Welcome!

Hello, Dremeraldgibb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

=

Thanks Chief Pumpkin! I've read the guidelines and share the aims - I am a philosophy and politics specialist and I aim to add real information to enhance pages - I'm not into misinfomation or overwriting other people's stuff. Chacun à son goût! Dremeraldgibb (talk) 10:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

==

Very good, Thatcher, but East thing says he acted on your recommendation. I'm not surprised neither of you wish to take responsibility. I asked you to disclose the 'evidence'. I'm not going to appeal when I don't know what the charges are based on, Mr Guantanomo Bay! I'm not going to appeal anyway, its not a big deal, but I think am still entitled to 'an explanation'? Disclose your 'technical advice' the block was based on. Was it having someone sit in this room and observe Wikigiraffes and me merge into one person?

90.17.74.19 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.17.65.201 (talk) 17:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I can not disclose Dremeraldgibb's IP information on the say-so of an anonymous IP who claims to be Dremeraldgibb. You can post a request to USer talk:Dremeraldgibb asking that the checkuser findings be released and confirming that you waive your right to privacy under the meta:Privacy policy with respect to the disclosure of non-public IP information. (meta:Privacy_policy#Policy_on_release_of_data_derived_from_page_logs)Thatcher 11:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC ---

I request that that the checkuser findings be released and confirm that I waive the right to privacy under the meta:Privacy policy with respect to the disclosure of non-public IP information.

Dremeraldgibb (talk) 18:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Checkuser evidence

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Let me focus on two particular IP addresses.

10 June 2008

(diff) (hist) . . Talk:Julian Baggini . . 19:18 . . Wikigiraffes (Talk | contribs | block) (Final thoughts on Slim and the Baggini page from Wikigiraffes: new section) IP: 86.220.13.112
(diff) (hist) . . User talk:CIreland . . 19:16 . . Wikigiraffes (Talk | contribs | block) (Second thoughts: new section) IP: 86.220.13.112
(diff) (hist) . . User talk:Merzul . . 19:15 . . Wikigiraffes (Talk | contribs | block) (Second thoughts...: new section) IP: 86.220.13.112
(diff) (hist) . . Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard . . 19:13 . . Wikigiraffes (Talk | contribs | block) (Slim and Baginni and manipulating minds: new section) IP: 86.220.13.112
(diff) (hist) . . m The Philosophical Society of England . . 18:00 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) IP: 86.220.13.112
(diff) (hist) . . The Philosophical Society of England . . 17:55 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) (correcting stub and adding some content) IP: 86.220.13.112

Here you are using the same IP as Wikigiraffes.

25 May 2008

(diff) (hist) . . Unsolved problems in philosophy . . 12:26 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) (existing phrase unfortunately fails to distinguish between a question and a 'problem', which is the central issue under discussion) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . m Unsolved problems in philosophy . . 12:22 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) (correcting links, and article does now cite two sources so removing cn) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . Unsolved problems in philosophy . . 12:08 . . 90.17.9.22 (Talk | block) (correcting link) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . Julian Baggini . . 00:41 . . 90.17.9.22 (Talk | block) (Adding more substance to the picture that is emerging of this writer) IP: 90.17.9.22

24 May 2008

(diff) (hist) . . Thought experiment . . 12:04 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) (correcting an important misapprehension about the origins and historical use of the term, while trying to preerve the earlier account as an 'alternative' view) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . m User talk:Dremeraldgibb . . 10:57 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) (Just acknowledging the message really) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . m User talk:Dremeraldgibb . . 10:54 . . Dremeraldgibb (Talk | contribs | block) (just acknowledging the message really) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . Unsolved problems in philosophy . . 10:44 . . 90.17.9.22 (Talk | block) (adding italics) IP: 90.17.9.22

23 May 2008

(diff) (hist) . . Julian Baggini . . 20:52 . . 90.17.9.22 (Talk | block) (Adding some neutral facts to make entry more than just a piece of personal advertising for a writer) IP: 90.17.9.22
(diff) (hist) . . Unsolved problems in philosophy . . 19:42 . . 90.17.9.22 (Talk | block) (adding links) IP: 90.17.9.22

The edits of 23 May prove that this was your IP on that day even though you did not log in from it until the 24th. That you kept the same IP for three days, and the idiosyncratic edits to such disparate topics, pretty much rules out any claim that the IPs switched between two different users during the 1:13 gap in editing on June 10 (plus the unlikelihood of two random subscribers to your ISP having identical editing interests. Thatcher 19:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Okay, Thtcher, thanks for the 'evidence'. It seems to consist of the computer staying connected to the network, and everyone using it being considered the same person! But this computer has multiple users. I might add that the email address I used 'info@objetunique.fr' is a general one too, used by multiple users. So I think your inference is more or less invalid. Even if you 'were' correct, that dremeraldgibb is a variant of Wikigiraffes but only does 'good' editing - what is the point of blocking that? Unless you see yourselves there as having some sort of mandate to 'punish' as well as prevent. Let me put it to you now, you have no such right, and you should not seek to create one.

guess i should 'sign this' too Dremeraldgibb (talk) 22:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

If you want to try the "it was my roommate" excuse, the post the {{unblock}} message and explain your case. Thatcher 02:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

No, I've got better things to do than flatter the egos of social deviants. I asked you if you had any reliable evidence, you have very kindly demonstrated that you have only a few 'surmises' and insinuations. Clearly SlimVirgin is setting your standards. And I have just been reading up (on teh WR) about the dispute - how about suspending this user who has clearly engaged in an 'outing attack' on Wikigiraffes and by extension, me too?

Funny thing, still seems okay when Slim does it: viz:

"I would appreciate more eyes on this, and some administrative help if necessary. Julian Baggini (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs )is a British philosopher and writer that I created a stub in 2005. In June 2006, Docmartincohen ( talk ·contribs ) — who was engaged in a non-notable, real-life dispute with Baggini — added some unsourced and poorly sourced material about that dispute, in violation of BLP. "

That is clearly to say that user docmartincohen is one particular Martin Cohen who Baggini (and evidently now Slim) dislikes. Not content with one offence, Slim then goes on to 'out' Wikigiraffes as also 'docmartincohen' or 'linked in some way'. Yup, like Slim is linked in some way to Linda Mack, only no one can say that! An admin called 'Wizardman' noted this discrepancy and put a query by it, saying the above ought to be investigated - but then Slim's 'outing attack' mysteriously disappered, leaving only Wizardman's query. Someone then posted the quote back on Wizardman's page but just 3 minutes later! it too had disappeared.

Yeah, there are definitely some disconcerting things going on behind the scenes regarding "Sara" Linda Mack.KlappCK (talk) 15:28, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is this a record!

As far as I know,all references to it have been cleaned away except in cached pages. There, the smoking gun, so to speak is:

SlimVirgin talk| edits 20:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC) BLP noticeboard "

Personally, I think Slim's guess is no big deal. The hypocrisy is the thing!

I guess this evidence won't be enough for you to do anything though, will it. Email if you have anythign postive to say, I'm not spending more time on this page.

Add topic