User talk:TAnthony/Documentation


 * Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Montaj13

 * Sockpuppet investigations/Montaj13
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Montaj13/Archive

Roak
✅ by CheckUser that Leslie Roak is:
 * Final civility warning 8/12/09
 * Subsequent violation 8/14/09
 * Incident report 8/14/09
 * Block 8/14/09
 * New insult 8/14/09
 * Another inappropriate edit summary 8/17/09
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Leslie Roak (8/14/09)
 * Clau5dia8
 * TAnthony AniMate
 * Leslie Roaker II
 * AniMate TAnthony
 * BreakingDawn 90210
 * Twilight 90210
 * M623 and N623 (who are blocked as possible sockpuppets of banned user Randy Jaiyan)

Canto2009
Initially, editor repeatedly removed DirecTV from lead pgh of all Passions character articles en masse and added repeated instances of "NBC Soap Opera" (link and incorrect capitalization included) in an effort to assert series ownership, as well other overlinking and redundancies. Edits were repeatedly reverted, and IPs warned.
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Canto2009/Archive
 * Passions and DirecTV edits, the following covered in part in 1st sockpuppet investigation :
 * Revert of a particularly extensive but misguided edit (2/17/09)]

Same editor has begun adding excessive phrasing related to "NBC making the final season of the Passions available for viewing exclusively on DirecTV's The 101 Network" and "NBC never released them onto it's [sic] own network or anywhere else for viewing in the United States." Related articles already have adequate explanation on the situation, by for example, editor insists on an extended discussion of Passions' distribution within the Days of our Lives article. Again, editor will not engage in discussion on the topic. Articles involved: NBC, NBC Daytime, List of shows previously aired by NBC‎, Today (NBC program), and Days of our Lives.


 * IPs used (City College of NY)
 * 134.74.74.48 (talk)
 * 134.74.74.100 (talk) - Blocked 10/21/08
 * 134.74.146.140 (talk)
 * 134.74.146.143 (talk)
 * 134.74.146.149 (talk)
 * 134.74.146.150 (talk)


 * IPs used (New York City Technical College)
 * 199.219.129.1 (talk)


 * Same editor
 * Canto2009 (Contributor of this unbelieveable edit)
 * Evidence:
 * This overlinking and this one
 * This NBC-DirecTV edit by Canto2009 is similar to this edit by IP 134.74.146.150
 * This "viewing on DirecTV" edit by Canto2009 mimics ones by 134.74.74.100 and134.74.146.150
 * Taishan88 : This "viewing on DirecTV" edit is nearly identical to this one by Canto2009 previously in the same article (all of this new user's edits relate to this situation)
 * User:Slumber101:, , , , and mimic edits by Canto2009 and Taishan88.

Comcast editor with similar overlinking habits began changing "NBC/DirecTV" to "NBC-DirecTV" and added irrelevant citations and uncivil hidden comments to ward off reverts. This editor also pasted large amounts of material from other websites into various character articles.


 * IPs used (Comcast, NJ)
 * 75.65.206.149 (talk) Blocked 2/17/09
 * 75.66.34.189 (talk)

This edit (adding "NBC-DirecTV") by 134.74.74.48 (talk) indicates that all of the IPs here are indeed the same editor, seemingly editing from school and at home.

KellyAna

 * Many soap-related edit conflicts with User:KellyAna
 * See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/User:KellyAna(2nd),User:Irishlass0128(2nd)
 * KellyAna tagged as a sock of User:IrishLass0128 - 4/9/08

KellyAna, I do want to calmly clear the air with you on a few things. I admit I have been somewhat frustrated with some of your edits and comments lately, but I of course apologize for anything which may be construed as a personal attack. And though I have indeed been watching your talk page and looking in on your contributions (as anyone has a right to do), I have only "interfered" in soap article-related matters. I have had Sami Brady and Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald on my watchlist for awhile, and I started watching TheRhani's talk page before you even commented there (I had left my own comment there previously, after she made her first Sami Brady edits). I'm sorry if you feel "followed," I assure you that is not the case.
 * DRAFT: Comment about recent events

My main issue with your edits and behavior lately is what I perceive as you making repeated controversial edits and reverts without discussion and using false and misleading statements to support them (An example:"Soap articles are done this way"). You then seem to dismiss and ignore any and all discussion or criticism of these edits, including citations of policies and guidelines that challenge your edits. This is inappropriate. I don't believe you are purposely misleading; you obviously feel strongly about your practices, but I feel that some of them are incorrect and yet you will not consider this possibility. As I've said elsewhere, my concern is for the articles I believe you are impacting negatively, and also that other impressionable editors may see your edits and practices and mimic them. You yourself sometimes note that you're doing things how you've seen them done in other articles. As an experienced editor, you may be influential to others, and I am uncomfortable with your perpetuating some of these "questionable" practices by advising and admonishing editors when they contradict you or make edits with which you disagree.

I admit that I am guilty of this myself at times, but I feel that you often have an unnecessarily defensive, hostile and combative tone in your edit summaries and comments. I understand the frustration that comes with the constant senseless and incorrect edits to soap articles by IP users, etc. because I go through the same thing, so I do not wish to scold you but rather ask you to take more care in this area, as I will for myself.

I watch a lot of articles and user talk pages. I of course will never fully stop editing and commenting where I feel it is appropriate, but I regularly ignore plenty of edits I disagree with and discussions I could be useful in. You and I are a lot alike in that we are both very opinionated and strong-willed, and it appears very easy for us to goad each other into inappropriate and counterproductive behavior. Despite my dedication to the Project in general, I have little personal interest in the Days of our Lives articles, and will probably now ignore them and let you do whatever you want. I do ask that you try in the future to thoughtfully consider the good faith criticisms of other editors, and respect their opinions enough to sometimes just accept their changes to your work or leave their own edits alone &mdash; even if you disagree somewhat. You may also reconsider the way you maintain your talk page, as dismissing/deleting validd comments without acknowledgment can be considered uncivil. I also ask that you take more care with your justifications, and provide links to actual guidelines or precedents when you are asserting questionable practices or those likely to be challenged.

KellyAna, you and I have butted heads lately, but I am posting the following comment on your talk page to calmly address some concerns I have. Please take the time to read and consider it in its entirely, and please do not take offense. I am trying to be constructive.
 * DRAFT: Kind warning===

As I have said before, I appreciate your vigilance in monitoring articles and enforcing policies and guidelines. However, I feel that you are sometimes misinformed about the "rules" and are unyielding even when challenged with citations.


 * 1) You continue to revert good faith edits by claiming consensus on the part of WP:SOAPS or a phantom "we," and yet not only do the practices you defend actually violate policies and guidelines, but the Project has no related guideline which supports your assertions. When other editors point out these violations and cite policy, you are dismissive and ignore them.
 * 2) You tend to be hostile and bite newbies. Even other editors have noted you to be repeatedly "hostile and argumentative"
 * 3) It is uncivil to delete, dismiss or belittle constructive comments on your talk page, especially using the excuse that they are "placed in wrong place on talk page" or "That's not where messages go" or you not read?" This includes the removal of repeated warnings without acknowledgement. Your arbitrary "Big Orange Banner" instructions do not makesuch removals any more appropriate. This ongoing practice suggests a general disregard for the opinions of other editors, as well as your obvious refusal to accept constructive criticism based on policies and guidelines cited in these comments.
 * More examples: your blunt removal of a "nonsensical" comment regarding your removal policy, which actually makes perfect sense -dismissal of a valid comment with "whatever" -


 * 1) You are consistently defensive and hostile regarding any comments you regard as criticism, be they valid or not. This exchange you removed shows your inflammatory behavior towards an admin who was making a valid point regarding your comment deletion policy and your previous dismissals of his other valid comments. Among other things, in this exchange you scold him for his use of the word "deprecated" and he later aptly classifies you as "combative" in his last comment.

I would also like to add that I acknowledge losing my temper with you at times out of frustration, and I am by no means suggesting that I am "perfect." But I honestly feel that I have always been able to step back and do what is best for the situation, be it argue a point or "let it go,"" even if I disagree. I feel that you are always unable change your mind, no matter how tiny or unimportant the issue, or how much "evidence" may be presented against your position.

Talk:Sami Brady

Regarding using IMDb for the awards: yes, SOD's lists may be used and perhaps may be considered more "reliable." However, I take issue with your simply removing the IMDb references out of hand and replacing them with a "need refs" tag (Or removing it altogether, as you did previously). We both know it will most like go uncited for a very long time; a "weak" source is far better than none at all. If you feel this strongly about the source and the article itself, I cannot understand why you wouldn't take it upon yourself to provide the SOD source yourself &mdash; especially since you are pretty much the only one questioning IMDb's validity in general. The info about Sweeney's awards and the other quotes about the character that The Rhani added constitute the only real-world context the article has. These help assert the character's notability, and without them the article is, plain and simple, deserving of deletion per WP standards. The Project's main goal is to improve soap articles with the idea of making them "deserving to exist" and not eligible for deletion. I would argue that one of its goals is not making sure every tiny detail of every character and show is specified, as many editors seem to think. I would ask you and every other member of the Project to recognize and remember that. The only reason I even got involved in this article was because I felt as though some of your edits were jeopardizing this article as I have described, and that your justifications might influence other editors to edit along the same lines. I have only the Project and its articles in mind. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk15:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Onelifefreak2007

 * Block log • IP socks

Image block

 * Image violation report:, , (8/19/08)
 * Block for 1 week: (8/19/08)
 * Resolution: (8/19/08)

IP sock

 * Suspected IP sock notification; editing during block using IP 68.185.181.8 (8/25/08)
 * Suspected sock puppets/Onelifefreak2007 (created 8/25/08; closed 8/28/08)

Formal 3RR warning

 * Warning (8/25/08)

3RR block

 * 3RR violation report: (9/1/08)
 * Block: (9/2/08)
 * Resolution: (9/2/08)
 * 2nd Block: (9/3/08)

Personal attack warning

 * With examples: (9/2/08)
 * Response by Onelifefreak2007: (9/2/08)
 * Clarification of warning: (9/2/08)


 * Subsequent personal attack after re-block for edit-warring, directed at blocking Admin: (9/3/08)

3RR with OLTL2002

 * 3RR violation report: (9/17/08)
 * 24-hour block: OLTL2002and Note
 * 72-hour block: Onelifefreak2007and Note (9/17/08)
 * Resolution: (9/17/08)

Miscellaneous

 * Disregard for permanent block and "promise" to create a new screen name if blocked {10/7/08]

December 2008

 * Documentation of some December 2008 incivility/edit-warring (12/14/2008)
 * Request for intervention by Kafziel (12/14/08)
 * Blocked for 1 month by Kafziel (12/14/08)
 * Personal attack by Onelifefreak2007 (12/14/08)

IP sock redux

 * IP 68.185.181.8 autoblocked (12/15/08)
 * Unblock request by P.J. (Onelifefreak2007)
 * Request declined
 * Various exchanges, and warnings for PJ to stop editing as IP (12/15-12/26/08)
 * Notifying Kafziel of continued editing during block (12/26/08)
 * IP blocked for 2 weeks Block log (12/26/08)
 * Onelifefreak2007 block restarted for 1 month for block evasion using IP (12/27/08)

January 2009

 * Edit war warning (1/29/09)
 * Onelifefreak2007 indefinitely blocked for edit-warring (1/29/09)]

2nd IP sock

 * IP 71.90.130.187
 * Blocked 2/5/09

3rd IP sock

 * IP 68.114.218.113
 * Confirmed
 * Blocked

4th IP sock

 * IP 71.90.0.115
 * Acknowledges identity here
 * Blocked 7/5/09

Phenomenon8980

 * Block log
 * Removal and archiving of initial 9/25/08 exchange and later comments] (10/10/08)

Attacks on my talk page:

 * 10/2/08 and my removal
 * 10/2/08 and removal by Elonka

Blocks

 * Removal warning 1 by Risker (10/2/08)
 * Removal warning 2 by Risker (10/2/08)
 * Block by Risker (48 hrs) (10/2/08)
 * Block by Rlevse (72 hrs) (10/5/08)
 * Block by Luna Santin (1 week) (10/7/08)
 * Block by Nishkid64 (2 weeks) (10/16/08)

IP sock 1

 * IP 66.158.194.206 made this removal of valid content without edit summary, which is basically identical to this one by Phenomenon8980, who was under a block at the time.
 * Open sockpuppetry case and Add comment (10/3/08)
 * Notify Phenomenon8980
 * Notify IP
 * IP blocked (10/3/08)


 * Bad faith content removal during block using IP 96.243.244.244 (10/4/08)
 * Further bad faith content removal during block using IP 96.243.244.244 (10/4/08)


 * Phenomenon8980 comment on sockpuppetry case (10/5/08)
 * Query by Phenomenon8980, including attack, Self-correction of query and Advice from Elonka (10/5/08)
 * Phenom blanks talk page, Elonka warns, Phenom re-blanks and Phenom blocked for 72 hours (Fix)(10/5/08)

IP sock 2

 * IP 131.247.207.7 made this revert without edit summary/explanation, which is identical to this one by Phenomenon8980, who is under a 72-hour block. (10/7/08)
 * 2nd sockpuppet case(10/7/08)
 * Notify Phenomenon8980
 * Notify IP
 * Phenom comment 1
 * Phenom comment 2
 * TAnthony response
 * Phenom reply "This article that I CREATED, is meant to be a day by day plot update page because I CREATED IT for that sole purpose."
 * TAnthony response

IP sock 3

 * Revert by 131.247.244.191 matches this one and this one (10/7/08)
 * 2nd sockpuppet case (10/7/08)
 * Notify Phenomenon8980
 * Notify IP
 * IP pretends to not know Phenom in response to sock warning, but is using this newer IP for warning on previous IP's talk page
 * Phenom comment
 * Phenom admits to reverting during block and intention to continue doing so
 * Subsequent reverts/edits:    (among others)
 * IP sock compliments disputed article and it's "creator" (Phenomenon8980) in an effort to gain consensus
 * Personal attack - see Continued, below (09:12 10/16/08)
 * IP blocked (24 hrs) (10:44 10/16/08)

IP sock 4

 * Removal of discussion here by IP 131.247.201.86, which goes against argument of Phenomenon8980 and related sockpuppets already reported (removal of talk is a typical tactic of this editor). Subsequent revert 1 and revert 2 (10/7/08)
 * Personal attack in response to warning (10/7/08)
 * IP blocked (10/7/08)
 * 2nd sockpuppet case (10/7/08)
 * Notify Phenomenon8980 (10/7/08)
 * Notify IP (10/7/08)
 * Personal attack by Phenom and removal by Moreschi (10/7/08)
 * Talk:Phenomenon8980 protected for 1 week (10/7/08)
 * Protection tag (10/7/08)

IP sock 5

 * New personal attack by IP 66.158.193.30 is reminiscent of this one and this one, and Phenomenon8980 seems to have motive since "his" article was deleted per Articles for deletion/Current Days of Our Lives characters.
 * Add to 2nd sockpuppet case (10/14/08)
 * Tag IP and IP talk
 * Block (10/14/08)

IP sock 6

 * Vandalism to my user page (11:06), Vandalism to my talk page (11:07) and Level 1 vandalism warning (11:07 10/23/08)
 * Repeat user (11:11), user (11:12), Repeated talk (11:13), Repeated user (11:15), Repeated user (11:25) and Level 2 vandalism warning (11:26 10/23/08)
 * Repeated user (11:30), Repeated talk (11:30) and Level 3 vandalism warning (11:27 10/23/08)
 * Repeated talk (11:32) and Level 4 vandalism warning (11:32 10/23/08)
 * IP blocked (2 weeks) by J.delanoy (11:34 10/23/08)
 * Tag IP user page as sock (10/23/08)

Continued

 * Phenom comment on my talk page (09:03 10/16/08) and My reply (09:35 10/16/08)
 * Phenom comment on Elonka's talk page (09:05 10/16/08) and My reply (09:39 10/16/08)
 * Personal attack by IP sock 3 (131.247.244.191) (09:12 10/16/08)
 * Query on Phenom's talk page (09:56 10/16/08)
 * Phenom comment on my talk page (10:13 10/16/08) and My reply (10:41 10/16/08)
 * Personal threat by Phenom on my talk page (10:59 10/16/08)
 * My reply (11:36 10/16/08)
 * Another threat on my talk page (11:41 10/16/08)
 * My reply (11:48 10/16/08)
 * Threat on his own page (11:19 10/16/08)
 * Block by Nishkid64 (2 weeks) (11:47 10/16/08)
 * Personal attack by IP 66.158.193.58 (10/20/08) WHOIS ISP: http://www.flmultimedia.com/ David Newsom 813.691.3333
 * Blocked by Elonka (10/20/08)
 * '''Phenomenon8980 blocked indefinitely due to CheckUser evidence (10/20/08)
 * Protestation of innocence by Phenomenon8980 (6:09 10/21/08)
 * My response to Phenomenon8980 (8:49 10/21/08)
 * Additional comment (9:09 10/21/08)

ThePhenom80

 * Protestation of innocence by Phenomenon8980 (6:09 10/21/08)
 * User:ThePhenom80 created at 6:15 10/21/08
 * User page vandalism 1 (6:18), 2 (6:21) and 3 (6:22) by ThePhenom80 and Revert (6:39) (10/21/08)
 * ThePhenom80 blocked indefinitely by Elonka (10/21/08)
 * My response to Phenomenon8980 (8:49 10/21/08)
 * Additional comment (9:09 10/21/08)

"Mexican vandal"
Uses random IPs to continually vandalize Carrington family, Dynasty (1981 TV series) and now Courtney by replacing all instances of "American" with "Mexican," adding multiple instances of the Mexican flag image, and related disruptive edits, as well as inappropriate slurs and personal attacks in edit summaries and on talk pages of those who revert his/her edits. Vandal also disrupts talk pages immediately after being blocked.

Contributions and block history:

 * Window.onload = initAll;
 * IP 58.178.143.162 Blocked 10/2/08
 * IP 58.179.207.253 Blocked 10/1/08
 * IP 202.67.101.170 Blocked 9/20/08
 * IP 210.50.232.31
 * IP 58.178.137.2
 * IP 210.50.234.212
 * IP 202.138.6.105
 * IP 58.178.137.25 Blocked 9/5/08
 * IP 58.178.149.68 Blocked 8/29/08
 * IP 58.178.150.64 Blocked 8/21/08
 * IP 58.178.105.125 Blocked 8/16/08
 * IP 58.179.189.122 Blocked 8/15/08 (probably same individual; used "Monkeys" instead of "Mexican" but similar vandalism, foul language and capitalization in edits and edit summaries)

John McBain edits
IP editor adds character criticism attributed to message boards/forums to John McBain (One Life to Live) and resorts to personal attacks when challenged and blocked.


 * 129.22.167.119 (talk) Reverted 1/18/09, Reverted again by me 1/19/09, Reverted by HexaChord 1/20/09, Personal attack to HexaChord 1/20/09, Article vandalism 1/20/09, Reverted by HexaChord 1/20/09, IP blocked for 48 hours 1/20/09


 * 129.22.167.87 (talk) Reverted again by me 1/19/09, Personal attack on my talk page 1/20/09, Reverted by HexaChord 1/20/09, Attack, Revert, Attack, Revert, Attack, Revert, IP blocked for 24 hours 1/20/09


 * 129.22.167.84 (talk) Restore material 1/20/09, Reverted by Kraftlos 1/20/09, Restore 1/20/09, My comment to IP, Removed by me 1/20/09


 * 129.22.167.103 (talk) Restore material and vandalism 1/20/09, Reverted by Kraftlos 1/20/09

Yrgh conflict
Archived Yrgh conflict

IP nuisances and vandals

 * Various IPs of OLTL vandal
 * User talk:12.5.1.207
 * User talk:75.182.80.109 (blocked 1 February 2008 for 31 hours)
 * User talk:75.177.134.97


 * The Listmaker
 * User talk:76.68.103.242 - Trivial lists copied from IMDb.com and inserted everywhere

Cebr1979

 * Block log
 * Sockpuppet investigations/Cebr1979 and Archive (April 2016)

       
 * 6/9/15 3RR warning
 * 6/16/15 Cebr1979 comment
 * Violation discussion notification
 * Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Cebr1979 reported by User:TAnthony (6/9/15)
 * Darkwind warning re: Cebr1969's tone
 * Cebr1979 Last word
 * Personal attack described as "Schooling" directed at Jester66 6/9/15
 * Warning re: Personal attack
 * Notice to Cebr1979 of inappropriately toned edit summaries
 * They are:
 * Latest comment by TAnthony (6/16/15) at User talk:Jester66, response to this Cebr1979 comment
 * My 6/9/15 comment at Talk:Katherine Chancellor
 * Cebr1979's response
 * My response
 * Another inappropriately toned edit summary (6/15/15)

AffeL

 * My talk page notification re: sockpuppetry (2/11/17)
 * AffeL's response


 * Supporting diff timeline
 * IP edit to The Well-Tempered Clavier (Westworld) on 11/29/16
 * AffeL reverts twice
 * AffeL reports IP for vandalism
 * Newly-created PeterD12 uses first edit to revert IP in same article/same issue once and then again
 * Accusation of sock puppetry by IP
 * IP is blocked on 12/2/16 for continuing to edit war


 * Continued use of sock account PeterD12
 * Requested move/December 2016
 * Merger discussion/December 2016
 * AfD/January 2017