334:. Now, I'm fully aware that this isn't at all inconsistent with the whole saga, and even the existing evidence is already pretty overwhelming. But I'd like to ask anyway: how do I find out and/or who do I ask to review Oirvine's IP to see if it's consistent with any of the other identities or not?
119:
THANK you sir for asking my assistance and for your last information. I had only the time to quickly review this User's modifications; some of them were indeed POV... I will soon get involved in the debate on the Talk page. Is the
JillandJack incarnation banned at this moment or not? Thanks again.
260:
I've just warned this user against making personal attacks, but I don't have the energy to get any further involved at the moment. Let me know if you need certification for an RFC in the future (assuming an admin doesn't take the initiative to ban this character outright). Note that s/he has just
44:
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that when I blocked you I did not know that you were an admin nor that you voted already on the Gdansk issue. Otherwise I would have waited for one more comment before blocking you. I also did not receive an email from you asking to be unblocked. If you ever see me
31:
Just to let you know
Apollomelos2 IS Noah Peters. It is a sock puppet he created to attack and impersonate ME. He agreed to arbritrator Raul for a permanent block to avoid an arbcom ruling against him brought forth on my part. He has returned in violation and attacked all the users that had
49:. As for the 3RR rule: It's not perfect, but I think it will be rather difficult to formulate something else. if you can come up with a proposal, that would be good. Also, i greatly appreciate it that you did not unblock yourself. I just hope that you;re not upset with me personally.
204:
should read the NPOV policy. I am merely reporting what some human rights activists and scholars have written on a number of important U.S. figures; you are violating the NPOV policy by attempting to cover up their allegations (notice that the article deals with
132:
Hi. Thanks for taking off that rather strange VfD election that turned on up my discussion page. What happened? Was this anon going around all over the place adding this to people's discussion pages? Weird.
216:
No, you are attempting to insert your POV opinions (morally equivalent to those of a
Holocaust denier), transparent disclaimers to the contrary notwithstanding.
33:
293:- help save Requested Moves, bring friends. I'd hope you vote to keep voting at RM instead of running away to cabal at distant talk pages. —
140:
I, on the other hand, would appreciate if you did not remove entries from my talk page (except possibly in the case of clear vandalism). --
229:
46:
314:
as I think it belong there more. Also look for the answer there. BTW: do you use IRC? If so, when is it possible to catch you there?
159:
155:
290:
154:
Well, the point is, this anon user called his own edits to talk pages "vandalism" when he reported himself to
32:
blocked him in the past including gay-related articles. See vandalism in progress page for further details.
127:
276:
301:
100:
has been blocked; it appears they were merely the latest reincarnation of a previously-banned user,
266:
223:
175:
147:
367:
Thanks for finishing the
Anuzutica VfD. 'Twas driving me batty. I owe you a beverage! --
8:
371:
83:
72:
311:
331:
294:
97:
91:
57:
169:
141:
121:
105:
17:
68:
vote. You can also start such a section yourself if you wish. Best regards, --
109:
368:
249:
233:
217:
210:
194:
134:
80:
69:
335:
327:
315:
262:
113:
90:
355:
241:
240:
The 3RR rule applies to more than three reverts, not exactly three. --
162:
26:
101:
284:
248:
Quit going through my user history; that's trolling behavior.
193:
are poised to break it before I am. Lesson: stop the cover up.
362:
255:
60:
is getting lengthy, and I am considering to move it to a new
330:, stating that their banning was in error and they aren't
321:
184:
351:
228:
You repeated violations of the 3RR have been reported on
341:
189:No, you should be aware of the three revert rule.
39:
79:Thank you very much for your understanding --
230:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR
47:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR
306:I moved part of inline discussion from
14:
45:doing a 3RR, feel free to put it on
23:
24:
383:
161:. I reverted on that basis. --
156:Knowledge:Vandalism in progress
302:Gdańsk/Danzig inine discussion
291:Knowledge talk:Requested moves
52:On another point, some of the
13:
1:
7:
326:I got an e-mail today from
10:
388:
150:06:30, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
75:12:04, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
66:Cross-Naming Gdansk/Danzig
64:section at the end of the
374:05:09, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
338:23:47, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
318:21:21, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
281:11:54, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
252:11:31, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
236:09:22, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
224:Your violation of the 3RR
220:09:15, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
213:09:04, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
197:08:59, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
178:06:44, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
168:Ah... that's unusual. --
165:06:34, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
137:03:50, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
124:04:55, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
116:00:23, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
86:14:23, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
358:19:17, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
297:18:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
244:09:26, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
36:03:28, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
128:The "Election" message
261:used up 3 reverts at
312:userpage discussion
174:
146:
379:
209:war criminals).
172:
144:
98:User:JillandJack
92:User:JillandJack
58:Talk:Gdansk/Vote
387:
386:
382:
381:
380:
378:
377:
376:
365:
344:
324:
304:
287:
258:
226:
187:
130:
106:User:Joe Canuck
95:
42:
29:
22:
21:
20:
18:User talk:Curps
12:
11:
5:
385:
364:
361:
360:
359:
346:What's a bot?
343:
340:
323:
320:
303:
300:
299:
298:
286:
283:
257:
254:
246:
245:
225:
222:
186:
183:
182:
181:
180:
179:
129:
126:
110:User:Angelique
94:
89:
88:
87:
56:discussion on
41:
38:
28:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
384:
375:
373:
370:
357:
353:
349:
348:
347:
339:
337:
333:
329:
319:
317:
313:
310:header to my
309:
296:
292:
289:
288:
282:
280:
279:
275:
273:
269:
264:
253:
251:
243:
239:
238:
237:
235:
231:
221:
219:
214:
212:
208:
203:
198:
196:
192:
177:
171:
167:
166:
164:
160:
157:
153:
152:
151:
149:
143:
138:
136:
125:
123:
117:
115:
111:
107:
103:
99:
93:
85:
82:
78:
77:
76:
74:
71:
67:
63:
59:
55:
50:
48:
37:
35:
19:
366:
345:
325:
307:
305:
277:
271:
267:
263:Bill Clinton
259:
247:
227:
215:
206:
201:
199:
190:
188:
139:
131:
118:
96:
65:
61:
53:
51:
43:
30:
27:Apollomelos2
332:JillandJack
295:ExplorerCDT
285:PLEASE VOTE
34:Apollomelos
363:Thank you!
170:L33tminion
158:(!). See
142:L33tminion
122:Liberlogos
369:Gyrofrog
322:Question
274:ubversiv
256:GSherman
250:GSherman
234:GSherman
218:GSherman
211:GSherman
195:GSherman
185:GSherman
135:23skidoo
112:, etc.)
81:Chris 73
70:Chris 73
336:Bearcat
328:Oirvine
316:Forseti
308:Forseti
207:alleged
114:Bearcat
104:(a/k/a
102:User:DW
62:Comment
372:(talk)
342:Hello!
270:adical
176:(talk)
148:(talk)
54:inline
356:Curps
354:. --
242:Curps
163:Curps
16:<
350:See
200:No,
84:Talk
73:Talk
40:Misc
352:bot
202:you
191:You
265:.
232:.
120:--
108:,
278:E
272:S
268:R
173:|
145:|
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.