"

 Edit war brewing at Yosemite National Park 

If you have some spare energy, please come and lend a hand. Thanks! —  

Looked ... acted ... )   

I was also approached recently with regards to possible edits to the Yosemite National Park article. My input on the matter can be found at the following link;
user talk:Edit Centric#Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite

Noted,   

 Thmc1 / 173.63.176.93 sill sockpuppeting / REPLYU REQUSTED 

This person (blocked sockmaster Thmc1) is still block evading by not logging in, even after he was warned by SysAdmin Kudpung. I would suggest that you block the suspected IPs(173.63176.93, 74.88.160.244) as well as IPs used by his other blocked account (Nyc88) and any other accounts affiliated w/them. Why are sockppuppets of a blocked sockmaster still allowed to edit even after ample warnings? To make matters worse, he even violated his block and continuted editing the day after he was blocked! Please see Thmc1 sockpuppet investigation archive for latest investigation/evidence.   

No clue  links would be helpful.   

Actually I think it's the other way around, if I'm not mistaken, I think I remember   being mentioned to admin Ronhjones as a possible sockpuppet in the past few months in conjunction with an edit disagreement issue. Are you stocking this address? Is this some sort of retaliation? First of all, I have no idea who any of these other users are, much less others who use this IP address. 173.63.176.93  
Hmm... Thanks, I think, hadn't noticed the 173... above was the same as the 173... I just talked to .. still no clue why MBaxter showed up here. Aw well - keep on keepin' on   

Vsmith- Don't let 173.63.176.93 fool you. It was him who attempted to mention this to RonHJones using IP 74.88.160.244. That IP was found to be one of 173.63.176.93's sockpuppet and blocked after a recent investigation. 173.63.176.93 is actually a sockpuppet of Thmc1, blocked for excessive sockpuppeting back in 2010. Even though 173.63.176.93 was ruled most likley as one of Thmc1's sockpuppet, he was let off with a warning. For the full story, I suggest that you check out Thmc1's most recent investigation, August 2012. The final assessment was one account (Nyc88) permanently blocked, one IP temporarily blocked, and one left open with warning. If he causes you anymore trouble, you should report this to the SysAdmins and don't hesitate to mention the sockpuppet investigation. The reverting of your edits is the same kind of BS he conducted on the London City article that got him blocked back in 2010. He has an anti-UK bias amongst many, and you can confirm this with user Eraserhead1.   —Preceding undated comment added  

Hantavirus
VSmith, I actually came to your talk page for a different reason and just happened to notice this. It looks ridiculous and I think this MBaxter1 character is highly suspicious himself. In the meantime, can you please look at this story seen on the main CNN.com page today? http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/health/hantavirus-warnings/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
I think that this Yosemite hantavirus story is worthy of at least brief mention in the article because it is now having international implications. I just don't see a justification in ignoring it completely, thanks.173.63.176.93  

Does the article have a current events section? The hantavirus bit isn't history, and as it is notable, it should be discussed on the hantavirus page ... haven't checked. And, no, don't think we need a current events section on the page ... WP:notnews.  ([[User talk:Vsmi