User talk:Magog the Ogre/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trouted

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Your edit at here. It added { in all of the new Articles for Creation Submissions and messed up the AFC Accept script leaving { in the article after it was accepted. Alpha Quadrant talk 19:44, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Duly noted; most unquestionably deserved. Do I place this item on my user page like a barnstar? Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

You can, some editors do . --Alpha Quadrant talk 15:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Continued copyvios by editor TyDwiki--you have already blocked him/her twice

Hello. I am hoping you can help regarding the continued WP:COPYVIOs by editor TyDwiki (talk · contribs). You have blocked him/her twice before for this ([1], [2]), and there is an ongoing WP:CCI seen here. S/he has continued to add copyrighted material to TV articles since the second block. I have now warned him/her 3 times since returning from the second block, ([3], [4], [5]) including a comment about paraphrasing (directing editor to WP:COPYPASTE#Can I copy-paste if I change the text a little bit? and Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing). Despite his/her apologies to you and me, ([6], [7]), the copyvios continue. I must admit that I have not been diligent in following this users edits recently. English is not this editor's first language, which is evident from some episode summaries that were clearly written by the editor, as well as some comments/conversations on various talk pages. (Language and/or spelling is a bit off. The editor understands English fine from what I can tell.) That said, I have had to assume good faith because I could not find the source material for his/her edits-- which contributed elaborately worded text. It has been frustrating. Can anything more be done to stop this user? Thanks, I'd appreciate your help! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 00:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Against my better judgment the block is only for two weeks, rather than indefinite. I'm hoping Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user will help him out. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 13:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Am I seeing quacking?

You blocked CAtruthwatcher (talk · contribs) for editwarring on St. John's University (New York). Soon after, Achievestudent (talk · contribs) appeared and has carried on. Is this obvious enough for a duck block? This isn't an area of expertise for me, so thought I'd ask your opinion on whether to block or go to SPI. GedUK  08:09, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh goodness yes that's obvious. I'll handle it thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Ta. I'm going to protect the article too to stop the next one. GedUK  08:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

No, don't do that, I know his IP. If you really want to see how I know, follow my upcoming VPT post. :PMagog the Ogre (talk) 08:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I missed this reply in my watchlist. Feel free to unprotect again, but could you leave a (brief) explanation at RfPP? GedUK  09:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Um, you haven't unprotected the article. Do you want me to? GedUK  10:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

OK. Just do me a favor and make sure you check out my post at WP:VPT for the reason why I haven't laid down an indef block yet. The only reason I ask is I have to go on a trip today, and I may not be able to get back before the autoblock expires on the IP and the sock would hence be able to edit the unprotected article. Do you follow? Magog the Ogre (talk) 10:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

You VPT post is about the fact that they are blocked, but the dates showing are wrong? Does that mean that the article should be safe from their edits? If so, I'm happy to unprotect,f and will certainly watchlist to keep an eye on it. If the problem edits reoccur (perhaps they access a different IP) then I'll reprotect. How does that sound? GedUK  11:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The article is safe from edits by that IP (i.e., the one with the sockpuppeteer) for 24 hours after I placed a block (i.e., until the autoblock expires). After that, the IP will have to be blocked directly. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. GedUK  12:40, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Rollback plz?

A series of edits [8] that need rollback if you or someone might accommodate? Thanks JakeInJoisey (talk) 15:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Problem resolved. Thanks JakeInJoisey (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Ha, you're welcome? For future reference, you can report that type of activity to WP:AIV if an editor fails to respond to vandalism warnings. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...that's a new one on me. JakeInJoisey (talk) 00:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

CAtruthwatcher

I'm a little late to the party, but I re-blocked User:CAtruthwatcher for a month for block evasion before seeing that you wanted to block him indefinitely. I would be okay if you blocked the account indefinitely, however, because I wasn't sure why you hadn't re-blocked him until I saw your message. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

6, 1/2 dozen of the other. It's an inevitability in any case, unless he wisens up and uses some alternate editing method. You may know a story about shoving beans up your nose to partially explain my response. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:41, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

ILW/Suzanne Images

(section moved to User talk:MuZemike#Uploads by Susanne2009NYC, Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC))

File:Conservative Gallup 8-10.svg

I don't happen to be color blind but I looked at this image using a simulation in Paint.NET and it was confusing. A single color with increasing saturation might best represent the variable, like:

Existing (red/green colorblind sim) Proposed (or similar)
  49% and above
  45%-48%
  41%-44%
  37%-40%
  33%-36%
  32% and under
  49% and above
  45%-48%
  41%-44%
  37%-40%
  33%-36%
  32% and under

Just a thought. —Mrwojo (talk) 19:32, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

OK.
1) When it comes to making these colors, I'm stupid. I do it by eye, and I'm never satisfied.
2) I'll change it, although feel free to make the change yourself in the future. It's SVG, so it's really easy to edit the text. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
3) I can't tell the difference between 49% and 45%. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:44, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Good point on 49 vs. 45. I also noticed that Hawaii nearly disappears. So how about these colors + dark gray stroke outlines for the states?

  49% and above
  45%-48%
  41%-44%
  37%-40%
  33%-36%
  32% and under

I tried it myself and I think it looks good. —Mrwojo (talk) 19:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Can you give me this website you're using to test out the colors? Also, FYI, I have no WP:OWNership issues, you so you can edit the file yourself on commons if you have changes; it's fairly easy, as it's an svg file and the text can be edited by hand (that's what I do). Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

For color blindness testing I ended up using Color Oracle, a Java app. I also found simulator plugins for Paint.Net and Inkscape [9] that I tried as well. —Mrwojo (talk) 04:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

PA

Thought you'd enjoy this. [10]. Malke 2010 (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Believe it or not, Pennsylvania has gotten a lot better with its road system. Mind you, it's meant having our roads on constant construction for the last ten years. So yeah, when you drive an 80 mile stretch of highway and have to slow down for construction workers that aren't there on four separate occasions, you know you're in Pennsylvania. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Of course this is in response to your email about Pennsylvania and issues on Wikipedia, which I got as well, thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

A bit of FYI always comes in handy. On PA roads, I grew up thinking all roads everywhere had sawhorses with orange and white stripes and a swirling orange light announcing "Detour," and "Men at Work." XD I do kind of miss it.  :/ Malke 2010 (talk) 00:23, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

TyDWiki, still editing as an IP?

Hi there. Sorry to bother you again, but I have a question about blocks and editor TyDwiki and hoped you might have an answer. I'm not sure of all the rules, but is a blocked user allowed to edit by IP address? Since you blocked TyDwiki (talk · contribs) for continued WP:COPYVIO, 2 IPs 189.62.12.183 (talk · contribs) and 189.62.9.207 (talk · contribs) have been doing his work for him. Same type of edits he likes to do (adding viewer data with source, removing references from TV eps that have aired, creating articles from redirects TyDwiki created, etc.) on the articles TyDwiki frequently edits (or created). In fact, every page edited by those IPs was previously edited by TyDwiki, including some obscure ones which only TyDwiki (or mainly TyDwiki) edited. I wasn't sure what to do, if anything? Obviously, I cannot prove it is him. Thanks for your help. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 18:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, and there is a ton of activity coming from him on a subrange there, going back months and block avoiding previously too. Also, the Brazilian IP explains his trouble with English. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Delete drawings not based on actual sightings

Thank you for the link: Commons:COM:CB#Drawings based on photographs. As I interpret that, almost any drawings made by looking at copyrighted images are not allowed. I never saw Gary Kildall, in person: all my views of him were from photos or American TV, where almost everything is copyrighted. Hence, I cannot draw any type of image of him, without being a derivative of some copyrighted TV image. Consequently, I must agree with you: delete the drawing that I have created:

Thanks for clarifying those issues. I would never have imagined that memories of TV images in my mind were under copyright! No wonder Wikipedia exists to overcome these vast, sweeping restrictions on information. -Wikid77 (talk) 00:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

An image based on the appearance of the subject from your memory is not going to be copyrighted; it's your own inspiration (no television program can place a copyright on someone's image, and I seriously doubt it would hold up in court that because every frame is copyrighted, you're not allowed to draw what he looks like). If you're deriving it from a specific image or images directly, though, that's when you get into trouble. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Howard M. Guttman

Dear Magog:

Thank you for deleting the link to my old article on Howard M. Guttman. I am new to Wikipedia and am struggling to work through article creation. I did not anticipate any problems when I created my article and moved it to the mainspace. It is not controversial, is basically very factual, and was modeled after several others in the same category on Wikipedia. However, there is now a template that cites several issues with the article. I have made changes to try to address these, and have explained them in my talk area, but no one has responded. This is very embarrassing for me and the subject of the article. I wrote to info-en-o@wikimedia.org, the only address I could find, to ask how I could remove the article from the mainspace while I try to work out the issues, but then I saw your name and thought it might be better to talk to a real person. I would appreciate any help you can offer. Thank you, Dale (Ms. Dale Corey) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalecorey (talk • contribs) 18:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted it for you. In the future, if you're the only major contributor, you can tag an item with {{db-author}}, and we'll delete it for you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:57, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Dear Magog:

Thank you so much for deleting the article on Howard Guttman for me and for the advice about future deletions. I will now try to correct the issues with the article while it is in my user space. I hate to impose, but do you have any suggestions for me as to how I can resolve these issues. Thank you again, Dale —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.55 (talk) 17:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd recommend WP:FIRST if you haven't read it yet; have you? Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Magog: I have read the article. I believe that my subject is notable and I have entered reliable references to prove this point. In response to the feedback that the article was written like a resume or an advertisement, I have rewritten sections to make them more objective. Thank you, Dale —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalecorey (talk • contribs) 18:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

OK. Frankly I do still see some issues with the article. Also, just as frankly, writing is not my strong suit. I recommend you post any requests for help at WP:HD (help desk), where they can direct you to the proper place to request feedback (as an aside, I know we have a request for feedback desk, but it's not very well populated). Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Dear Magog: Can you help me to understand the issues with the article? I didn't think there was anything wrong with the writing, but rather with whether or not Mr. Guttman was sufficiently notable and the article was factual rather than promotional in nature. Since your last message, I have rewritten it substantially. I have shifted the focus to the contributions that Mr. Guttman has made as a thought leader and an author and lecturer. If you think that there are still issues, can you tell me what they are so I can address them? Thank you again, Dale Corey —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalecorey (talk • contribs) 19:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Again, I'm not very good at this; can I recommend you check out this page: Wikipedia:Help desk, and they will point you in the right direction. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Magog. I will try it. Dale —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalecorey (talk • contribs) 19:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

SPLC

(moved to User talk:The Four Deuces) 22:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

WMATA Silver Line map

Since you commented on the earlier FFD discussion regarding File:WMATA Thin Silver Line Map.jpg, which was withdrawn due to the need for a venue change, I invite you to comment on the new discussion at PUF, at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 November 23#File:WMATA Thin Silver Line Map.jpg. SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

AfD and Twinkle

Hi Magog, I realise you're just trying to be helpful with your 'bugger consoles' and Heisnburgers, but there is a common misconception that all Wikipedia editors are IT nerds. Computers nowadays are as common as cars - every body uses one, and very few know how they work. Try telling my 86 year old mother when she hears a rattling coming from under the bonnet: "Hey Missis, did' ya take the cover off and check the slack in the timing chain?" ;) On a more serious note, I find the response to Twinkle development and debugging perilously slow - is Twinkle the work of just one Wikipedian?--Kudpung (talk) 03:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid you just threw a load of wording at me so British that I understood almost none of it besides the last sentence (no, seriously). To answer the last question: I honestly don't know. I've had a bug sitting in the queue for quite a while with no response. And I don't know why you'd think that I think all Wikipedians are IT nerds. Also, why do so many spaces in your sentences have double spaces (i.e., " " instead of " ")? Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:30, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Yup, about as much as I understood about your broken consoles and hot burgers - point proven ;) I don't know about the double spacing. It only shows like that in the edit mode above. In read mode it looks perfectly OK. I certainly don't type the double spaces. No idea - probably a browser problem? There seems to be very little action on the Twinkle feature requests too. --Kudpung (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hilton Pittsburgh

Thanks for the move. Invitrovanitas (talk) 15:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

User page: jmorganferry/PS Business Parks

Hi Magog the Ogre,

I see your comments on the talk page for above-mentioned article. Can you elaborate for me on my talk page?

Thanks, Jmorganferry (talk) 19:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't the one that nominated it for deletion; I was only the one that declined the nomination. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:07, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I definitely see that- and thank you. I'm asking for clarification regarding your comments: "speedy declined - it would not require a complete rewrite so far as it is necessary to delete in order to rm spam; suggest MFD if user doesn't fix soon enough."

I've edited the article since then and am almost ready to publish, but I want to make sure it's up to standards before I do. I've checked out all the sections regarding avoiding advertising and so on. Just making sure!

Thanks, Jmorganferry (talk) 18:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You know, I'm really not very good at formal writing, you might want to reask the question at the help desk where more people will be able to help you. You can see my response above on the talk page at #Howard M. Guttman where I gave advice to a similar editor; all of the same applies here - from reading WP:FIRST to where else you can turn once you've done everything you think you can. I hope that helps. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

EddieChow.jpg license

Hi, I have accidently selected the wrong category of copyright license type for the image EddieChow.jpg that I uploaded. This photo is actually an own work. It doesn't violate any copyright license. How can I upload the image again using the same name? Each time I try upload the same image with the same name, I get error message saying the deletion log is found for this image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Movetheworld (talk • contribs) 16:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

It looks like you've had success since you messaged me. Also, can I ask how you got this photograph? It looks like a promotional photograph for him, so do you know him personally or do you work for Eddie Chow? Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

File:John martin thomas.jpg

Can you please help? User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) has once again removed your and then eventually my addition of {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} to this file. The editor has already done the same thing to the other images in discussion. I'm sorry that I tagged this wrong at first, thanks for fixing it. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:20, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I've added a FUR. I recommend Wikipedia:FurMe rather than tagging f7 because (frankly) you'll just piss people off. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
That came out wrong... er, sorry. Again, drinking + Wikipedia = bad. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:43, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Bug_in_wiki_software_for_autoblocks

Hi! I've replied at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Bug_in_wiki_software_for_autoblocks, I hope it answers your question. HeyMid (contributions) 22:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Help

That guy is back. His personal attacks have only escalated into alleging sexual something or other. Help, and how do we remove the defamation? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 01:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done Responded on your talk page. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Defamation? Seriously? If I had as thin of skin, I'd cry to an admin that he just defamed me in the above reaction. Jeez. Westbender (talk) 01:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh dear me. Now we the flame spreads. LAEC indeed acting with a truly thin skin (sorry, but he's right: you'd be best to just take it on the chin sometimes), and Westbender unable to stop pressing his buttons. Magog the Ogre (talk)
Dude, I had a legitimate question, and now I'm being included amongst some mass off-wiki conspiracy against him? That's hilarious. Westbender (talk) 01:49, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Magog the Angel. But, there are certain things that are per se defamation. He hit at least one of them. The thickness of my skin is irrelevant. No one would want that kind of defamation written about them anywhere. Wikipedia has rules about that. I am certain those rules do not include laughing about the thickness of one's skin. Again, rules are strictly followed against me, but loosely in my favor. And Westbender pushing buttons? This is just more confirmation of my concerns regarding Westbender. If you made it so the guy could no longer use his Talk page, perhaps you should do that on the pages of all his socks. And please check to see if there's anything there. Thanks again. I'm really sorry we keep meeting in this fashion.

And in the time it took for me to write the above paragraph, again Westbender comes back for another helping. What is the threshold that results in the proper discipline of such a person? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 01:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2)Yes, but you (WB) are not being 100% polite about it (another way of saying it is your own skin is a bit thin when he reverts; or perhaps we could rephrase that as you're being just a touch of a dick... there were some subtle ad hominems in his talk page history [11] [12] - whether legitimate or not). If you have someone who you have believe has a thin skin, it's best to deal with that person on the politest of terms if you wish to advance the debate in a legitimate way. But you're right, this diff is not in any way defamation. So seriously, LAEC, don't remove legitimate comments along with the defamation, or it will make it look like you're using "defamation" as a reason to shut down all debate. Which in fact you will be.
Regarding the comment made after my edit conflict, your (LAEC's) comments are no less impolite than the ones WB has been making. Watch out for the WP:POT effect. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
But seriously, enough with this circus, focus on the content, not the contributor. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

First, my comments about Westbender are factual and made as a reaction to his continued harassment. Do not claim equivalence.

Second, the defamatory remarks were not Westbender's. They were that guy you indef blocked. That was what I was talking about. Shall I assume the "thin skin" comments where because people thought I was calling Westbender's comments defamation? If so, I now see why you and he said what you said, and I withdraw may comments accordingly. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 02:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I think both WB and I misunderstood that. I'm sorry. Can you understand how we misunderstood that? You removed a comment WB made [13] which is consistent with the notice on your page LAEC Will Remove Harassing Comments, Templates, and Outings.
Anyway, yes, of course User:BalancedAndFair is engaging in defamation. But you might take to heart the following essay: WP:RBI, because currently the you're feeding the troll a full helping of dinner. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
"If you made it so the guy could no longer use his Talk page, perhaps you should do that on the pages of all his socks. And please check to see if there's anything there" Um, are you now accusing me of using sockpuppets? That's a strong (and not in good faith) accusation to be throwing aroundWestbender (talk) 02:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Read the conversation, WB, it's not concerning you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
The explanations seems spurious, since the entire paragraph seems focused on me, including the immediately preceding sentence. Westbender (talk) 03:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Lyon Kiborg

He doesn't know English, I suppose, so he won't be able to «understand the messages sent to him». By the way, he was banned in Russian Wikipedia and even in Russian Uncyclopedia. 109.111.22.186 (talk) 21:42, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

UPD — Oops, he has some basic skills of it. Sorry for troubling you. 109.111.22.186 (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Why was he banned there? Was it for continually ignoring messages? Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

True. And for flooding. Oh, and for the bootlicking too. 109.111.25.111 (talk) 06:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't understand your words. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:27, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Ahem. Seems like I thoughtlessly translated Russian «флуд» into English «flood». Well, he wrote many senseless messages to other users. As for bootlicking, see «wikt:bootlick». 109.111.19.143 (talk) 15:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

OK. I've never heard the phrase bootlicking ("kissing up", "brownnosing", etc.), and I wasn't aware that doing so was a bannable offense. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, he was banned not for bootlicking, but for having some malicious sockpuppets. As for me, he should have been banned an encore for the forementioned actions too (though it's not in the rules of Wikipedia). Sorry for taking your time. 109.111.31.203 (talk) 12:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It's quite OK, I appreciate your input - it's very hard to tell sometimes when the problem is that someone doesn't speak English, or whether someone is just a dunce (perhaps you were looking for the word быдло? we don't have such a strong sense of this sin, although we might call someone a conformist or redneck). Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

SPLC(2)

since you unblocked LAEC, he has appeared to return to edit-warring on the SPLC article, reversing another editor twice by re-inserting the POV template.[14] TFD (talk) 17:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, what a mess. Well he did say he would only reinsert it twice more, so I think he's probably done. And it would sure be nice if he didn't keep having these sockpuppets follow him around to complicate the issue. If he does it again, I guess I'll reblock him. *Sigh*. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:10, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Remember what you said to TFD about edit warring on the BIAS tag in SPLC? Well now "Accretionist" is doing it. I even quoted you, anonymously, not to edit war on the BIAS tag, but to no avail. And get a load of his contribs. The edit war started with his first edit ever. I don't know if anyone can say he is not a sock. I reverted once, but I must not any further. Enjoy! --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 15:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh; that's almost certainly a sockpuppet; at best a meatpuppet. Blocked and reverted. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. That lasted all of 3 minutes:
30 November 2010 TechBear (talk | contribs) (65,985 bytes) (Undid revision 399740947 by Magog the Ogre (talk) Consensus has been reached, and it was to remove the tag.)
I remember no consensus to remove the tag, only people continuing a pattern of claiming it was misuse to add it in the first place. Be that as it may, this 1RR is keeping me out of trouble! --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Meh, you might want to follow further channels like WP:M. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I simply do not have the time. This is how the SPLC page protectors win -- their joint efforts to edit war, attack, sock puppet, meatpuppet, AfD, 3RR, whatever, all create a barrier so high that individual editors eventually say, "I simply do not have the time". It's just happened again. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 16:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia is a community project; it is not about "individual editors." The community, on the whole, has deemed the article on the Southern Poverty Law Center to be sufficiently neutral. That an article does not conform to ones own prejudices does not make it biased. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 18:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
The issue raised in the BIAS tag is not neutrality alone. The problem was and remains the page looks like an advertisement, and Wikipedia is not a repository for advertisements. Simple as that. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 18:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
"That an article does not conform to ones own prejudices does not make it biased."
TechBear, explain to me how observing the SPLC page looks like an advertisement and adding a BIAS tag accordingly in any way has anything to do with my "own prejudices". Factor in that I support the same tag for the same reason on the Family Research Council page. Thank you. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 18:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
You have made your case on the SPLC, and the community found it neither legitimate nor compelling. Let it go. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 18:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Really, that was cute. Thanks. But I was hoping you would answer the question as no one there answers the question either. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 18:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
And just so people know, another person added the tag back today and it was edit warred off by a meatpuppet. So my "letting it go" has nothing to do with others adding the tag back in. Clearly some know it is appropriate. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Another IP range for TyDWiki

Hi there. I have found another IP range from which banned editor TyDwiki (talk · contribs) is continuing to edit. Is it possible for you to block these like you did to the range 189.62.0.0/20 a few weeks ago? I would bet my life that these are all TyDwiki. 187.37.99.188 (talk · contribs)187.37.100.118 (talk · contribs)187.37.97.38 (talk · contribs)187.37.98.219 (talk · contribs)187.37.99.129 (talk · contribs) In at least one case, he is adding a source which he knows is considered unreliable and not allowed, but is using it anyway. [15] Thanks. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. And yes, again, the 187.37.96.0/20 has a long history of edits from TyDwiki, and little to nothing else. I've blocked it for 6 months [16], as there are literally like two edits outside TyDwiki's and hundreds of his for over a year. By all means let me know if it creeps up again. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review notice

Just so you know, I nominated this FfD for deletion review. I wouldn't call your close unreasonable; I'm appealing the consensus itself. Since I don't feel you made any error, I didn't see any way you could assist me, which is why I started the review without messaging you first. But, for what it's worth, this is a notification of the review. Seems like process for the sake of process to me, but people might complain if I didn't contact you at all. Swarm X 15:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually I appreciate that, thanks. I would have been a trite annoyed, although nothing too serious. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Elders of Kirani Quetta..jpg

File:Elders of Kirani Quetta..jpg is a picture taken by me. Thankyou. --Maqsoodshah01 (talk) 07:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but you compiled those photos from a list of other photos. We need to know where you got each one of those photos for copyright purposes, because your work is a derivative work. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:40, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

All these pictures are taken from my personal album. --Maqsoodshah01 (talk) 16:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

OK; do you own the copyright on each of the photos? Or are you authorized to release it on behalf of your family? I just want to make sure. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:56, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, i am authorized by my family to release these pictures on their behalf.--Maqsoodshah01 (talk) 18:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Continued edit warring

As you were the closing admin for this, your intervention may be needed at Blink-182. Both parties should know better.--Terrillja talk 22:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Both editors blocked – for a period of 24 hours Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Christ. And Wooblz! is back at it: [17], changing the order to satisfy himself, again no attempt at discussion. It's a number of articles that he changed, that's just one example. --Terrillja talk 20:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

This is a WP:LAME edit war. I'm not sure I'm inclined to block over something so trivial. Thoughts? Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:23, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Not sure, it's one of many issues I have with him. There is also the improper copy and paste article moves and uploading oversize album covers. I'll give it a good think.--Terrillja talk 22:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Static IP

Can't say I've ever really thought about it. I'm not too worried about losing the IP and "starting" again so to speak, it's changed a couple of times before. The IP is actually tied to the cable modem which isn't mine so well outside of my control, rather than the router (not that I've had to change that for quite a few years). The previous times it has changed were due to a port on the cable switch failing, they swapped the modem first then ports on the switch, somewhere between the two the IP changed. One other time was due to powering down the modem for a while.

Quite simply I've committed far too much time to the project in the distant past(3 years+ ago), and whilst I have some interest in it, I don't have anywhere near the time to commit. By remaining "anonymous" I can dip in and out as time permits, if I were to register for a new account (or seek out the password of the old account) I suspect I'd end up too involved. Partly my own attitude, partly the attitude of others responding to IPs vs Name users means less engagement, more on the edge of the project so less commitment. --82.7.40.7 (talk) 08:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Magog the Ogre. You have new messages at PatGallacher's talk page.
Message added 23:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

How best to handle these images?

Hi. :) You do a lot of work with images; I don't. I know you've already been involved in the image issue under discussion at my user talk page, here, where apparently User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) is proving somewhat difficult to work with in terms of addressing image concerns. Can you offer any input on the best way to handle images that have insufficient information in the FUR or on sourcing or for which DFU tags are removed? Would WP:FFD or WP:NFCR be better? (I worry about the latter, as it has quite a backlog; the former seems a problem where all that's really needed is more or better information.) It would be nice to get this CCI cleaned up, but this may prove difficult if the subject does not choose to cooperate. Your advice at my talk page would be much appreciated! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:42, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Responded at discussion on your page. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi. :) Thanks so much for your very thoughtful reply! I've got some running around to do today (stupid Holiday season :)), but I wanted to let you know that I've seen it and appreciate it and will digest it later today. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Ha, it's OK, I had some considerable activity last night and I outright ignored your message, so you have every right to take time at whatever you're doing first. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Moving File:DeVonte Christopher 11-17-10.jpg

I am trying to get File:DeVonte Christopher 11-17-10.jpg moved to File:DeVonte Christopher 11-27-10.jpg to get the correct date for the photograph in the title. I put a move notice on the page in accordance with WP:MOF. It's been six days, but thus far no administrator has taken action. Would you be able to perform this move? —Ute in DC (talk) 20:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done. FYI rename requests on images usually take a while on en.wikipedia (this is another reason to consider using commons). Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:34, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! —Ute in DC (talk) 20:37, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Anchor baby / "immigration reductionists" as weaselly?

Hi. As I see it, the "immigration reductionists" phrase in the lede of Anchor baby (the subject of the edit-warring notice) does seem to be adequately substantiated by cited, reliable sources which show the term "anchor baby" being applied derisively not only to children of illegal immigrants, but also to children of legal immigrants, or even children of naturalized US citizens. However, I'll concede that it might be appropriate to change the phrase if it sounds like WP:WEASEL (even if technically it is not). There's been a lot of controversy on this page in the past (most notably over whether or not "anchor baby" should be identified as a derogatory expression), and I imagine we're not done with all the controversy yet. Thanks for your feedback. Richwales (talk · contribs) 18:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. I don't see why there's any question that it has a primarily negative connotation. But I have to be honest the phrasing in the first sentence by anti-immigration activists screams of the some argue problem. And I'm not sure one has to be an activist to see a problem and use a derisive term about it. Say, regardless of how one feels about welfare policy, one may still see welfare queens as a problem and use the term. Actually, the lede for that article is pretty good, maybe we could use it as a template. :) Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

You are right!

I saw the message you left at Sandstein's talk page and you are absolutely right. I consider the cartoon to be antisemitic and highly offensive. According to European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights expressed in its working definition for antisemitism "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" is considered to be an antisemitism.

  • According to WP:UPNO "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" is usually interpreted as applying to user space "
According to WP:NOTSOAPBOX "... Therefore, content hosted in Wikipedia is not for:
  1. propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, religious, or otherwise....
  2. Opinion pieces. Although some topics, particularly those concerning current affairs and politics, may stir passions and tempt people to "climb soapboxes" (i.e. passionately advocate their pet point of view), Wikipedia is not the medium for this. Articles must be balanced to put entries, especially for current events, in a reasonable perspective, and represent a neutral point of view. "
  • According to WP:UPNO "Generally, you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so your user page is not a personal website. Your user page is about you as a Wikipedian, and pages in your user space should be used as part of your efforts to contribute to the project."
    According to WP:UPNO "Extremely offensive material may be removed on sight by any editor."

In accordance with the above policies, may I please ask you to remove offensive, antisemitic cartoon from rolandr's user page? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, no offense, but you are entirely too eager to see this happen, and I disdain your sort of zero-sum battleground thinking. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Is that so, you "disdain"? Then maybe you could be so kind to address your "disdain" comment to Jimbo Wales too? Looks like he's also not very happy with roland'r user page, is he? Well, it is just a rhetorical question. I am not really interested in your response. You are just another of those unworthy admins running around Wikipedia. Please have a nice day.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd be glad to have a serious talk with you, but frankly I don't have time for games. Please don't post on my talk page unless you're willing to have a serious talk without trying to use reverse psychology or personal attacks or whatever it is you're doing. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

TyDWiki IPs

Hi once again. I've been keeping track of TyDwiki's IP addresses in case we could discover more ranges. (Unfortunately, every day the IP changes.) I saw yesterday that you blocked one of them: 189.46.244.172 (talk · contribs),which was a single IP rather than a range. So I thought I'd mention that today he is using 189.18.224.96 (talk · contribs). This has become a game for me.  ;) --Logical Fuzz (talk) 14:01, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, seriously, is this man visiting every wifi in the city? Or is his ISP just that bad at allocating IPs? Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

LOL. I don't know a whole lot about how they assign IP addresses, but even to me they seem to be all over the board. (187.37.x.y / 187.58.x.y /187.79.x.y / 189.18.x.y / 189.46.x.y/ 189.62.x.y/ 189.110.x.y--it's crazy! And that's just the ones I have noticed.) Unfortunately, it seems impossible to really block this guy. Thanks for trying, though! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 18:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

SPLC Wiki page copied from SPLC site

No need to respond. I just wanted to say I have been vindicated on the SPLC page for adding the BIAS tag since the page looked like an SPLC advertisement.

I have uncovered massive wholesale copying of material from the SPLC site into the SPLC Wikipedia page. That's likely why the Wiki page looks like an SPLC advert. I am happy to have stuck with it, and while the harassment continues, I am handing that much better and significant changes are being made to the article as a result of the massive copying being changed or removed.

Your guidance has likely helped me be a better editor. Thanks. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 06:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Just want to point out that WP:COPYVIO means we need to either attribute quotes or paraphrase them. It is not, in itself, an indication of bias. Bias would involve the content of the material, not merely its source. Glad that's all straightened out now. I fully expect that we'll restore most of the removed material, but in our own words. Dylan Flaherty 07:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Well I'm glad to hear that you were correct, although kind of saddened that the other editors were so ready to shut down discussion before it came to full fruition when there was a legitimate problem with the page (assuming what you're saying is correct!). In the meantime, if you have any other questions, let me know. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Block summary

Thanks for the block, but I'd appreciate it if you fixed the summary to something other than "Both blocked", since I (the reporter) was not the other edit warring party and was not blocked. Jpatokal (talk) 03:19, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done Unfortunately I have to go to bed, which is hard to do when you block two ex-administrators (!). I was definitely lenient with Pmanderson (I wonder if it should have been more than 12 hours?). In any case, I can't guess myself to death. If any admins see this note while I sleep, and want to undo anything that was done: I recommend getting consensus from another admin first, but by all means proceed. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:33, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
"Consensus" isn't just getting one of your mates to agree with you. Malleus Fatuorum 05:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

And they're ex-admins for a reason... Jpatokal (talk) 10:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually they weren't both ex-admins. Malleus Fatuorum 23:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Re rollback concerns

You have new messages
You have new messages
Hello, Magog the Ogre. You have new messages at Alansohn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alansohn (talk) 23:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

If you have a chance, I'd really appreciate your considering the background of the revert in question as described on my talk page and providing further feedback based on the circumstances of the Huggle-assisted revert you questioned. I am confident that I am complying with Wikipedia guidelines on the use of rollback, but I would appreciate your comments on this particular edit. Alansohn (talk) 15:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm getting there, I'm just slow. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Wooblz!

You recently blocked Wooblz! (talk · contribs) for disruptive editing. He has now returned in a less than subtle manner as Thornofhate (talk · contribs). Rehevkor ✉ 22:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I was about to inform you of the same thing. I posted a SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wooblz!, but you may want to just pre-empt it by taking immediate action. Your call. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Second Quick Question

I have another question for you. I hope you don't mind me asking, since it really isn't a question about anything you have or haven't done. I am just trying to learn from you, since I know you know what you’re doing alot better then I do.

I noticed a heated debate about the use of this image: File:Garment.jpg. The debate isn't why I'm taking to you. The debate got me thinking of the copyright status of the image, and I got confused after reading the "nominated for deletion" decisions for that image. I again realize I'm missing some information about copyright. So I re-read Commons:COM:CB and Commons:De minimis, but I'm still a bit confused.

I know that I can't take a photo of a coke bottle or a painting and claim copyright ownership. I know I can take a photo of clothing as long as it dose "not to infringe the copyright of any printed or woven design that may appear on the clothing's surface".

Anyway, I know that this clothing is post 1970s LDS garments, since these are the new style LDS garments. A great deal of unrelated literature is based on the changes made to LDS garments in the resent past, so I know these are the "NEW" garments. I know that you can only buy these when you have a valid LDS temple recommend. I know you cannot make them yourself without approval and I can’t go and open a local garment making store. Therefore I know there must be some legal reason why all these are true, but I don't know what it is or how it applies. I also know that the use of this image is the garment itself, and so I believe Commons:De minimis doesn’t apply.

Anyway, my question what give Mr. Packham (the image creator) the ability to create this image? I notice the two deletions "kept", so I know he dose have the right, but I don't understand why I can't take a photo of a coke can or art and claim copyright but I can take a photo of these garments when legally I can’t make the clothing myself. After all the LDS church must have some kind of exclusive right to the use of the garment or they couldn’t have had the e-bay listings selling them removed due to copyright claims.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 13:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Well first off, from my limited experience, it's easy to bully eBay customers. I had a classmate in college who had Eddie Bauer threaten to sue her for copyright or trademark violation (I can't remember which) simply for using the word "EB" in her online listing (by which standard, you'll note that I've broken their "trademark" simply by typing this sentence). Frankly, I doubt their legal standing: but with their big lawyers vs. the small guy, they can threaten about anything they want (cf. a similar situation [18]). If I had a company threaten to sue me for tens of thousands of dollars, I'd probably take it down too: no matter how frivolous.
And now to the reason we don't allow someone to copyright a piece of clothing: it lacks enough originality to constitute a creative piece of artwork. The LDS might be able to claim a patent on it as a unique piece of technology (as long as they've cleared it with the Patent Office), but they cannot claim it violates a form of artistic intellectual property. Of course the real reason they don't like these going public is they a) believe very intensely that only their believers should wear such garments, and/or b) seem to be very secretive about it. I'm not terribly familiar with LDS theology (I've had no LDS friends since high school), so I don't know which; but their secretive zeal seems to rival even the Church of Scientology. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:07, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I think I need to e-mail you instead of posting here. I don't think I can expain what I mean in this setting.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 14:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Magog the Ogre. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

File:EdwardRobertArmstrong.jpg

The proper thing to do is to contact me before deletion if you have a question. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware you weren't notified. How can I help you with this? Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:13, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for File:EdwardRobertArmstrong.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:EdwardRobertArmstrong.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

CAtruthwatcher

Is back to his old tricks again. 24.239.153.58 (talk) 19:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any bad behavior yet. He is inserting his contention on the page, but try to bring to the discussion page while avoiding edit warring yourself. Also, check out the essay I wrote: WP:DV for an appropriate definition of vandalism. Let me know if the behavior continues to be problematic. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Well now he's using another account. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=St._John%27s_University_(New_York)&action=history 24.239.153.58 (talk) 21:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

You should not have edit warred with him. If I had not protected that page right now, I would be blocking you for violation of the three revert rule. Nevertheless, he's banned now, and the page is protected for a good long time. Let me know if it ever becomes a problem again. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Help needed

Hello, please tell me how will i come to Know the articles created by me. Is there any list saved any where?? I am just trying to accumulate the number of articles created by me in a list for my records. - Humaliwalay (talk) 19:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe there is a tool that will do it quickly for you, but I don't know what that is; you an ask at the help desk. The only other way I know how to do it is to click on Special:Mycontributions, click on the highest available number to show at one time (in your case, 2000 suffices), and do a text search in your browser for "hist) N" (including the trailing space, excluding the quotations). This will include pages of all types and redirects as well. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, for the prompt assistance. - Humaliwalay (talk) 05:14, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Tea Party movement

At the same time you responded to the AN3 request with a block, I fully protected the Tea Party movement for three days. In this situation, it's not a big deal if the two run concurrently, but perhaps one or the other should be removed. I'm indifferent. -- tariqabjotu 01:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The article is on probation, one which I imposed at the suggestion of the community: see Template:Editnotices/Page/Tea Party movement. It seems a bit extreme to protect it for such a storm in a teacup (i.e., tiny edit war), IMO. That said, as Kelly wrote at AN3, there are some problem editors on that page, and I don't quite know what to do about it. Thoughts? Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

As I said, I'm indifferent; you seem to be more familiar with the history of the article. -- tariqabjotu 03:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Mmk. I think this one just might have to head to arbitration eventually. I lack the power to arbitrarily (no pun intended) pick out who I think is edit warring and who not. Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
It seems to be under control now. Dylan Flaherty 03:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

JPG caps

I noticed that you worked on a pic of mine (File:BishopTuff.jpg) taken of the Bishop Tuff. Was the main thing the commons, and/or was the capital ".JPG" in the fine name a problem? I only bring it up because almost all of my pics (User:Qfl247/pics) have caps in the extension name, and some work may need to be done to my collection... QFL 24-7 bla ¤ cntrb ¤ kids ¤ pics ¤ vids 05:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah it's just a commons thing; what happened is someone transferred your image to commons, and when they did so, they removed the capitals from the filename (commons does that by default now when possible). Because Wikipedia and commons have case sensitive file names, I had to instruct the bot to change the name for all the transclusions of your image, or it wouldn't have appeared after I deleted the copy on Wikipedia. Magog the Ogre (talk) 05:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Magog_the_Ogre/Archive_7&oldid=1139348447"