User talk:Avraham/Archive 38

SPI - blocking socks
Hi Avraham

Do we still need to ping WP:ANI for blocks with the new, improved SPI page? (I remember that was the case with ye olde checkuser page, but I've not needed to thus far).

Cheers, This flag once was red propagandadeeds 18:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Cheers, will do. This flag once was red propagandadeeds 18:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:SPI archiving
Howdy, I'm the culprit that wrote the bot that does WP:SPI. I've fixed it so that you can do now. That was a silly bug on my part, sorry about that. ——  nix eagle email me 18:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm also doing other random fixes... my suggestion to you is to leave the archiving up to the clerks as there are some things other then "is everything done" that needs to be checked for the bot's sake... I'll find the instructions for you in bit when I can figure out what happened to them.
 * should also work now... for some reason I made it case sensitive. ——  nix eagle email me 18:44, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If you put just without the |archive portion, the bot moves the case to "pending archive" which is what I suggest you do until I figure out all the bugs in this system and we get decent instructions up. ——  nix  eagle email me 18:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please do let clerks handle the addition of |archive for the time being... if its not done right the bot does not always work right :S. I'm working on it! I wrote a whole page of instructions on how to close and what you have to look for for the bot... and I can't find the page! :( ——  nix eagle email me 18:52, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah tell me about it (the page) I showed it to a clerk and I can't find it again! I'll ask him later though. ——  nix eagle email me 18:59, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

NPOV
There was no NPOV or OR in my edits to circumcision, as you could easily verify by googling terms. --Itinerant1 (talk) 07:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Quick Checkuser request
Avraham, are you online to do a quick unblock check? If so, please reply on my talk page - if this message is a couple hours old when you see it, never mind. Thanks. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism related deletion
see Articles for deletion/Ignatz Lichtenstein 3rd nom --Joseph3333 (talk) 21:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Re : Interlingual ability
I think you did undersold your ability! I was thinking lang-1 as more of "able to read, struggles in writing". :P - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 23:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

RE:Language Ability
I see, thanks. I'll reconsider.  Marlith  (Talk)   21:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Lincolnshire Help
There are getting a few cases of Vandalism at Lincoln, Lincolnshire, and I am concerned about some edits in the Lincolnshire article, that have been made by User:Big Gold Fish and User:Tastyninjasticks. I think they might be the same person. Should a Semi lock be put on Lincoln and Lincolnshire? It's bad for true genuine new editors, but real information is now being messed with and I'm sorry to say, in some cases going undetected. I'm asking your advice as an experienced administrator.--BSTemple (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Many Thanks
I’m stunned by your speed of execution! Thank you and yes I will of course keep an eye on Lincolnshire. Many Thanks.--BSTemple (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight elections/February 2009/Oversight/Luna Santin
Hey Avraham, I guess the committee does not people placing comments with their votes. I guess you could put it in the "Comments and questions" section, or just remove it. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 01:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Khalidi
I have proposed an addition to the Rashid Khalidi article on the talk page.Historicist (talk) 03:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Note
I've requested PR to rephrase a comment of his and I figure it might be worth mentioning to you. Cheers,  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  15:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There was no response so I'm open to suggestions/intervention.  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  02:23, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Red Links
Hello again, before I reply to S711 on Talk:List of Moroccan writers, I would like your opinion as I am not wanting to get into any verbal war. I wish to reply thus:

I remove red linked names from lists because they are unverifiable, and a Wiki Article thus verifies them. Please remember this is an encyclopaedia that not everyone is just using to edit, but will be use for study, research and knowledge. If there are red link names, they are not useful. What if there is a red link name dkhdhd jhfmhfd or how about Mickey Mooouse in a list, do we leave these names? This makes a mockery of the Wikipedia and makes it a dream for vandals. Who vets red link names in lists? Only a Wiki article, backed by References makes for a solid encyclopaedia.

What do you think? Am I right? My aim is not to make a mass of pointless edits, but to help along with others in making for a sound useful Wikipedia. Do I redo his edit in List of Moroccan writers? --BSTemple (talk) 17:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Pioneercourthouse
Hi, I was wondering if you remember the underlying IP you blocked during your check here. You noted that you blocked an IP for 6 months, but I cannot find a six month IP block in your log from October 8. I did see a six month block of 86.167.21.238 on October 12, though. Was this for Pioneercourthouse? Thanks, Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 22:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Email...
...on its way :). -- lucasbfr  talk 13:56, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Challenge-response
-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

hQQOA5SyA3xlFDnMEBAAlGkSkn1Xf3PTJpMrDrDAqb8F0NDmq9LmKR9BvJDY/MxX P/xBlIe6eBABu5JAdjtFeY+HmAIHW++XzvdozSeHHrXzbThYAvPTp5AdnlAkhxRC 24o8LxnhSdClpbVIjcs84YNe+BzAUwatHzmxc39UhSTLEwf2GcJmlo4sTbfcuPil uS2foIY8pzxehBOp8htuq19VycOrqRQ6E51VZcDlLKIdgEJYnI1Yy89UlmWf0tC9 0GX8XHIkGLJAqHMCffdaLGGe0HsEQcdIMaNVVpcHGGIe5uq35TnGszAH/lP5x3EW KDTnKEYjTxptrsy8muOVlooLx946X++5+B3OV9lnEhsFRR/qHksv5DmefMZP3mCd kRdzeNWn8Li8RWXq/mRuH0VjM2401QBgYEmUtnQ8uiZNvWR78XKJVHqYlBFnksGW 95mNJixWM7T+vtl3NlmHFl4G5fRYgVWXyZmbLlfwRTMzQtvYFo3FrWdR5KuzC5WA dKZmJDyi9najB365BRLZbgVQ51QJ2O/MDfRXpdNNo7nQCx6N/CLCmt3Pxz39D9Ci ZfdDSOasR79pUlFskqq6Z/fA6lDqIhg6T2BpGj3IhBxT2shfYzzpzMJGSoGsqSv2 97P5HIFWcrm1boOjJSiEpDdndfs+PqorgZQHG/QQ4QU1jA7BB9YigESLEDlRTAYP +QEMrSCc9funzyxwW52dP/lE6uPNyNMtQXsknpatBPfXUUubO37X8Lx77vbww7Pa imrxjxXCTKVNaP1W7J8qqxZ/kqKh3LEJpbVMGV3ABuYhsuD7ZgMa+MiTZOJnBVU4 HtanaYQADKSELZM4k9hyXhlbj2/2rv/FH94LIRihORY7ExsYN9xvGjCvuGhDzQ1n sDM8LYxPrFiqzXVzEL09a/7aAcz5d1/gBWlI95AMkSDDlJ7beaXnz4yMe7/A8IEu Jx9OSUKD1FVjMnUTw0MvlW1n1fPes2F+jiE5sDePL7JsNsFXQaOfXB2OybYXNx2y DQpvl5Z79ZevCX1Zhyo9uQAye/NIMo6uev5og2KfsNJanp1GbUk4EuIlBTFTN8RF kdOhRvB68lNhfjxKLn5bQY1WVtH9obqNuyTBiGK51cpaGuNBtYVkF8ZCGbRqBJDU WLFMKd4cVQyaLjsVj/QFZ5t1ELSjby/bVCZymJlhV2QeSjS7JZgJtd9eFnUzO4Bf ypo1dAw8HjYmGjTw/iCYj4mlBjrWPW39HJV7IcLbsuxKRz3Ok1peNPO+TUGze3qj yDi6S7eNtazfiTWXURYBhjGg009LNq5Bq6CIM8toieGYuq1MMZSduw8mtoLaM4zR bt5c3Z8Ew2LruEkIaOtPNilzM0Ur22IeUirkNPXxtWd50sAxAWK9irPWY/EoXOoi N8FX8t5beWLRiAwPK8Q1UJ9UejQ/4SQR6FhtLpa3djHeB8EgimrU2fXAbwC+DOkY 9tArScL0Qi16jT0JXgaKj9IomorCH/kHneob0j14RJbhm3BkrKow24Mbqxks14at 8Lxt2OsD8Lkh8C7AG5HhkLlkT1eyOigQWi0zeVOWBmRzHbA3sPEoTNjRoATdCXEO /AvZKFOILh0/Fax5T30ukJ5qfWUmbzxCgW4aL+w+s5tj/qOci7ZTIJ2rV3HnWRVN 1G2PcrNwkFy/8fhwBUuOu7ykU5GSEqS64F9bm3YYnnXO7Dr5/A== =wmD4 -END PGP MESSAGE-

Thanks, [[Sam Korn ]] (smoddy) 18:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

For the sake of completeness :-)

-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

hQQOA5SyA3xlFDnMEBAAjGA2+DFIcbnex3OrkaehuvABRraz4HaFcVriH85yqLtv ebQLy1i7x8NTDxIyXA/JLMUdXjKrD6ncYLdjp5dwBZX8en3jCPaPyGEtD/9aWuT2 udzPkn7jbuPom4KhCZq7fBV5TPHWbDyzmJire0dQtP7N8z7grOd28I9vPMU969IY 6eB6vuRMWDLf3UlO4pxgZSjcZYP9/eSpjC3nBdu/Bpuj/BNyviN/XOHVyv57gOFt F1YQWqXFHQvayz8ITjh7KR8Q/XhR00F8CwJ7oAXkzfTM5rF+ZvsQ1CY0RwHC5zED qOSEZFnHDSexf29TOH9hcYG+SOBlF8UcY9tKU5J22e8TuJ3TiT7H+8CC2UOUoMi/ eUjsM1qYjPDy4iW9uynDUemo2qmRCSmEWzap2VFH8OlpACqlBN9ylN7yi7WRDfwY QsLFMoVm8hwCsVvSp8+1ps6paq+tCe/2vZLvSGUAQzNFvNfxYuzwRSkziohM6XJG RbzEjDvkcFlVU+TbRUd3YBwM+GUUO7eBdKNbEiYrAnZjZi6V09Whma1s0Q0nq1Aw Ci3fot7IP7Sh+kWWJkHNbTAz8fFzNwH9ZTn2rJ8E9sEj2sUGP21qAmn6Ja78Iw68 2Mql91F+/skz8t8x63GaTjYm1YnhAbLeQ8Jb93kOZba2BeYyC8/8dDY8r4GuTr0Q AJ9bebPtxwugx/8HdhMssXxVmkU/dUSZTjQOHwl/Oq2XvZf+rhaKayaTJAR6Gqpc PPTMAnim7rUl4o66/GVBgd1D7CZJaUWsVAiTol8K/M4AmbR6fJiuEQY7NcgiHyR9 X2emi9XjuSXV705DfU2n4szG8OwD4RuzGjN+DrO5Jfv+r4J79UNSYQzzkXvKizMH Kue6uonRSwk8pFwTUTwAO9axVQqypKGVAsEz3IJu0KmqbsQi2H7LCa9IllcKkoo3 m/UbI6WM1qyYWSb5BuAyaQ6Qnc0Hkk3u0ROt0gUbJTOZKLP9J7T7oUiktn43eoXC Db24JOvlwMSDb3N3e3rjGHKqg8oeI76qF/40lZpK2ZsFwexXr2W+tqUmnv43zzhB C9Z1S0j9Q4hsQRts1qPNR0aFT/M70ZhZB119/BlWwV0ns4/m+mZZGrBai8CZPeIm qLsx6h7tagiDGwhTvb0JtYL1I0CM5jyie2oQI1jd+4kX1NNzJHDmN6ua0CQubp+n ttnaD/M4n9s1LpgFxbxgV0I6qSIqm9rE6EK0fTPV5CfIcnM1PMx1bdFyI8XbW5KX fmNj0YUe3a/4bSRyLq2ZIi1jGZjOK8gNb9gHuo75pZvk+9d/J041W7+bS26FuG67 dKTMHDR+VcEqnDZkr5io9kzBkvw/+Tghrq3NeuRgGefe0sAlAW3Y5hTchZ4/VVld MAJMjlU93uWWVxARDmceoz1cYv+3mJ2o6RQA8EqGCwLm0ipfoanOdrwGTn5BvibL NPU52vUNxIemdaTXE3Nf/Jc14pvzKSlcF1Dx5cw7GL29OTSTqsNtbTI7U4EOcj90 nL7mCkKx9AjaUhTt0Tjc7Nnk3glwpS0bokXsw6u+07nQqDewF58992Y0ri9x0PDc XEOG0tEwXMPfsETsKJOlmDJ7A+/HCDf43SmU9Tt+XVGBYOYJPmG5PR+VuVsfWT8F Oj1INC0fRVoLBXl+1MPHEzAO3Benw3tpIw== =BD3t -END PGP MESSAGE-

Ping
Good day, Avraham. I was wondering if I could get your attention here. Best regards, -- Kanonkas : Talk  20:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Ban for Tundrabuggy + comment Cerejota (talk) 08:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. That was my mistake. I thought I'd linked to the ban page but apparently, I only linked to a page discussing the ban. However, Tundrabuggy has been blocked from editing the article for a month.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Right of defense
Avi, thanks for doing the sockpuppet investigation. I did just want to comment that the form has a section for the accused's "defense". I rec'd notice last night late and by the time I got up in the morning it was over. I think it is important that it be honored by giving a little more time to allow a defense, at least 24 hours or something. This is becoming a sore spot for me since even the month-long block I received from PhilKnight in relation to this was done without either notification or opportunity to defend myself. According to PhilKnight there is no neccesity for one to be informed under IP discretionary sanctions. I was in favor the checkuser being run, but I still believe it is necessary in ALL of these wp legalistic-type procedures, that the "accused" be allowed to make a case before judgment is rendered. Just my 2 cents. Best, Tundrabuggy (talk) 16:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note and I take your point, and as I said I am a bit sensitive to the issue. I liked your comment on the bottom, which was what I had planned to say, about users sharing similar viewpoints not automatically being socks.  And also I was planning to ask that there not be a "fishing expedition" since the accusation was specific for the two of us.  You addressed all that.  So I have no complaints really, except in regard to the broader issue of adjudicating anything "behind (seemingly) closed doors," a message which I would like to get out to all of wiki and the powers that be here.  Best wishes, Tundrabuggy (talk) 17:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Betacrusis
Hey, I though this was closed pretty fast. Was it the norm? I was hoping to do some posturing, including requesting that I be included in the CU. It's really shameful that all non-pro-Palestinians are continuously accused of being sockpuppets at the Gaza conflict talkpage. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 00:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
I don't know if you watchlisted my page, thought I would respond here, or (most likely) chose to ignore my reply :-) but, in any case, I would like to try this talkback shtick. I think it's somewhat cool.  brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 00:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

OTRS
As you asked to be notified, just letting you know there's half a dozen or so Hebrew tickets in the permissions-commons queue. :) Stifle (talk) 17:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Jmundo
Could you please take a look at User_talk:Jmundo. Its related to the Dixie block by Drini.--Cerejota (talk) 06:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
My TB is broken :(--Cerejota (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Die4dixie
Just replied on his talk page. -- m:drini 13:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Jmundo still blocked.--Cerejota (talk) 13:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Another admin unblocked.--Cerejota (talk) 14:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Daniel??
I think this user: Piz_d%27Es-Cha might be Daniel. His talk page shows some editors making comments similar to those we made, and he shares similar traits. I would keep an eye on him. Yossiea (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Is this acceptable?
Is it now considered good behaviour to call other people bullies ? -- m:drini 19:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Because that is what Duero and Netito are: WP:DUCK. However, you an admin and steward, called Jmundo a "wikilawyer" (without any evidence - and failing even basic WP:DUCK), and then called me a liar, for something I didn't even say. Please, I ask you to again apologize for your mistakes, this is the third time I ask you. --Cerejota (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

And, you spoke for Die4Dixie... what are you going to do regarding canvassing? -- m:drini 21:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 * 


 * He doesn't need to do anything! I have spoken to Die4Dixie about the matter. Theresa Knott | token threats 22:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Just got back (I did say I was at meetings all day), sorry. Thanks for taking care of this. -- Avi (talk) 04:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Stephen Atalebe
Can you have a look at Stephen Atalebe? This is blatant advertising, even listing his address. --BSTemple (talk) 20:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

RE:Languages
Yes, from what I have seen now, you do have enough language ability and cross-wiki capability for the job. Many of us just didn't look deep enough into you and your editing history. Thank you and sorry about the delay in responding.  Marlith  (Talk)   17:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Done. Thank you so much for bringing this to attention for me. I otherwise would have made an ignorant decision if it were not so. Good luck!  Marlith  (Talk)   00:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ancestry
Avi, I have run into an interesting issue on Lawrence Summers. An editor there has been adding a lot of snarky comments on Summers. Unsourced. The comments included attacks on his politics, assertions of his Jewishness (Larry is Jewish, of course) and finally a geneological assertion of the Jewish origins of his mother's family. There was a tone about his edits. I joined other editors in reverting what he added. Now he has begun a discussion on the talk page, asking why ancestry is irrelevent. I think it is something that needs consideration. Ken Salazar's page includes assertions that he is a "12th generation American." Nineteenth century biographies routinely began with a geneology often going back hundreds of years, but routinely three or four generations. Is that where we are going with all this? Confining the discussion to Americans, do we now write about everybody's grandparents, which ones attended mass, which immigrated form Albania? Or do we mention it only when the parents are notable? giving this kind of space to which cabinet officer has French blood and which one is a "12th generation American." frankly gives me the creeps.. Interested in your thoughts.Historicist (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Bootleggers and Baptists
I notice you reverted a link to Bootleggers and Baptists on the Unholy Alliance page. This article reminds me of the unholy alliance article that User:Mbhiii started some time back. The consensus was to delete that article. In your opinion, is this one significantly different enough to remain? Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 00:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

IP block
Hello Avraham, Thanks for carrying out this case. I wonder if the IP adress (/eses) could be blocked as it's being used to create more socks and evade the block. Thanks for your help; best regards. -- Dferg (w:en: - w:es:) 20:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, if I'm noticed about more socks I'll tell you ASAP. Thanks for the reply. Best regards -- Dferg (w:en: - w:es:) 20:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Eden Natan-Zada
Please read the articles. The law was only defined regarding entities "hostile to the State of Israel". There is no mention of religion. Continued deliberate misrepresentation of article content is a WP:NPOV violation and may be met with measures necessary to protect the project. -- Avi (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is the quote:

-- Avi (talk) 20:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That is one quote. Here is a quote from the Guardian where the information was found.

Please respond to this matter on the article discussion page, where the discussion belongs and where you could see the relevant quotation for yourself. TWilliams9 (talk) 20:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Spam links
Becks (talk)Thanks Avi. I will see what needs to be done to be considered not spam so added the site that does not take advertising. Hopefully that corrects situation. FYI Employers use these calculators to gain management commitment and it's the only place to get them, so am trying to figure out how to complay while still providing what they need and want. Thanks again, Becks48 :-)

Sockpuppet investigations/98.180.202.52
Hi Avi. I noticed you started to run a check on this case, and its been a day or so. I figured you may have forgotten? Best.  Syn  ergy 20:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Perfectly understandable. I'll post an additional clerk note to the case. Thank you for your promptness.  Syn  ergy 20:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Clonedroidcadet1
Please see the above. Thanks Avi, Tiptoety  talk 17:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

User talk:91.108.219.174
He's requesting an unblock, and he says all the right things. Putting unblock on hold and seeking your input. --Jayron32. talk . contribs 20:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that lasted a while. What was that, 1.5 hours between unblock and reblock.  Oh well, live and learn... --Jayron32. talk . contribs  02:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Question about licensing
Hi. I've got a question about licensing text in light of the upcoming potential transition to CC-by-SA. As one of my favorite go-to OTRSers, I wanted to let you know about it and ask you, if you have any input, to please weigh in. :) It's at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Jack Coggins
Responded on my talk. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 17:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

heh
... beat me to it :) - A l is o n  ❤ 19:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/Geocourrier
Hi, I see you're a checkuser. I'd be extremely grateful if you could clarify I am not User:Right2. Thanks in advance. Geocourrier (talk) 20:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, yeah I know that - but the checkuser wasn't set up by me. It was set up by a user accusing me. I just came to you hoping you'd be able to sort it out soon, rather than my name being under threat for however long it goes on for. Cheers Geocourrier (talk) 20:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * As a checkuser, could you perhaps take a look then, if you have enough time? Geocourrier (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)