User talk:Tancred

Archives:
 * Archive 1

Mediation Case
Cheers for raising the request for mediation :) BTW did you get to see the "great" Romario play at Gosford? The SMH was rather scathing about his performance. 13:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah... Oh boy was he bad. Had a few touches where you could see where a world champion once was, but they were mere shadows. You coming up to CCBTS on Sunday with your lot? We'll make you more than welcome in the Kendall Bar.
 * RE: mediation - I just wanted a third opinion to come in on it. I'm getting really frustrated at the moment with this, because this same puppet is just popping up time after time and causing the same old trouble. There's x number of other things I'd rather do, but I wind up 'stalking' as he would say just trying to clean up after him. And I don't have anywhere near this sort of trouble with any other person in the wikiverse. His alegations that we're SP's is just hilarious though. Hasn't noticed that we support different teams, edit at similar times on different things, have pretty divergent interests barring football... I'm pretty sure, for example, that the first swathe of edits a SFC supporter's SP would make would be related to the mariners and other Gosford related things... Dibo | Talk | Contribs 22:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If I was in Sydney I would come up to Gosford, but after the World Cup I moved to Edinburgh :) I know what you mean about frustration at the moment, but I have noticed the more often he posts, the more often others clean up as well. Tancred 22:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah... that's a complication then isn't it! lol! One thing that's really irking me is that I laid out another SP case ages ago, and it simply hasn't been looked at. When I made the original SP case, the action taken was pretty half-arsed. And the thing I find really frustrating is that for ages after that first case, user:Ehinger222 simply did RL stuff and did it reasonably well. He kept out of edit wars, he kept nice, and he constructively added content and made WP better. Then, for who knows what reason, he's dipped back into the edit warring on the apparent assumption that nobody will notice he's doing exactly what he's done endless times before under endless names. I wish he'd just give up the barrow-pushing and get back to the good edits... Dibo | Talk | Contribs 22:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

147.10.*
I have blocked him, and a non-involved admin has approved the block (denied the unblock request), so we should have a bit of peace now! -- Chuq 09:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not likely Chuq. I have a different and active user name and will not use it because you will block it but am not user:147.10... I came across this whole dispute and the whole thing seems beyond me and mine. The unblock request was not looked into properly bcause I think that user: 147.10 did not wholely understand the process and prevent clear and concise evidence. --Caesar34 11:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * until he finds another IP or username... Dibo T 22:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, avoiding a block is a valid reason for re-blocking, so will be able to get him straight away if that happens. -- Chuq 00:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * from the time that (the person I believe is) the same person has been doing this, I think that's easier said than done. to wit:
 * Licinius
 * NSWelshman
 * Suspected sock puppets/Ehinger222
 * Suspected sock puppets/Ehinger222 (2nd)
 * Of course, I could be wrong, I just suspect I'm not... Dibo T 01:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hahaha Dibo, who ever thought that the concept of Pelican droppings would work.

Regarding User:Tenuous walker - I checked with another admin. If he edits in that fashion again, let me know and I will block immediately (if I don't see him first). -- Chuq 02:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * have added this to an existing sockpuppet case - Suspected sock puppets/Ehinger222 (2nd). also suspect relationship to and  Dibo T 05:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm about to add User:Topcattheirrefutable to Suspected sock puppets/Ehinger222 (2nd) Tancred 09:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And another one User:Caesar34 :( Tancred 11:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Is this all you ever do on wiki Dibo, LOL. To read you I am the antichrist as well.


 * , Dibo, it was nice to look through your contributions and find this, lol, you are really starting to develop a complex. I suppose I am the source of all things rugby league football is not soccer to you, haha. Do you understand the concept of pelican droppings? That if you leave a trace here, it will be found by another and another and than snowball? Like the recent commentary over Alan Oakley using comments from http://www.stoush.net?? I do not believe that evidence by the way because I remember it being changed in November of last year. Anyways, good luck with the sockpuppet case. Another strike for righteous indignation in this overly rude world. --Caesar34 11:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * your [|edit here] is a dead giveaway - misspelling 'common' as 'commen' is a dead giveaway. see [|my first sockpuppet page about you]:
 * "stereotypical misspellings, like 'commen' and common style of edits and comments on talk pages"
 * so... there it is again. Dibo T 11:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * btw - removed user:topcattheirrefutable - already on an indef block Dibo T 11:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFCU
Just letting you know, as a checkuser clerk, I've moved the checkuser request you submitted to Requests for checkuser/Case/Rugby 666. :) Luna Santin 19:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal
Hello, I am going to be one of the mediators listening to your case. Please see Alan Oakley Mediation Cabal to participate in this voluntary mediation. Somitho 21:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

List of football (soccer) stadiums by capacity
Ok I agree to let brittish stadiums be classified under english, scottish, welsh. Maybea i was doing it to be controversial. Someone else had previosly changed Wembly to England instead of UK. However I still feel I am technicaly correct. ie. Camp Nou doesnt have the flag of Catalunia next to it. But I agree to let (perhaps petty) nationalism prevail.80.41.235.219 21:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

As if I wasn't completely sick of it already
That complete orifice is back again I see. Do you know if there's any way we can just stop him for good, by some form of magical "i know who you are and don't even think about it" no account creation, no anon edit, just GTF block? Dibo T 01:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Troll
Policy recommends against negative name calling, but I will take is as a compliment all the same, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troll, yes that is me hiding under the bridge :) {144.132.221.157 (Talk)}

Please calm down
The message you left at my talk could very easily be interpreted as abuse. Please calm down, or I will have no other option than to report you to an administrater. I think that what is happenning here is a case of mistaken identity, that is the only reason I have not sought out an administrater yet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.132.217.29 (talk) 10:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

Templated warning removed. I've been informed of the history. Sorry about that. – Riana ঋ 11:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm trying to assume the best here - could you all have actually gotten confused between your recent encounters with one person User:144.132.221.157 above, vs. what is likely to be a totally different person User:144.132.217.29. Uh, it's a really big Internet out there. Please don't make such broad assumptions. Shenme 11:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Looking at a few page histories, the actual edits they're making, and the fact that both IP's are coming from 144.132.xxx.xxx makes it seem very likely that this is not a totally different person. --Onorem 11:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Both these IP's are in the same CIDR block. They are both controlled by Telstra - an Australian ISP.  Editors that use these IP's have been pushing a POV for over 12 months here.  These edits all take the same form.  The editor picks 1-2 words each week, edits for his POV and then spends a week or so reverting despite what other editors suggest.  How do I know they are the same person?  A number of things.  The constant refusal to sign any comments is one key.  User talk:Rugby_666 was finally banned.  That case can be looked at here:
 * ‎Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ehinger222
 * ‎Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-27 Alan Oakley
 * ‎Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ehinger222 (2nd)
 * ‎Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ehinger222
 * ‎Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Rugby 666

The Rubgy League POV pushing stopped for a short time but quickly started up again. Some examples: User 147.10.112.157 (A known Ehinger222 IP) made this edit  about Marconi Stadium. A week later the plans for a new stadium development were called off and the article updated. Then 5 new accounts were created, just to revert back to the now incorrect edit:

.

After this the user has given up with registering new usernames and just uses IP's. His/Her latest series of edits are nothing more than tweaking Wikipedia for POVness. ,,. not to mention the endless POV stuff here.

here, both revert the page back to edits made by Rugby666, one of the banned usernames.

Given this has been going on for for many months, something really needs to be done. I would call for at least raising this ongoing wikipedia attack with the ISP, and blocking the IP range. Tancred 12:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Alemannia Aachen‎ stadium
Did you check Alemannia Aachen‎'s website. I think if we can get a number from there, then it would be better then the number. Kingjeff 22:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Tancred/2008 Australian football code crowds
Hey there I can see why you created 2008 Australian football code crowds but it breaches Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. I don't know if there is a project page you could park it for a while instead? Garrie 02:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

WP Munich
 Hello,

You are invited to join WikiProject Munich!

There are a lot of things to do in this project. From creating new articles to finetuning articles into featured article status.

How can you help?
 * You can join a Task Force.
 * You can help comform Munich-related articles to Wikipedia Policy.
 * You can get free Munich-related images under GNU Free Documentation License.
 * You can create and edit of Munich-related articles.
 * You can do translations from German Wikipedia to English Wikipedia on Munich-related articles.
 * You can help do assessments of Munich-related articles.
 * You can help expand articles currently in the Stub-class and Start-class.
 * You can help reference articles.
 * Since original research is against Wikipedia policy, you can research topics to expand. This means you don't need to know anything about Munich.
 * You can help expand stubs and start-class articles and help finetune other articles into Featured article status.

A WikiProject of this nature is very broad. Munich has a rich history in sports, culture, politics along with many more topics. Feel free to help out in your area of interest.

If you want to check the project out you can click the link above. If you want to join the project, you can sign up here.

If you have any questions feel free to contact myself or any other member of the project.

 Kingjeff 00:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * A while ago I proposed a WikiProject for sporting facilities. Would you be interested in doing that? Kingjeff 01:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Football

 * Check rugby league and WikiProject Rugby league in regard to naming before going around name calling. It is manual of style, so stop the pov, please, you are probably the only person in the world that would have a problem with calling football football whether it be any code. --144.132.216.253 09:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:SA-Panthers-FC.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SA-Panthers-FC.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

RFCU
We're unrelated. Colour me surprised... *shrugs, whistles, shuffles feet*

It is a laugh, really. Given the weakness of the WP policy on sockpuppetry (as evidenced by our persistently trolling chameleon-like friend) I wonder why we wouldn't have started up a farm of usernames or anon IPs to do our edits. I also wonder why our edits are divergent beyond a limited area of POV cleanup... We're some seriously odd sockpuppet/eers... Dibo T 02:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Sockies
So, are you suggesting that perhaps User:Elvisandhismagicpelvis is related to whoever Rugby666 is? --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 03:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Created Suspected_sock_puppets/Elvisandhismagicpelvis and then saw you've done Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Tomasthetankengine. No matter, it'll end the same way. Dibo T

He's back
I thought he had actually gone for good this time, but I was apparently wrong: Special:Contributions/Bumchewer. Mark Chovain 09:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SA-Panthers-FC.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SA-Panthers-FC.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Pirate Party of the United Kingdom
I have nominated Pirate Party of the United Kingdom, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Pirate Party of the United Kingdom. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 17:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Now revived at Pirate Party UK after the official registration. --Apoc2400 (talk) 13:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AdvanceAustraliaNationalFlagProposal.png
Thanks for uploading File:AdvanceAustraliaNationalFlagProposal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AdvanceAustraliaNationalFlagProposal.png
Thanks for uploading File:AdvanceAustraliaNationalFlagProposal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)