respectful to you on yours, so I expect the same from you. Hermiod (talk) 15:09, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

PDSA Pet Fit Club
Hi Alexandria,

Please can you un-delete the page 'PDSA Pet Fit Club' its not a club as such, thats just the name of the charities work. PDSA is a UK based veternary charity and this is about their efforts to get less overweight pets in the UK. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greaves.kirsten (talk • contribs) 15:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Michigan Motor Sports Hall of Fame
Hi Alexandria,

Can you please un-delete the page 'Michigan Motor Sports Hall of Fame'. I believe I followed the example of other published Hall of Fame pages.

I am unsure of the "section A7" reason for deletion as all information came from the Michigan Motor Sports Hall of Fame website. I am a board member & was asked by the board to make a Wikipedia page.

Here is the message I recieved... 17:47, 20 October 2011 Alexandria (talk | contribs) deleted "Michigan Motor Sports Hall of Fame" ‎ (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

If you could make any suggestions to make my page in accordance with standards I would be greatly appreciative.

Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darciefuzi (talk • contribs) 21:19, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

bougnat87
could you please explain why the article "gus mills" has been deleted (without a discussion)? if a world famous specialsit of the big carnivores of africa ,who wrote 5 books is not eligible for wiki, who is ????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bougnat87 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Paris Lees
Hey, you deleted the page I was creatin titled Paris Lees, and quoted "Not enough context to identify article's subject" as the reason. I was just wondering how much more context you need, as this is just a short page to detail who she is and what she has done recently, as she is due to be published in the Sunday Telegraph, as part of the Pink List 2011 article, and asked me to create a wiki-page for her, so that people who read about her on Sunday would have a point she could point to that gave a brief bio of her.

If you could possibly give me more information, un-delete, or just advise me on the best course of action, I'd really appreciate it.

Please use my Talk page, or contact me through one of the mediums specified on my User Profile, as it is simply easier for me to communicate :) MooseyJake (talk) 21:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Response
Well firstly i was reporting on behalf of another editor and secondly, His edits were reverted several times; i got banned for reverting something three times (which was simular to this guys case except on a political page) and all he got was a warning! He then ignored that and continued making unconstructive edits, good faith or bad they were tagged as unconstrutive and were removed. Also, that guy, while i do have a lot of respect for him; in my humble opinion accusing me of a personal attack is quite frankly pathetic as he should of assumed good faith on my part. Ive noticed on a number of occasions people accuse others of bad faith, and that in itself is against the rules but alas i cant really be bothered for this; but thank you for your help and advice. User:Goldblooded (Return Fire) 17:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

And also, you should of really put that comment in the constructive criticism page NOT my talk page. User:Goldblooded (Return Fire) 13:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Miss Asia Pacific World 2011
Dear Alexandria, one "issues tag" on the article Miss Asia Pacific World 2011 is outdated. The article is no longer written as an advertisement. Now it's reasonably more something between "Start" and "Stub" class. How can the tag be cleaned up/updated/removed? Furthermore, there's an ongoing content dispute with many IP addresses making changes and some parties asking for "protection" of the article and the blocking of other editors. The "multiple issues" template should at least acknowledge that there's a dispute. I consult Wikipedia hundreds of times every month and this alert makes me look closer at the veracity of an article: "The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved." How can this alert for the sake of fairness and objectivity be added to the article in question? Best regards. Kanovski (talk) 08:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear Alexandria, Thank you for your note on my talk page. The "dispute" that you seem to be referring to originated in October 2011. I requested information about an outdated template from February 2011, in order to help with Wikipedia's cleanup and quality efforts. If I have mistaken your role and purposes at Wikipedia, then of course I am sorry for any inconvenience. Kanovski (talk) 08:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/AlexLevyOne
I think you missed User:Miranda Tate! JohnInDC (talk) 18:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

SKYRAD nominated for speedy deletion
My (fist) attempt to contribute to Wikipedia resulted in a nomination for Speedy Deletion do to apparent product advertising. My contribution was about an acronym I created to facilitate winter alpine recreation participants in a global message using SKYRAD. The letters stand for each of the fundamental skier/snowboarder responsibility requirements to prevent some winter sports activities. There is no product to sell. I have created a poster to visually represent the message. Posters are not for sale, but given, for free to groups participating in safety discussions. SKYRAD is a copyrighted term used in educational forums in an effort to inform winter athletes using an easy to remember vehicle. Please reconsider my contribution and help me spread the good word of safety. DelRecord (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)Del Record

Tummel
Hi, User:FredrikT restored the article Tummel, which I had nominated for deletion and you in turn reverted to a previous redirect. 126.109.230.149 (talk) 03:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Alexandria, I noticed Tummel on Articles for deletion/Tummel and felt it could be saved, given quite favourable reviews. I've added 4 reviews from good sources to the AfD and the article itself. with best wishes Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

USURP@arwiki
your request has been approved, thanks for waiting and sorry for being late.-- Antime •  (Talk)   08:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

TaraLoveYou SPI
That was fast™.  HurricaneFan 25  14:08, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

SPI/Daft
Hi Alexandria. Just to clarify, if/when Daft comes back with another userid, should we create an SPI entry called "Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Richard Daft/newname"? Thanks. Jack | talk page 15:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. All the best. Jack | talk page 16:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Esther Vilar
I see no reason for classifying what has been written in this article as copyrighted. As you can see, the article just explained what was said in all books from Esther Villar, and that does not qualify as copyrighted. At best, it would be qualified as redundant information. The burden of proof is not mine but yours, I told you I have looked Esther books and have not found a single piece of evidence that everything that has been written here is copyrighted. What was written here was just an extensive explanation about what Esther taught in her books. Unless you want me to upload all Esther Villar books to convince you what I am telling it's the truth? Is that what it takes to reverse this vandalism? Is this how Wikipedia operates? Sanctioning indiscriminate removal of the good work that is being done in articles will only make people refrain from contributing. Perene (talk) 19:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

User talk:De33356
Alexandria, could you please revoke this user's talk page access? They're continuing to edit there. Calabe1992 (talk) 21:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No longer needed. Calabe1992 04:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Notification of arbitration case
An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by, 2011, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Betacommand 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 00:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Request for undeletion
Hi, you recently deleted the article Unadilla, Nevada, which I nominated per A10. I now see that the author's intent in creating this article was to clean up the somewhat unwieldy List of city nicknames in the United States, and believe he simply erred in the title. I ask that you undelete the article, and move it to List of city nicknames in Nevada without redirect. Thanks. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 14:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Alexandria   (talk)  14:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Loinoflamb
Concerning Sockpuppet investigations/Trowla, I also blocked another account,, who is not a new user but was also participating in the creation of the same hoax article as the Trowla socks. Should this account be included in any sock puppet investigations? -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Mark it in the patrolling admin section so we have it on record. Alexandria   (talk)  14:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, done. Thanks.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:52, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

The CVN Proposal
Hello, You recently closed a discussion in the CVU Think tank inappropriately. The discussion was among persons interested in revitalizing the project to decide how/what we may want to do and to discuss how we wanted to go about it. It was a loose discussion simply to stir ideas on how to re-organize the project. Of course, if any action is to be taken, we would of course take it to the village pump. But at this time, there are no serious plans in place, and the Village Pump is the wrong place to discuss it at this time. Thank you for your understanding. AndrewN talk 22:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The discussion has been re-opened and a disclaimer put on top of the page clearly stating that the page is for developing ideas for a potential future proposal, if those involved in the project so desire to go forward with any actions on the page. AndrewN  talk 22:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Unblock requests
Hi! I'm looking at User talk:216.26.209.193. Don't forget to click on the "active blocks" link to see if the account is affected by a range block (which is the case here: .) --jpgordon:==( o ) 19:50, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Re:Sockpuppetry case
I didn't even notice it was an archive page, sorry about that. Why was it closed, because I didn't respond?  Ss 112  20:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Ta
I was moving it anyway. I think the case could be closed as a bit of over enthusiastic vigilance. not sure why he notified me about it, though. Must be me kind face.... Peridon (talk) 19:10, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Blocked IP / Atomic coffee machine
Hi ALexandria, You have asked me why i claim the above mentioned article is a Soapbox. Here is the answer i was writing but which didn't get edited because someone blocked my IP: "Ok! 2 things i would like to get an explanation for:

First, Why is the picture still there although the source and author clearly states a commercial website who was involved in a legal procedure over the name Atomic for these coffee machines ? It clearly goes against the Soapbox policy of Wikipedia. By the way, i proposed another picture as a constructive alternative.

Second, The phrase "The Robbiati design and patent registrations cover the Atomic shape" doesn't make sense at all. a) How can someone cover an atomic shape (atomic mushroom??? or a nucleus???)? b) The coffee machine doesn't look like a mushroom or an atom, does it?. Mr. Robbiati covered his improvements (patent). The rest is a trademark problematic (atomic name). If someone can explain how someone can cover an atomic shape in a patent, i would be very thankful.

I am glad now we can discuss about it without having to delete each others contributions. I can't wait for your answers. Nitzkovic (talk) 20:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)" Thanks, Nitzkovic (talk) 20:43, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Dynasty Electric
I think this band is notable - it has toured nationally and has been noted by several reliable periodicals. Bearian (talk) 21:29, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

No worries
I'm trying to amend my sig to say Hi, I'm Elen of the Roads, and my markup sucks :) --Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Suspected Copyright violation - Help Needed
Dear Alexandria - I had placed my objection on an article on Marwat in the listing on 11th November 2011. The entire article (excluding vanity entries of notable people's names) has been word to word copied from http://www.khyber.org/pashtoplaces/lakkimarwat2.shtm and was reported earlier on as well but no action was taken. Please look into this blatant plagiarism which has gone to the extent that even sources have been copied ditto. I hope a prompt action in deletion of this material as per Wikipedia's policy. --Arbab Shahinshah (talk) 05:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

early close
Hi - User:The Pink Oboe has got an even bigger crossover with User:Fred the Oyster - a confirmed sock of User:WebHamster  - here the three of them all edit the same article. Would you object to my reopening of the SPI so I can add more detail to it - and the known sockpuppet, it was only open a half hour? Off2riorob (talk) 16:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Can you answer my question about your closure please? Off2riorob (talk) 10:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * First off, that link above: All three have edited it yes, but all Oboe did was copy editing shortly after an IP made a change to it, which leads me to believe that he saw the page on recent changes and decided to fix it. This has also happened to me before, make a small formatting fix, next edit is someone doing copy editing.  Secondly, WebHamster was blocked for disruption.  Even if Oboe is him he's not being disruptive.  Thirdly, I asked a CU to double check my close and said it was fine.  Alexandria   (talk)  14:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

That link above is just one of many. Oboe is a sockpuppet of a blocked user - the previous user was disruptive, Oboe has already two blocks for related issues - I accept your comment - but considering the speed of the closure and your refusal to allow me to add additional details I reserve the right to open a new SPI with additional detail. Off2riorob (talk) 17:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not say you couldn't re-open, but you do please provide as much evidence as possible. If you opened up a CU request with the same level of evidence on another user you'd likely have it declined on  grounds.  Alexandria   (talk)  17:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I didn't request checkuser. No other account is less than three months active. You closed the SPI in less than half an hour. I was still adding evidence. It wasn't fishing - a blind person that looked at the contributions would see the three users are the same person. Anyway, never mind - I will, if and when required open a new report. - so, removing your userpage from my watchlist, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 19:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Check
Do you care to check if 209.248.178.106 is Devasthali? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 02:58, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Already blocked – obvious sock is obvious. –MuZemike 03:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, the socking wasn't so obvious to me, though there was plenty of incentive to block. I hadn't even heard of this one before. Isn't y'all's brain full by now? Drmies (talk) 03:19, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Aww, looky look, all ✅:



–MuZemike 03:18, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Ahh, another drawer exposed. Some people have way too much time on their hands. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 03:20, 16 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Good work. Wait, so, these were 'under' that IP, and that's how you found them? Or is that spilling the secrets already? Drmies (talk) 03:22, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Given Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Devasthali, I think anyone can connect the dots. –MuZemike 03:53, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Shannon9077 socks
Hi Alexandria. Since you were involved in the sockpuppet investigation of Shannon9077, I wanted to let you know that the user is back under another Shannon account being disruptive as before. — Mike  Allen   03:53, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked as an obvious WP:DUCK and sent to SPI for sleeper check. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:59, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! For future reference I just add any future socks to that same page? — Mike  Allen   04:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yup - Shannon9077 appears to be the master. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:40, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

WebHamster
RE: Sockpuppet_investigations/WebHamster, you might want to reconsider in light of Administrators_Noticeboard/Incidents. There is a general consensus among those in the know that is quacking and that other socks may be on the loose. According to his statement, was in the process of drafting the request when you closed it. The Pink Oboe is now indef'd by Jehochman and the apparent sockpuppeteering is included in his rationale, while the user denies it in his unblock requests. A SPI could resolve that question one way or another. Regards, causa sui (talk) 20:36, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Here, The Pink Oboe mocks the indef block by pointing out that anyone can simply recreate another account to escape the consequences of a block. causa sui (talk) 20:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm going to say this again. I did not say you couldn't re-open.  Thank you.  Alexandria   (talk)  20:44, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if I offended you - I'm not sure how. I thought it would be better if you re-opened it since I'm not a checkuser. Or are you recommending that he (or I) file another SPI? causa sui (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I know decent amount of people on the project take great offense to having their actions reverted; I'm not one of them. However it is frustrating when people ignore prior statements by me, hence the blunt reply.  Regarding the case, I've left the case unarchived for this very reason.  All one needs to do is to remove the "close" from the SPI case status template and it'll be reopened.  I'm also not a CU, just a simple clerk.  Alexandria   (talk)  21:01, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is a peril of a de-centralized project that sometimes you'll make statements in one venue that others don't see in another. I hope you don't find it too frustrating; but I don't know what else I could have done. I will remove the close from the SPI as you suggested. Thanks causa sui (talk) 21:04, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Atomic Coffee Machine
You fully protected this article a while back, and once again the main disruptor is back to his old tricks. Any chance you can take a look? --Biker Biker (talk) 09:13, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Sock Puppetry
Hi, I've filed a case at Sockpuppet investigations/Padmalakshmisx. The reported user reverts my edits. Can you have a look into it. -- Commander (Ping Me) 12:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Mirrored Love Sockpuppet case
I have recently noticed these two IP addresses (190.137.239.87 and 86.30.228.22) edited the Aphrodite World Tour article. Exact same edits as User:Mirrored Love and User: In My Arms. Not sure why but whoever this person is, is trying really hard to have their way. I don't know how long this will continue. Here is the link to both investigations. Itsbydesign (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Helioid
Hello Alexandria. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Helioid to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:18, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dundswk
Just a quick procedural question - in regards to your point that the two accounts you mention are likely to be be 'stale' - they have both been editing today, so I'm just curious why that would be? --Cameron Scott (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

the 'Horasis' wiki
Hi I see you are in the loop – I have contacted UKexpat, Cameron Scott and Hans Adler. I am the author of the Horasis – Global XXX Business Meetings (XXX= Arab, China, India, Russia as well as the ‘at home’ version).

Yes I am guilty, innocently, of too many names – puppets, but not meatpuppeting. For this I am sorry.

Others unbeknownst to me – Dewritech and Dundswk – were odd contributors, but generally benign. Except that one of them, I forget which, created empty pages ahead of my entries causing some difficulty when I wished to save a new page.

So – I think we ought to wait until the above others comment and I know how to proceed to clear up the issues. Johnbkidd (talk) 18:13, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the articles as spammy. Good luck cleaning up the sock farm. Drmies (talk) 18:17, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

archiving
dear a,

you archived the latest iamtrhino-sockpuppet case to a page that redirects to somewhere else,. hence, the case disappears when you access the page, .--  mustihussain   21:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Padmalakshmisx
This is definitely padmalakshmi for sure. The sock has made a similar edit in Cinema of Andhra Pradesh, which was exactly made by one of the previous socks in the past. &mdash; Commander (Ping me) 06:23, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Dougweller (talk) 20:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

999 Games
Hi. You deleted 999 Games in September. I would think that this board game publishing company is important in the Netherlands (German Article). It has won the Netherlandse Spellenprijs in 2001, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and is one of the greatest in the Netherlands. Boardgamegeek says that it has published 291 games. Greetings --Heiko (talk) 14:49, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Linestwice suspected sockpuppet of Chanakyathegreat
I have reason to believe that Linestwice is a recent sockpuppet of Chanakyathegreat. User Linestwice popped up on the 21st December 2011 and displays the same editing interests as Chanakyathegreat. It is also worthy to note that they share a very similar manner of writing. Thank you. &mdash; Woe  (eoW)  14:31, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Uhm... What do you want me to do exactly? I'm not a CU... Alexandria (chew out) 14:33, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed you were recently involved with the sockpuppet investigations regarding Chanakyathegreat. I thought it best to hand it over to those with experience in Chanakyathegreats case. &mdash;  Woe  (eoW)  14:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement
An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 12, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety  talk 08:46, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:ANI
Could you do something about this-- Ankit Maity  Talk •  contribs 10:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Your Abuse Response Filing
Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 193.62.43.132. MacMed</b><sup style="color:red;">talk <sub style="color:black;">stalk 22:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Needed your help
would you please upload the poster for London, Paris, New York in special case from http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=209387905822690&set=a.209387832489364.48188.136811219747026 ? thanks alot.

--Sahil Kohli 10:06, 19 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kohlisahil (talk • contribs)

Article re-creation request - Vulnerable (The Used album)
The track listing, record label, release date for the album are now known, and very soon we'll see the cover artwork. I'd like to request that this page is un-protected so the community can start creating a more detailed, sourced article this time.

Thanks.--SUFC Boy 19:23, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Alexandria,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 06:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement closed
An arbitration case regarding Civility enforcement has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:


 * 1)  is desysopped for wheel warring and conduct unbecoming of an administrator, in the face of previous admonishments regarding administrative conduct from the Arbitration Committee. Hawkeye7 may re-apply for the administrator permissions at RFA at any time.
 * 2)  is admonished for conduct unbecoming an administrator, and for failing to adequately explain his actions when requested by the community and Arbitration Committee.
 * 3)  is admonished for reversing another administrator's actions while said actions were under review through community discussion.
 * 4)  is indefinitely topic banned from any page whose prefix begins with Wikipedia talk:Requests for Adminship.  This remedy explicitly does not prevent him from !voting on RFA's; however, should his contributions to a specific request for adminship become disruptive, any uninvolved admin may ban him from further participation in that specific RFA. Further, Malleus Fatuorm is admonished for repeatedly personalizing disputes and engaging in uncivil conduct, personal attacks, and disruptive conduct.
 * 5) Administrators are reminded that blocks should be applied only when no other solution would prove to be effective, or when previous attempts to resolve a situation (such as discussion, warnings, topic bans, or other restrictions) have proven to be ineffective.
 * 6) All users are reminded to engage in discussion in a way that will neither disrupt nor lower the quality of such discourse. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature, in order to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.
 * 7) The imposition of discretionary sanctions, paroles, and related remedies by the community is done on an ad hoc basis in the absence of clear documented standards. The community is strongly encouraged to review and document standing good practice for such discussions. As a related but distinct issue, the community is encouraged to review and document common good practice for administrators imposing editing restrictions as a condition of an unblock and in lieu of blocks.
 * 8) Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to the Administrators' noticeboard, or to Arbitration Enforcement, or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks are to be logged at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement.

For the Arbitration Committee: Mlpearc ( powwow ) 02:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Discuss this

:v
(^^^) —Emufarmers(T/C) 23:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Please restore a copy of Healthy people 2020
I see the article on Healthy people 2020 has been deleted. I was just cleaning up the coverage of this set of US Dept. of Health and Human Services programs (moved Healthy People 2010 to just Healthy People, and going to redirect the particular decade links to that page.) I don't know what was in the 2020 page, but if it had any substantial content I would like to merge it into the general Healthy People page.

Could you restore it into my user space (or elsewhere if there is a better place) so I can see what is there (unless it is something truly trivial and useless). (I assume if there is anything that I want to merge from the deleted page I will need to have it moved back to where it was to keep histories in tact.) If there is nothing worth merging, I will just create a redirect from Healthy people 2020 to Healthy People. Thanks. Zodon (talk) 05:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Laura Jane Grace
You do know you (as an editor, not even as an admin) can move over redirects, can't you? It could so easily be moved again if you'd moved Tom Gabel to Laura Jane Grace in the first place. :P Sceptre (talk) 23:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Requesting intervention
User:Vensatry and User:Secret of success are indulging in Edit warring and vandalism on the articles of Cinema of Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Cinema

I have provided all the required citations and made changes to the articles accordingly, yet these users are undoing my work and warning me not to revert.

For example User:Vensatry has given me a warning about three-revert rule and he himself has violated that rule on cinema of andhra pradesh which I did not violate, please see my contributions to the article along with citations.

User:Vensatry also commented that I was quacking too loud on User:Secret of success 's user page and one of the edits which User:Vensatry did were undone by User:Secret of success itself as it was too evident that he was disruptively editing Cinema Of Andhra Pradesh

Thank you Pavan 19:19, 26 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pavn123 (talk • contribs)

Formatting tables
Hi, I see you recently removed distracting formatting from a table on The Championships, Wimbledon. Here's a tip: If you're going to do this, you might as well go the whole hog and change it to use standard Wikipedia table formatting. Use this markup to open the table: {| class="wikitable" and then don't specify any borders or colours in addition unless there's a specific reason for them.

Another thing you might as well do is correct the capitalisation of the table's contents – should be sentence case, not title case. See WP:MSH. — Smjg (talk) 21:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

note:
your undoing of Floq's block without discussion is poor form at best, but your editing of his desired protection level of his talk page is even worse. I request that you restore the protection level to his talk page that he instated. —  Ched  ZILLA  04:41, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * striking for the moment while I research a bit. —  Ched  ZILLA  04:48, 21 October 2012 (UTC) (still wrong to undo the block though)


 * Your vindictive intention violated WP:AGF, and your "vindicitive" spelling English orthography.
 * You are out of line, particularly when the majority of ArbCommers and certainly all with sense condemned JClemens' remarks, which he keeps defending.
 * What hypocrisy and double standards! Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  09:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Unprotection
Hey, I don't want to start any more drama, so this is all I'm going to say; I'm not going to do anything or concern myself with this further. I think it was inappropriate for you to unprotect User talk:Floquenbeam. Keilana&#124;Parlez ici 04:52, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, Alexandria can call Floquenbeam's blocking "vindictive", so why shouldn't she be able to play with his user page? Her mojo allows her to erase her own tracks, apparently. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  13:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Your unblock of Jclemens
I have no comment on the fact of your unblock, but I'm very surprised by the reason you give in the block log. "Vindictive" (I'm correcting the typo), means primarily "desirous of revenge". Is that what you meant to say with your comment, which reads, in full, "Vindictive block"? That Floquenbeam blocked Jclemens in order to revenge himself for some slight? Are you referring to some history between Floquenbeam and Jclemens? If so, I ask you to specify. Please refrain from gratuitous personal attacks in the block log. Bishonen &#124; talk 23:50, 21 October 2012 (UTC).

On the recent wheel warring
I've written something on the Clarification request the singles you out by name, so it is only fair to notify you.--Tznkai (talk) 04:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I saw this just as I was going to bed, but I'll take a closer look tomorrow. Alexandria (chew out) 04:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

When was your RfA?
Please link your failed RfA and   your second RfA to your account, or place a notice of your RfA at the top of your user and talk pages. Please link your earlier account.

Please explain why you blocked your earlier account, and why its editing history is no longer visible.

Please list alternative accounts.

Thanks! Kiefer .Wolfowitz  13:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Kiefer, I would strongly suggest you drop the stick. You are a rational person: do you see the realistic outcome of your requests to be (a) everyone does what you want, admits that you're right about everything' and you know, moves on to a better world, or (b) that it'll become a hive for (to quote the edit notice) "drama llamas"? The wash of the last few days is going to come out. Arguing with individual members or making requests that (quite frankly) smack as accusations of impropriety is merely going to ensure that you're just as covered in mud as anyone else. Ironholds (talk) 13:52, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * And, for referenced, Alexandria's contributions as Kwsn do not show up because she appears to have just had them transferred to the Alexandria username. In other words, all of her contributions under the old account are available under the new one, and associated with her, and directly linked to her newer contributions. That's admirably transparent - it is not a requirement that users do that. Ironholds (talk) 13:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ironholds,
 * I asked myself, "Self, who is this Alexandria after she removed the block on an editor who had made and continues to defend a severe personal attack?". (I thought Alexandria was feminine, but apparently the old account was referred to as he.)
 * I don't understand why when I click on user, I don't see an RfA. I wondered if this person was like Galactus, a survivor from before the Big Bang, and it took me a while to find the RfA. Why not link it?
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz  14:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, you would if you looked in Special:Logs for example. But at the moment it's not SOP to list RfAs (obvious COI: if it was, I'd have no space on my userpage for the pretty pictures). I think if you're interested in this becoming SOP, one admin's talkpage is likely to prove a poor venue to pursue reform. Ironholds (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * (ec) On the contrary, Alexandria's editing history starts after the 2nd RfA. Curiouser and curiouser....   Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  14:14, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Erm. March 2007 and October 2007, respectively, for editing start and second RfA? Ironholds (talk) 14:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparently, I mis-typed something, because the earlier contributions record ended after the 2nd RfA. (The log you linked does not list contributions.) Thanks for the correction. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  14:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, my apologies; yes, Special:Logs was a reference to "where you'd go to find someone's RfAs", in this case here. Ironholds (talk) 14:35, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I have just now created Requests for adminship/Alexandria; I believe that's standard operating protocol, except in cases where the first account is unlinked due to harassment. Are we good now? --Rschen7754 18:06, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I thought I was experienced, and I was surprised by the this administrator's not having an RfA button. I had not heard about Jimbo having a black ops corps.... ;)  Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  18:23, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, he did back in 2001 and 2002, when this sort of thing was done by mailing list. But the information's located if you dig far enough through the archives. --Rschen7754 18:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It would be good to have a link to the first RfA. I don't think that there is anything worth rev-deleting or otherwise obscuring, for the sake of personal integrity.
 * Speaking of parallel universes, it would be useful to have an elimination-button, like the parallel-universe Kirk had (courtesy of some aliens). Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  18:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's necessary, because it is linked from the second RFA, after all. --Rschen7754 18:30, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I say to myself, "Self, Alexandria filed the first 'civility enforcement' case against Malleus---amid other contributions." Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  02:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)