User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2014/06

08:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

This user posted an explanation to the SPI that is much more plausible than the typical one. Thoughts? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's not unreasonable for them to be University of Waterloo students. Stuartzs: Please email me as soon as possible to discuss the issue. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:22, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

my 2c worth here is that in the past

WP:SOMEONEDIDIT. I also find it a stretch given we are talking about a total of seven accounts here. If only he could have said "Yep I socked, I won't do it again" as blocks are preventive and not punishment he could have been unblocked. LGA _talk^edits 00:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

We can also rule out them being

University of Waterloo Stratford Campus and is "Just interested in the subject after reading about what they are doing." LGA _talk^edits 01:10, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Don't worry, I will conduct a very thorough interrogation to make sure everything is sorted out. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:20, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked this user on Commons (based on checkuser data). You'd need a quantum-level microscope to be able to detect the likelihood that these accounts are not the same person. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 02:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a reminder that Stuartzs is still waiting on his unblock request (also ping @Ohnoitsjamie:). LGA _talk^edits 23:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  I asked him to email me, but he has not yet done so. I have thus released my hold on the unblock request. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who created that page? OccultZone (Talk) 00:52, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An IP did, in 2004. In case you were confused about the recent course of events, here's what happened:

Involuntary celibacy were ensnarled in the deletion. I cleaned up the mess made by the sock and moved the article history back to where it belonged. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:18, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I just had this page on watchlist, today I saw that it has been deleted. I think I had reviewed it or contributed a bit. There are thousands of edits yet to be investigated. Yes I remember how Coffee had investigated, Coffee had agreed that these pages can be re-created but something better than adding the version of Candleabracadabra. Thanks for explanation. OccultZone (Talk) 05:22, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am still completely confused. What history did you restore[14] and where? I see Rhaworth deleted the article[15] (again?) after this discussion. Was that part of your process or an independent action? I can't even work out what was there to be deleted! Thincat (talk) 10:50, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the history from Denise Donnelly and moved it back. RHaworth deleted it, and I am currently asking him why he did so. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:44, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I hadn't seen the discussion there (and in many ways I'm rather glad I hadn't). Very weird, it seems to me such a reasonable topic (most people are presumably involuntarily celibate at some stage in their lives) but opinionated writing and bad behaviour seem to have put a curse on it. Thincat (talk) 10:54, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey KoH, I've been off gallivanting around the country for the past few weeks so I didn't get a chance to say this, but thanks for catching the GFDL incompliance. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 22:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your majesty. I have just dealt with an unblock request at

That is fine with me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, King of Hearts/Archive/2014. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

Could I suggest/request a small amendment to your close at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lino_Alvarez?

You closed as redirect to

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the followup comment. Any advice on whether it's worth doing anything else about this? That the article has been written in a promotional/peacock manner by six SPAs and illustrated with various studio-quality portraits uploaded as "own work" or "I have permission from the copyright holder" over the years, and is now being aggressively defended by an SPA claming to be an unconnected arts council intern, seems like a serious COI problem. Is it worth raising this at COI/N?

And out of interest for future sock cases I might raise, why does the staleness of the accounts prevent checkusering? It is just the high chance that the IPs will be different, even if they were all the same human? --

Bringing it up at COI/N would be a good idea. Staleness prevents checking because IP information is deleted from WMF servers after 90 days. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:37, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Makes sense. Thanks. --

McGeddon (talk) 09:16, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Is it possible to track down the editor of the post? He did a great job on it and I'd like to see it reposted as it is abut my son. I believe as I understand the reason for the deletion is because of 1 word, professional. You would be correct not to classify him as one as the car he was to drive for Carbir is still not finished. I believe if I could convince RacerReporter1971 to change Reid's status to amateur the article could be reinstated. Thanks Bruce Hazelton. [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.61.208.57 (talk) 22:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the point. Having an amateur status would make his claim to notability even weaker. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pls see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oglesruins -- Moxy (talk) 00:35, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that the closing of the deleiton proposal on

There's a difference between a government and a private organization. As for the NYT, that's just not significant coverage; he is only mentioned in the context of an interview, which 1) is not really coverage of him and 2) is considered a primary source. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:51, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Extend PC time? --George Ho (talk) 22:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:51, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I wanted to discuss the deletion of the article on Hong Kong film actor Philip Ng. It seems to me that he meets the requirements of [[16]] having been in over 2 dozen Asian films, including several notable ones including "New Police Story", "Bodyguards and Assassins", Naked Soldier and the lead in "Once Upon a Time in Shanghai (film)". You can see him credited on the "Once Upon a Time in Shanghai" poster here on wikipedia too - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OnceUponaTimeinShanghai.jpg#mediaviewer/File:OnceUponaTimeinShanghai.jpg

From what I read of the debate over deleting his page previously, the editor ignored his sizable body of work which is noted in multiple sources and took issue with the fact that much of the news articles about Philip mention his relationship with a famous actress, therefore concluding that he wasn't notable enough on his own. (I think they ignored the fact that even articles about his personal life clearly refer to him as an accomplished actor and martial art choreographer).

If the editors arguing for deletion could read Chinese, perhaps it would have cleared up some of the problems, as there is much more primary information about him in Chinese too.

Anyway, I'd like to know what important items were missing from the page previously and what sources are needed to make sure that the page is not marked for deletion again?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.198.225.243 (talk) 04:13, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can read Chinese. If you present some of the Chinese sources here, I can evaluate them. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:52, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Thanks for your quick reply. Here's a few that I could find through google that I think confirm he is a working actor and martial arts choreographer with a significant body of work -

Talking about "Once Upon a Time in Shanghai" that include info on his background and some of his previous films - ::[[17]][[18]][[19]] English article - [[20]]

Kungfu Quest 1 & 2 programs on RTHK TV that Philip was a featured martial arts host on - [[21]][[22]][[23]]

Upcoming movie "Zombie Fight Club" where Philip is an action choreographer as well as actor - [[24]] [[25]]

This is not a complete list of all articles, just recent ones, but I think it gives an idea of the scope. There are also video interviews available from Mainland networks' official websites, but not sure if those are acceptable as sources. Thanks

203.198.225.243 (talk) 06:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:08, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 203.198.225.243 (talk) 04:23, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:39, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

It seems clear to me that User:Pranav prasad singh is the sockmaster and the other account, User:Pranavtat09 (and the IP I have added to the case, User:27.107.98.6) is the sockpuppet. I'm curious as to why you switched the investigation around. Why did you do that? Gparyani (talk) 16:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pranavtat09 was created in February 2013, while Pranav prasad singh was created in May 2014. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:King of Hearts: Thank you. Based on behavior, it seemed like Pps was the sockmaster, but I guess that it is in fact Pranavtat09... Gparyani (talk) 05:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you restore the full talk page history? Thanks. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 20:09, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:28, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirm if any of the options are incorrect or abuse of alternative account.

• 99% Similar name.
• Declared on the userpage.
• Participating on same discussions where main account has.
• Not used for evading 3rr.
• Creating articles of similar subjects. i.e.if main account made, 'Canadian mountains', alternate acc may have 'American mountains'.

I've seen a few accounts though, but I really wanted to know once. Thank you. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:18, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but could you please clarify? What does "Confirm if any of the options are incorrect or abuse of alternative account" mean? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:47, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you can tell if any of those options are incorrect, or violation of multiple accounts. Considering that "multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not". OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:01, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's very case-dependent. But in general, if the connection is undisclosed, then pretty much the only permissible situation is

WP:CLEANSTART. If it is disclosed, then pretty much everything is OK given that we treat the two accounts as one person (so you can't still can't make four reverts in 24 hours). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:16, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Got you, sounds to be perfect. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:34, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just made one account. I hope it is okay. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 10:00, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• You may want to have a look at the reports submitted on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nangparbat, I've added some evidence and the account this user had created. Thanks OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 11:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC) Callanecc has requested a CU.[reply]

Thanks for checking and blocking. Strange behavior indeed, no sleepers, and the person creates a brand new named account for each editing session even when the old ones aren't blocked. I would assume this will continue, as it has for 7 years. Is there any way that an IP or range block could do any good? - Wikidemon (talk) 21:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If a CU believed that a range block would be appropriate, they would have done so. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:00, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, King of Hearts/Archive/2014. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

Upcoming Saturday event - June 21: Wiki Loves Pride NYC

You are invited to join us at Jefferson Market Library for "Wiki Loves Pride", hosted by New York Public Library, Metropolitan New York Library Council, Wikimedia LGBT and Wikimedia New York City, where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on this theme: Saturday June 21: Wiki Loves Pride NYC (RSVP), focusing on LGBT history and culture. 11am–4pm at Jefferson Market Library. We hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Dear King of Hearts

Please analyze the following: This is a primary source created by the Cultural Institute of Providencia It belongs to the State of Chile and is one of the most important cultural institutions in Chile. Please see here is Primary Source [Cultural Institute of Providencia].

In addition to this article will add 4 other references from the creation of this.

We show here the placement Erase [Cruz Vargas: Difference between revisions].

Please request your competition in order Remain this article, which show the life and work of the Chilean artist now deceased

Thank you and I hope your answer

--

Under new references added [add reference]

Thank you and I hope your analysis

grateful

--

Please I show what happened in this last article, where it intervenes here [[66]]. Please request your competition. In the first part of this section I explain that primary source is the Providencia Cultural Institute is here and [Providencia Cultural Institute]

Thank you very much and I hope your answer if you can

A fraternal embrace

--

The time delay these processes [[67]]

I am wait your answer, thank you

--

Unfortunately, I cannot understand what you're saying. Feel free to post in Spanish if that's easier for you. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi King of Hearts , Sorry

This process how long? [[68]]

Thank You --

It takes 1 week. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello King of Hearts

Please see this, I find it incredible [[69]]

I hope your opinion

--

You have been found to be using an

alternate account for illegitimate purposes. (Puedes ver la política de usuarios títeres en español si no la compredes en inglés. No será precisamente lo mismo pero te podrá dar una buena idea de la versión en inglés.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, King of Hearts/Archive/2014. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 21:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{

ygm

}} template.

LGA _talk^edits 21:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear King of Hearts

Please analyze the following:

Please see the following References are added where they do literary Interest, these primary sources are aggregated into the article and these are: [Study on Chilean literature, 1940, Pastene foreword written by M. Correa, October 1940] [History of Literature Illustrated Francisco A. Encina, written by Leopoldo Castedo, vol. 11, pp. 144-152]

You can see here the proposed deletion [[70]] which does not take into account the references of this article litarario Critical.

Please analyze and reconsider

I hope your support and collaboration A big hug --

You can remove the

WP:PROD tag yourself. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I proceeded to remove, what I could see here see here [[71]]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pedro_Nolasco_Cruz_Vergara&diff=613631017&oldid=613620530

--

I did what happened indicated by you and this [[72]], I request your competition.

Thank you very much and a hug

--

I see you have replied to the AfD. At this point all you can do is to wait for it to run its course. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

07:20, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello King of Hearts. As I'm fairly sure you are aware, some of the HTML code in your signature is deprecated or obsolete. This means that a good portion of your signature is dropped from pages in some browsers (I see just "King of ♠" on my BlackBerry). As such, I was wondering if you would be willing to update your code a little bit. If you are willing, I suggest replacing:

-- [[User:King of Hearts|King of]] [[User:King of Hearts|<span style="color:red;">&hearts;</span>]] [[User talk:King of Hearts|<span style="color:red;">&diams;</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts|<span style="color:black;">&clubs;</span>]] &spades;

with:

-- [[User:King of Hearts|King of <span style="color:red">♥</span>]] [[User talk:King of Hearts|<span style="color:red">♦</span>]] [[Special:Contribs/King of Hearts|<span style="color:#000">♣</span>]] ♠

which will result in a 201 character long signature (38 characters shorter) with an appearance of: -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠
compared to your existing 239 character long signature of: -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠
— Either way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 12:06, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer to have "King of" and "♥" as separate links as otherwise there is an underline between them, which is visually unappealing. A long time ago, I used the icons themselves rather than things like ♥ for a while, but thought that several dark icons stood out too much in the wikitext and reverted. By the way, the spades used to be a link to Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts, but I had to get rid of it when the 255-character limit was imposed. Do you have any suggestions on how I can accomplish that? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• To get rid of that space in between (I thought you might bring that up actually), you would have to use:

-- [[User:King of Hearts|King of]] [[User:King of Hearts|<span style="color:red">♥</span>]] [[User talk:King of Hearts|<span style="color:red">♦</span>]] [[Special:Contribs/King of Hearts|<span style="color:#000">♣</span>]] ♠

which adds 24 characters and gets you back up to 225 total characters and would look like: -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ Linking the spade to an email link like ♠ would add another 70 characters ([[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<span style="color:#000">♠</span>]]) which would put you way over the 255 character limit since I'm assuming you would want it black. You "could" save a few more characters if you made all of the icons bold, and if you could live with the on hover underline, but that's entirely up to you (it comes to 246 characters, seen below).

—[[User:King of Hearts|King of <b style="color:red">♥</b>]] [[User talk:King of Hearts|<b style="color:red">♦</b>]] [[Special:Contribs/King of Hearts|<b style="color:#000">♣</b>]] [[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts|<b style="color:#000">♠</b>]]

Which would look like: —King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ Hope this helps you decide. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 01:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LGA: continues to be quite difficult with respect to my contributions to the University of Waterloo of Stratford Campus page. He continues to use serious editorial license with respect to content that I believe is important to the page. Specifically, he has removed all references to industry partnerships and the school's advisory board. Would it be possible for you to have a look at the rationale I have provided on the page and weigh in with your opinion? I am not asking you to agree with me. I am sincerely interested in what you have to say because I want what is right to prevail. I intend to ask other editors as well. Thank you. Stuartzs (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday July 6: WikNYC Picnic

You are invited to join us the "picnic anyone can edit" in Central Park, as part of the Great American Wiknic celebrations being held across the USA. Remember it's a wiki-picnic, which means potluck. Sunday July 6 RSVP ). 1pm–8pm at southwest section of the Great Lawn, north of the Delacorte Theater . Also, before the picnic, you can join in the Wikimedia NYC chapter's annual meeting. 11:30am-12:30pm at Yeoryia Studios, 2067 Broadway. We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

06:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)