Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 08:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
It was a redirect. Exert 15:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- No problem. Exert 15:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
GoblinBot3 (talk) 12:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
|Shappy, Thank you for taking part in my request for bureaucratship, which closed as successful. |
I promise to do my best and justify the trust the community has placed in me!
fr33kman talk 19:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with getting my rename accomplished. I appreciate it. :) JavertI knit sweaters, yo! 00:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Griffinofwales (talk) 02:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
||Barras has given you some cookies! Now enjoy them!
--Barras || talk 20:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- Om nom nom! :D Shappy talk 20:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
- I hope the cookies have a good taste after your hard work on my new sig :) --Barras || talk 20:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
3rd August 2009
Pmlineditor 10:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
This kid never learns, does he? Anyway, in regards to that new IP range from UUNET, EN just blocked that entire range. It may be the only way to keep him out of these sites since I strongly believe we're dealing with an individual with Asperger's or some other form of autism. He is so obsessed that nothing short of keeping the little menace away from a computer is going to stop him. He's been relatively quiet on EN, thank goodness. I'm an admin there and I can't even begin to tell you how many of this kid's socks I've had to block. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:53, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- He is serial, I must say. It does seem like he has Asperger's, which means there's very little we can do unless a diplomatic admin does some digging. I don't have too much knowledge of rangeblocks, perhaps it'd be best to contact a CU? Shappy talk 14:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
I may withdraw :P I do not have experience of GA's--Deoxyribonucleic (talk) 17:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Sorry to bother you on your vacation, but I need to know why DNA was blocked. You said that he was blocked at enWP, but User:DNA has never been blocked at enWP (only has 2 edits). Did someone run a checkuser here? The other reasons you cited are good reasons, but he was never warned. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Didn't I say? It was not DNA, but en:User:RRuk. Pmlineditor Talk 16:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- 1. I didn't read your message until after this post, and 2. What is the relationship between DNA and RRuk? Griffinofwales (talk) 16:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Socks. That much is obvious. Please do something more constructive than ask so many silly questions. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Where is the proof that DNA is a sock of RRuk? Did a checkuser check? Griffinofwales (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- We want to build an encyclopedia here. Please go and write an article than asking so many questions. Pmlineditor Talk 16:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Please do something more constructive than ask so many silly questions. Majorly talk 16:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- silly? I want to know where Shappy got his information from. You don't need to be involved. I don't see you building an encyclopedia. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:54, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Everytime I see you, you're pestering people demanding answers to questions that don't need to be asked. "Why this, why that, what policy has he broken, why wasn't he warned, where is the evidence?" Seriously, just drop it and find something else to do. Majorly talk 16:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I think they need to be asked. If you don't, that's fine. 45% of my edits are in article space, 35% are in user talk space. I spend most of my time at RC, and cleaning up articles. I am not here to create GAs, I'm here to keep this WP clean. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to explain this once, and then I want this discussion to end. This shows the DNA account merged by DNA (talk · contribs). At en:User talk:DNA, a request was made to usurp that account from a RRaunak sockpuppet. Similar editing styles show that this user is DNA, without needing checkuser evidence. He apparently linked it somewhere too, adding further proof. Now, let that be an end to it. PeterSymonds (talk) 17:08, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- And that is the end of it. Thanks for the information. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I see that this wiki obviously has little trust in its admins. Shappy talk 18:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- You blocked a user for non-blockable offenses (see User:Yegoyan). I objected. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Griffin, don't be so quick to gauge the situation. That edit alone is enough to justify the investigation, and if additional evidence turns up, then the block is valid (there are plenty other reasons to be wary of DNA here; just the other day I had to warn him about abusing rollback). Yegoyan isn't blocked because they haven't made a fuss here; if they were to do so, they'd be gone just as quickly. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- So, being extremely immature, trolling the project, tagging Simple Talk for quick deletion don't count? DNA was not being helpful to the project. Plus, in February or March, we had several discussions on ST and AN that resulted in an unwritten rule allowing only once chance for banned EN users. en:User:RRuk was/is a voracious socker there. And, if after all of this you still want DNA unblocked, good luck with that. Multiple admins have told you earlier in this thread that your campaigning for DNA is useless. The community gave me the tools to keep the wiki clean, which I'm doing. Shappy talk 18:22, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I saw 3 things on his talk page/block log. 1. The warning about rollback (possible punishment=removal of rollback), the warning about the QD tag on ST (he was warned), and the block for sockpuppetry. Shappy, where is the evidence (I'm questioning admins again, sorry) that DNA was a sockpuppet here, not at enWP. I didn't see any immaturity or trolling in his edits, but I only checked a few. I'm not online 24/7 of course, but do you have diffs? Griffinofwales (talk) 18:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Did you even read PeterSymonds's post? The request for SUL was made by a RRuk sockpuppet, confirming it was him. Something you need to learn is that mountains of diffs are not needed for every single admin action. Besides, DNA was not contributing positively, and immature trolls are blocked. For a period of time late last year, we let banned EN users run amok on our wiki and we became the laughingstock of all wikis. We've adopted a zero tolerance policy on banned EN users. Shappy talk 18:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I did. The diff referred to enWP. Sorry about your vacation, I promise you can mess up mine (I have one coming up in September). Zero tolerance? User:Yegoyan? Griffinofwales (talk) 18:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yegoyan became an admin in 2007, before this was noted, and has done nothing wrong. DNA, on the other hand, is a common troll who did nothing to improve the encyclopedia. DNA is the same user on EN as on Simple. There may not be a diff (which makes it hard for you to believe), but it's obviously true. It's astonishing that you care so much about a troll who in addition to being a notorious banned user and vandal at EN trolled our project. I don't know about you, but I prefer that trolls not edit. :-) Shappy talk 18:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
This is just great. I check in from vacation, and I see a user questioning my judgement for blocking a troll? Griffinofwales, you need to stop blindly following policy. It doesn't get you anywhere. Shappy talk 18:33, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
(change conflict) DNA is the same user on EN as on Simple. enWP's DNA is not blocked. Different user.Yegoyan became an admin in 2007, before this was noted, and has done nothing wrong. User was blocked at enWP for sockpuppetry. Since the evidence says that DNA should be blocked because of sockpuppetry, I support the ban. I wanted to know how you figured out that our DNA was a banned sockpuppet. That was resolved. You blocked DNA for that reason. I am pointing out that we have a double standard. Yegoyan, an admin, is not blocked for the same action. I thought admins were held to a much higher standard than beginner users. Why isn't Yegoyan blocked? I am about to check DNA's contribs to look for trolling. Griffinofwales (talk) 18:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any evidence of trolling. I will continue to pursue a ban for Yegoyan per this case. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:03, 8 August 2009 (UTC) Your ban actually helped me. Thanks.
- It's not actually a zero tolerance policy in the way you are thinking of it. We allow banned users from other projects to edit here. They get one chance to screw up here and then we institute a ban/block on them as well. As such Yegoyan has done nothing here to warrant a ban. Also this policy only came into effect within the last year or so, after Yegoyan was already a user here. Please stop trolling. -Djsasso (talk) 19:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- DNA screwed up? From meta, Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the editing of Wikipedia. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, he tried to QD simple talk. A clear and deliberate bad faith edit. -Djsasso (talk) 19:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- Why would he have done that after a year of editing normally? We should create a template for banned users that edit here so that they know that they can be blocked after 1 bad edit. Griffinofwales (talk) 19:42, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
- He didn't really have a year of editing normally....He edited a tiny bit a year ago, and disappeared and then edited a tiny bit this month. We don't need to template everything. Users know what is expected of them. They shouldn't have to be told you can only screw up once...you shouldn't screw up ever. There should be no need of chances. -Djsasso (talk) 19:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! Welcome back. Nice to see you here again :) Barras (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! A break did me good, and I'm giving Simple another chance. Hopefully, things have changed for the better? Shappy talk 20:31, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yup, they have a bit. No drama in the last time :) Barras (talk) 20:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- YAY!!! You're back! :D Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 20:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- "Nodramazwelcomeback" The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well if you knew why he was away, (maybe you do, I don't know) well you'd know why I'm so happy. I thought he'd be gone for good. Yotcmdr =talk to the commander= 20:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- I may not be as active though. Shappy talk 20:53, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Seriously Yot, I was here to say welcome back with no drama. Your response is a particularly perfect example of making a fuss out of nothing. It's good to see Shappy back but we don't need the continual "yeah, but what did you mean? no, what did you mean"?" nonsense. Give it a break. It's always good to see former regular editors back. Nothing more. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- WB Shappy. :D Pmlineditor Talk 16:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
London Underground 2009 Stock is currently at PGA, and is nearing the end of it's three week period. I was wondering if you could comment on it, and if it was ready see if we can form a consensus to promote.
Goblin 18:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman!
26th October 2009
- Billy Graham has been promoted to Very Good Article status.
- Blackpool tramway has been promoted to Very Good Article status.
- Portman Road has been promoted to Very Good Article status.
- Jupiter has been promoted to Very Good Article status.
- Hermann Göring has been promoted to Very Good Article status.
- Victoria line has been promoted to Very Good Article status.
- Hyderabad, India has been promoted to Good Article status.
- Carom Billiards has been promoted to Good Article status.
- Mimicry has been promoted to Good Article status.
- London Underground 2009 Stock has been promoted to Good Article status.
- India has been promoted to Good Article status.
- Earth has been promoted to Good Article status.
- Caffeine has been demoted to regular article status.
- Romania has been demoted to regular article status.
- Royal Rumble (2009), Presidents' Trophy, Manchester and New York State Route 308 are currently at Proposed Good Articles - your comments are welcomed.
- Southampton Corporation Tramways, Talyllyn Railway and Yellow (song) are currently at Proposed Very Good Articles - your comments are welcomed.
- The Simple English Wikipedia has 150,000 pages, with the creation of User talk:Mynameinc by RubiksMaster110.
- The Simple English Wikipedia has 57,000 articles, with the creation of Bispham, Blackpool by Pmlinediter.
- The Simple English Wikipedia has 56,000 articles, with the creation of Serie C1 1988–89 by Nameless User.
- The Simple English Wikipedia has 55,000 articles, with the creation of MTN Elite one 1986 by Nameless User.
GoblinBot3 (talk) 08:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
9th November 2009
GoblinBot3 (talk) 00:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
23rd November 2009
|Simple News News|
We Are One! Simple News is now One Year Old, and we would like to thank all of the Simple English Wikipedia contributors who have helped with it during this time. As we move into our second year please continue to send in your contributions, and let's try to develop Simple News further!
On that note, please do continue to submit articles, QandAs and the like. You may have noticed that recent Issues have been fairly bare - and the only way that will change will be with your help.
Goblin, On Behalf of the Simple News Team. 15:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman!
--Barras (de) (talk) 22:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
7th December 2009
Yottie =talk= 20:12, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
4th January 2010
–Juliancolton | Talk 21:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
1st March 2010
Pmlineditor ∞ 12:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Simple News: Issue Eighteen[change source]
13th March 2010
20th March 2010
PmlineditorBot (report errors) 11:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
29th March 2010
- Yottie talks about the new Stub Cup to try and eradicate them from SEWP.
GoblinBot3 (talk) 15:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Issue Twenty One
5th April 2010
Happy Easter from everyone on the Simple News Team!
GoblinBot3 (talk) 18:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey. :D SimonKSK 15:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
29th March 2010
Pmlineditor ∞ 10:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Issue Twenty Four
12th June 2010
GoblinBot3 (talk) 15:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Shappy! Sorry, but due to policy I have removed your sysop bit. All the best! fr33kman 06:05, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Issue Twenty Five
15th November 2010
Grunny (talk) 11:32, 17 November 2010 (UTC)