This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tonywalton. 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.
You deleted the Professor Layton: The First Movie article. IT was about an upcoming movie! I had sources to confirm it, so please let me keep it up! AlexanderLD (talk) 21:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay, Professor Layton is not a High School professor. It is a very succesful series of games in Japan. The source I used is from the official Level-5 (owner of the series) website. It WAS legit, and if the movie page shouldn't be up, then all the pages in reference to Professor Layton should be removed. I understand that this is what happens, but my sources are valid. AlexanderLD (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Sure, that's fine! Once more news about the movie comes out, I will set up the article again. As for know it can remain in the Professor Layton Series article. Thanks for the help! AlexanderLD (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry! But its a really fun game! I'm surprised you never heard of it, because the sales are very good across the UK. If you plan on buying Layton (and the sequels) you should get a DSi, because its cooler than a DS. AlexanderLD (talk) 11:30, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Joe Cell
Hi Tony,
I've rewritten the article and included references, criticisms and a pseudoscience tag. What more do you need?
Cheers, Krambambuli (talk) 14:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Problem is there is nothing out yet in terms of RS as there is a lot of misinformation out there. 'Proper' scientists won't go near it as they don't want to risk their reputation. Understandable, yet sad. Ten-thousands of people want to read about this thing and Wikipedia continues to censor/delete any attempt at making it legit. I'll keep trying Krambambuli (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, that was not what I meant. What I was trying to say was that a wiki page could act as an encyclopaedic entry about a controversial topic: neutral and objective. I'm not trying to 'reach' people, I want to clear up misinformation. The 'legit' comment was meant to say that other people who have done research on this thing can edit the article and add peer-reviewed sources. I can't do that myself, or any other 1 person for that matter. By deleting the page you're effectively taking away any chance of documenting the cell in the public domain.
And as for New Scientist et al., we won't see an article there until Toyota produces cars running on Joe Cells. It's a phenomenon that can't be explained at present, so can't we just leave it at that and call it 'inexplicable', 'pseudoscience' or whatever? Not everything on Wikipedia has New Scientist references..
Thanks for the advice. I just went ahead and fixed it, and posted a message on the talk page to let me know if my edit was wrong. The page was WP:TM. ZachInOhio (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Theresa Meeker
Thank you for changing where my edit takes place to my talk page. I have worked on the edit and would like additional feedback.
I could keep the Shaun Silva connection and take out the others (driver, runway model). IMDb.com features a new selection of talent on the "Fresh Faces of the Week," a Gallery selected by the makers of IMDb.com. Having photos on IMDb.com is self promotion; however, having the photos featured is up to the IMDb.com web designers.
Hi, I noticed that you blocked User_talk:208.3.91.202 about a week ago. Since then I guess the IP was unblocked and first edit was vandalism. This IP has many edits and all of them appear to be vandalism. I undid the edit but I have not added a comment over at that page because I thought it might be best for some continuity, that is for you to put a comment on the talk page. PDBailey (talk) 16:19, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
You missed out the closing brackets (}}) from the ref tag, that was the issue. I have reinstated your text with the ref tag fixed. Regards, Woody (talk) 00:56, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for that - I copied the whole thing to a sandbox and had just found out what I'd done (">>" instead of "}}"). Why oh why (as they say) is ref syntax so *^%* cumbersome when putting good references in is so &(^%*^% important... Cheers, TonywaltonTalk01:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
VOA
After reviewing the user's contribs, I just decided that he's not here to contribute and VOA blocked. I did not mean to step on your toes after you left the 4th level warning. –xeno (talk)19:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I saw Raquel's recent response to your suggestions (and may I add that was about as diplomatic as answer could have been), however I don't thinks that she "gets it". She still believes in "The Truth" and that we are engaged in "Orwellian Double-Speak"...I said it earlier in the thread, and I'll repeat, we're being trolled here in this case and I'm trying to use as much good faith as possible, but it's so close to being blatant trolling to me that I'm surprised. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Sadly my bucket of AGF pills is running out on this one as well. I ask myself "if she gets blocked will she just see it as the Nasty Establishment Censurring Her Theery". Then I ask myself "do I care?" TonywaltonTalk20:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
One of these things will happen: 1-She will "give up" and quit editing, in which we possibly lose an editor who may be able to develop into a good editor. 2-She lashes out at more and more people, causing her to get blocked, then proceeds to show how Wikipedia' is "part of the conspiracy". 3-She gets blocks and socks come out of the woodwork to "save Wikipedia" from the "conspiracy". I hate to feel that way about any editor, but it's so obvious I needed to comment. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
That's why I'm working to bring 1b about (become a good editor), or at least 1a (give up and wander away muttering darkly about WP). 2 I don't care about - she can cause as much disruption as she wants off-wiki as long as it doesn't lead to meatpuppetry. Having lived through the drama that was the User:Iamandrewrice affair I should hate to see 3. TonywaltonTalk20:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
No problem. I hope he's just trying things out (WP:AGF, of course) but if he doesn't calm down he's looking at a short block to give him the opportunity to read some of the documentation without actually trying it out then and there! TonywaltonTalk20:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, and, unfortunately, the block is necessary. I do hope that this one is salvageable - I have a great deal of sympathy for people like this; I see someone diving in with both feet, poking all the buttons to see what they do. If they can learn to restrict their playing to appropriate places, then such people have a great deal to offer the project. Cheers! -- Chzz ► 21:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Definitely. He's as bad as me - I get a bit of kit home (camera, IP router, rice steamer, whatever, and dive straight in. Instruction books? Pah! Those are for wimps ☺ However my new camera or rice steamer isn't being viewed by thousands of people worldwide… Hope he learns. TonywaltonTalk21:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Tony, that's fine. I meant what I said, and suspected that you might well pick up on the unblock. He is only a High School student, and hopefully will have learned a lesson. I had hoped that he might opt for adoption, but you can't have everything. I will, of course, watch him. --Anthony.bradbury"talk"18:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Apology
We at Fooglebuzz High School would like to apologize for the resent vandalism by "some user or other" (or as we know him "his real name") he is a bit slow. we will make sere it dose not happen agine.
To help us in this can you give us his account password so we may monitor him.164.58.69.2 (talk) 20:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Tony
Hi and welcome back! Sorry for not responding before now but I'm so thoroughly tired of this that I'm making a serious effort to leave for real this time. My old user name had to be blacklisted because this lunatic was creating imposter accounts at an alarming rate. I can't leave e-mail open because that gets abused too. The kid is a manipulative pathological liar. He manipulated Jeffpw and abused his trust and then when Jeffpw died the kid had the nerve to try and take advantage of that too. The list of accounts and IPs here, on Simple and elsewhere is simply overwhelming. What's worse, every time he's lasted one or two weeks max before becoming disruptive. I'm also concerned that Iamandrewrice wasn't the parent account but I'm frankly too afraid of what I'll find to pursue this any further. I give up now. I'd out him here if I were allowed to but obviously I'm not so... I sent everything I have to TalkTalk but I'm unsure they'll do anything about it. After all, who would believe that anyone would go through all this trouble just to edit Wikipedia? EconomicsGuy. DanishWikipedian III (talk) 21:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello Tony
You do not know anything about advertising. Please stop changing it back under different names or I will tell the mods and they will block YOU not me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.39.35.178 (talk) 23:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh Tony, and in response to your reply on that IP's talk: 4chan.
Think I'd rather be a troll from Channel 4 ;-) I must admit for a troll that IP is funnier than some. I do like the trolls broke my wikipedia and now everyone disappeared!! I wonder which blocked user is sockpuppeting on that IP. TonywaltonTalk00:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, I get it now. Duh! "Fed" is like a synonym or cousin of "Ate", which he had used in an earlier sock today as a homophone of "8". Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?
I'd still like to raise a checkuser. I'd add this user to the Axmann8 SPI but I can't actually find a previous Axmann8 checkuser case. TonywaltonTalk00:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
He (or the troll) didn't start the socking until today (as far as we know) after he was indef-blocked yesterday. The 3 users today are obviously all socks of each other - the same M.O., the names all variations of "ax man 8/ate" - so it's either Axman himself, or a troll wanting us to think it's Axman. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots00:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Chip Douglas is a bloody good typist for a four-year-old. Regarding Axmann8, who seems to be a bit of a linguist, it's interesting he doesn't (despite the "mann" bit) seem to speak German. German for Ax (or en-gb Axe) is "Axt". I see there's an SPI case on "Hombre ocho...". Thanks for adding HGfed to it. TonywaltonTalk00:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
←Yeah, in that case the '8' is probably meant as 'H' for Hitler ('H' is the 8th letter of the alphabet, see Combat 18). Sad. As for Chip Diller, you've lost me there. TonywaltonTalk01:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I hadn't thought of 8 = H, but that could fit, or it could be something obscure. Maybe Artur wore jersey #8 in the touch football game at the annual Nazi company picnic. Regarding Chip Diller, unless you've seen the movie Animal House, it won't make any sense. But I made the connection because of a line in the movie where one guy from the crazy frat called Delta House is beaten up by members of the very straight-laced frat next door. When asked what happened, he says, "Oh, it was Greggie and Douggie and some more of the Hitler Youth." Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots01:09, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps the most often-quoted line from that film that I've heard, in the corporate world anyway, is cited whenever it seems like no matter you do, it's wrong in the eyes of management. As part of the initiation ritual, Chip Diller is in his undies, bent over with hands on knees, and being spanked, hard, by one of the frat members (Greggie or Douggie) using an oar-sized paddle. Each time he gets whacked, he says, with progressively greater pain, "Thank you sir! May I have another?" Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots01:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Sounds like #4 on my list of "Films I'm glad I never wasted my life seeing", to be honest. Chacun a son goût. As for Axmann8, I think a ban looks likely. TonywaltonTalk01:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, with regard to Ban, you've lost me again. With regard to 24.187.0.0 I'll take a look in the morning, and with regard to my local timezone 1am became 2am very suddenly a while ago, so I'm off to sleep. Regards, TonywaltonTalk01:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
It's a moot point now but on his talk page, when Landon asks him to stop his reply isn't 'I'm not a sock; I have no idea what you mean', or a variant thereof (which is what he tried here), it's 'OK'. HalfShadow02:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Or neither. There seems to be a prevailing wisdom round here that "if an unfamiliar user is familiar with Wikijargon then they must be a sockpuppet". While I'm fairly, well, OK, completely, convinced that Hatchetguy is a sockpuppet per WP:DUCK but I'm not sure it's a safe criterion to use in general. TonywaltonTalk15:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Apparently the checkuser came back "positive". In any case, when a user with an obviously imitating name makes a point of saying "I'm new!" that "quacks" pretty loud. They always think they're the first ones to try something like that, and that we were born yesterday. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots18:36, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
You have to admire his style, in a way! To be honest until this ridiculous socking started I would have been very willing to argue a case for Axmann8 to be unblocked - WP:BIAS does seem to be rearing its ugly head. Not any more, though. As for blocking the IP, the checkuser should reveal the IP(s) he's using, and they can be blocked. TonywaltonTalk21:09, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I asked several admins the same question and got pretty much the same answer - that he probably has a floating IP, and that the checkuser case may or may not fix it. Hopefully he'll just get tired of this childish game and go back to conservapedia, where I'm sure he'll be welcomed with open tentacles (although it has occurred to me that even they might tell him to get lost). Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots21:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello Tony. For some reason this IP's activities are showing up on my watch list. The latest nonsense is him trying put up an IP banner on Momusufan's Talk page. Since I notice you having discussions with the IP, you could have an opinion on whether it's time for a longer block for disruptive editing. EdJohnston (talk) 22:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
"Nonsense" is the right word. As I'm sure you've seen from the edit histories, the only interaction between us was me trying to get them to edit like someone with at least half a brain, and them threatening to "report me to the mods". (Perhaps they meant these mods). I'm not entirely convinced this IP is a naïve user - something smells of socks about them; perhaps I just can't believe that anyone could be so clueless unless they were pretending to be… The diff you quote above does make me wonder a bit as well. Is the organisation in that whois purely random, or are we looking at some WP:OUTING? Either way, though I normally wouldn't like blocking an IP for a substantal length of time I think a longer block would be a good idea. Cheers, TonywaltonTalk23:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
This editor seems to have violated 3RR at Advertising on March 25, but it's too late to do anything about that. With enough admins glaring at him, perhaps his behavior will change. EdJohnston (talk) 05:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your help with my new article. The next time that I start one I will may sure that it doesn't go public until it is ready. Your helpful and understanding attitude is appreciated! Jean Tisserand (talk) 19:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Bob the VI
Tony; thank you for your help with this totally well-meaning user. I think we will finish up with a good editor here, if, perhaps, not a fast article creator. --Anthony.bradbury"talk"20:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh, by the way, I've blanked one of these from Bob's talkpage, and there was a similar one on this talkpage, from the same IP, which outed Bob's real name (now oversighted). Just a heads-up. TonywaltonTalk21:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)