User talk:X!/Archives/01/2013

A vandal?
Clearly not very helpful, and perhaps incompetent to the point of warranting a block (look through the deleted histories and see the times xe would undo my template fixes), but what was xe doing that qualified as vandalism? — Francophonie &#38; Androphilie  ( Je vous invite à me parler  ) 10:28, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was a mistake on my part. If WP:CIR was a valid block reason, that would be it, but what he was doing wasn't actually vandalism, as I thought it was. ( X! ·  talk )  · @723  · 16:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Peachy
Hi X!  As the original creator of the framework, I was wondering if you could recreate the manual. I hope it's not too much to ask for.— cyberpower ChatOffline 21:15, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't even remember how much of it works. I also wouldn't recommend using it for new code, as it's unmaintained. I would use a different framework for new code. ( X! ·  talk )  · @050  · 00:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Peachy has proven to be reliable for new code and I maintain it as best as I can, keeping it, as well as your bot code up to date. I'm sure you wrote a manual in the past as you had links to it but is no longer accessible.— cyberpower Offline Happy 2013 02:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The bot
Thanks for catching my mistake. I guess I cleaned a bit too much. :-) Widr (talk) 19:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, at least I caught it early. The UAA holding pen was broken for the past 9 months. ( X! ·  talk )  · @843  · 19:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia users who support Flagged Revisions
Category:Wikipedia users who support Flagged Revisions, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. To be exact, you are being notified because you created an image which goes into this category. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

SPI re-open
Could you re-open WP:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jyongchul? After you closed it 4 more socks popped up. I don't know if there's anything more that can be done on a CU end, but I figure it can't hurt. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If more socks popper up, a new case should be filed. ( X!  ·  talk )  · @129  · 02:05, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Strike that, I thought the case had been archived. I've relisted the page for another check. ( X! ·  talk )  · @134  · 02:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Tunoapeggy and Littlesparkle2002
Both accounts are blocked for abusive socking, with a link to an empty evidence page, with no archive link.

I see no abusive socking, and usually we only block one account - generally we let the editor choose which to keep.

All the best. Rich Farmbrough, 17:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC).


 * First, I fixed the archive by purging the page. Second, the deleted contributions show a lot more than the undeleted ones. These two accounts have a history of persistently recreating the same articles with both accounts, in what appears to be an attempt to prevent the articles from being deleted, even though they clearly meet the CSD criteria. ( X! ·  talk )  · @986  · 22:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Has the CSD criteria been explained to them in non-templated form? Rich Farmbrough, 01:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC).


 * Yes. ( X! ·  talk )  · @129  · 02:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

announcement link
The link Archived discussion in the RF motion announcement leads to the talk page, not the archive -- maybe the text should be "Discuss this"? NE Ent 14:01, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, fixed. ( X! ·  talk )  · @741  · 16:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!
Hello, X!, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
 * The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
 * Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
 * If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
 * Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
 * Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 23:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Fedor Emelianenko

 * If you check the history Over at the Fedor page, Delinquent1984 has still not decided to discuss the issue of whether or not it was a knockout on the talkpage. I also went through and removed libelous info such as:


 * "UFC President Dana White, who had recently launched a public slander campaign against Emelianenko in an effort to devalue Emelianenko, even admitted to being impressed with Emelianenko's performance against the ex-UFC champion Sylvia. When asked if the submission win changed his opinion on Fedor, White said; "It does. Tim Sylvia was a real opponent."[77]".


 * and


 * "Club affiliation Emelianenko began his mixed martial arts as a member of Russian Top Team (RTT),[26][27] training with the first generation of Russian RINGS competitors, such as Volk Han and Andrey Kopylov. After winning his Pride Heavyweight title, a rift grew between Emelianenko and the manager of RTT, Vladimir Evgenevich Pogodin. According to Emelianenko, Pogodin, who held the position of vice-president in the World Sambo Federation, attempted to control Emelianenko's career through threats and abuse of his position to deny "Master of Sport" ranks to Fedor and his brother Alexander. Emelianenko alleged he was deceived by Pogodin in financial disputes between Pogodin and Emelianenko.[28] " The source for withholding the Sambo ranks comes from a Fedor interview. The source for the slander accusation comes from a yahoo sports article with no mention of slander in it.


 * To give them credit they attempted to talk about the issue in the edit function, but made no mention of the info above which was among what I adjusted on the page despite multiple instructions. I was hoping you will be able to make Delinquent1904 see reason. Thanks. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Seeing as I'm not involved in this debate, I can't offer any advice except to follow the advice given in the arbitration request: take it to WP:DR if you're still having issues. ( X! ·  talk )  · @808  · 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It was my understanding, as per the comments of the case, that any uninvolved admin may administer sanctions to anyone within the MMA project who is making disruptive edits. I also figured since you warned this person once before it would make sense to point this out to you. The person in question has now been warned twice about their actions by an admin, and have not followed their requests. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The person has, to this point, not been willing to engage in a discussion with me. I would not characterize it as a debate, except to say that he/she is avoiding it. I have tried to communicate via the talkpage for nearly a month. I have also tried to talk about in on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADelinquent1904&diff=531773572&oldid=531721551 user in question's talkpage]. Since wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, can't you just settle it now and force his with an indef topic ban or something until he agrees to play by the rules? However, if you still insist that I take this matter to another board for review I will. Thanks[[User:PortlandOregon97217|PortlandOregon97217]] (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Seeing as I am not familiar with the entirety of the debate, and am not experienced in solving debates such as this, I would advise that you take it to Dispute Resolution instead of my talk page. ( X! ·  talk )  · @867  · 19:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

SineBot
Yo, X, just wanted to let you know that I added an opt-out template for Sinebot to Yetabotherbot's user page. Sinebot had been trying to sign its changes to AIV. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Doncram
Got the note about the ArbCom/Doncram thing. I've been drafting some stuff and sifting through, as we must. However, if you get no evidence from me then that's just how things go. Others will have to argue the toss. I'm due in hospital tomorrow and have no idea when I'll be out. Just an advisory, so you don't think something has gone wrong! - Sitush (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll bring this to the Arbitrators' attention. Thank you for the notice! ( X! ·  talk )  · @809  · 18:25, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of people who know what has gone on and who can advance/rebut or whatever. I've never been named in an ArbCom case but I've seen a couple of the things. - Sitush (talk) 18:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Archive
I see you archived here but there wasn't yet a determination if the two cases should or shouldn't be merged. ie: is JonnyBonesJones really a sock of Glock17gen4, and not a master? I know they are already both blocked, but for continuities sake, I think we should either rule that out or histmerg the cases. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  Join WER 20:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Hey X! I know I'm very late, but welcome back! It's great to see more old faces around here! You eased back in with no trouble at all! It's good to know we're in safe hands :)  James ( Talk •  Contribs ) • 10:38pm • 11:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

My articles
Just a note to thank you for creating those tools we can grab from our contributions page! I just used the Articles Created tool, and that one's particularly snazzy! Thank you so much! – Paine ( Climax !) 22:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Advice requested
Hi X!. You kindly responded to a request of mine at WP:OPP a couple of days ago; I wondered if I could quickly ask for clarification and advice on how to proceed. I'm not sure from your reply whether you are saying that 89.238.153.10 is no longer an open proxy, or whether you mean the entire range 89.238.153.0/24 is now in the clear. If it's the latter, I can remove the rangeblock easily enough, but if it's the former, I'm not sure how to pick a single IP out of a range to unblock, or even if such a thing is possible. I'd welcome your help on the issue. Cheers, Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  08:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If I recall correctly, I didn't see any open proxies in that range. ( X! ·  talk )  · @277  · 05:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Grand, I'll cross my fingers and unblock the lot. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  06:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I was briefly an admnistrative backlog
Thanks for taking care of it. *facepalm*  Salvidrim!    &#9993;  04:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Heh, no problem. Backlogs are evil and should go away. I wanted to make sure you were spared. ( X! ·  talk )  · @277  · 05:39, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Scots WP redirects to English WP
Hi, if you check Articles Created over at Scots WP, it tells you about English, a different project. How come?

The generated URL is:

http://toolserver.org/~tparis/pages/index.php?name= &namespace=0&redirects=noredirects

The project string "en" or "sco" does not appear, so where is the redirection occurring?

99.237.226.18 (talk) 05:51, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Any perspective on this matter? 99.237.226.18 (talk) 17:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not maintaining those tools anymore, it's likely a bug in the code. ( X! ·  talk )  · @812  · 18:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm a professional programmer. Can I take a look at it?
 * 99.237.226.18 (talk) 03:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Toolserver
I found this. You may want to remove it.— cyberpower ChatOffline 16:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Why? ( X! ·  talk )  · @805  · 18:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know. I didn't think you want your IP address visible.— cyberpower ChatOnline 20:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's not his IP, its your IP. And mine. And well, his too. Legoktm (talk) 21:06, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It couldn't be, I'm currently editing from 130.91.93.243 and that's nothing near the ip of the link. Ryan Vesey 21:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Same here. I'm editing from 75.xxx.xxx.xxx, not from what I'm seeing, which is 91.xxx.xxx.xxx.— cyberpower ChatOffline 00:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it's just showing the IP address that the toolserver program is running on. It's not running on anyone's local computer, so it just gives the IP of the place in the Netherlands that hosts the program.  — Soap — 00:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops I read the code wrong. $_SERVER['REMOTE_ADDR'] is all that it is. Legoktm (talk) 00:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

.beats
And there was I thinking I was the only person who liked Internet Time. I used to have an original .beat Alu watch, but it got stolen. Sad times. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   14:37, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

BAGBot: Your bot request Yetanotherbot
Someone has marked Bots/Requests for approval/Yetanotherbot as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:03, 27 January 2013 (UTC) <small style="color:gray">To opt out of these notifications, place  anywhere on this page.

announcement link
Sorry to be a pain again so soon ...

Isn't "The request for a full arbitration case is declined as unnecessary." part of the Hex motion? Seems like it is since the Arbs were quibbling over it, ya know? NE Ent 00:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The motion was passed instead of a full case. The summary is correct. -- Guerillero &#124;  My Talk  00:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)