This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.

I undid your rather drastic change to this page, then tweaked the wording. The Wikipediocracy website is registered to Kohs' company, MyWikiBiz, so he owns it. He is shown as "for more information" on the press release announcing the launch. I would say he launched the site. But I have tweaked the wording. The section is clearly relevant to the subject. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

We (Cullen328, Technical 13 and myself) are having troubles with this user. Can you stop by this User_talk:Miss_Bono#Why_Did_You_And_Technical_13_Vandalize_My_User_Page. We did explained to him the canges we did in his user page and we clearly said that he could undo them if he wanted to. If you stop by Tech 13 talk, you will se another problem we had with him. Please, I need your help. Thanks. Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	I don't know how you manage to put up with all this crap. :) Ishdarian 01:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• LOL - thanks! :D - Alison ^❤ 01:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

If I make it to the board, I'll see to it that Mango is deleted by fiat. Thanks for maintaining your good sense of humor, and keep up the good work.

Drmies (talk) 01:36, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• LOL - thank you, Drmies!! ^_^ Email coming your way ... - Alison ^❤ 07:11, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I like the chibi artwork on your userpage, did you draw it? very cool =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:06, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• Oh - that's æ-tan - the moe personification of ED. It's a nod to my history when I was an admin there :) She was originally painted by "Fapman" (now known as "Mungbean") who may or may not be a professional graphic artist. æ-tan > Wikipe-tan anyday :) - Alison ^❤ 07:05, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I had a chuckle at that troll post as well - do you think you might have an evil alter ego somewhere? Prioryman (talk) 06:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• I'd certainly like to think so. I'm Irish so already have a filthy mouth, which would mean that my alter-ego would be some sort of prim, well-spoken sort - Alison ^❤ 07:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit) Get free access to research! Research tools and services Resource Exchange Reference Desk Research Desk Discover open access Free Resource Guides Book Sources Journal Sources Bibliographies Free newspaper sources Online archives Find Your Local Library tips Find Your Source tips How to find sources Citation tools guide Outreach The Wikipedia Library Bookshelf (meta) Universities and Libraries Archivists Publishers Wikipedia Loves Libraries Wikidata source metadata Get involved Get free access to sources Read the Books & Bytes newsletter Help disambiguate authors of scholarly papers Be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar Teach Library Interns Become a Coordinator Learn about TWL ...Support Open Access...

Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization consisting of over 28,000 volunteers in more than 100 countries. The collaboration was formed to organize medical scholarship in a systematic way in the interests of evidence-based research: the group conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.

Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account. Thank you Cochrane!

If you are stil active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:01, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit) Get free access to research! Research tools and services Resource Exchange Reference Desk Research Desk Discover open access Free Resource Guides Book Sources Journal Sources Bibliographies Free newspaper sources Online archives Find Your Local Library tips Find Your Source tips How to find sources Citation tools guide Outreach The Wikipedia Library Bookshelf (meta) Universities and Libraries Archivists Publishers Wikipedia Loves Libraries Wikidata source metadata Get involved Get free access to sources Read the Books & Bytes newsletter Help disambiguate authors of scholarly papers Be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar Teach Library Interns Become a Coordinator Learn about TWL ...Support Open Access...

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

• Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
• Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
• If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I got the following message. What do you make of it?? Quis separabit? 00:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Yip Doesn't hate you. Yip got all of his data from Sallieparker's talk page (including your name and mother's name). I was posing as her in an effort to get her block (which looks like it's going to be lifted) extended. "Greasing the wheels of justice" when WP gets stuck.
Seriously, check out her talk page before an admin takes it down. I have no issue with you (and you actually seem like a stand up editor - one of the reasons why I took issue with Ms. Parker's boychick comment). That being said, I don't know you and have no intention of finding anything about you in the "world". CongerEelSolo (talk) 00:19, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I know you can run a check user (and indeff people) - because you did it to me with the quickness. I have a favor to ask. Could you run a CU on Sallieparker and oversight/blank the parts of her talk page that have info relating to RMS. You know by now that I'm Yip. I am a troll (not a very good one, though), but I don't know who Sallieparker is or what she's up to. She seems to have been around longer than I have and has info not otherwise available on WP.

Here's the diff [1]

I surrender.

CongerEelSolo (talk) 02:00, 20 June 2013 (UTC) aka Jonathan Yip.

Hi, Alison! The network guy I've been in contact with at University of South Florida needs to know the IP(s) used by Biggerandbetterthings in order to match their logs with the edits made here. We've been speaking by email and I can forward you his address if that is convenient/acceptable to you. Please let me know the procedure if another route needs to be taken! Best, --auburnpilot talk 02:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right way to go about doing this and if I'm wrong I'm sorry for bothering you, but a user has accused me of sending malicious emails to him using the email feature. They have made the claim in several places and I'd like to know if you are able to check and confirm that I haven't sent any emails to Wesley Mouse. He claims they are signed with my name. Please let me know if you can do that for me, I'd appreciate it greatly. Pickette (talk) 22:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Protection of this page will not solve the problem. What you have is basically a SPA with a significant history of disruption [2] (considering they only have a couple hundred edits), who is being allowed to continue their pattern of behaviour. I'm not going to get bogged down in interminable wrangling with a disruptive SPA when admins should be doing their jobs and preventing this disruption. No wonder so many people get frustrated and leave the project. I don't "police" pages, so I have already made my last edit on that section. Regards -- Taroaldo ✉ 23:42, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

• To be fair, "admin should be doing their jobs" is not a fair comment since admin are volunteers, it isn't supposed to be a "job". The editor has been blocked once before, so their actions haven't been ignored. Full protection simply allows for a clear consensus to form, so if an editor wars against it, it empowers admin to take necessary action quickly. Admin have to walk a fine line when it comes to content disputes, as content is dictated by editors, not admin. Full protection is a better first option in simple edit warring situations because it doesn't favor one side or another and doesn't have the admin forcing their preferred version on the editors. Had I stumbled across that article, I would have done the same thing: Protect when you can, block when it is the only option. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 23:57, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

• My point was disruptive editing is tolerated far too much. I have seen vigorous discussions go on for days about reversing bans on editors who have been nothing but disruptive throughout their history on the project. Yes, admins are volunteers, but so are plain old editors. Why do regular editors have to put up with so much shit from perpetually disruptive users, go through nasty stressful discussions just to draw attention to the matter, then, if we're lucky, they get blocked for 48 hours or maybe a week after which they're back at it again. I have a question over at WP:AN right now which nobody seems to want to deal with: the example is a user who has been reported to ANI twice in two weeks (not by me), yet nothing has been done because the user refuses to respond. This is just another example of frustration. I don't do anything special around here — usually just try to clean up a bit here and there. I'm a volunteer too, but if "regular editors" aren't going to get support from those who have the tools then maybe I should stop wasting my time here, because that's what it amounts to. FWIW, I added my comments [3] at the Steve Jobs talk page. Regards -- Taroaldo ✉ 00:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
  • You filed a hypothetical problem at WP:AN. It looks like two editors have offered assistance. I'm very aware of the frustration of disruptive editors and I'm sympathetic. But admin don't have infinite power to just block on command, and I think Alison choosing to protect was a good first step. Assuming a few more opine in your favor, then the editor goes back and reverts against it, I would warn them, then if needed, block them if they won't comply with consensus. Trust me, you wouldn't want a wiki where admin can ride in like cowboys and block on a whim. We have enough problems with eager blocking as it is. Alison has a COI with Apple and she has stated this on the article talk page, so there are ethical limits to what she can do there, understandably. If you get a clear consensus and there are future problems, feel free to ping me on my talk page, as I have no COI with Apple articles. I can't promise to do what you prefer, but I can promise to use my best judgement. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | © | WER 00:30, 29 June 2013 (UTC)