User talk:Nakon/archive7

User:Naconkantari/talk header

I don't know if websites that aren't spam per se should be added to the spam blacklist, but if they can, could you add www.5191victims.com/? It's an incredibly offensive website that is being persistently added to Comair Flight 5191, and I don't see it stopping anytime soon. Thanks, --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 01:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think Mr. Lefty's been reading my mind, because I was just looking for a page for this. Seconded. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I saw you changed the repubblica.it site wrongly added to the spam blacklist to espresso.repubblica.it.

Espresso is one of the most important magazines in italy (let's say, same as Time for the US or Bild for Germany).

I can't understand why it was added... Repubblica it is a very big and famous editor, I can't see them spamming around like webzines.

Please, remove espresso.repubblica.it --Jollyroger-I-could-be-admin-on-it.wiki-but-refused

Understood part of the problem. Block [was requested] because an user found the site spammed on an article. The spam was from ***.blog.espresso.repubblica.it. Note, *BLOG*. The Espresso blog are of two kinds: one open to public, and one used by famous journalists of the magazine. So, you should block the domain blog.espresso.repubblica.it instead espresso.repubblica.it (the magazine website).

But, sometimes the journalists blogs are considered a good source (or these journalists have a article themselves). And the IP after that request gave others related to the same article, spammed with totally different links. So I think it is simply a vandalism made using a random link, not related to Repubblica or Espresso. Maybe, we could even completely lift the block on that domain. --Jollyroger 14:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added "5191victims.com" to blacklist and modified "expresso.repubblica.it" to "blog.expresso.repubblica.it". Naconkantari 15:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and sorry for bothering you. --Jollyroger 19:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is just to let you know that I've removed your {{prod}} tag at Clap Your Hands Say Yeah. The explanation's at Talk:Clap Your Hands Say Yeah. Omphaloscope talk 01:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Why did you delete then (partially?) restore this article a few days ago? I am just curious. Thanks. --Edcolins 12:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was removing someone's personal information from the history. Naconkantari 15:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific? You can email me if necessary. I have reviewed the removed version (I am also sysop) but I have not been able to identify the contentious personal information. Thank you. --Edcolins 08:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting my userpage, and blocking that user. I've had a lot of trouble with them in the last few days, Checkuser is pending-- hopefully more can be done as far as blocking the IP. DVD+ R/W 23:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote a message at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) talking about the T edits. Please make your responses there. Georgia guy 23:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reported Macaw 54's reverts of T in the 3RR noticeboard and it appears that there must be something I forgot to do. What is it?? Georgia guy 23:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You forgot that I didn't revert more than three times. You did, though. You also placed dead links for the reversion diffs. This is pretty serious stuff.--Macaw 54 23:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 2, Issue 36	5 September 2006	About the Signpost

Everyking desysopped	Explicit images spark debate
Report from the Italian Wikipedia	The English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 administrators
Voting begins in Board elections	Wikipedia in the news
News and notes	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked Juro to participate in his arbitration. I will speak to him regarding editing outside arbitration. Fred Bauder 16:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm workin on the article. What's the way to proceed. The user is continuing an edit war over severa articles. He was even blocked doing the exact same onece. But nevermind that, I put the Underconstruction tag. And that's what I tried to explain to him on summaries, I'm working on it and it is (or was, depends on you) going to take me 2-3 hours.

My next step was to divide and move article. Also to add the alfabeth thing at the top to make easier to navigate. I know 3RR is broken at the third and punished at the fourth. But, I don't know what to do, shuldn't everyone respect the underconstruction tag, at least for a reasonable preriod of time?--The Judge 23:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could copy the entire text of the article into your userspace, at User:The Judge/work perhaps, and work on it there. Then when you're finished, you could copy what you fixed back into the main article. Naconkantari 23:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea!!!!! Thanks!! Actually, CovenantD has a big historial wit 3RR problems. That is a recurring behavior.--The Judge 00:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that (: 205.188.116.10 23:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was learning to use my new JS rollback tools when I saw the incident. Hope I'm helping. If not, I'm not so very savvy yet. BusterD 23:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the block should be longer, as the user is a repeat offender, will keep attacking, and is touching on a very difficult situation he knows nothing about. Will ^{(Glaciers melting in the dead of night)} 12:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am curious about how the blacklist works. You kindly put JBactors on the blacklist but I see that spam with that address still occasionally appears on Wikipedia. How are they able to add that web address if it is blacklisted? Thank you, Tree Trimer 17:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the spam blacklist is having some problems with blocking links and should be fixed shortly. Naconkantari 18:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 2, Issue 37	11 September 2006	About the Signpost

Carnildo resysopped	Report from the Hungarian Wikipedia
News and notes	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked these ranges, which are apparently all of New York University. Could you refine the range, determine if the harassment is ended, or other means of correcting it? I have changed the block to allow account creation after receiving a complaint; this block affects tens of thousands of people; all of whom are likely contributors. —Centrx→talk • 15:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not much of a problem, Naconkantari, we figured out the reason for blocking--but it did take a bit of research. Going forward, can you try to list these somewhere when you do a wide-range block like this? Thank you for all that you do. Bastique▼^parler _voir 15:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not just listing them; if the only reason for the block was what you found then there was no reason for such a broad block, there wouldn't have even been much reason for a short limited block. —Centrx→talk • 16:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding [1] I'm amused to learn that that is a valid unit of block time. Is there a list anywhere of what the valid units are? JoshuaZ 19:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are GNU standard dates, see [2]. —Centrx→talk • 21:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to comment on exactly that after seeing a block...:) -- Deville (Talk) 18:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick question; the Evanescence "Call me When You're Sober" page references a rather wolfish individual named Oliver Goodwill. However, when I clicked his page to learn more about him, I was dismayed to learn that it had been deleted AND protected to prevent re-creation. Since the article doesn't have an entry on AFD, I would assume you know more than anyone else the reason why the page is in its current state? Ex-Nintendo Employee 11:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The text of the article that I deleted was "He went out from the England and was to Los Angeles form a band in which he would touch battery. It knew some people and started to act. It is doing their films... he acts, burrow battery and composes. Your last released work was the new clip of the Evanescence, Call Me When You're Sober, in which he was the "Big Bad Wolf".

File:997417532 l.jpg

The jobs that he is accomplishing are: 'Left for Shadows', 'Courting White' and 'Spades".

If you wish to recreate the article, reply here and I will remove the protection. Naconkantari 16:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you recently participated in the discussion of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roy St. Clair (4th nomination). You may also be interested in the following discussions for the following collectible card game players:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darwin Kastle
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olivier and Antoine Ruel
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tommi Hovi
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Selden
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kai Budde
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Long
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Finkel (2nd nomination)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic: The Gathering people

Thank you. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 19:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am somewhat confused at your speedy deletion of this article as G7 is speedy request by only editor and the article had multiple editors, in fact the user in question was not even the creator of the article. (I see the prior edits were deleted - however G7 still does not apply to current version.) As such I restored, however if you still feel deletion is warranted I wont restore again. Thanks - Glen 00:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Looking at the comments in the spam blacklist, it appears that you are responsible for the blacklisting of all urls in the waw.pl domain. This seems to be a common domain for sites in Warsaw, Poland. Blocking it means that we cannot link to many useful sites in that city, for example the official website for the Warsaw Metro (www.metro.waw.pl). If you did indeed add this entry, could you explain why?. If not, apologies for distrurbing you. -- Chris j wood 17:46, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the domain to the blackist after this edit was made. I will modify the blacklist to only include "devrosareas.waw.pl". However, this may have to change if the site continues to have parts of it used for spam. Thanks, Naconkantari 21:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Incidentally, as best I can tell, I don't think 'waw.pl' is a site, but rather a two-deep naming convention, akin to the relatively little used '<state-digraph>.us' (eg. 'ca.us') in the US, or the more common '<owner-type>.uk' (eg. 'co.uk') in the UK. -- Chris j wood 10:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Program Feature: Barnstar Brigade Here in Wikipedia there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go unappreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go unnoticed. As Esperanzians we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. This is where the Barnstar Brigade comes in. The object of this program is to seek out the people which deserve a Barnstar, and help them feel appreciated. With your help, we can recognize more dedicated editors! What's New? September elections are upon us! Anyone wishing to be a part of the Advisory Council may list themselves as a candidate from 18 September until 24 September, with the voting taking place from 25 September to 30 September. Those who wish to help with the election staff should also list themselves! Appreciation Week, a program currently in development, now has its own subpage! Share your good ideas on how to make it awesome there! The Esperanza front page has been redesigned! Many thanks to all who worked hard on it. Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.

The last AC meeting (full log) The proposals page has been updated, with some proposals being archived. Since the program in development Appretiaion week is getting lots of good ideas, it now has its own subpage. The September 2006 Council elections will open for nominations on 18 September 2006. The voting will run from 25 September 2006 until 30 September 2006. If you wish to be a candidate or a member of the elections staff, please list yourself! The new Esperanza front page design has but put up - many thanks to all who worked on it! TangoTango has written a script for a bot that will list new members of Esperanza, which will help those who welcome new Esperanzains greatly! Signed... Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, Freakofnurture, and Titoxd 04:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.

The last two IPs who have been claiming to be Cute 1 4 u are more than likely a troll at Duke University who knows of the whole situation (not that the blocks are uncalled for, it's just that they do not fit in with her geographic area or ISP). Do we know any long term abusers at Duke? Ryūlóng 01:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to him, UNC. NCV perhaps? Naconkantari 01:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tired of reverting spam today, could you do me a favor and get the reverts on this one? I will owe you one...thanks! —Khoikhoi 02:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. —Khoikhoi 03:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I've just sent you an email. JoshuaZ 04:46, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you choose to reply I'd prefer that you reply by email (for possibly obvious reasons). If you don't wish to do so it makes more sense to discuss it on .en on my talk page or yours since apparently one can't edit one's talk page when blocked on meta. JoshuaZ 04:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent you a reply. Naconkantari 05:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And FYI I've replied. JoshuaZ 15:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Naconkantari!

I see that you have given numerous warnings to Elcajonfarms for creating articles that you felt could be speedied under A7. However, the user seems to have been very confused since the warnings were only generic vandalism warnings, and the user had no idea what was going on. In this future, it may be better to give a personalized warning or to use a template like {{nn-test}}.

Happy editing! -- Where 01:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused as to your creation of the account User:The Great Gitten Huff of Testing. A series of similarly named new accounts has been created, including at least one associated with WOW. Did you create this account, or did someone use your account? — ERcheck (talk) 05:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was testing the functionality of an IRC reporting bot. I think the bot owner was making the others, but I only made the "testing" one. Naconkantari 06:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, er, sorry for flattening your sprotection! Lack of communication on my part on IRC, mea culpa! Forgive me? *begs* ~Kylu (u|t) 06:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. I meant to reply to your PM on IRC, but I logged off before I noticed your message. Naconkantari 06:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This latest sock already reported to WP:AIV. -- Jim Douglas 20:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...and didn't catch your response regarding the LexisNexis until you were gone, so thanks for the help anyway. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, my language was inappropriate, but I was frustrated and sick of reverting vandalism. Given that my comment spurred the vandal to stop vandalizing the article, it was helpful in some way, but I apologize for the use of the "f" word.--csloat 00:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not link articles to the disambiguation page British. If you are intending to link to a currently living person, current event, or existing company from the United Kingdom, please link to [[United Kingdom|British]]. For people that are not currently living, historical events, or companies that no longer exist, please check the disambiguation page for the appropriate link. --Bobblehead 02:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm? Do you have a diff that I can see where I did this? Naconkantari 03:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here ya go: [[3]]. Not technically a diff, but it's an article creation. It also appears you just copied and pasted from the talk page.--Bobblehead 03:26, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks Naconkantari 03:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's this all about? --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 00:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, never mind. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 00:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking through the unblock cat to see if there were any obvious ones I could remove the tag from, when i came across Account 1024 (talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log), who is asking to have their IP unblocked--64.12.116.10 01:19, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Similar for George Macaca Allen (talk · contribs · page moves · current autoblocks · block log), or rather EsdnePyaJ (talk · contribs) who is being affected by an autoblock as well--64.12.116.10 01:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IP unblock is OK. Naconkantari 01:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What are theese blocks for: [4] and [5] (both requesting unblocks).--Konstable 05:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They were created during the time when there was a username creation vandal operating. The first one was blocked as an obvious account and the second one was blocked with a message for them to contact me to verify that they were not the vandal. I'll WP:AGF and unblock both accounts. Naconkantari 13:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page, I didn't even know anything happened until I checked my page history! Thaks a lot! =) ShadowUltra 00:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to blacklist every domain with a particular suffix? We've had a massive amount of spam for sites with the URL *.theat.info. Thanks, --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 22:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added it to the blacklist. It may take a few minutes to filter down to all wikis. Naconkantari 22:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Naconkantari,

Per the CheckUser Policy, I have been granted the checkuser permission on Commons. Thankyou for supporting this request. Requests for checkuser can be made at the Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Thanks, [ælfəks] 01:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar!

The Spam Award For going great lengths to defend Wikimedia from insidious spammers, I award you some spam of your own. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 02:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You blocked this user a while back, and now she's requesting to be unblocked. I don't see anything wrong with her username, so could you please explain? Thanks. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 00:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably has something to do with User:Anita934. DVD+ R/W 00:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the last Un documet about Kosovo there is no combination of the string witch is given "Serbia": http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/diplo/de/Aussenpolitik/RegionaleSchwerpunkte/Suedosteuropa/KosovoStatement060921.pdf

And you can see here what the serbian clique is traing to do (whatch the time).http://sq.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kosova&diff=105231&oldid=99628

Pleace contact with outher administors and let minimum a chance for albanians to comme to the article Kosovo (they dont iusse this terminology evean in English they youse Kosova, Kosova State) or protect the article in UN last version witch is the CG statment. In other cases there is going to be like till now only serbian propahander and this is going to be coordinentid from ChrisO. I am not a standy member of english wiki but I am a Wikipedian. My work in Wikipedia projects you can see my contribution on Wiki every where. My target is not to presant Kosovo independen biut like it is in realty. For thate we nede albanians and serbs or we must let the article in UN version.

Enyway the haeder must be UN official version and thate is Rez. 1244 and last statmend of CG

Ups! Sorry about my english and the troubels - Hipi

The vesion of Kosovo articel is now not neutral. If you dont conect with administartors team and disccus the officel UN version. I am a fried thate I mus do the same think like the ChrisO (open new user accounts)

Please follow the restrictions imposed on you by the Arbitration Committee. Violation of these requirements will result in a block. Naconkantari 01:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hello!! are you maken a jocke. Shud I folow restrictions if I make a clique and start to say thate Germany is part of Rusia???? Pleace contact with the administrator team, we dont need nothing else, only one think it can stop this crasy clique, this is UN version and they mst accept or you wount to let one clique to play with the comunity? It is inof more then 4 years.

If you the administrators team dont coopered they will not stop in the futer. Is beter one moth wandals als souch dirty games. (Watch how many discussions and edit wars are there in Kosovo aticle and they have lete ChrisO to work in this case, is this normal)

Hi, I was unsure on who to ask here, but I was wondering how close I was to being able to become an admin. I have around 700 edits so far and i've been around since August. I'm guessing sometime in December or January would work, but what can I do to get there? People Powered 01:14, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update :) Glen 01:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. --HappyCamper 03:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nacokantari, Another wikipedian has brought up this issue already as part of the ongoing arbitration and the motion was rejected by the arbitrators [6]. I think that although it is disruptive and annoying, it is necessary for it to stay unprotected if this eventually helps to identify the main culprits. If you decide to keep the semiprotection, please let me know here so I can then record a note to that effect in the Arbitration pages. Thanks and regards, Asterion^talk 06:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the protection. Naconkantari 13:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/Chinese Businessman and [7]. Daniel.Bryant 06:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's been taken care of. Naconkantari 13:24, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, not sure why you reverted my edit on Opie and Anthony? Wowfans is a valid fan site. I am not affiliated with it, and I didn't add it. I just reverted an edit by someone who removed it. --Bill.matthews 18:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the Talk:Opie and Anthony talk page, there was extensive discussion about the validity of the external links. Naconkantari 18:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see anything too recent, or any mention of the link in question. But I will re-read, and add a new section about this issue. --Bill.matthews 18:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I've had to resemiprotect Kosovo again - Hipi seems to be on a rampage tonight. Given the incessant violations of the arbitration injunction, a longer block on his main account would probably be justified. -- ChrisO 19:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have protectet at Serbian propagander version. Keep the neutrality for Wiki and your nation emotion for yourself. It looks thate you are intelegen then UN. Whay UN dont say Kosovo is part of Serbia? They have maked the rezulution about Kosovo (1244) als province in Yugoslavia and the have confirme thate last week thate Kosovo is the last part of breacken out of Yugoslavia. Here hase nobody to discuss, it is clear formuledet and ther is ot Kosovo als state or as part of Serbia but Kosov als last part of breacken out of Yugoslavia.

One step more. He hase removed the albanianien name from Kosovo arikel now we have in Kosovo intro :

In one paragraph we have 4 times Serbia. In the article Kosovo is referenting to Serbia more then 200 times. hahahhaha . No comment

I Cant seem to find the template for arbcom request, --GreekWarrior 05:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 2, Issue 40	2 October 2006	About the Signpost

New speedy deletion criteria added	News and notes
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Naconkantari,

My name is Brian and I run the technical department at ProxBlocks.com, a company devoted to detecting and blacklisting web proxies for schools and other organizations. Our blacklist contains many thousands of web proxies and grows every day, we'd love to contribute to your efforts of keeping wikipedia free of vandalism by donating our list. I quickly ran through our proxy list and found over a dozen in the first 5 minutes that you do not yet have blocked from editing articles, so I believe our list could really be of help to your efforts.

Please contact me at michaeb(at)gmail.com if you are interested,

Best Regards,

Brian Michael

ProxBlocks.com

Below are 5 proxies I noticed were unblocked, we have a list of over 10,000 web proxies that are similar.

http://gate7.us http://www.fenasionline.net/cgiproxy/nph-proxy.pl/010110A http://www.hotel.kg/cgi-bin/axs/nph-pro.cgi/010110A/x-proxy/cookies/clear http://www.drhekmat.com/cgiproxy/nph-proxy.pl/010110A http://russd.userworld.com/cgiperl/nph-perl.pl/010110A/x-proxy/start

Thanks for contacting me. I am unfortunately busy this week, but if you can email me, I can provide you more information regarding our blocking procedures for open proxies. Thanks, Naconkantari 18:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this morning that you put an indefinite block on gary lorentzen. In the past I have had trouble with User:A.J.A. and was reviewing his edits to determine if others were having similar problems. He/she seems a bright fellow, but he is very abrasive towards others and their conflicting opinions. I tried to find the threat, but the examples given state "I will go through the process that Wikipedia has laid out, but if A.J.A. 'wins', as h/she appears to do again and again with information h/she doesn't like (there's a litany of complaints about this person), there are ways to remedy the problem". As I understand the statement, the editor is willing to go through proper channels (see the request for assistance[[8]]. This request was made two hours before you blocked him/her.) There was never a direct threat.

In reviewing Gary's contributions, he has been an editor for all of two days. I think your actions were premature and could have been improved by reviewing the dispute in question. You would have noticed that A.J.A. broke the WP:3RR and was unwilling to cooperate. I view your actions as overkill and would hope that you would reconsider your actions. Further, I would hope you would review the Kepler College article, verify that A.J.A. broke the WP:3RR rule and block him for an appropriate time period. It would also help if you could provide a little counsel to A.J.A. about working with other editors (Review the recent edits on Christianity. It will also help you see how he/she interacts with other editors). Your unwise actions only encourage A.J.A. in his unacceptable actions. Storm Rider ^(talk) 16:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits like this one, I have a lawyer looking into this nefarious form of censorship practiced here on Wikipedia and especially by A.J.A. to determine whether the editing practices are censorship. If h/she insists on censoring objective, factual information for religious or ideological reasons, there will be repercussions. (emphasis mine), imply legal repercussions and are not permitted per WP:NLT. If you find an editor breaking WP:3RR, leave a warning and list them on the 3RR page. Naconkantari 17:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While it is apparently true that implying threat of legal action, or even implying an implication of legal action will get you blocked on Wikipedia, it is also true that very few people KNOW this. It's probably the biggest HOT BUTTON in the whole place, but nobody puts that in the "welcome" message to new editors. So, for god's sake, man, before you permablock somebody, leave them ONE warning about this. SBHarris 19:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The request was to take it in the context of a new editor; Sbharris is exactly right. You are out of bounds and should have warned this new editor. Also, to allow A.J.A. to con you into doing dirty work while he consistenly abuses other editors is inexcusable. It would have taken 5 minutes of reading for you to get a handle of the situation and understand the perversity of the situation; A.J.A. pleading for use of policy while he blatantly ignore policy. Justice may be blind, but your perfmance makes it so that justice just doesn't even care. Apologize to Gary for your hasty action, straighten out A.J.A. and act more worthy of your position. Storm Rider ^(talk) 20:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm certainly not going to call for your head while brandishing a torch and pitchfork and shouting Abuse!, it might be a good idea to offer to unblock Gary Lorentzen if he indicates understanding and acceptance of Wikipedia's policies on legal threats. I suspect that his actions may be those of a bitten newbie that is unfamiliar with our rules, rather than an irredeemable troublemaker. (I could be wrong, of course.) In general, I find that it is often instructive to see how an editor responds to a warning before I apply an indefinite block.

I will note that A.J.A. has not demonstrated a willingness to apply WP:CIVIL in this dispute, and I can express a certain sympathy for the position of an editor who might be...upset...by A.J.A.'s rather confrontational editing style. (Note his response to my request not to label Lorentzen a vandal: User_talk:A.J.A.#removal_of_content_regarding_Kepler_College.) Just my two cents, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds quite reasonable. Naconkantari 21:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; I may be a little overly solicitous of new editors, but I appreciate your willingness to provide a little slack. Thanks again. Storm Rider ^(talk) 06:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I've now proposed an indefinite ban of Hipi Zhdripi - see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kosovo/Workshop#Hipi Zhdripi banned indefinitely. I suspect it will probably come to this anyway, but you may wish to comment given your recent experiences with him. -- ChrisO 19:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lobster telephone: I am not vandalising, I am removing copyrighted text lifted wholesale from another website. 86.6.207.111 21:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded on your talkpage. Naconkantari 21:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work on the block on this User - he is vandalising all over the place! --Mikecraig 03:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo has commented on the Arch Coal delete-review. He said: "I am happy for this to go through deletion review." - meaning that he would be willing to accept an undelete if consensus for such was reached. Given the above would you be willing to re-evaluate the article under the same criteria as other deleation reviews? Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 16:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article I spent several hours writing - Sakari - was deleted with the reason uncontested prod after expiration. I'm not too sure what that means... I've recreated the page with an updated version. Please let me know if there is something wrong with the article.

Thanks, David

You are allowed to recreate pages that have been removed via the proposed deletion process. However, your article is about a non-notable website and is subject to speedy deletion at any time. Naconkantari 19:14, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for replying. -- Illustrationism 16:11, 5 October 2006 (EST)

I dont see why your bothering reverting my edits. If you had taken the time to keep up with whats been going, or checked the article history. The edits id changed were part of serial vandalism across articles - reverted by several different editers, including me. What happened with them was a specfic two users - the ones who performed the vandalism - started calling every user and then some a Sockpuppet of myself. This behaviour caused a ripple and a lot of users, innocent and otherwise got banned.

Well, now those two users have been caught out - coz someone actually thought to do the RFC's that were never done. As such, their arb coms were checked and the edits they made. The edits im reverting are a batch across a subject im familiar with, and has already been noted by WP:HMM as needing doing because of Deathrocker.

So, in essence, i understand you reverting coz im a 'sockpuppet'. But, your removing sourced information from articles, causing it to be misleading and incorrect when you look at the Symphonic Metal and Gothic Metal articles, and techinically reverting back to a vandalised version. I can understand you getting ahead of yourself, fair cop, its your role as an admin. Just asking you to check the edits before you revert them, because often times users, including me, are making edits not anywhere near vandalistic, and having them reverted unjustly.

Hi Naconkantari. My name is Abbopa. please leave me a message and read my user page. Thankyou so much. Abbopa 18:54, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. The banned user Bonaparte is editing as 200.47.172.120 (talk · contribs), and keeps leaving messages at User talk:Sosomk. Could you please put a stop to it? Thanks. —Khoikhoi 19:51, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that this IP failed the VCN proxycheck script. Could you check to see if this is an open proxy? I already reported this at WP:OP, where there are a couple of backlogs: one at the suspected proxies to check list, and at the proven proxies waiting to be blocked list. Jesse Viviano 21:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indef. Naconkantari 21:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. While I appreciate your... erm, eagerness to keep the wiki free from vandalism of all kinds, I'd appreciate it if you didn't revert edits I make to my own sandbox. I think that's going a step too far. Thanks anyway – Gurch 02:01, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I saw the edit from the bot and reverted. Sorry if this caused any problems. Naconkantari 02:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can you erese some domains from black list? Recently lots of Polish Wikipedians, are complaining about spam list becose of blocking this domains: prv.pl, za.pl They are popular alias domains in polish internet, and keeping them in black list is paralising our work on wikipedia. Egon 14:37, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to remove those as they are widely used as spam sites. If pl.wiki wants to use them, I'd suggest to add them both to your local spam whitelist. You can add the main domain "prv\.pl" or "za\.pl" to the whitelist to allow everything from the domain. Naconkantari 16:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Due to recent vandolism, can you put a semi-protect on Stephen Colbert and The Colbert Report? Thanks,--Twintone 21:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to try a rangeblock first and sprotect later if the vandal returns. Please use WP:RFPP in the future. Naconkantari 22:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was a pretty quick oppose vote :-)

I was just going to fix that time problem when you beat me to it! Oh, well. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 23:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware that the malformed request isn't the only reason I opposed your nomination. I'd like for an editor to have more than a thousand edits before applying. I'd take the advice of MatthewFenton and withdraw early and try again at a later time. Naconkantari 23:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies I'm really try9ing to get the hang of this, and make some contributions. My biggest pet peeves are spam links, I like to add good useful links too. The content is so tough as anyone can debate over what's right or wrong or the way to look at something. But I do find wikipedia the single best resource on the internet and i'd like to help out. Tried setting up my about me page, copied an admin link sorry... Do some of those buttons or user icons have to be earned? Thanks! --Edited By a Professor of Life 00:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]