User talk:Tonywalton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tonywalton is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia eventually (though may make short appearances when broadband access allows).

Undated sections are archived here.

Older page archives
Jul — Aug 2005 | Jul — Aug 2006
Sep — Oct 2005 | Sep — Nov 2006
Nov — Dec 2005 | Dec 2006
Jan — Feb 2006 |
Mar — Apr 2006 |
May — Jun 2006 |

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tonywalton.

This is the user talk page for User:Tonywalton, where you can send messages and comments to Tonywalton.

Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.

Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming

Contents 1 Hammerandclaw redux 2 Re:Whoops! 3 Neopaganism 4 QPR Youth Wing 5 Thanks 6 Funeral (Reply)

[edit] Hammerandclaw redux

Hi Tony,

I'm pretty sure my original gut instinct was right. FYI: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Hammerandclaw --barneca (talk) 23:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I quite agree. I wonder what WP:RFCU might say. I also see that H&C is claiming that Drillerman "used his account when he was away from the computer". The sequence you presented on the sockpuppet case makes that look very unlikely, IMV. Tonywalton ^Talk 12:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I was going to file an RFCU, not to confirm the puppetry (which I think passes the duck test), but to see if there were any other socks waiting in the wings. In closing the SSP, MastCell seemed to think it might be declined, and I don't have the time to spend on filing an RFCU unless I'm quite sure it would be accepted. Anyway, if H&C and DM are separate people, I'll eat my hat, and if there are any other socks, I'm sure my user page will be an irresistable honey pot. --barneca (talk) 13:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. Thinking of changing your name to User:Honey trap, eh? (Honeytrap's taken). Tonywalton ^Talk 13:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Whoops!

That's OK, don't worry about it. Happy editing. ;-) Lradrama 14:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Lradrama 14:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neopaganism

Thanks for the input, Tony.--Cúchullain ^t/c 00:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] QPR Youth Wing

Hi I noticed your comment on the talk page of the above recently created article, and that you removed the speedy deletion tag. The user who created the article may well be a sockpuppet of a banned user who has had numerous accounts to try and get round the ban. The reason I think this might be so is because their edits are virtually always about exactly the same topic of this QPR Youth wing for which they have been banned. Plus the edit pattern of User:StevenDB seems to be the same as the banned user, User:JackQPR. It got that bad that the article, List of hooligan firms had to be fully protected from editing just to try and stop the banned user from editing. I am presuming that you are able to check if this is the same banned user? Thank you.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 21:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hah hah, yes indeed it is a proverbial can of worms to say the least! To be honest I would probably also agree with you that the content added does have some validity and that maybe the article is on that basis not a candidate for speedy deletion. However, when taking into account the edit pattern looks very similar to that of an indefinitely banned sockpuppeteer then on that basis should it be back for speedy deletion? What I will do though first is contact one of the Admins who was involved in all the furore which arose a while back and ask them to check him out. Though given the edits and the sources being used it does look very similar to JackQPR, and presumably if/when that is confirmed then their edits will need to be reviewed or simply deleted. What I don't want to do of course is make any accusation of sockpuettry simpley based on what I think so will wait until I can contact the admin who blocked most of the accounts! Hopefully the worm can will get a new lid soon! ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah right, no JackQPR is "indefinitely blocked" sorry for the confusion and for my mistake, I need to pay more attention to these things! This - is the list of known sockpuppets of JackQPR all of which have a very similar edit pattern to StevenDB. I have contacted the Admin who protected the List of hooligan firms article and who has also dealt with JackQPR before to see if they can check. I must say though that in this instance with the article created about the QPR Youth Wing I do agree with you that it is almost certainly notable, it is just I suppose if it is JackQPR doing it then he has done so again to try and evade his block (must remember to put block not ban!!) cheers, ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Well it just goes to show how no matter how long you edit on wikipedia there is always something to learn! I suppose though because it is an area I don't particularly enjoy with regard to wikipedia, I have paid little attention to it. The admin who was involved is User:Black Kite who I have asked to look into it. I presume that is what happened previously with the request for checkuser process and wehat will happen now. Of course it could all turn out to be a different user but I would rather make sure!♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

And just as we talk about all of this, the article goes and gets deleted! Weirdly, StevenDB for some reason put the tag back on there and added the notification to his own talk page! Oh well!♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

[1] You deserve my gratitude too! Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · [

[edit] Funeral (Reply)

Hi!

Thanks for adding the info for me. I was being lazy at the time the article went out. Normally I edited the article immediately as soon as a sourced info came out. Besides, it's not really my area. I started to watch Speight since Autumn 2007 on BBC2's SMart (so basically I barely know him). Since then, I watched it every week until about February - and just like you, I am an adult. Really enjoyed when he wore woman's dress. Shame to see him gone. w_tanoto (talk) 22:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)