User talk:Tiptoety

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
If you are here to make a request for oversight, please do not do so. Instead, you can send me an email via the "email user" function, or you can email oversight-commons (at) which will reach all the oversighters.

Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4

Take a hint from Clyde here:
keep it mellow.
Clyde The Bulldog.jpg


Hi Tiptoety. How did you come up with this? Regards, Trijnstel (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

CheckUser. That said, take that comment with a grain of salt. That is not meant to be a "confirmed" result. Tiptoety talk 17:36, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Vandal is back[edit]

Can you take a look at Special:Contributions/Mondaylest569? Thanks. Dominic (talk) 00:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

For what it is worth, they are highly Likely and blocked. They moved ranges, but it is a bit too large to block at this point. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 00:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Category:Minnesota U.S. Highway shields[edit]

Could you please recreate this category? I understand the circumstances under which it was deleted; however it is, or was, a valid category. Thanks in advance. –Fredddie 06:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

There really isn't any content to undelete, that said you are welcome to create it if you feel it is a valid category, hence why I only added semi-create protection. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 06:53, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Hrm; I'll try it again. I tried recreating the category last night and I thought it sad it was locked down for non-admins. –Fredddie 17:57, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Revl Del/Oversight check[edit]

I am asking this because of your experience and knowledge regarding the policies and ethics behind the rev del and oversighting because you are an oversighter and a highly trusted user here. Please see this and this for comments.

Romaine has stated that the user in question not only asked for rev del but oversight of public information and trying to hide previous accounts which they admitted was theirs when they did a user request for images to be deleted (and hasn't contested it since). Personally, I am horrified and very offended by these actions because not only do I hate sock puppetry and trying to hide evidence of abuse, but he demanded admin to speedy delete his images on IRC and then contested a user asking for his image to be deleted in a deletion review. It definitely seems of a horrible double standard that he is trying to hide by saying it is harassing or outing to point this out. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:59, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm aware and familiar with the situation. I will comment when I have some time in a few hours. Tiptoety talk 06:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually Ottava, I do not have much to add so I'll just put it here. I declined an OS request regarding this matter yesterday as I do not feel the content rises to the level of justifying suppression. Outside of that, my comments would simply be in my role as an editor and nothing more. I'm debating whether or not to participate in the RfA, and if I do my thoughts will be shared there. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 08:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Right now, I care more about attempts to mislead admin and oversighters into hiding public, non-sensitive information as a way to seemingly wage war against those who are pointing out aspects of his past that he unethically tried to hide from, which I consider an outright violation of multiple policies and, if there is some evidence (i.e. how he approached the individuals regarding the matter) I would pursue a ban because this is a complete disruption of Commons at many, many levels. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
I will say that the OS request appeared to state that non-public personal information had been released and as such I originally suppressed it on sight. My personal philosophy is that OS can easily be reverted and that the less time personal information sits out there the better (kinda a shoot first ask questions later thing), and given that the request came from a trusted user I assumed good faith and performed the action. Upon doing so though, I began digging and realized the content did not rise to the level of suppression and reverted my actions. That said, there was no obvious deception in the way the request was written. Tiptoety talk 07:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
I want to publicly state that I am the one who requested suppression of the edits I had redacted myself (not so hard to guess, after all); I did so just because I felt was the right thing to do and OS would have decided; there isn't any clandestine direction so I don't know if suppression was asked by others as well. In any case, the reasons I gave were merely an iteration of my edit summaries, because I think the oversighters are able to evaluate the situation better than me and don't need to be explained it; Tiptoety has acted correctly, there's nothing strange about suppressing first and unsuppressing after thorough evaluation; I'm sorry if someone has understood that my requests were about real names but I've never removed or mentioned them so I didn't expect it, it seems to have happened because other users were particularly enjoying repeating real names (and activities) everywhere for various reasons and someone has spread false information about the removals (even though, again, my edit summaries were very clear). Nemo 08:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Email. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Replied. Tiptoety talk 07:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Recent global ban block[edit]

I received an email from a mutual friend of ours about a global ban you performed last night. He pointed out he was blocked by you per that rationale and I asked if there was a discussion or where he was banned. He said he wasn't banned on Meta and just blocked on en.wikipedia. I checked his account here - though it has no edits from 2009, it appears not to be blocked. He does have an infinite block on Meta for "trolling". I checked for his name on Meta and I could not find a ban discussion though. However, I do not have other names and the rest, but that is just information from my end based on what I was sent. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Just as an update, I talked to a Steward saying the individual was locked in March 2010, but I still couldn't find a discussion. I don't know how we are dealing with locks now that the global ban process is here, but I was told that the locks are being treated like a ban and they need to appeal in the same way. Hmm. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
It may be that I misinterpreted the global locks as essentially serving the same as a global ban. If you, or the locked user in question would like me to change the wording of the block to reflect "globally locked", I'd be fine with that. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 06:06, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
No, I think the major issue would be to see with the Meta process how to deal with past global locks now that there are global bans. However, a few of the Stewards said they are treating the old global locks as new global bans (without the ban discussion) so I don't know. Seems like a mess that wont be figured out. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Stop the nonsense please[edit]

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Yogo1ct.jpg Is this guy for real. His reasons are totally invalid. What is childish is him filing a totally bogus DR. He's retaliating for a thread at Talk:Yogo sapphire on en wiki. Now, is "it's a crappy image" a valid DR reason? no. so just kill the DR please. PumpkinSky talk 03:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Enough canvassing please. Given the votes I would say the file isn't going anywhere. Remember, "mellow" is the game we play here. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 03:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Oh really? Are you going to do anything to Dingley for a retaliatory DR with no valid reason whatsoever and wasting all our time? That's not mellow at all. And I'll say and do what I please. PumpkinSky talk 03:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
PumpkinSky, please don't take my comments as an attack on you. I'm just attempting to resolve this matter in the must mature and civil manner possible and calling people names certainly doesn't achieve that. You and I have been friendly before, lets not ruin that over something as silly as this. As for Dingley, I see that the two of you appear to have been (or still are) involved in a dispute on While I will agree it is possible he came here out of retaliation, on the flip side he could have seriously felt that the file doesn't meet commons standards for inclusion. While he is sorely wrong, I do not feel that his behavior has risen the level to justify me stepping in as an administrator. The DR will be closed as "kept" and all will once again be well in the world. Tiptoety talk 03:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
So I got it, you can file a retaliatory DR without any valid basis as long as you're polite about it? That's more disruptive than calling a spade a spade. Also see post about him really having 15 thousand edits. No way he doesn't know the basics. No wonder so many people leave wiki. Why the discrepancy in the edit count? I don't get that.PumpkinSky talk 03:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
User:Andy_Dingley-user page with 15 k edits, my post is on the DR. PumpkinSky talk 03:24, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Ah, the 4 edits is Jessemv. He has been involved with the en wiki article and obviously saw the post by commonsbot on the article talk page. PumpkinSky talk 03:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

←I've left a note for Andy Dingley. Best, Tiptoety talk 03:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Good.PumpkinSky talk 03:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Go ahead and block me now. I don't care one bit. Just ensure you treat the true disruptors equally. PumpkinSky talk 00:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Just where is the line drawn? this is downright insulting and could be phrased far better, despite the attempt at misdirection]. This person should get a warning too. Tiptoety, you seem like a great guy and user and I really like you, but your attempts at the effectiveness and application of the civility policy is misguided though totally well intentioned. It's useless to enforce it. The issues are far greater than little ol' PumpkinSky, towit Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility_enforcement/Evidence. PumpkinSky talk 00:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the delete vote, maybe I am missing it, but what exactly is disruptive about it? As for your thoughts on my application of the civility policy we will just have to agree do disagree there. ;-) And the ArbCom case, I'm well aware (I just so happen to be the case clerk). But remember, this is commons not Lastly, understand, I'm not just targeting you. I'm just calling it as I see it. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:10, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
the delete vote insults her intelligence. Blocking people for civility does no good, it will not change their behavior, they're easily overturned, and no agrees on what is or isn't civil, and if you've got admin friends, it's even more pointless. I'll do and say whatever I want and I don't give a crap what anyone thinks or if I get blocked. I believe in calling a spade a spade, not kissing their ass to make them feel good. If you're a jackass, I'll tell you that, not suck up to keep from getting blocked. As for arbcom, must be nightmare being involved with that. The effectiveness, rather ineffectiveness of the civility policy is the same no matter what wiki you're on.PumpkinSky talk 01:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Nudity and sexuality-related deletion requests[edit]

Hi mate, thanks for closing a few DRs. I noticed you removed Category:Nudity and sexuality-related deletion requests when you did - could you please in future hotcat them into the /deleted or /kept subcategories? Thanks. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:15, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and FYI, just hotcat removing them leaves some noinclude tags lying around. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Copy that. Thanks for the note, I wasn't aware this additional step needed to be taken. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 23:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Disruption by Herby[edit]

Please see. You originally moved the thread into its own section. It dealt with a very serious issue - Rd232 was involved in trying to have me banned in a proposal started by Fred, and he defended Fred many times. The original matter was started by Herby as retaliation for my saying that Rd232's previous behavior in using ops against consensus while involved was problematic. Rd232 used ops to remove Fastily's block increase on Fred. Herby then closed the complaint which you moved. Herby is involved, and we do not close discussions in that manner, especially when they are of a serious nature. The warning by Herby to block me while involved shows a clear intent to disrupt this community, ignore our policies, and goes in the face of what makes this a working environment. He claims that we need to stop the disruption, but it is clear that abuse of adminship is the true heart of the disruption. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

See here. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Doubtless you will catch up with this and read around however I assure you I saw nothing wrong with the original thread - however - it me - it along with others has deviated from its purpose. Best --Herby talk thyme 18:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry Ottava, but I am done. I'm not going to comment on Herby's closure (and even if I did, there is nothing really I could do about it - I don't have the power to desyop if that is what you are after), but I will say that I am a bit disappointed that you continue to open sub-thread after sub-thread. Regardless, I'm getting thrown under the bus here and dragged into stuff that really has nothing to do with me, so my little involvement regarding this matter his hereby over. Best, Tiptoety talk 06:43, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Ottava Rima email correspondence[edit]

Hi, according to this post of User:Ottava Rima, you are one of 9 users to whom he showed private email correspondence (from me to him). Can you please tell me (i) if this is true, and if it is: (ii) when and how he did this (iii) why you did not feel it necessary to tell me of this breach of trust (iv) what your view of my comments is, since Ottava claims of the 9 users "they agreed that you were defending Fred's action in an inappropriate manner."[1]. Please either email me or respond on my talk page, since I'm asking the other users Ottava has identified and I would prefer not to have discussion scattered on different talk pages. Thank you. Rd232 (talk) 01:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

I've replied at AN. Please remember who these threads are discussing, and don't get derailed by going after administrators and users in good standing here. We are not the bad guys. Tiptoety talk 06:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Your response here and at AN has rather thrown me; I took Ottava's claim to have shown my email to 9 other users seriously because it was either a serious breach of trust by him, or else a lie (I cannot see any wiggle room for a middle ground). I guess your "going after" remark derives from point (iii)? In re-reading it, bear in mind that it's qualified by the "if it is", and that I was highly skeptical that Ottava had actually done so. However, if he had, that would be a very legitimate question, I think (which there might or might not be good answers to). Rd232 (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Missing deletion reason[edit]

Hallo Tiptoety, at Commons:Deletion requests/File:ANAL INTERCOURSE.jpg. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Dropping a note to here to state I see this request. I'm currently busy with real life matters and will tend to this soon. If someone wants to reverse my closure, that's fine too. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 20:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Rename needed[edit]

Hi. Can you rename/move this: File:Lonsomehurst1911.png? I left out an 'e' between the n and s. thanks. PumpkinSky talk 18:58, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done - [2] Sorry for the delay on my part. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 01:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


Please can you forward me the underlying ip? It's the fifth account I've locked this morning (actually I took from this page but I cannot be sure it's the same guy), ty! --Vituzzu (talk) 10:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

✓ Done - Tiptoety talk 17:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)



could you please tell me, if a user with oversight tools could replace some info in the file history section in description of, for example, this image File:IMG 1247 mating king penguins.JPG? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:31, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

We can't "replace" but we can certainly "remove" information from the file's history. Best to email the address above though. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 02:36, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Did I understand you right? I sent you an email. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:48, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Fred the Oyster[edit]

I'm sure you're still watching his talk page, but just FYI I've reduced his block to 1 week following email discussion. If you have any questions, feel free. Rd232 (talk) 15:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Fred_the_Oyster_(again) -mattbuck (Talk) 18:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I have no real interest in continuing to comment as I feel I have already said what I need to. I trust the commons community to make the right decision, even if it is not the same one I would make. If there is a specific comment or question you would like me to respond to though, I'd be happy to. Best, Tiptoety talk 02:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Review, maybe?[edit]

Hello Tiptoety. May you please see here?. Thanks in advance. --Marco Aurelio (disputatio) 20:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Policy question[edit]

I have a number of photographs that if published will link to my reallife persona. As a checkuser what is your take on creating an account to upload these while maintaining my current (SUL) account? Agathoclea (talk) 17:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

That is an appropriate use of an alternate account. The important thing in this situation is that the two accounts do not cross edit. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 03:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Oversight nomination[edit]

Thank you for the nomination, and sorry for such a late reply — that bloody time difference! :-)) odder (talk) 11:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Triple Hat[edit]

Checkuser fez.pngCheckuser fez.pngCheckuser fez.png The Triple Checkuser Fezzes
I present to you these three Checkuser hats in recognitions of your work and dedication as checkuser across multiple projects, and because you said you didn't get the routine hat when you got the job, which is a fairly sad state of affairs indeed. Snowolf How can I help? 06:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Huzzah &c. Killiondude (talk) 06:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Reply to request[edit]

✓ Done! No worries! Hope you are well! Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 04:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)


Hi there. I do use OTRS occasionally to verify OTRS tags on deletion requests I come across (despite not directly working on OTRS requests)... Rehman 04:39, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you provide diffs showing your work in verifying tickets? Thanks, Tiptoety talk 04:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I think you misunderstood. I rarely work on pending OTRS requests or things directly relating to OTRS. As I mentioned when I requested OTRS access: my main purpose is to verify OTRS-ticketed files that frequently get nominated for speedy deletion. (Although, despite being online and responding to requests/inquiries/ect, I am less active across all projects lately due to personal work and Wikimania 2012.) Rehman 11:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Nope, I understood correctly. I think you misunderstood. :-) I am asking if you have any evidence of reviewing tickets? Like responses to requests to review tickets at the OTRS noticeboard, commenting at deletion requests, etc... or have all your reviews been made privately? Tiptoety talk 00:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Mmmm, like I said, I am pretty sure I have done very little work which directly relates to OTRS, so it would be near impossible for me to provide one. But then again, I quite often simply access (aka "read") OTRS mails just to verify reasons why a/the particular OTRS file has ended up at CAT:CSD. The latter is largely the main reason why I requested OTRS in the first place (and I have mentioned that during my request some years/months ago).
On a totally separate topic though, I don't understand why I am being revoked of this access? And this is exactly some of the issues discussed at Wikimania 2012. I mean, my account was not compromised, I haven't misused the tool, and I am not completely inactive nor unresponsive. And despite being relatively inactive lately, I still do some volunteer work. I am not required to be 100% active to be allowed to voluntarily work in certain areas (no one on wikimedia is!), we are all volunteers. So why is that just because I am rather temporarily unable to be on the projects, I am punched in the face? Being such a long-term person, I am sure you understand this practice is wrong, particularly for a volunteer project(s) like the Wikimedias. Respectfully, Rehman 01:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, it has been a busy week. I'll post a more detailed reply later but for now I have reactivated your OTRS account. Best, Tiptoety talk 14:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :) Rehman 15:56, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

← Alright, now that I have a break I'll give you a more detailed response. To answer your first question about why your access was removed: it was purely housekeeping. You did nothing "wrong" and it was not meant to be seen as a punishment. It is the practice of OTRS team leaders (admin) to remove accounts that have done (or at least appear) no OTRS related work for an extended period of time. After looking over tickets you have answered (none) and your contributions here on Commons I saw no evidence that you were still active and, as a result I closed your account. I completely understand that you are a volunteer with real life commitments; heck, I am too. I've taken months off Wikipedia before. I was by no means trying to make it feel as if I, or OTRS, was/is ungrateful for the OTRS work you have done and apologize if it came across that way. (Trust me, had I punched you in the face it would have been a whole lot harder :-P ). As for my line of questioning above, I was more attempting to determine exactly what type of work you are doing with regards to OTRS and if you plan to continue to participate in OTRS. Seeing as the answer was yes, and you still assist when and where you can I re-opened your account. PS: Answering a few tickets now and then wouldn't hurt. ;-) Best, Tiptoety talk 16:36, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of User:Rolandhelper[edit]


I see that you were in charge of User:Sdiillla's sockpuppet case. I think he is now using a new account User:Adobe Roland to evade the block.

Fleet Command (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. They have been blocked. Tiptoety talk 01:13, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Er... Sorry to bother you again, but this user seems to have created a new user account, User:Msiexe. (And if I am not wrong, this username violates our username policy for being the username of a commercial product.) Profile and edit patterns fully match. May I advise a checkuser run? Thanks in advance. Fleet Command (talk) 20:38, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Maybe you mistyped something? The user in question does not exist. Tiptoety talk 15:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, my bad. Sorry. It's Msiexe (talk · contribs).
Fleet Command (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed and blocked. Thanks, Tiptoety talk 23:05, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Cleaning up after him is a pain really. Just out of curiosity, is his IP blocked too? Or should I expect more of his sockpuppets within the next 48 hours? Fleet Command (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
He is operating on too large of a range to block, so expect more socks. Tiptoety talk 00:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, here it comes: User:KbereskaistvBM‎. Created moments after you blocked the last. Fleet Command (talk) 05:30, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Blocked. Tiptoety talk 03:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/KberesdjrnoemKM, also. Σ (talk) 02:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
It is almost the same username, isn't it? Fleet Command (talk) 04:18, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed and blocked both Rolandengine (talk · contribs) and KberesdjrnoemKM (talk · contribs). Tiptoety talk 05:54, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't their contributions be nuked, as edits made by a blocked user? Σ (talk) 05:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
No. Contributions are only and only reverted based on their contextual appropriateness. To revert a contribution because it is done by a certain person is called argumentum ad hominem and is forbidden. Fleet Command (talk) 09:08, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
See also: Special:Contributions/Adimbrittw. Σ (talk) 05:30, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Blocked. Thanks, Tiptoety talk 03:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
It's useless. The moment you block one, he creates another. Is it absolutely not possible to temporarily block his whole country? Fleet Command (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
We have one TasvgwulzsnaMN (talk · contribs). Fleet Command (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Blocked. A short rangeblock has been implemented. Tiptoety talk 05:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello again, Tiptoey. We have Rolandhelper 4 (talk · contribs) and he has started his day by vandalism, i.e. deleting a DR tag. Oh, thanks for the rangeblock. Fleet Command (talk) 06:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
And blocked once again. Thanks, Tiptoety talk 03:00, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh, thanks a bunch! This time, the user went for disrupting a DR. Fleet Command (talk) 05:47, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Sorry to bother you again; I try not to bother you unless the sockpuppet is doing something wrong. We have User:Mixert. Editing pattern matches. Thanks in advance. Fleet Command (talk) 08:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Blocked. Tiptoety talk 15:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I found User:Dude Mr. ?. That is a sock that I used,block this sock,please.-- 10:58, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Kabyst (talk · contribs), per block log at ENWP and this. Σ (talk) 03:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done - Tiptoety talk 05:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello again, Tiptoety. Looks like bothering you about this sockpuppet has become a necessary evil. Sorry for inconvenience. We have a User:Szillasst assinmk whose pattern matches, although I might be wrong. He has started certain irritating behavior such as personal attacks and vandalism too. Fleet Command (talk) 11:32, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Request above cancelled. wake up! I have User:Szillabrt mix that needs to be blocked because it's a sock. Thanks,--TomV. (talk) 23:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Does God have a sense of humor? Fleet Command (talk) 05:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Wake up again!I found User:Lostrust. It's a sock,block it and sorry to bother you.-- 11:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Please wake up! I,User:Lostrust,Please block this, because this account are my sock.--Lostrust (talk) 12:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello,Tiptoety,please,wake up!!! i requested you to block this User:Lostrust!!! did you hear me?--Lostrust II (talk) 07:10, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello again.I'm sockpuppet here,Block me,User:DudeTwo II.--DudeTwo II (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
DudeTwo_III (talk · contribs). Σ (talk) 04:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
✓ Done - Tiptoety talk 08:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)



Could I enlist your assistance with a username change?[edit]

Hi Tiptoety

You were very helpful to me in the past, so I would like to once again ask for your help with a frustrating issue.

Approximately one month ago, I requested a username change here, based on advice received here. It was my understanding that my username on commons could be changed without regard to the existing username on As you can see, the admin responsible for username changes declines to make the change unless and until I usurp the name on (more detail here).

Finally, I did attempt to usurp the name on here but was (predictably) declined for being contrary to policy. In spite of this, and the fact that I do not speak German, EugeneZelenko suggested that I discuss it with a admin.

I have also involved Trijnstel who said that the original username request should be done. I'm not sure why he/she did not simply make the change.

If the answer to my original request is simply no, I can accept that. I will simply make any future photo contributions on My hope was that this username change on commons would allow me to consolidate accounts, and bulk upload photos and properly categorize them on commons. I have a catalog of more than 50,000 photos, many of which I would like to contribute to creative commons. The current situation is an impediment to doing so.

Any help that you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! Umbris (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I am not a Commons Bureaucrat, so I can not perform renames on this wiki. That said, your request sounds do-able. With our current technology, you should be able to globally rename your account so that you have the same unified username on all wikis. You can request a local rename here. Best, Tiptoety talk 03:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. That's exactly what I have tried to do (Unify and local rename). You linked me to a page where I have already placed such a request, a month ago. I'm really lost as to where to turn for support. Umbris (talk) 13:07, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Hm, you might want to contact a Steward. Tiptoety talk 22:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I will Tiptoety. I really appreciate your help. Umbris (talk) 21:36, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


Message tied up in Ribbon.jpg Hello, Tiptoety. You have new messages at Delicious carbuncle's talk page.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Asturianu | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | বাংলা | Català | Čeština | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | हिन्दी | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Português | Română | Русский | Slovenščina | Svenska | Türkçe | +/−


Juletræet.jpg * * * 2013 !!! * * *
Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!

Yours faithfully, George -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:25, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas George! Tiptoety talk 05:40, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Nudity & sexuality deletion requests[edit]

Hi mate, thanks for categorising DRs. If possible, when putting something into the NSDR category, use {{subst:nsdr}} - this not only adds the category, it adds a sortkey which sorts the category by date of last edit. -mattbuck (Talk)

Copy that. Thanks for the info! Tiptoety talk 03:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Could you confirm or refute some details from the OTRS ticket?[edit]

In this discussion I said I thought that mattbuck updated the discussion with more details, including that the request in the OTRS ticket was to have the image renamed or deleted. Do you feel it is consistent with your obligations as someone with access to the OTRS ticket to confirm or refute this?

Do you feel it is consistent with your obligations as someone with access to the OTRS ticket to explain why she did not consider the expo to be a public event? Do you feel your responsibilities allow you to explain why she thought she could withhold her consent to have photos published taken while she was employed as a promotional model? I would have thought accepting the taking of photos would have been a job condition.

The nomination linked to Commons:PEOPLE -- which has a section Commons:PEOPLE#What are 'public' and 'private' places? -- which states:

as well as public places on private land (like at a large private party or concert where there is generally no expectation of privacy when many people are openly taking photographs).

It seems to me that a large trade show, with lots of professional and amateur photographers wandering around snapping photographs, would be a canonical instance of a public place on private land. Did she offer a convincing rationale as to why we should consider this trade show a place where she had an expectation of privacy?

One of the participants in the discussion reminded us all to be patient and respectful to those who request deletion. I want to patiently and respectfully state my concern that without regard to whatever she might have said about her consent being required, her consent was not required, and that both the public nature of the venue, and the nature of her job, meant she could not expect to be able to withhold consent to have her picture taken, or to have it published.

I am one of the participants in that discussion who wants to politely and respectfully voice doubts as to whether she has a meaningful privacy concern, as her online resume seems pretty clear that she continues to be willing to accept further gigs as a promotional model, where she could expect additional pictures to be taken, like this one, and the one on IMDB.

Do you feel it is consistent with your obligations as someone with access to the OTRS ticket to offer further details as to why she says she thinks she has a meaningful privacy concern?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Geo Swan. Thank you for your questions. I'll do my best to answer all of your questions but let me know if I miss one.
Mattbuck is correct in saying that the customer did in fact request that either her real name be removed or the file deleted (though I will note that she claims there is still issues with the current version of the file). After corresponding with her further, she began to raise more privacy related concerns as well as concerns regarding the source from which the file was uploaded, and as such I made the move to file a deletion request. As for your direct question regarding my "obligation", I see no real reason to confirm or deny what another OTRS agent said unless specifically asked or someone brings up concerns regarding that specific agent. As far as I am concerned, agents have no reason to lie.
As for your second question, generally speaking I ask customers to provide OTRS with an exact copy of what they would like put up at the deletion request and I copy/paste it for them. In this case, my attempts to get such a statement were not working and instead all I got was consent to release the fact that I was corresponding with the subject and file a deletion request on their behalf. As such, I did my best to summarize the concerns they had raised. It is important to understand that OTRS is bound by the privacy policy and I can not just release emails without consent (or some binding legal document). So, I would have to say no. I am not obligated (nor is any OTRS agent) to explain why she feels the expo was not private or to explain why she wants it deleted. Instead it is my job to best assist the customer in reaching an agreeable outcome and serve as a messenger between them and the community. If they want me to just post "delete this page" I will. By me filing the deletion request it should not signify that I in any way support the file be deleted (same can be said for me supporting keeping the file). Once again, OTRS just acts as a neutral party. As such, it is up to the community to determine if they should give credence to the reasons that the subject of the file is requesting it be deleted.
And to answer your last question, I can only go based upon what the customer has written us about. I can not pretend to know all of the reasons they are requesting the file be deleted. Additionally, I have attempted to gather more information from them and have generally been unsuccessful. Lastly, as mentioned above there is only so much information I can give out per the privacy policy.
I hope this answers your questions, Tiptoety talk 05:55, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply.
Some of what you wrote surprises me. I would have thought that any {{afd}} initiated by the OTRS team implied that the basis of the {{afd}} had been checked for credibility and policy compliance. I am afraid that practically everyone else participating in the {{afd}} also assumed that the OTRS team had endorsed the credibility of her claims.
I didn't understand your passage about trusting other agents wouldn't lie. I never thought any members of the OTRS team were lying here, and I certainly didn't mean to imply that. Rather, I meant to show I understood there were limits to what you could or couldn't say -- although I didn't know what those limits are.
Delicious carbuncle cited a WMF resolution that individuals like our model should be receive patience and respect. I thought there must be patient and respectful ways to tell outsiders when their requests are not consistent with our policies.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
While OTRS attempts to patiently and respectfully inform customers of our projects policies (which was done in this case), we also provide the customer with every option available to them within said policies. In this case, a deletion request was a viable option and it was explained that the community may choose not to delete the file. Really the only difference between the subject filing the deletion request and OTRS is who clicks "save page."
I think a point of confusion is the different roles that agents play on this project. Because they are expected to evaluate licensing releases and ensure they meet our requirements prior to adding an OTRS template to a file, many feel that all actions made by OTRS respondents in the course of their duties are "official." While this is true of permissions related activities by the respondent, it is not the case in many other functions. As mentioned above, generally speaking OTRS simply acts as the middle man. Maybe that should be made more clear in the future. Tiptoety talk 01:04, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

An old friend[edit]

Is back. IIRC you are more familiar than I am so maybe you could review the check I made? Equally is this one for locking normally (I see others are). Cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Yep, that is him alright. Found a sleeper as well. And yes, they get locked. I'll notified a Steward. Thanks, Tiptoety talk 01:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

UserTom Sorensen[edit]

Hello, I noticed that you blocked this user. I understand why he has been blocked, and why all his uploads were deleted. But is there a way to see which pictures were deleted? Because a lot of his pictures were used on articles about celebrities on dutch Wikipedia. It would help if there was somekind of list of his deleted pictures to see which articles have to be checked on missing pictures. Thank you, LeeGer (talk) 16:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I deleted most files, so you can see my deletion log. In that log you see three different parts starting from the top of the page:
  • part 1 (ca. 100 entries in the log[3]) is derivative works uploaded by MyCanon based on uploads from his sockpuppet. That are cropped faces that other Chace Watson sockpuppets or MyCanon included in Wikipedia
  • part 2 is another sockpuppet with not so many uses
  • part 3 is the original files uploaded by User:Tom Sorensen, those files hadnt many uses too.
The most used files where derivatives uploaded by MyCanon, so you can also check the redlinks in Special:Log/MyCanon.
--Martin H. (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi, I do not understand why the image Anahí Puente, 2011.jpg was deleted, flicker license is correct and is authorized by the owner of the photo. photo.--JudithJunkers (talk) 18:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


INeverCry 04:59, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the second opinion on this one. Looking at the extensive socking history recorded at de:Wikipedia:Checkuser/Anfragen/Benutzer Messina, Benutzer T.Honward, Benutzer Braun-Ribbat, usw., I'm surprised not to find a page on I've tagged the socks here: Category:Sockpuppets of Messina, and added the ranges to my sandbox on INeverCry 17:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good. Thanks for all your work! Tiptoety talk 17:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

New email[edit]

Jianhui67 talkcontribs 14:53, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and...[edit]

Hello Tiptoety, your have give up this message on my talk page?. Thanks you ♫♫ Leitoxx ♪♪ 21:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

It's not required that I post that template on your talk page. You have clearly seen the message and can read its content there. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 23:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


Commons:Requests for comment/Separation of powers. Just in case you hadn't seen already. --Túrelio (talk) 07:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I was made aware of this prior to it being proposed on-wiki. Thank you for the notification. Tiptoety talk 02:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


Greetings Tiptoety: I thought you might like to see the magnitude of the problem of a particular Sock whom you have previously blocked. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:48, 19 July 2014 (UTC) Another user had a serious problem with that page, so I removed the file to keep from upsetting him further. Face-smile.svg Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. Tiptoety talk 06:43, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


INeverCry 17:00, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Cross wiki sockmaster/vandal[edit]

Can you take a look at this (diff)? This user uploaded an attack image here for vandalistic use by one of his socks on I wonder if/how much he's engaged in any socking here, has any sleepers, etc? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 18:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

This user has a large sockfarm on as well. Perhaps a global lock is in order now that he's blocked here too for using Commons for cross-wiki abuse? INeverCry 18:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi INC. I did locate some pretty clear cut sleepers which are now blocked (they can be located by checking my logs). It appears that a number of these accounts are already locked, so it would seem appropriate to request the others be locked too. Best, Tiptoety talk 02:33, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I've mentioned this to Trijnstel too, so I can ask her about the locks. I don't feel comfortable or welcome on Meta personally... INeverCry 02:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


A new sock of User:Toma646. Left the same derogatory Czech message on my talk, and made other personal attacks on me on an IP talkpage (the IP is likely his as it repeatedly blanked my talkpage yesterday, along with an IPv6 which I blocked /64. I've blocked the new sock acct, but I'm sure there'll be more. INeverCry 17:15, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I located and blocked a single sock. Tiptoety talk 18:25, 18 September 2014 (UTC)