User talk:Keesiewonder/Sockpuppets, Trolls, Harassment, ... 1

Unfortunately, I seem to attract or find this ... Keesiewonder talk 16:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Specific Vandals
75.28.90.78
 * User Page (4); Talk Page (1) ~ 20:37 January 28, 2007

75.5.180.4
 * User Page (1); Talk Page (1) ~ 19:40 January 31, 2007
 * User Page (1) ~ 22:51 February 2, 2007
 * User Page (4) ~ 19:20 February 10, 2007

76.213.174.48
 * User Page (10); Talk Page (1) ~ 07:10-08:27 February 18, 2007
 * User Page (1) ~ 22:28 February 19, 2007
 * User Page (1) ~ 06:53 February 22, 2007

192.195.154.123
 * User Page (1) ~ 01:34 March 29, 2007

75.8.92.90
 * Talk Archive (1) ~ 22:16 April 16, 2007

Martin Luther Page
Keesiewonder, thanks for sharing my concern about "Slim Virgin" and this person's unilateral edits. I've done a google search on this person and researched this person's history on Wikipedia and let's just say that we have in this person a notoriously flagrant violatoer of Wikipedia policies, and, frankly, a Wikipedia bully. The only way to deal with this king of thuggery is simply to keep reverting this person's edits. If you and I do this every day this person may lose interest and go away, but, on the other hand, "she" and I put "she" in quotes for I've learned there is every reason to believe this person is not a "she" at all, may call in her other allies on these Jewish POV issues and they will cause problems. But if you want, you and I and anyone else who share our concerns can just keep reverting this person's vandalism on the Luther page. Johann Friedrich 11:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmmmm. Ok, let's see if there's a politically correct way a la Wikipedia to deal with this. I'm relatively new, as I said. And, by the looks of your empty user page, empty talk page, and contribution list that began less than 8 hours ago, you look even newer to me. Just an observation; I realize you may have other accounts with much longer histories. Anyway, if what you're telling me is true, then the bulk of users on WP would probably join forces with you and/or us and the end result may be that at a minimum, administrator privileges, for example, may be taken away temporarily. My life experience tells me that getting in to a revert war in hopes that we win is probably not going to have the intended effects we seek.


 * Please don't get me wrong; I am quite proficient at causing a tremendous amount of effective trouble ... but ... do not like to be a troublemaker ... Nor do I feel that people who know me well see that as my purpose in life. My instincts tell me to try to proceed with the information you have offered me in a 'right' way, rather than just responding in a manner that may be perceived as responding in kind.


 * I expect other users are going to quickly see this part of my talk page and may offer some advice on how to proceed. May I also suggest that you and I, in all our spare time (HA!), figure out how to proceed with the existing policies on WP? For me, that means locating and reading about what options undoubtedly already exist for dealing with a situation such as this one involving an administrator. I realize that being an admim has perhaps little to do with the ML article, but, perhaps more than a revert war, it is something that SV would notice in a broader way. Thanks for your correspondence, I assure you I am female!, and if you prefer, you may email me at the link to the left. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 11:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Since there was a request for advice, I can't hold back my own two cents here. Without even looking at the ML article, and considering just your comment here, I'm assuming you're in a potential edit war with a person who happens to be an administrator. There are various procedural remedies but they are kind of slow. If there's no claim the administrator has abused his powers, then IMHO it's a plain old edit war among equals in which WP:RFC (Requests for comment) can be considered. Another idea is to find a 'parent project' for the ML page, and you could post there a specific question, asking those editors to look at the page and offer advice. I know this has often been done with positive results in the math and physics projects. Since this could be a 'religious war' kind of deal, you could look through past AfDs in which religious issues have been discussed, and ask one or more of the closing administrators (or AfD proponents, or just anybody) for advice. If a bunch of local editors have got into a weird state, bringing in new observers can help. EdJohnston 03:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Got your update on my talk page. Since you pointed me to the thread at ML, I sympathize with the struggle, but it seems you may no longer be the coolest head there (though you were until recently). EdJohnston 03:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Your patronizing remarks and personal insults on the Luther page
It's fairly obvious to me, and no doubt anyone else who reads your comments, that you can't participate on the Martin Luther page without emotionalizing everything. The patronizing tone you take over against new users, your constant references to your style and how busy you are...well, it's just getting old. Maybe you should consider sticking to "real life" since Wikipedia seems to be a source of such personal frustration and angst for you. Stop the personal attacks. And stow the patronizing remarks. It's just absurd. And, grow up for heaven's sake. If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen, etc. Justas Jonas 12:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this really the activity of a new user?   Keesiewonder 12:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Good question.--Mantanmoreland 22:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

AN/I
I've chimed in on your AN/I. Weird situation. I am actually sympathetic with this new editor's avowed goal but I find his/her methods simply wrong.--Mantanmoreland 16:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Excerpt of supplemental info I placed at AN/I:
 * So, one question I have is do the following four accounts all stem from one person:
 * Special:Contributions/Justas Jonas
 * Special:Contributions/75.37.215.34
 * Special:Contributions/Johann Friedrich
 * Special:Contributions/Ptmccain
 * I do not have any personal experience with the last; I do with the first three. Keesiewonder 17:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * In particular, see Talk:Martin_Luther/Archive_7. Having read virtually all of Ptmccain's posts before his ban, I have little doubt that he's the same as the other 3 users cited above. If you are interested in Ptmccain's contact information, it is readily available in virtually countless places on the Internet. Keesiewonder 20:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Another, i.e. # 5? Special:Contributions/24.107.121.195
 * No. 6? Special:Contributions/Bailan

Kees, you might want to report this to the suspected sockpuppets page. See WP:SOCK. I tend to agree with your analysis. --Mantanmoreland 01:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the tip; I'm afraid that since they have such a backlog and since only one of the 6 has been active within the last week that it may not be a very interesting case. I'll keep my eye on it though. The content rich info box was recently undone, again, about 90 minutes ago. Keesiewonder 01:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

More activity, disruption of other's work ... 

Relevant? ,,.

A Bot Ooops: 05:02, January 19, 2007 SlimVirgin (Talk | contribs) (reposting a thread that seems to have been archived early and replying)

checkuser  AN/I

If this and this are both true, I expect there are several Wikipedia editors who would appreciate knowing what other user names and IP addresses have been used to gain in excess of 500 edits on Wikipedia. If there's no truth to the 500+, then some light may have just been shed on the reliability of someone's posts in general. Keesiewonder talk 17:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there a similarity (or distinction) between the following two allegedly different users? See JF's words and JJ's words about ... what? "'she' in quotes for I've [JF] learned there is every reason to believe this person is not a 'she' at all" ... vs. ... "assuming she's a lady" (per JJ) ... What do you suppose is going on here? (BTW, JF has been blocked indefinitely and is additionallly mentioned in the checkuser link as being yet another previously, indefinitely banned user ...) Keesiewonder talk 18:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keesie, you might also want to check how many times all these "users" you are talking about use vowels and consonants. You might find some amazing similarities. How about the number of times we all use definite articles? Can you also draw conclusions based on that? Keesie, seriously, do you realize how you are beginning to make yourself look here? This is getting worse than Fatal Attraction.Justas Jonas 18:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for showing me that cool tool thing you use. Keesie, I've decided that you are my number one fan! I prefer to think this than to assume that you are disregarding WP:Harassment. Justas Jonas 18:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

A bio on the left. User:Ptmccain and User Talk:Ptmccain page histories are available (resurrected) for viewing.

Keesiewonder talk 10:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Seems like Ptmccain, like Justas Jonas and Johann Friedrich, may have something against women. "They are the incarnation of your proverbial busybody aunt." The Hazards of Wikipedia. Keesiewonder talk 17:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

checkuser
Yes you have to initiate a request. All information is on that page.Circeus 17:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see the outcome of checkuser at. I'm having trouble understanding how it is possible that WP does not have Ptmccain records if WP intended to ban the user indefinately. Someone, please enlighten me if you can. Thanks! Keesiewonder 10:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * THe records aren't kept for ever William M. Connolley 09:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me about the checkuser record retention question. Ptmccain was "indefinitely" blocked less than 6 months ago. How long are the records kept? 1 month? 3 months? I, obviously, don't have access to records from 6 months ago, yet, found a tremendous trail that leads to today's possible instances of this former user. If you've had a chance to read my AN/I and notes I've left for myself on my talk page, you'll see the "best" of what I saw. Thanks for your input. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 09:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:Harassment
Keesie, could you possibly find something more useful to do with your time than stalking me and obsessing over me on Wikipedia? Please read the WP:Harassment guideline and follow it. I'm growing increasingly concerned with you and your strange obsession with me. It is embarrassing for you. Please stop. Justas Jonas 13:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Patience and character deserve recognition

 * Indeed - I earned this one the hard way! Thank you so much, BadBilltucker, and others for your support, work and patience regarding "this" matter. You all know who you are and know what "this" is. I owe you one, and you know how to contact me. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder talk 13:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

VNDLS

 * RE Vandalism - I have 4,500 pages/articles on my watchlist - that might be the problem - but Portal:History, Gamelan, Krakatoa, Indonesia, Java, Indigenous Australians of recent seem to be the most vandalised - one big problem is that many users (usually red links) get their work of destruction reverted - but many of the reverters fail to put any warnings on the talk pages of the vndls.....  therein lies the problem  also some vndls get cheeky and continue after vndl bots revert - they simply continue.  Some who work on recent changes can also track down a lot that way too.  I often think that any editor who has only edited or worked on positive side of things should trawl either random page/or recent changes on the left column - for a a few hours just to get a sense of the jungle out there.  Popups are useful to check things - but plain old looking can be enough too.  The big problems yesterday were actually more vicious than that, but enough of that for the moment.  So thats my ideas - but good ideas of which WP pages to go to in emergency I think is as important as is the reporting itself - well worth refreshing up on regularly as to which issue deserves which  - WP:TT is well worth looking at IMHO :) SatuSuro 13:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * BTW your friendly ip niumber you warned at luther blanked your user page 4 times this am (Tokyo time 10.30 am utc 2.30) but seemed to have warnings and appears to have stopped - if I see it again it goes to AIV SatuSuro 01:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * 75.28.90.78 - User Page (4); Talk Page (1) ~ 20:37 January 28, 2007

Fan
History of your user page shows you have a somewhat naive fan :) - trust you had a good break SatuSuro 00:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah - this very moment we are having thunderstorms - whoopee! also cleared the 14,000 edits recently, still plodding away... thanks SatuSuro 02:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)