User talk:Alison/Archive 64

Plz Protection my User Pages From Ip Vandalism
hi, this IP in back in this history blocked 6 time for No personal attacks, Harassment and Sock puppetry now backed and attack and Harassment in my user page and sub pages , plz help me and protection my user pages from this edit ip , thanks dear فلورانس (talk) 19:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Someone got there before me and did most of them. They're all ✅ now! - Alis o n  ❤ 21:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Unblock on hold
There is an unblock request at User talk:Miranda Frost. King of Hearts blocked the account as a sockpuppet, on the basis of your checkuser report at Sockpuppet investigations/Mangoeater1000. However, two other administrators, one of them a checkuser, have expressed doubt about your assessment, and I can't see any resemblance between the edits of the two accounts either, so perhaps you could have a second look at the case. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

User:ShutThemUp
Considering a few of their edits, what is the likelihood that this is a returning banned user?  He  iro 14:29, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep - it's, back for more - Alis o n  ❤ 16:32, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Amiram Goldblum
There are growing concerns that Amiram Goldblum is himself editing the article about him. He has two accounts: User:Rastiniak and User:רסטיניאק. Take a look at the this sockpuppet investigation. Also, read the following discussion. רסטיניאק has removed the POV tag from the article twice so far: 1 and 2. While I don't find this subject particularly interesting, I'm alarmed by the fact that Goldblum is fighting tooth and nail to get users who question the neutrality of his article to get blocked. I request you to help us determine whether the two accounts indeed belong to Goldblum. Nataev (talk) 11:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Please note that is posting this item on the talk pages of > a dozen admins.  It might be instructive to investigate more deeply via his contribs as to why he is doing this -- I suggest that it has to do with his right-wing (Israeli) sympathies and his desire to smear Goldblum for being a leftist (on which ).  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 11:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Here we go again. This is the first time I have asked for help from a user who has access to CheckUser. Now Nomoskedasticity himself is calling me names. I don't know much about left-right politics. I have no interest about subjects related to Israel either. My sole problem is that Amiram Goldblum has written the entire article about himself. If doing so is acceptable on Wikipedia, then I have no problems with it. Nataev (talk) 11:42, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Just so you'd know...
Ash Ketchum isn't a BLP. It's a Wikipedia article on a fictional character. But yeah, thanks for reverting that edit. Either way, it was still gross vandalism. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Kim Feenstra
I added commentary on Talk:Kim Feenstra. Belsen (talk) 10:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Coffeepusher (talk) 04:24, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Turlough Hill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ESB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 22:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

CP on English Wikipedia
Hey Alison, over at Sue's meta talk page, I am in broad support with WTT, AGK and yourself on the issues as they relate to child protection. Obviously on Commons the CP/paedophile problem is with images; given that we are a media repository. On enwp we would assume that the CP/paedophile problem lies with advocacy in articles. WTT mentioned that over the last 5 years, there has been use of the child protection policy on no less than 100 occasions. User:Odder mentioned in this blog post that in the last 12 months there have been less than 100 images oversighted from Commons which would fall into underage photos (that covered both CP and so-called innocent images [you know, 16 years uploading photos of themselves]); of course this would include multiple images uploaded by the same person, so the number of people involved in uploading such things to Commons is minimal. Any chance you can give us a comparative number of such images OSed from enwp in the last 12 months? Russavia (talk) 16:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Russavia. Likewise, I'm in broad support of your comments on Sue's talk page. To be honest, I have absolutely no idea how many CP-related images we deal with on enwiki. While Odder's article was certainly interesting, you guys would have much greater visibility on the number of CP images that appear on Commons; you have five oversighters whereas we have thirty eight. I have no real visibility on the quantity of CP that others are dealing with. Ideally, a question like that should be addressed to the WMF or maybe Philippe, as all CP issues should (and I say should) be routed to them, too. I think we both agree on this latter point, too - Alis o n  ❤ 17:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Alison, can I just say thanks for pushing this to the board elections? I was planning on writing a very similar question this morning, but your well written question asks everything I'd like to see. I'll watch for the answers with interest. Worm TT(talk ) 07:37, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Speaking from a crosswiki perspective, there are several editors who go around from WMF wiki to WMF wiki, asking for userrights they do not understand and are not nearly qualified for. They frequently start at enwiki, and when they get indef-ed due to CIR or are blocked after repeated oversighting, they move on to other English (or sometimes Chinese) wikis. They tend to be <13 years old, have a form of autism, and have parents who are unable to control their internet use. They give out their name and age, and too much personal info, about themselves, and there's nothing that can be done about it because as far as I know, the English Wikipedia is the only WMF wiki that oversights child personal information (though obviously child porn is handled differently). The stewards can't lock an account for that either. As a future Wikidata oversighter (future because I passed, but since I was the only one that passed, my rights are on hold) this is something I want to try and address over there, but the WMF really should be making this global. --Rschen7754 07:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=557217009 your edit] to Advocates for Informed Choice may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

I have sent you an email message. I look forward to your response. SapiensIngentis 18:05, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Runty
Wann hit his sock too?  He  iro 08:33, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep - blocked now. No others yet that I can see - Alis o n  ❤ 10:01, 30 May 2013 (UTC)