User talk:TonyPark

2012-01-14T01:28:48Z

ThankYouTonyPark: /* Awesome */ new section

{{welcome|sig=--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 12:19, 7 January 2012 (EST)}}

==Block of Adambro==
Have you used the checkuser tool for that ?--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 16:22, 11 January 2012 (EST)

:No, I don't believe I have access to the CheckUser tool. It's under Special Pages, right? I wasn't able to find it. My decision to block Adambro came from analyzing his contributions. He has a large number of very minor edits and talk page posts, mostly pushing liberal POV. He also seemed to clean up the vandalism within a minute of each attack happening, as though he were trying to "build cred" with the site. Mostly, he was an argumentative liberal nitpicker who didn't feel the need to contribute anything to the site. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:34, 11 January 2012 (EST)

::By the way, I just check your contributions and I wonder how fast you got your block rights: 1st article on the 6th, then mostly contributions in [[Debate: 15 questions for evolutionists.]] that shows how much you love your [[pseudo-science]] of [[Evolution]], then you got your block rights on the 9th ! I unblocked Adambro‎, feel free to discuss the matter with me. Reverting vandalism in less than 2 minutes does not prove anything. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 16:35, 11 January 2012 (EST)

:::I'm not interested in a blocking war with you. I blocked Adambro out of a genuine concern that he is a deep-cover parodist. My belief in evolution is irrelevant. I think it is very curious that he was able to revert long stretches of vandalism by two vandals with very similar names almost immediately after they happened. If you could do me a favor, run CheckUser on Adambro, BL4NK3R, and BU99ERY and make sure that they don't have similar IPs. Thanks. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:53, 11 January 2012 (EST)

::::I'm not interested neither in a blocking war. I just feel we shouldn't block users without valid accusations. You made a good case and Adambro should be warned and monitored but I don't feel he deserved an infinite block (except if he really is a sockpuppet). Twice he reverted vandalism really quick but this does not prove anything, I have done that before. I do not have the rights to use the checkuser, you may want to check this [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers&username=&group=checkuser&limit=50 list]. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:02, 11 January 2012 (EST)

:::::Thank you for the help and information. I will be more cautious from now on. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 17:18, 11 January 2012 (EST)

::::::You are welcome but be careful, I haven't seen a lot of people win an edit war against a senior admin, however legitimate it may be.--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:42, 11 January 2012 (EST)

== Um... ==

How can you block people who don't have a first name and last initial username when you yourself don't follow the policy? You're banning innocent users that want to join. [[User:DynaboyJ|DynaboyJ]] 17:54, 13 January 2012 (EST)

My real name is Anthony Parker, so TonyPark is a perfectly acceptable name under the policy, the point of which is to keep frivolous, anti-intellectual usernames out. Besides, its not like I permanently banned them, they can just go and make a new account with an acceptable user name. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 19:55, 13 January 2012 (EST)

:Actually, he can, and will, unblock himself. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 20:26, 13 January 2012 (EST)

::Then he'll come after you. [[User:SammyP|SammyP]] 20:27, 13 January 2012 (EST)

== Awesome ==

That was a very good block. Thanks! [[User:ThankYouTonyPark|ThankYouTonyPark]] 20:28, 13 January 2012 (EST)

Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:TonyPark