On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Jay Litwyn <
brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> wrote:
> Plus, no admin actions went against his account:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Wp_freedom_fighter
> on wikipedia.
It's not the most intuitive thing, but the "user" field in l
"Casey Brown" wrote in message
news:de28ceda0907191928u248ab87cr889c788006055...@mail.gmail.com...
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, wrote:
>> Why would Google care about our internal issues?
>>
>
> I would assume because he was using a gmail e-mail address, maybe
> something the user was doing
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, wrote:
> Why would Google care about our internal issues?
>
I would assume because he was using a gmail e-mail address, maybe
something the user was doing was against google's TOS?
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
___
WikiEN
Why would Google care about our internal issues?
In a message dated 7/19/2009 5:38:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca writes:
Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Wp_freedom_fighter ...
No response from gmail about why his e-mail is still functional.
The
Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Wp_freedom_fighter ...
No response from gmail about why his e-mail is still functional.
The Apathy Cabal rules again.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing
I see no problem with responding. The question for me is how, and to whom,
besides this hacker (of the slack hacker variety, not kludge writers) should
I respond to. Since he responded to me, and may the wonders of stupidity be
praised, he asked for my useless password, it might be within my pow
Maybe it should go directly to {{SockBlock}}, do not pass go, do not collect
notoriety, until he appeals on his discussion page, which might show him to
be Grawp. Whoever it is did not introduce himself or make any edits, so it
is clear that they want to go directly to using admin powers. I thin
The suspected sock template does not summon checkusers and nor should it.
You should either send a request to a checkuser vie email, or use
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SPI ... the process is much faster
then it used to be. (SPI is the replacement for RFCU and SSP).
Contacting the arbcom
What was I thinking? You can contact ab...@googlemail.com about your problem
without bothering a checkuser. You could also be sly and solicit a response
from him via direct e-mail, by replying to him with direct e-mail. IOW, lie
about your password. That might let you reach his ISP about hacking
Summon a checkuser with a suspected sockpuppet template on their front page.
Those are *mainly* the ones who see IP#s and whois search links on those
IP#s.
"Abigail Brady" wrote in message
news:68e55ace0905210832g75a27ee5ha7a36217a2045...@mail.gmail.com...
> The headers indicate it was sent thr
"Thomas Dalton" wrote in message
news:a4359dff0905210757r6bf68360m80277e6491df3...@mail.gmail.com...
> 2009/5/21 Carcharoth :
>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Thomas Dalton
>> wrote:
>>> 2009/5/21 Jay Litwyn :
Nothing is to do here. Adminships, last time I checked, are already
sub
The headers indicate it was sent through the 'email this user feature': my
mailhost received it directly from wikimedia.org.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Wp_freedom_fighter
indicates the account was created May 10, although it doesn't seem to have
done anything after
2009/5/21 Carcharoth :
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Thomas Dalton
> wrote:
>> 2009/5/21 Jay Litwyn :
>>> Nothing is to do here. Adminships, last time I checked, are already subject
>>> to a time-out under admins open to recall. I do not think it matters whether
>>> it's three months, twelve
Abigail Brady carbon-copied an e-mail purportedly from
user:Wp_freedom_fighter (if you follow the trailing indications of source,
which were probably written manually) and that user does not seem to egzist,
nor do they seem to hav ever egzisted. All I get on google is games and Sri
Lankan war h
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/5/21 Jay Litwyn :
>> Nothing is to do here. Adminships, last time I checked, are already subject
>> to a time-out under admins open to recall. I do not think it matters whether
>> it's three months, twelve, or fifty months. If that's the
2009/5/21 Jay Litwyn :
> Nothing is to do here. Adminships, last time I checked, are already subject
> to a time-out under admins open to recall. I do not think it matters whether
> it's three months, twelve, or fifty months. If that's the length of your
> term, then it does not matter if you go in
"Andrew Turvey" wrote in message
news:25230745.571242081651794.javamail.sys...@atsl_laptop...
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Thomas Dalton"
>
>> Desysopping inactive admins has been discussed and rejected 1000s of
>> times.
>
> {{citationneeded}}
>
> Please?
http://en.wikipedia.org
Nothing is to do here. Adminships, last time I checked, are already subject
to a time-out under admins open to recall. I do not think it matters whether
it's three months, twelve, or fifty months. If that's the length of your
term, then it does not matter if you go into a coma due to a bad batch
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Alex Sawczynec wrote:
> Wikipedia Review appears to have picked up on this as well:
>
> http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?&showtopic=24276
>
>
They always do. Good for them.
--
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
WikiEN-l mailin
Wikipedia Review appears to have picked up on this as well:
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?&showtopic=24276
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/lis
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Oskar Sigvardsson <
oskarsigvards...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey, you wanna hear a really stupid thing *we* could do? The exact
> same thing! We write emails to a bunch of inactive admins, pretending
> to be disgruntled wikipedia-haters asking for their accounts, and i
T +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] someone after non-active admin accounts
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Dalton"
> Desysopping inactive admins has been discussed and rejected 1000s of
>
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Dalton"
> Desysopping inactive admins has been discussed and rejected 1000s of
> times.
{{citationneeded}}
Please?
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailin
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Andrew Turvey wrote:
> Automatic suspension of admins who have been inactive after a certain
> period sounds like a prudent idea - and also of admins who turn inactive
> after posting any kind of "resignation" message. By all means allow them to
> be re-activated
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/5/11 Andrew Turvey :
>> Automatic suspension of admins who have been inactive after a certain period
>> sounds like a prudent idea - and also of admins who turn inactive after
>> posting any kind of "resignation" message. By all means
2009/5/11 Andrew Turvey :
> Automatic suspension of admins who have been inactive after a certain period
> sounds like a prudent idea - and also of admins who turn inactive after
> posting any kind of "resignation" message. By all means allow them to be
> re-activated on request without going th
.
Andrew
- Original Message -
From: "Gwern Branwen"
To: "English Wikipedia"
Sent: Sunday, 10 May, 2009 14:58:39 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] someone after non-active admin accounts
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Thomas Dalton wrot
2009/5/11 Angela Anuszewski :
> It does make you wonder... with the extra responsibility associated with
> having an admin account, there should be some expectation of a certain level
> of activity. There are certainly guidelines for the amount of activity that
> should have occured before an RFA,
It does make you wonder... with the extra responsibility associated with
having an admin account, there should be some expectation of a certain level
of activity. There are certainly guidelines for the amount of activity that
should have occured before an RFA, so why aren't there any for an expecte
2009/5/11 Oskar Sigvardsson :
> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Thomas Dalton
> wrote:
>> I would hope RFA is good enough to weed out people stupid enough to
>> respond to such things...
>
> Hey, you wanna hear a really stupid thing *we* could do? The exact
> same thing! We write emails to a bun
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> I would hope RFA is good enough to weed out people stupid enough to
> respond to such things...
Hey, you wanna hear a really stupid thing *we* could do? The exact
same thing! We write emails to a bunch of inactive admins, pretending
to be di
I'm surprised the account hasn't already been blocked with e-mail disabled.
Not that he/she couldn't register a new one, but...
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Whew, I thought you were talking about [[User:X!|me]].
- -X!
On May 10, 2009, at 8:52 AM [May 10, 2009 ], Abigail Brady wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Wp freedom fighter
> Date: Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:14 PM
> Subject: Wiki
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> I would hope RFA is good enough to weed out people stupid enough to
> respond to such things...
It's expecting a bit much of RFA to not just pass only people who are
suited for the job, but also pass only that subset which will never
ever be
I would hope RFA is good enough to weed out people stupid enough to
respond to such things...
2009/5/10 Abigail Brady :
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Wp freedom fighter
> Date: Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:14 PM
> Subject: Wikipedia e-mail
> To: Morwen
>
>
> Dear X,
>
> We notice y
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Abigail Brady wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
[snip]
> The Wikipedia Freedom Fighters
>
Thanks for this -- I forwarded it to the Arbitration Committee and
they said they're looking into it.
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
---
Note: This e-mail add
-- Forwarded message --
From: Wp freedom fighter
Date: Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Subject: Wikipedia e-mail
To: Morwen
Dear X,
We notice you haven't edited Wikipedia for some time. Perhaps you grew
disillusioned with the project after seeing the corruption and bureaucracy
at
37 matches
Mail list logo
