User talk:Luk/Archives/2009/08

This Archive Page goes from 1/8/2009 to 31/8/2009 (dd/mm/yyyy)

Previous conversations prior to 1 August 2009 (UTC) are archived there.

Judaism protection
I noticed a post at the Talk page that the article's been protected for 14 months.

Do you think that the indefinite protection should be made permanent? --Dweller (talk) 10:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Judaism. Perhaps give it a try? Debresser (talk) 10:35, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've no issue against someone giving it a chance (be my guests ;)), I just think this being the Interwebz, this will unfortunately get bombed again by vandals as soon as they discover it's unprotected. -- Luk  talk 12:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with you. In that case, you could protect it again, but this time indefinitely. It is just that I prefer to give humanity its umptieth change to try and prove itself worthy. :) Debresser (talk) 13:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Unblock request
Thanks for your testimony which exonerated me from the sockpuppetry. I'll try to keep a cooler head on future editing disputes. GoldDragon (talk) 16:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you got unblocked, please be careful next time. Note that it's entirely possible the "sockpuppet" was not an innocent user... -- Luk  talk 14:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

re: Lost Account
Hi Luk :) Fortunately I was able to contact a system administrator this morning and have regained access now :) Thanks for the offer to help though, it's appreciated! 98.231.181.127 (talk) 05:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This is great news! -- Luk  talk 14:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

ANI sock question
Hi. There's a combo situation at ANI, suspected copyright infringer with maybe some socking (and maybe not). I'm working on the copyright side of things, since that's where I hang out with my mop, but I have done practically nothing with socks. If you get a chance, can you take a look and offer some feedback? It's always possible somebody else will weigh in, but I'm afraid it's quite likely to be a TLDR. (In fact, what first caught my eye about it was the sheer size of the edit. It's huge!) It's here, and the person who opened the section is not an English Wiki regular, but evidently hangs out at the Armenian WP. If it's not a good time, please feel free to just tell me so (when you get back online), and I'll go poking around for somebody who has time to spare (when I get back online). Of course, it's always possible that another sock-familiar admin will come along in the meantime who'll wade through that mass of text. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Replied on this user's talk page - 09:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC) 


 * Thanks for the feedback. Given that scenario, would you suggest that I courtesy list this at SPI for the contributor who brought it up at ANI (not sure he's familiar enough with our environment to navigate it), or would it be better to wait for further developments? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:19, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Evidently you're busy. :) I appreciate the feedback you've already given, and I'll ask one of the SPI clerks to weigh in on my further questions, as there is more evidence unfolding and still no other admin than me seems to be reading the thread. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. :) This sock puppetry stuff looks very complex. I like them when they're obvious. The last sock I blocked was kind enough to announce himself and name his blocked account. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to thank you again for your help with this. The sock portion of things is closed, at least, and it seems like the image issue will shortly follow (barring a surprise communication to OTRS). --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Osama bin laden portrait
Hi, you deleted File:Usama bin laden.jpg in June citing that it was also available on wikicommons. I can't find anything there that would be suitable. Is there any way the image can be recovered? I'm a bit miffed as to how no one has noticed that the Osama article hasn't had an image in the infobox for months. Thanks a lot, Smartse (talk) 03:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah figured it out (sort of). User:Trixt deleted the commons image yesterday citing this previous discussion. I found a non-free version File:Bin laden 12 27a.jpg which is also up for deletion and have put that into the article for the moment. Smartse (talk) 03:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Replied on this user's talk page - 07:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC) 


 * Replied on this user's talk page - 07:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC) 

User:Rich Rund
This account matches a pattern of similar usernames (and a few sockpuppets of User:Tile join) that have vandalised the user page, either by blanking it or making this edit. snigbrook (talk) 20:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, don't forget to say so on AIV :). I blocked a sleeper too. -- Luk  talk 06:41, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

No Title
Thanks for getting rid of duplicate PAGES of mine which were part of my work process when my gallery was closed. Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Wallack (talk • contribs) 20:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem! -- Luk  talk 06:41, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

IP "sock"
OK thanks, I have unblocked it. Black Kite 14:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

suspected sock
Hello. Sorry about not using my own account. On Sockpuppet investigations/Historičar for some reason the merge has not put User:ICTYoda as the suspected sock. Polargeo (talk) 16:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It has been done thanks Polargeo (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Request for checkuser
You may wish to see this. CU is required to prevent this user from damaging the encyclopedia.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  02:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:File:20061015-XR1200-PROTOTPYE55.JPG
Hi Luk. That's an excellent point! We wouldn't want to have images needlessly deleted from both projects. Thanks for letting me know - will check for that when cleaning out the en.wikipedia files on commons backlog. Regards,  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 23:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion and poll on reviewer usergroup criteria
You may be interested in a discussion and poll I've started to decide the criteria that will be used for promoting users to the reviewer group at Wikipedia talk:Reviewers - please put your comments there. AndrewRT(Talk) 17:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

== Wikipedia Signpost : 24 August 2009 ==


 * News and notes: $500,000 grant, Wikimania, Wikipedia Loves Art winners
 * Wikipedia in the news: Health care coverage, 3 million articles, inkblots, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)