User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2014/10

Latest comment: 9 years ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic The Signpost: 29 October 2014

User_talk:Peter352#2nd_chance edit

Hi, King of Hearts. I read your message at User_talk:Peter352#2nd chance. I'm confused by it. I see no record of the user ever requesting an unblock. What prompted your message? Jason Quinn (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

I handle requests on WP:UTRS. -- King of ♠ 03:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
Ah, of course. Thanks for the reply. Jason Quinn (talk) 04:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 01 October 2014 edit

06:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Tombstoning listed at Redirects for discussion edit

 

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tombstoning. Since you had some involvement with the Tombstoning redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Fiddle Faddle 19:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 08 October 2014 edit

08:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Quick question edit

Hello King of Hearts,

An SPI I filed awhile ago appears to be stale (see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/E4024). Can you please check it out and let me know what you think? The reason why I come to you is because you've closed a previous SPI on the very same account. This time around, I've provided even more evidence. I would greatly appreciate it if you can just give it a quick glance. If not, happy editing! Étienne Dolet (talk) 01:23, 14 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

The master edit

In Turkish Wikipedia they blocked me for about one year claiming I was User:Tapfereritter and then they said sorry, mistaken etc and lifted the block. I hope you won't do the same to me again here or to anyone else. Note that I never ever requested block revision etc. Neither do I request an answer. All the best. --E4024 (talk) 07:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 15 October 2014 edit

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/E4024 edit

Hi King of Hearts. In closing the SPI, you mentioned lack of DUCK evidence. I thought that there were many examples of identical edits is many areas. What was the weakness of the evidence? Thank you for your time. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 06:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't have asked for a check if I still would have blocked even with a negative result. While there's a significant overlap of interest and certain stylistic features, it really requires indisputable behavioral evidence to override negative technical evidence. -- King of ♠ 16:35, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
Thank you King of Hearts for the clarification. I can see your point regarding overriding the negative CU evidence. All the best. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
Though I respect King of Heart's decision as well, I would like to have his decision reviewed. If possible, what is the procedure to do so? Étienne Dolet (talk) 19:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
You can email the checkusers list for a reevaluation of the situation. They would be the best bet for weighing behavioral against technical evidence since they actually know the specifics. -- King of ♠ 21:16, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Expiring on or before 25 October 2014 edit

Korean Central Television and Madison De La Garza? --George Ho (talk) 05:45, 19 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Due to the very low activity on both articles, I don't think it justifies reprotection. -- King of ♠ 21:09, 19 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

13:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 October 2014 edit

05:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 October 2014 edit