rmv trolling |
64.175.39.242 (talk) →Insults: new section |
||
Line 211: | Line 211: | ||
A [[WP:RfC|Request for Comment]] has been posted for an article on which you have been an editor. If you wish to comment, go to [[Talk:Isle_of_Wight_Academy#RFC_regarding_mention_of_segregation_academy_in_lead_paragraph.2C_parallel_version_of_history]].— [[User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] ([[User_talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|talk]]) 14:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
A [[WP:RfC|Request for Comment]] has been posted for an article on which you have been an editor. If you wish to comment, go to [[Talk:Isle_of_Wight_Academy#RFC_regarding_mention_of_segregation_academy_in_lead_paragraph.2C_parallel_version_of_history]].— [[User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] ([[User_talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|talk]]) 14:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Insults == |
|||
How dare you post that I am an "IP Hopping Troll". I saw that you had deliberately reversed edits that were in no way unconstructive and a warning that you had posted which in fact reflected your own behavior. |
|||
You will remove the remarks you have made about me and apologize or face the legal consequences. |
Revision as of 06:56, 15 August 2012
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 |
Sandbox
I am using this space to create my sandbox. MarnetteD | Talk 20:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Edits from Banned User HC and IPs
1) HarveyCarter (talk · contribs) and all of his sockpuppets are EXPRESSLY banned for life.
2) Be on the look out for any edits from these IP addresses:
- AOL NetRange: 92.8.0.0 - 92.225.255.255
- AOL NetRange: 172.128.0.0 - 172.209.255.255
- AOL NetRange: 195.93.0.0 - 195.93.255.255
Thanks! ~ IP4240207xx (talk) 06:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
No bother whatsoever
The MO of that anon vandal seems similar to Bambifan, but that IP resolves to Michigan. Bambi does the majority of his nonsense from Alabama. However, if you even so much as think you smell this guy, please let me know. His destruction and damage is nearly incaluculable. Thanks for letting me know and believe me, asking about something like this is not a bother. :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- You bet; it was a pleasure hearing from you. You may find this page helpful in regards to Bambifan. The precious little darling has his very own long-term abuse page. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi MarnetteD, in looking over the edits of a large number of inter-connected IPs that all seem to engage in frequent disruption I came across this post of yours which indicated to me that you may be familiar with the same editor/editors I am tracing. I was wondering if you could give me a little background for this particular post and perhaps could you explain whether the "favorite football team" is always the same team or whether it is several different ones.
The person I am examining (I think it's a single individual who edits from a cloud of dynamic IPs) seems to be a fanatic about the Shamrock Rovers. His MO includes removal of all tags requesting improvement to or additional sources and the un-sourced insertion of information he claims to have personal knowledge of despite repeated requests to provide RSes. He is a single-minded edit warrior and refuses to get the point until the page is protected from his constant un-sourced additions. I have noticed that he has gone on sprees of adding "favorite football" information to celebrities and actors and that's how I came across your edit. Any information you can provide on this character would be very helpful. Thanks. -Thibbs (talk) 17:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
- My experience was with the Colm Meaney article and that was pretty much it. The fact that I haven't encountered this pest very often just means that I don't have the articles they like to hit on my watchlist. Although its been awhile I think that the various IP's located to Dublin and we joked once about this yahoo traipsing around town to use different computers to make edits. I'm afraid I don't have much more info for you - many apologies. I can suggest that you take this to the admin who helped me User talk:HJ Mitchell and see if he has any ideas. You could also make a post at the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard in case others have encountered the same problem. Again sorry I wasn't of more help and good luck in dealing with this and many thanks for your efforts! Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 17:22, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Socks
Hi Marnette, blocked IP 90.218.255.152 has turned up again as IP 90.201.251.31 (both from West Sussex) making the same daft edits. Can we get them blocked? Span (talk) 10:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hi S. First off I don't know what time zone you edit from so if this reply seems late my apologies. Second my Sunday is busy off wiki so I can't follow up as thoroughly as I would wish. I have two suggestions. First, you can notify the admins who previously blocked the IPs to let them know that disruptive editing has resumed after the blocks expired. Next I would say that you could also report them to AIV as long as you make sure to include a list of the other IPs that they have edited from so that admins there will know that this is a sock situation as well as disruptive editing. Only thing to be aware of there is - depending on the admin - some might ask that you issue warnings to the new one - I know that can be frustrating. One other suggestion when you post about these IPs you might use either this template {{userlinks|IP number}} or this one {{IPvandal|IP number}}. As you can see 90.201.251.31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) It brings up all manner of links that allow admins (and even regular editors for that matter) to check things without having to go and search for an edit made by that IP. If you get a chance let me know how things go. If things stay the same I will try and make some reports tomorrow when I have more time. Thanks for your vigilance in trying to protect Wikipedia from this stuff and I hope you have a July full of fun off wiki and on. Cheers MarnetteD | Talk 16:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Beethoven!
Marnette, I see by your User Page that you are a Beethoven fan. I wanted to let you know (if you already didn't) that the company, Harmonia Mundi (France), issued a 7CD set of the complete symphonies of Beethoven as transcribed for piano by Franz Liszt. Extraordinary! I especially like the Pastorale played by Michel Dalberto. It is the 5th disk in the collection, and its disc number is HMX-2901196. In fact, I have it playing right now as I write this. Enjoy! - Michael David (talk) 17:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- OK so, in addition to being computer-challenged, my memory needs some work. Don't pick on me, I'm a Senior Citizen :-). The most important thing is that you are enjoying the music. My best to you. He healthy, Michael David (talk) 18:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for participating in my RFA! I appreciate your support. Zagalejo^^^ 06:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Rod Serling Audio
Hello again, my friend. I need your advice on this. I have an audio file of Rod Serling speaking these famous words from his TV program, "The Twilight Zone":
"The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosives and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices, to be found only in the minds of men. For the record, prejudices can kill, and suspicion can destroy. And a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own."
I'd be happy to send you a copy if you like. My question is this: Could this audio file be placed in Serling's Wikipedia Article Page, or on the "Twilight Zone" Page? Michael David (talk) 22:45, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the input, Marnette. I've just posted the question on the Wiki Television Project's Talk Page. Be healthy, Michael David (talk) 00:08, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, again, Marnette. Good idea, giving the question to the techincal people. I just hope I can understand whatever advice they give :-) - Michael David (talk) 00:56, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Greetings from Wales
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e6/Thunderbird_6_stunt.jpg/220px-Thunderbird_6_stunt.jpg)
![]() |
Wishing you a (belated) happy Independence Day! |
Hello again! Seeing this photo' earlier this morning, made me gasp. Hope all is well over there with you, and a (belated) happy Independence Day! Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 11:20, 5 July 2012 (UTC) |
- You too. I remembered that you liked watching the (few) Six Nations matches that they broadcast in the United States. Thanks for the hyperlink above (Australian 'league') – and I shall expect the US to do even better in the next Rugby Union World Cup. Each year they get better and better, which is remarkable considering how few play the game. I shall enjoy learning more about 'Union' over on your side. Any suggestions?
- Best wishes, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- That is helpful. Thanks! Good editing! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 21:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
IP editor
Please see User talk:180.251.29.12 for an update. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Your friendly Annual I am camping for one week notice.
Hi, there. Yep, I'm still on staff at "Camp Quest West" and am off the net starting 2morrow Sat late morning the 7th till Sunday the 15th. 2nite, I'm seeing The Magic Flute at SF Opera - won some fancy seats thereof in a raffle. Later,--WickerGuy (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Old friend returns
I've blocked 90.199.99.147 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), would you mind going through and cleaning up his mess? I really am exceedingly lazy. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I only just got online today. Thanks for the block and it looks like the ever reliable Republican Jacobite zapped all the edits so many thanks to him also. Until the next time Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 18:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks Marnette! I'm not as active on wikipedia as much as I used too, but people like that always keep me coming back to make sure not too much nonsense is happening. Thanks for your help! Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- You are most welcome. Your work - whenever you have time to give it - is much appreciated. As frustrating as dealing with Pe is it is more frustrating to never have enough money to get all the DVDs that we want from the Criterion Collection :-) Their release last month of Harold and Maude is a treat. Cheers and best wishes to you on Wiki and off. MarnetteD | Talk 11:57, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
I just came across this editor today, seeing that he had altered the genre of The Departed. Taking a look at his contributions, I see that obsessing over genres is his main activity. This reminds me of someone... what was his name again? He seemed to originate somewhere in South America. This might be someone we want to keep an eye on. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 13:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- The discussion here makes me even more suspicious. First, we see the all-too-familiar Brazilian IP address, which is outed by Andrzejbanas as Pe. Then, StarShop makes his first contribution to the discussion, supporting the IP's view that the film is an adventure film. This was StarShop's second contribution overall. I find this coincidence very convenient. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 13:47, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. Yes, we will keep an eye on him and decide if there is any real reason for concern.
- Thanks, also, for the note regarding JC. Not sure why he would decide to involve himself.
- Best of luck at the dentist. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 13:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- I brought this matter to the attention of an administrator here, with a proposal for moving forward. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 16:14, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- I need some dental work myself, and dread the very thought of it.
- I have never put together an SPI report myself, but I am not surprised that they would be tedious and time-consuming. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 16:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Gah. Thanks for bringing the attention of the report to me. This user has been on my tail since at least 2008. I see the recent conversation about wanting to be a good editor now, but he's done this before. When he doesn't get his way by not reading rules then he goes back to his vandalizing ways. I'd try and dig out these statements, but he's posted through dozens of IPs before, and it's hard to find specific incidents. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yes! I've been keeping track of his updates and your quick undos. Great job! He already tried to edit the action list again with another anon IP, but it's been removed. He's hard to keep track of, but he does keep on coming back to his favourite pages to vandalize, so he'll be found again soon enough if he decides to return. Again, great work!Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Your help would be appreciated
I cannot discuss the matter here on your talk page, but if you would email me at uno1dos2tres3quatro4@gmail.com (or simply post your email address below this message) I would greatly appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.239.63.5 (talk) 03:17, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- I hope that things go well for you in Framingham but if you think I am going to respond to this you are sadly mistaken. MarnetteD | Talk 04:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Quick question
Hello sir,
A quick question for you. When the BBC Television Shakespeare originally aired, two factual series accompanied it - Prefaces to Shakespeare and Shakespeare in Perspective. Prefaces were personal introductions to the various plays by actors and directors and what not which aired on Radio 4 the night before the initial TV screening of the respective episode. Perspective was a 25 minute contextual setting intro to each play presented by historians, academics, actors etc etc which aired immediately before each screening. Now, if you check out these two links:
and
you'll find info on every episode of both Prefaces and Perspective. My question is, do you think any of this info is worth including in the BBC TV Shakespeare article and/or the Shakespeare on TV article I'm currently working on. I was prompted to ask by the recent Shakespeare Uncovered series on BBC 4 which had six one hour long episodes on Richard II, both parts of Henry IV, Hamlet, The Tempest, Macbeth and Shakespeare's Female characters. So, any thoughts. Thanks. Bertaut (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
The recent BBC Henriad
Hey, no word on a date yet, but you will, I'm sure, be delighted to hear that the Henriad recently done by the BBC is going to be screened on PBS as part of the Great Performances series. It's also going to be released on R2 DVD if you can't watch it on PBS (you can keep an eye on Amazon.co.uk). I would highly recommend you get it, it far surpasses both Age of Kings and the BBC Television Shakespeare adaptations, and the Henry V episode is almost (I say almost!) on a par with Branagh. Keep an eye on the PBS website. In an unrelated topic, I'm actually back living in Dublin now, so my opportunities for live Shakespeare (or Elizabethan drama in general) are sadly few and far between. Most of his play have never been staged in Dublin, outside the usual suspects - the major tragedies, Midsummer, The Tempest etc etc etc. 17:43, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
WP Doctor Who in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Doctor Who for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 06:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Television films
It seems to me that there should probably be a centralized discussion coordinated by the television and film WikiProjects to arrive at a consensus about how TV films should be disambiguated, and how they should be treated relative to theatrical and other (direct-to-video, for example) releases. Right now, it seems as if the general opinion among the film-project editors is that a film is a film, whatever the source--which I was under the impression, apparently erroneously, was the general consensus--while the television naming guidelines suggest that made-for-TV films should be treated as a distinct group. I don't have a dog in this hunt--I'm willing to go along with whatever the consensus is. But right now the article-naming is all over the board, with most TV films disambiguated as just (film) or ([year] film), and a small but significant number dabbed as (television film) or (TV film). There should be some sort of agreement on a reasonable and consistent naming policy for TV films. Regards,--ShelfSkewed Talk 15:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note. I too wish there was an agreement and that the various MoS's (film, TV and DAB to name but three) noted such. Sadly, I'm not sure that you are going to be able to get such a thing. The film and TV project membership has dwindled and I sometimes see messages go up on their talkpages that never get replied to. The DAB project is more active so you might be able to get some input from them. I would disagree with your assertion about the general opinion of the film project. Having been a member for over 6 years I don't remember seeing that expressed. But, I don't have anymore empirical evidence for that than you do - and let me apologize because this statement sounds inflammatory and I don't mean it to be that, I just can't think of better wording at the moment. The last major discussion that I can remember was over whether the "Film" and the "Television Film" infoboxes should be standardized to be the same and, if memory serves, the conversation just petered out. I'm sorry that I can't link you to that but I can't remember where the discussion took place and I am a bit pressed for time. There are differences between the two like "air date" and "release date" being two different things. Also the two formats are quite different for one thing TV films (granted not all) plan for commercial breaks. IMO so that the naming conventions are accurate "TV film" should be included DABing and article but I don't know if either project would want to move 100s of articles. On the other hand making sure that the words are included in any future articles would be a good thing. Again, IMO it looks silly, lazy and/or bad to have TV items listed in a section titled film - I have to fix that in filmographies that have split the two all the time. In fact that might be a solution. If you combined the two section into "Beauty and the Beast on screen" (as with this section Hamlet on screen#List of screen performances) you could them have both formats listed together in chrono order. If you want to start a centralized discussion about this I say more power to you. I will be happy to add my thoughts. Life off wiki has somethings going on that shorten my online time so I have to go. I fear that what I have posted here is jumbled and frenetic. Again my apologies. Cheers and continued happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 19:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, and a question
You're right: I hadn't noticed the "preceded by" field was showing up. The trouble I was having with the TV infobox was that no studio field was appearing, just "distributor," which would be a network or, in the case of syndicated shows, the syndication company. I'm loathe to make changes to infoboxes, since I'm sure it involves lengthy discussion. You seem more experienced in this respect: Is a "studio" not there for a reason, or did it just fall through the cracks? Thanks for any information or help. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- This is a coincidence as - a bit like the question above - we have two different projects that are aiming to do different things. I was typing a longer answer but then I remembered that we may have a simpler solution. If you use Template:Infobox television film you will see that it has all the fields that you are looking for (I think). I probably should have used it when I made my change months ago. I hope that this helps. Regards. MarnetteD | Talk 00:37, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
External links removed
Hi, you removed several external links that I have added to pages related to the Barsoom Series from Edgar Rice Burroughs without any explanation. I have commented on the talk pages why I have added the links, but seems that you did not read the comment. Can you please give me your opinion on this and if you agree to my comment restore the links. Thank you in advance.
The comment was:
I added an external link to my blog page that is only intended to make available a better formated version of the book. Since no other reasonably formated version of the book is linked here and therefore easily available to the reader of the article, I believe that this link actually is complying with the scope of wikipedia - making information available to everyone. Please let me know your opinion and accept my apologies if I am wrong and let me know what better way is to make the epub version of the book easily available to everyone. I am new to wikipedia. RC87 (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- My understanding is that we don't normally link to blogs.
Based on your explanation please feel free to restore the links in question.I do not have any of those pages on my watchlist (which is fairly hefty as it is) thus, I did not see your earlier posts. Cheers and continued happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 14:43, 27 July 2012 (UTC)- (talk page stalker) Yes, see WP:ELNO item 11. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:03, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your addition Redrose64. If you are still onWiki (or when you get back here) perhaps you could take a look at the site in question [1] and see it it meets the criteria for inclusion. I'll strike my comment about restoring the links until you have a chance to reply. As ever, I appreciate your vigilance and your assistance. MarnetteD | Talk 16:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, I will wait for a decision.RC87 (talk) 17:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- I have concerns over the copyright status of the eBooks linked from this blog. As I understand it, under U.S. law his works are copyrighted for 95 years from the date of publication: therefore anything published on or after June 16, 1929 is still in copyright; this therefore applies to most of the books listed on that blog. See WP:ELNEVER. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Yes, see WP:ELNO item 11. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:03, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Sunday...
- ... and this edit summary just made me side burst.
Cheers and have a great weekend~! --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 07:02, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
A pie for you!
![]() |
Thanks! DonQuixote (talk) 19:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC) |
Bowite userbox
Here you go! Hope you like my litle improvisation :) Glimmer721 talk 22:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
This user knows that bowties have been cool since 1966. |
VCV
Hey there, MarnetteD! Thanks again for keeping track of this character - I'm thinking of restructuring the page to a year-by-year or month-by-month format after dealing with an even more insidious vandal who is active almost daily and has been for years. Behold the horror that is "The Hanoi Vandal". While our VCV chum is busy obsessively fabricating film and TV credits, this guy's... a music lover. I just caught him for the umpteenth time trying to falsify Eagles credits,[2] one of his many favorite targets. These two are similar in quite a few ways, and I sometimes get confused between the two. Anyhoo, your efforts against the VCV are appreciated as usual. Cheers :> Doc talk 05:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Red letters in Lewis
Hey! Have you been keeping track of what the red letters in the Lewis credits spell? I had no idea they were anything but decorative until I saw the note in the Endeavour article. Then I nearly died laughing when I saw they spelled "Starsky and Hutch" in the last episode credits. It would be fun to know what they all are. Spotted Dexter in all four episodes, which is a record for me. --Drmargi (talk) 14:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
- You didn't know about them? Amazing! In a word: PROJECT! We should go to e-mail. --Drmargi (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
The not English play
Hey there. Do you still want me to take a look at the Macbeth edits or did yourself and Tom sort it out? Bertaut (talk) 23:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Neutral notice of an RfC
A Request for Comment has been posted for an article on which you have been an editor. If you wish to comment, go to Talk:Isle_of_Wight_Academy#RFC_regarding_mention_of_segregation_academy_in_lead_paragraph.2C_parallel_version_of_history.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Insults
How dare you post that I am an "IP Hopping Troll". I saw that you had deliberately reversed edits that were in no way unconstructive and a warning that you had posted which in fact reflected your own behavior.
You will remove the remarks you have made about me and apologize or face the legal consequences.