User talk:Mjpieters

MJ is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

My talk page; use it to talk to me, but please use a new section.

Blech. It sure is hard to shape up an article while a semi-vandal is constantly reverting it to rants. It's certainly not been the first time I tore my hair over such. There's something comical about the fact the semi-vandal in this case is the subject of the article. Anyway, I don't want to risk 3RR, so I was hoping that if you see this, you can rollback the article to the last version I edited (and improve it however you think best, of course). Thanks for your help, and kind words. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:32, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll certainly do my best; It's easier in the European morning when our subject is asleep.. --MJ 18:44, 27 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

hi thanks for your message regarding the Zing technologies page. I shall log in and to the Zing talk page to discuss the deletion and reversal. --59.167.67.71 03:32, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okidoki, sorry if I reverted a legitimate delete. We've had some pretty petty vandalism last night and I was in a perhaps too trigger-happy mood. In any case, being logged in and having discussion with other editors is on the subject is always preferable. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 08:06, 30 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Mjpietes, I wanted to inform you that Haniff's deletion does have some basis and I've aptly removed it again. Apparently both paragraphs were copyvios. More info is at Talk:Petronas#Copyvio section. Regards, Andylkl ^(talk) 19:13, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help with the userpage vandalism; I've blocked the offender for 24 hours. --Spangineer (háblame) 20:23, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, glad to be of help. I saw you booted him, I guess he was retaliating against earlier vandalism reverts. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 20:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Perhaps you'd like to opine at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Mertz. Maybe I'm no Merkey, but still :-). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 19:58, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check, I added my two cents. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 21:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

This is to advise you that a Request for Arbitration has been filed against you by an anonymous user, who seems unable or unwilling to inform you themselves. The details can be found at

Thanks; I had already found it after becoming aware of the next Merkey sockpuppet. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 22:23, 9 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Quick catch. Beat me to it. Good work. KHM03 19:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Long live CryptoDerk's Vandal Fighter! :) --MJ^(☎|@|C) 19:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page. --Nlu 13:38, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NP; wish I had the authority to boot that IP; repeat vandal with last warning blanking User pages. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 13:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for helping revert the Care Bears page to my recent update! It's the first time my name has been in any page history... maybe it was well worth the recognition. The Bears in Care-a-lot would be proud of this (I'm a big fan of theirs). But anyway...thanks! --Slgrandson 03:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As the title says, thanks :D. I only just noticed it was hit, so this is a bit of a late thanks...sorry.

Anyway, I have noticed you've done a lot of good work against vandalism so I've awarded you a much deserved Barnstar, which is now on your userpage.

Feel free to move it to your talk page if that's where you would prefer it.

Thanks! :) Blightsoot 11:21, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir,

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. I am not a sockpuppet. Please stop violating policy. Thanks. Waya sahoni 20:22, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jeff, Please stop being a sockpuppeteer. It is obvious to everyone and embarrassing to you. Please. Stop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Why you so hawny? (talk • contribs)

Sigh. Thank you for providing more evidence on your identity, Jeff. Your actions speak volumes. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 10:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please do not vandalize the project tags in the article talk page again. This is the third time you have vandalized the talk page for the article. Please do not remove the tags again. Waya sahoni 03:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I have explained to you already, Jeff, it is WP policy that any sockpuppet edits by a banned user are subject to reversal. Also, you'll need to learn to count. So far I removed the tag from the talk page twice. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 15:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. I have asked you repeatedly to stop removing the project tags from the talk page of that article. You persist. I do not want to be disruptive and post alerts, but what you are doing is deliberate vandalism. Waya sahoni 08:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making accusations of vandalism. Don't confuse revert wars and conflicts on consensus with vandalism. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 09:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that he wasn't "banned." It doesn't matter to me anyway. I just had some spare time and looked into it. Thanks for the information! --BWD ^(talk) 14:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no prob! I learned that there was a difference only recently. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 14:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a moment; perhaps you can clarify something for me. It appears that he was 'banned' by arbcom with the reason Given block summary:(Jeff Merkey (Personal attacks, legal threats, harassment, disruption, ...)). The block is used as a mechanism to enforce arbcom's ban. Does that mean that any account that Jeff Merkey owns is subject to this block as well? Is there a link to the actual arbcom decision? Or do I have this all wrong? --BWD ^(talk) 14:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, by the time Arbcom dealt with User:Gadugi, User:Fvw had already blocked him. ArbCom never looked into the two cases (they were both rejected[) so there are no ArbCom decisions concerning him. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gadugi vs. Fvw and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/67.177.35.25 vs. Fvw, Pgk, Exabit, Kebron, Lulu_of_the_Lotus-Eaters, Mjpieters and Redwolf24. Yes, one of the arbiters uses the word 'banned' in his reasoning to reject the case, but that's not an arbcom decision, unfortunately.

If Jeff were banned, that would apply to him in person, and any accounts he creates would indeed be subject to blocking. See the

WP:BAN page for the details. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 14:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks. --BWD ⁽talk) 14:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions, for MJ or anyone else who is interested. (I'm asking here because MJ had requested "not fanning flames".)

1. Would it be appropriate to put {{Sockpuppet|1=Gadugi|evidence=[[Talk:Jeffrey Vernon Merkey]]}} on Waya's user page?
2. On
   WP:SOCK
   it does say "Users who are banned from editing or temporarily subject to a legitimate block may not use sock puppets to circumvent this" (emphasis mine). I understand Merkey is blocked not banned, but if Waya is Jeff's sockpuppet, isn't he circumventing a legitimate block?

—

Hmmm, I missed that wording. Note that on

WP:BLOCK it does state that blocking suspected sockpuppets is controversial though, and I don't think you'll have much success in keeping the tag up; it has been done before by someone else (although that account did appear to have been created to bait Jeff). In any case, I am not sure what it would accomplish at this point in time; unless User:Waya sahoni cleans up his act about the bio, he is heading for another block anyway, at which time it would be far easier if an impartial admin would put up that label. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 16:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

I also suspect it's just a matter of time. Jeff's close to starting threats, which is usually the beginning of the end. And for the time being I'll refrain from addressing the sockpuppet as Jeff. --Jerry | Talk 16:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's established fact that he is a sockpuppet, unless you follow the argument that he's just a completely random person from Utah. I think that not calling him a sockpuppet when he is, just to avoid his legal threats or whatever, does a disservice to wikipedia and compromises the integrity of it. That's just me though. --BWD ^(talk) 16:37, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not avoiding any threats. I am trying to honour WP policies and guidelines such as

WP:POINT, and I hold User:Waya sahoni to the same. If he then chooses to flaunt the policies and guidelines, that is then his problem, and he will be dealt with. I guess that assuming good faith includes the possibility to redeem oneself, and User:Waya sahoni

appears to have been a constructive editor on Cherokee articles.

I also don't think that placing sockpuppet tags on his page is going to do anything else than fan the flames some more without accomplishing anything. You'll need to convince admins of sockpuppetry, not User:Waya sahoni. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 19:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See

Thanks; I think I need sleep. The misplacement was a mistake on my part. — TKD::Talk 10:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your note on User talk:195.194.119.220. This editor was changing the birthplace to Egypt. If you look here it says South Norfolk, Virginia. Copeland's bio at his offical site says Virginia. And http://www.nndb.com/people/739/000024667/ NNDB] say Alexandria, Virgina. Anyway Egypt is not correct. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for the correction. A quick google turned up a fan-site that made the egypt claim as well, and in my vandal-reversion mode I didn't look any further. My apologies! --MJ^(☎|@|C) 16:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I didn't block him for that as I felt it was probably just a good faith but incorrect edit. The user was blanking pages as well. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With IP addresses I give a lot more leeway as I'd hate to be the one poor good-faith editor stuck with a proxy IP address of a vandal. :) --MJ^(☎|@|C) 16:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll dub this the Alexandria Confusion; some more googling shows up more sources claiming Alexandria, Egypt. As Stewart himself states to have been born in Virginia, I am going to assume that people have mistaken Alexandria, Virginia (close to where I in fact lived for a few years) with Alexandria, Egypt, and leave it at that.. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 16:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reverting some of the damage done by the seemingly endless "parade" of vandals that have wreaked havoc on my user page today. Your help is appreciated. Weatherman90 16:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic! I was surprised to see such a complete biography of this rather unusual writer on the Dutch Wikipedia. User:Besednjak there has some curious and broad interests. But I'm glad Kosyk's now in the English Wikipedia because of his ties to the United States. I'm going to try to enter some additional Sorbian writers. Thank you so much for noticing it quickly and churning it out. Best, Tfine80 17:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your fight against vandalism, keep it up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.49.105 (talk • contribs)

Yeah! You found a talk page to communicate. :) Keep it up, you'll make an excellent Wikipedian! --MJ^(☎|@|C) 10:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page! See you around. - Liberatore(T) 13:38, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:PONDHEEPANKAR alias User:Pranava alias 202.141.141.10 has vandalalized a number of articles. He keeps on insisting that Gounder is a caste not a title. But the usage across the world in the Tamil diaspora indicates it is a title of many caste people. Please dont revert articles to a version that is not even Wiki format. Please give you your reason in the Talk page or here RaveenS 14:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted a change on Gounder because:

1. The edit I reverted was made by an anonymous IP address that seemed to blank out a lot of new content
2. The blanking was done without an edit summary
3. The new content, although added by another anonymous IP user, appeared to have been made in
   good faith
   if somewhat inexperienced.

If wasn't aware of an edit conflict on that page, if the blanker had used an edit summary I would have looked further. My apologies if I reverted something that wasn't vandalism.

Do note that you should try and avoid an edit war; have you tried to

engage the other user on their talk page? --MJ^(☎|@|C) 14:37, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Also, content not marked up is not necessarily vandalism. I know next to nothing about castes, so I am in no position to judge the contents of the edits; I merely am trying to battle vandalism, and anonymous blankings without edit summaries are easily labelled as vandalism. Again apologies if this was not the intent here. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 14:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to communicate to him via the 2 talk pages. Also tried to be positive on a article that he just edited, hopefully, he will learn the Wiki formats and use his latest edit

Vettuva Gounder

as a model. Thanks

RaveenS 14:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No use communicating with this nihilist, I just tagged the articles as needing cleanup and moving on. See what he has done to Kongu Vellalar and the Gounder page :-(((

RaveenS 15:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need to

bite the newcomers :) I placed a welcome message on his talk page, and am cleaning out the obvious errors. Be patient, and trust in the wiki process. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 16:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for fixing my user page when I wasn't around. Pollinator 04:20, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page - don't know what the guy has against homeschoolers, but...

Anyway, thanks.  :) --

More a case of homophobia me thinks; your homeschool tag just happens to be the one he choose to replace.

Hmmm, there are homeschool user boxes? Do you know of any 'I homeschool my kids' tag too? :) --MJ^(☎|@|C) 09:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Reply to self, a sure sign...) Ah, the tag applies to both educator and educated. Perhaps I'll add it (though I try to only add boxes I feel are relevant to what I do on WP, it may become relevant in the future). --MJ^(☎|@|C) 09:16, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting my user page when it was blanked. ... discospinster 15:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you already figured out how to add the function I wrote :D Let me know if you have any questions/run into problems. --lightdarkness ^(talk) 19:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I jumped the gun a bit when experimenting with a new JS snippet, and later saw I saved that version before I saved my edit to your talk page! I'll let you know if I have any problems, and keep an eye on what changes the script makes on my behalf. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 09:01, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a possibility to get a checkuser on Userid:PeyoteMan ? Is there a specific admin or page that one needs to go to?

His interests are too similar to one we all know and love... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/PeyoteMan His exagerations here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/WikiGadugi are too similar as well.

Thanks --Kebron 03:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The behaviour certainly matches (I already noticed). Still,

WP:RCU. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 09:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Well, the outburst and blocking happened quicker than expected. And apparently I stand accused of being a Professor in Sweden. ;) There are worse things, like what he accused Vigilant of. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 06:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir/madam, I am not an anonymous person as I have boldly registered under my own original name.I am a student of Delhi University doing my research on my own caste.I respect the sentiment of user:RaveenS.He seems to have got pacified after the hullabaloo created by him in continiuously deleting my articles.The user name Pranava as said by him neither is me,nor do I have any idea on the user.I have valid credentials as a student of history and hail from one of the reknowned institutions of our country.I am happy that his entry is posted in a different category.

                               Thanking you,

Yours sincierly, PonDheepankar K,M.Phil History, Delhi University.

The

Hello, Mjpieters. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Stack Exchange, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a