User talk:Daniel: Difference between revisions
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
==User:Rumpelstiltskin223== |
==User:Rumpelstiltskin223== |
||
The mentioned user you blocked for 1 week again has been confirmed as using the same IP I mentioned on the checkuser report. It's also obvious that the same user who used that IP is in fact Hkellar, who'd been banned for 1 year. It is impossible that the IP could've known the precise sources on several pieces of information from several different textbooks on a subject not particularly popular. That in addition to the fact that the two edit the same articles, share the same POV, and have been accused by a whole crowd of people of being the same person. Anon ''is'' Hkelkar, there can be no doubt about that, given the evidence. Anon has also been found to be Rumplestiltskin. Rumplestiltskin should be permanently banned as Hkelkar's sockpuppet, and Hkelkar's block of 1 year should be reset, or extended given the cases of vandalism perpetrated since the original block. [[User:MinaretDk|MinaretDk]] 00:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC) |
The mentioned user you blocked for 1 week again has been confirmed as using the same IP I mentioned on the checkuser report. It's also obvious that the same user who used that IP is in fact Hkellar, who'd been banned for 1 year. It is impossible that the IP could've known the precise sources on several pieces of information from several different out-of-print textbooks on a subject not particularly popular. That in addition to the fact that the two edit the same articles, share the same POV,engage in the same pattern of violations, and have been accused by a whole crowd of people of being the same person.In a court of law, this would meet the criteria of 'beyond any reasonable doubt'. Anon ''is'' Hkelkar, there can be no doubt about that, given the evidence. Anon has also been found to be Rumplestiltskin. Rumplestiltskin should be permanently banned as Hkelkar's sockpuppet, and Hkelkar's block of 1 year should be reset, or extended given the cases of vandalism perpetrated since the original block. [[User:MinaretDk|MinaretDk]] 00:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 00:25, 4 February 2007
User:Daniel.Bryant/Header User:Daniel.Bryant/TPHeader
Archives
As noted above, I archive obsessively, mainly when I believe a conversation/section is completed or else needing no further attention. If the message isn't on my talk page, please see the archives (linked above) for the time period of your original message. Feel free to post any further comments on my talk page, and I'll respond to you as soon as possible. If you wish to revisit an archived discussion, please copy and paste all text, formatting included, to the bottom of this page, in a new section. Thanks, Daniel.Bryant
Template
Hi. If you feel helpful, I wouldn't mind some help with my talk page. Specifically, I'd like to wrap a box around the top part -- the part that currently has no border. I put a copy in User:Shaundakulbara/Sandbox in case you are interested in mucking around with it. If you're too busy or not in the mood, no worries! Thanks. Shaundakulbara 08:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- I very recently fixed the template at User:Daniel.Bryant/TPHeaderForOthers, so now that problem won't occur. If you tell me what colours you want, I'll be able to whip you up something in no time. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 08:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- For now, let's say red. Can you please refer me to the chart or wherever that explains what numbers equal what colours so I can change it later? Thanks very much! -Shaundakulbara 08:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- You can do it yourself, following the instructions laid out in the gray box at the bottom of User:Daniel.Bryant/TPHeaderForOthers. For colour codes to fill in the background/border fields, see List of colors. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 08:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- For now, let's say red. Can you please refer me to the chart or wherever that explains what numbers equal what colours so I can change it later? Thanks very much! -Shaundakulbara 08:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Golf cart on wheels
Of course! I didn't even think of WoW — which is probably a signal to me that I should go to sleep. (It's quarter till 5 in the morning where I am.) Thanks for catching my goof. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 09:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ha :) I once saw a username that was a blatant attack on me, and I didn't even click that it should be blocked; it was about 4am as well :) Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 09:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Daniel. I added a nomination for Did you know (my first! :), but I noticed you removed it, along with all the others for that day. I'm not sure why you did it, and I'd like to know why. Was it too old? I'm knew for Did you know, so I still don't know how it works; I'd appreciate an explanation. Thanks! | AndonicO Talk · Sign Here 23:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- I removed your nomination as I agreed with Blnguyen, who said "[v]ery much on the short side, in terms of the main body". The others removed from January 26 were either because of the same problem, or else they didn't qualify for the 5-days-old criteria (one was over four months old!). Generally, we prefer articles which are slightly longer than yours; however, on checking back, the article you nominated was borderline length, and in the interests of being non-biting (as you are a newcomer to DYK! :D), I'll add your nomination to the next update with my sincere aplogies :) Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 00:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
User:Rumpelstiltskin223
The mentioned user you blocked for 1 week again has been confirmed as using the same IP I mentioned on the checkuser report. It's also obvious that the same user who used that IP is in fact Hkellar, who'd been banned for 1 year. It is impossible that the IP could've known the precise sources on several pieces of information from several different out-of-print textbooks on a subject not particularly popular. That in addition to the fact that the two edit the same articles, share the same POV,engage in the same pattern of violations, and have been accused by a whole crowd of people of being the same person.In a court of law, this would meet the criteria of 'beyond any reasonable doubt'. Anon is Hkelkar, there can be no doubt about that, given the evidence. Anon has also been found to be Rumplestiltskin. Rumplestiltskin should be permanently banned as Hkelkar's sockpuppet, and Hkelkar's block of 1 year should be reset, or extended given the cases of vandalism perpetrated since the original block. MinaretDk 00:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)