Jump to content

User talk:Moreschi

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Moreschi (talk | contribs) at 18:45, 29 December 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I'll be taking a short break, checking in every now and then, but back regularly in the second week of January. Merry Christmas to all!

Subpages:

Recently archived

Please check the archives for anything older. Moreschi (talk) 18:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

Hi. There's a whole new bunch of suspicious accounts. Moonvise (talk · contribs) I believe is yet another sock of Verjakette (talk · contribs). And then Kalifo (talk · contribs), who clearly is not a newbie. Grandmaster 15:01, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are also both accounts whose editors have just made edits which Grandmaster particularly didn't like - one on the Alinca entry, and the other on the Shusha talk page. The latter particularly hurt him, uti possidetis being a silver bullet for Azeri wolfishness. [[1]]. Meowy 21:32, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked Moonvise, that's pretty glaring. Kalifo may well be a reincarnation but I'm not sure who of, and seems fairly harmless for now. Moreschi (talk) 21:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And yet another SPA: Karabakh Boyevik (talk · contribs). Mass socking by the proponents of a certain ethnic POV becomes a serious concern. I'm thinking of taking this to arbitration, as it appears to be coordinated off wiki. There is also a bunch of older accounts, which joined the circus after the long period of inactivity. Matrixfighter (talk · contribs) is a good example. Grandmaster 07:33, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SPA blocked. Grandmaster, I wouldn't bother taking this to arbcom. There's nothing they can do here without a smoking gun, as there was in the recent Eastern European mailing list case. We'll just have to block the socks as they come up, and fairly liberally at that. Shrug. I believe IRL tensions are somewhat heightened around now, so it's not really surprising that we're seeing an upsurge in sock activity.

It is just irritating that we have to spend our time on all those throwaway accounts, which reappear the very next day. Grandmaster 12:20, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meowy, toning down the rhetoric would be nice. Werewolf metaphors are always entertaining but perhaps not the most mellow, hmmm? Moreschi (talk) 20:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually a Grey Wolf metaphor. :) How can it be an "ethnic insult" when those it concerns seem to think being called wolves is a good thing? Meowy 22:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"IRL"? Do you mean "in real life"? I haven't noticed anything - for example the likes of day.az periodically go on anti-Wikipedia drives, encouraging the faithful to come and edit out what they don't like, but they seem fairly silent just now, and I've seen no "troop mustering" on any Armenia-related boards. Meowy 01:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about this guy - Oceolcspsms (talk · contribs), another older account that, after a long period of inactivity, is suddenly doing a lot of reverting without discussion. Meowy 23:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yup. I'll keep an eye on that one, I suppose it's just possible he's a bona fide newbie. Too early to tell. Thanks for letting me know. Moreschi (talk) 00:24, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think Oceolcspsms is a sleeper account of Verjakette. He used such accounts. Oceolcspsms fist appeared in July to support Lumberjak, the sock of Verjakette, and vanished once Lumberjak was banned. Now he is back again, and his appearance coincides with emergence of new socks of Verjakette. And he reverted the article to this edit by Moonvise [2]. It is very strange when the only edit by a newbie after the long absence is a revert for the banned user. And another new account to keep an eye on: Szentida (talk · contribs) Grandmaster 07:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion by Guildenrich

I recently reverted this disruptive IP [3], who reminds me very much of someone else [4] [5]. --Athenean (talk) 02:59, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with, thanks. Moreschi (talk) 20:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, by the way, would you be willing to semiprotect Anatolia while you're at it? Shuppi socking through IPs again [6]. --Athenean (talk) 21:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

Merry holidays
Merry, joyful Christmas and fortunate New Year, both in real life and here. Brand[t] 15:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for any distress I may have caused

My intent was never to question your judgement, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. Happy holidays. Throwaway85 (talk) 23:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. At bottom, though, I really miss the old culture of rouge adminship, which seems to have totally died out, both in terms of people actually using the term and in terms of people doing rouge things. There was always a good deal of playfulness and humour surrounding rougery, but at the root of the concept there was a realization - taken fairly seriously - that when push came to shove, and the drama boiled over, some brave admin would stand up, make the decision, and do the right thing for the encyclopedia. And when he or she did, people would applaud and say they wish they had done so, had they the courage.
Ah, the old times. Gone now. As sysops, we're supposed to be craven creatures, afraid of our own shadows, needing every decision double-checked and filled out on the triplicate form. Automatically guilty of all sorts of horrible policy violations unless extensively proven otherwise. Abusive OCD nutters, out to ban the people who cross us on the slightest pretext.
What a joke. In fact there's a whole RFC about the attacks on sysops having gone way too far, at times. I tell you, in 2007 this wouldn't even have got to RFC: CoM would have been recognised as a vexatious litigant and banned from ANI for his own good. Unfortunately he's hardly the worst offender, just the most high-profile. It's sad. We need some of the old spirit back. Moreschi (talk) 00:35, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I sympathize. Unfortunately, with Wikipedia's growing prominence, some people are increasingly seeing it as their personal battleground. This invites an atmosphere that is less than conducive to good, wiki-building interactions. With all of the nationalistic crap going on, be it Irish-English, Iraeli-Arab, Turkish-Armenian, or what have you, accusations of bias are nearly as prevalent as helpful edits. The fact that there have recently been events that shake people's faith in the Powers that WikiBe doesn't help one iota. As an aside, if you think the nationalistic crap is bad now, just wait until China starts sending legions of editors our way to make sure they are "truthfully" portrayed. I can't see this mess getting better anytime soon. Hopefully the new Arbcom members will improve things a bit, but, like you said, all the admins are stepping on eggshells. It seems you have to be entirely uncontroversial to actually get any sort of high office, and that doesn't speak well for a reformist Arbcom.
The other problem I see is that most of the articles on political subjects have already been created, and are near-complete. This takes the focus away from article-building, and just leaves POV-pushing and bickering. It'd actually be nice to have a round of RfCs on the controversial articles, do a blitz and get them to GA status, then lock them down until new information arises that warrants addition. Goes against everything the project stands for, but at least it would block some of these pointless feuds. Anyways, that's my rant. Enjoy your holidays, and don't let things on here get to you too much. It's just the internet, after all. Throwaway85 (talk) 03:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

A NobodyMy talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 20:43, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anon

Hi, could you check out 67.84.140.181 (talk · contribs) for possible socking? Brand[t] 07:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is Hetoum, even though the IP points to a different location. He repeats Hetoum's reverts. Could be his meatpuppet. I think Khanate of Nakhichevan should be placed on permanent semi-protection. The amount of regular vandalism there is ridiculous. Grandmaster 09:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why Hetoum? The edits on the Khanate of Nakhichevan indicate someone with a probable Iranian agenda (inserting Encyclopedia Iranica-style spelling, use of "province of Persia" phrase, etc. But I think blind reverting by Grandmaster and Brand only makes the sitiuation worse - "RV sock of banned user" should not a valid reason, and it only invites further warring. Only revert if there is something wrong with the actual content of the edit - and say what is wrong with the content (not what is allegedly wrong with the editor). Meowy 15:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article was reverted to this version many times, and for the most part by IPs from NY University, which belong to Hetoum. Most recently the article was reverted to this version by User:Brunotheborat, a CU proven sock of Hetoum. Now another IP pops up, and reverts to exactly the same version as Hetoum did. I think this pretty much speaks for itself. Even if the IP is not Hetoum, it is his meatpuppet. I think the long term disruption can be stopped by the long term semi-protection. IPs made no useful contribution to that article, other than POV editing and edit warring. Grandmaster 15:56, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might also check 80.212.247.121 one of Neftchi escape IP used to make controversial edits. The only remaining user who is not blocked or banned for still using socks to make controversial edits. Can someone ask, the initial removal of the modern Azeri alphabet from a subordinate Khanate was whatever or not legitimate regardless of the fact that it was done by a sock or a banned user, when four other registered and genuine users have already removed it? Was Turkic not written in Perso-Arabic alphabet? It's obviously wrong to claim the Turks of Nakhichevan would have called it Naxçıvan xanlığı. That's a modern Azeri pronunciation, and anything comming to us from the Turkic population of the region had it pronunced nowhere like Naxçıvan xanlığı, it can't even be rendered with that alphabet. It comes as no surprise that Grandmaster here who want the Azeri modern rendering there is also the same who removed the Armenian rendering from the article which covers historic as well as modern Nakhichevan (and refused to split the historic Nakhichevan), when that name in its English form came to us first from its Armenian original name, not a modern rendering. Socks could multiply in a bizare way all they want, the initial point on the essence of the conflict is one sides annacronism from one side and the removal of Armenian historic presence. All what I had to say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justpassby (talk • contribs) 17:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted now, I think. Moreschi (talk) 12:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guildenrich yet again

[7] Almost certainly him, socking through IPs again. --Athenean (talk) 18:48, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted. Moreschi (talk) 18:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Topic ban violation by Sulmues

[8] [9]. Not to mention some god-awful editing in other areas. --Athenean (talk) 20:08, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I have broken the ban that I have on Kosovo. I am respecting the ban. Saying that Fadil Vokrri is Kosovo Albanian instead of "Yougoslav" improves wikipedia. The "Yougoslav" nationality does not exist any longer. Basically Athenean is accusing me of mixing onto Yougoslavia issues. Now Yougoslavia included Kosovo, so should I not touch any kind of Slovenian, Serbian, Montenegro, Macedonia, or Croatian issues? This is becoming ridiculous. Athenean, there is need in the US for cops, why don't you come to the streets of LA?

The Bjeshket e Nemuna/Prokletije are in Albania, so that cannot be a ban on Kosovo for that. The table was too big, but user:Tadija reverted that already. How does that count as a topic ban break?

In addition I would recall Moreschi's attention about the consistent vandalism of User:Athenean in the Albania page where he is trolling the page: [10] sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 22:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fadil Vokrri is, as you said yourself, from Kosovo, and the Prokletije form the boundary between Albania and Kosovo. Therefore, these are Kosovo-related articles, from which you have been banned. --Athenean (talk) 23:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now wait a moment: Since Albania is adjacent to Kosovo and the Prokletije mountains, i.e. the Northern Albanian mountains are found in Albania, should I also be banned from editing Albania articles? You are becoming even more pathetic. On Fadil Vokrri: He is not a Yougoslav, so that has to be removed.

Below more information for Moreschi to see that you are really obsessed with trolling Albania-related pages. Moreschi you should block Athenean for awhile form touching ANY ALBANIAN RELATED PAGESsulmues (talk--Sulmues 23:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments of the type "you are becoming even more pathetic" are personal attacks and a major violation of your civility parole [11]. I strongly urge you to stop digging yourself even deeper. --Athenean (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if you feel offended. Please do accept my apologies if you were hurt.sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 14:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attention on User:Athenean

User:Athenean's marked anti-albanian obsession can also be viewed in the following edits (only in the last week because his anti-albanianism is a very long disease, so it would take me days to sort through his obsession):

Moscopole: [12] - Clear POV that all the muslims that ruined Moscopole were not Turkish regiments but only Albanian muslims.

Greater Albania: [13]

Berat: [[14] Pushing POV that Dassaretae were greeks.

Epirus (region): [15] Again POV pushing that Epirus has no traces of Albanians, but even the air is in old greek and the flowers smell in old greek too.

Korçë: [16] Taking out initial stubs that are a very common way of starting new Wikipedia articles.

Gjirokastër: [17] Deleting people that are ALREADY in Wikipedia and trolling the page by taking out useful information.

Aristeidis_Kollias: [18] A nomination for deletion for a very prominent Arvanite.

Albanian communities in Greece: [19] completely trolled the page and made a total mess there.

sulmues (talk) --Sulmues 22:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ignores trolling) The plot thickens. This [20] IP is none other than Sulmues [21], which he used to evade both his block and his topic ban on Kosovo-related topics [22]. --Athenean (talk) 01:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Go prove it that it wasn't my grandchild that did it. And try to give some explanations for your own obsessions.sulmues (talk)--Sulmues 13:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to put under Moreschi's attention that the article Albania has been requested to be protected because of the continuous vandalism of user:athenean. I made useful changes to the religious statistics here: [23] because the numbers in the reference [24]was incorrectly used and added so I had to foot the numbers properly. It took me some minutes to do that.

But here he comes and reverts the WHOLE THING with other things as well and makes a mess in the article. Of course his numbers in the article for religious statistics won't add up to the right amounts that appear in the source. [25]. What kind of an editor are you Athenean? Making a mess everywhere in albanian-related topics won't get you anywhere. Please get your frustrations elsewhere.sulmues (talk)--Sulmues 14:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hurrrggghhh. Alright, one minor fix as an IP I can live with, but any future non-compliance with the topic-ban will be rewarded by block. Football and geography articles that aren't directly related, that I can live with as well, but nothing closer, OK? And stop informing the world that Athenean is a vandal. He just isn't, OK? Please right WP:VANDAL for an explanation of what is and is not a vandal. Further accusations of this type will be viewed as violations of your civility parole and rewarded (you guessed it) by block. Thank you. Moreschi (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request of Bigred58

Hello Moreschi. Bigred58 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Carcharoth (talk) 05:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC) It would have been quicker for me to type out a personal message than work out how to use that template...[reply]

Hehe. This seems to have been dealt with. Scibaby this may not have been, but the account will clearly need monitoring with so many sockmasters active in this topic area. It is difficult to see what else we can do but block on sight when accounts like this turn up, we simply don't have the number of checkusers to deal with the shitstorm any other way. Moreschi (talk) 12:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

arrgghhh!

I dont agree with your block and I dont accept your demands. You didnt punish other people violating Wikipedia rules.--Paweł5586 (talk) 11:05, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is free encyclopedia, you cant decide what I should write.--Paweł5586 (talk) 11:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Free as in libre, Pawel. It's not a free-for-all. And it's my job to stop it becoming a free-for-all.
You don't actually have much of a choice. You can either play by the rules or get banned. And yes, I will be the one doing the banning. It's as simple as that. Moreschi (talk) 12:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look closer to my edits, you can find there only the truth, not sweet but bitter truth. I have no fun with war edit or anything else, but my opponents are trying to destroy my work and stop me. I am just trying to write about Massacres of Poles to hounour victims and to make Encyclopedia better. I will use only reliable sources, I have now good relationships with Faustian. Look also at my Polish profile, you can find there some stars, I am not troublemaker. See template, Birczanin is trying to remove link to article, this is misbehaviour, but you didnt react. I will play by the rules (no edit wars, and good behaviour) but I won't stop write about Massacres. If you want to ban me, go ahead, this is simply for you as you said. --Paweł5586 (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TRUTH. Please. Just try to comply with policy, OK? Then you'd be amazed how easy this editing lark becomes. Moreschi (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Moreschi&oldid=334765040"