User talk:Alison/Archive 57

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Alison. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 50

←

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

Email concerning privacy

Can you please check the Email I've sent you. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• Replied! :) - Alison ^❤ 20:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

same old, same old

A time ago you blocked a Grawp sock that was active on Hamsa..AFAIK that was my only (tiny!) interaction with him....for which I have been rewarded the last few days with promises - pr email- of being exterminated/killed, etc. etc.I have now switched off my email. There is a discussion here, which I wonder if you would like to look into? Some claim you must be an autoconfirmed user to send email to others...but the accounts which have emailed us have made no edits at all. Is this a bug? Is there someway to raise the threshold for sending email to other users? And why, oh why, should anyone have a legitimate need to send 50+ emails in 2 minutes to the same user? The system looks like an open invitation for abuse, or am I missing something? I don´t know if any of this interests you at all, but any suggestions would be appreciated, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm - it kinda looks like it may be a bug. I've emailed it to one of the internal CU/tech mailing lists for advice as it doesn't seem right at all. If it's any consolation (and it's not :/) you were amongst dozens of people to get them. Yours appear to have been from Jarlie/Grawp but the ones that Roland Rance was getting were likely from the Runtshit vandal. I see you've already switched off your email setting, but hold tight and we'll see what the more geeky folks have to say about it. - Alison ^❤ 23:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC) (largely retired, BTW)

Ok, thanks a lot, I thought Roland had gotten emails from the same accounts as me: User:Prammac, User:Squadroncapitol, User:Nickovie. Oh, and I´m not loosing my sleep over this, it is just a tad inconvenient to have my email disabled. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 23:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Tagging socks of (you-know-who)

I'm personally a supporter of tagging socks like Sparqs (talk · contribs) but others prefer to not do so and WP:DENY him instead. Jasper Deng (talk) 23:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm cool either way. Just that I've been asked to look into it (see message above) otherwise I'd not have been arsed, y'know? It's not so much a case of WP:DENY as not really having the inclination to perform the mouse-clicks required. There's zero value-add to tagging them, really - Alison ^❤ 23:11, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

That's the thing. But others might feel that he is using the sock categories' page counts for amusement, which is what I thought about when others deleted socks' userpages (w/ tags) with "WP:DENY" in the deletion summary.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:13, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Mail

Thenub314 (talk) 06:22, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

L Bacon

Louis Bacon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi Alison. As the previous protector of this article and I think you are aware of the legal case in London as regards wikipedia, with that in mind, would you consider some more ongoing semi protection as your previous has expired, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 19:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Off2riorob (talk) 23:56, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

...for your quick action against a spammer. Much appreciated! Hamamelis (talk) 02:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Recent block of User:Nair

Hi, I note that you refer to CU evidence and some oversight query, which sounds pretty convincing support for the block ... but please forgive me if I query it! User:Nair has had several previous identities, which IIRC include User:KondottySultan and User:Chekon. There is no doubt that the person is a muckraker and earlier this year was abusing multiple accounts etc, but the recent activity is in direct contradiction to their previous POV. The contributor has always wanted to needle the Nair community with egregious, trivial but inflammatory information whereas the recent spate of PAs against me (or, rather, my mother) on the article talk page has the appearance of being pro-Nair.

I am not unduly concerned to see the user blocked because they are indubitably problematic but, with my sincere apologies, are we sure that we have got the right person here? - Sitush (talk) 07:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hi there. I don't want to give away too much geolocating information, but I was able to link the edits to that account in a number of ways. The only reason I got involved was because I responded to an Oversight request (as did some of the other oversighters) and I ran a check on the two IPs involved. I see another possible two accounts which I'm still monitoring and that are as yet unblocked - Alison ^❤ 07:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

• That's ok. It must be some sort of good hand/bad hand thing that I haven't spotted during the last 10 months or so. They're an absolute nightmare, these Indian caste/community articles. - Sitush (talk) 07:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)