Revision as of 21:28, 17 May 2012 view sourceJKMMOC (talk | contribs)189 edits Undid revision 493087313 by Bwilkins (talk)reinstated good faith edits accidentally deleted.← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:30, 17 May 2012 view source DangerousPanda (talk | contribs)38,827 editsm Reverted 1 edit by JKMMOC (talk) identified as vandalism to last revision by Bwilkins. (TW)Next edit → | ||
Line 281: | Line 281: | ||
Of course you support each other. There's a shock. Nice to know that one of the vaulted administrators escaped a block due to a "connectivity error". No such error impeded the poor editor who was proven to be correct. Now your connectivity error has cleared, I'm sure you'll be imposing the same ban and punishment. As you say, an edit war is an edit war. But it takes more than one person to create one. But only one victim was punished. And "if you bothered to read" you'll see that the editor cited Amazon.com as their source. But alas, they're not an administrator. I'm ready for my block now. ] (]) 20:41, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | Of course you support each other. There's a shock. Nice to know that one of the vaulted administrators escaped a block due to a "connectivity error". No such error impeded the poor editor who was proven to be correct. Now your connectivity error has cleared, I'm sure you'll be imposing the same ban and punishment. As you say, an edit war is an edit war. But it takes more than one person to create one. But only one victim was punished. And "if you bothered to read" you'll see that the editor cited Amazon.com as their source. But alas, they're not an administrator. I'm ready for my block now. ] (]) 20:41, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
: I'm sorry, I don't do punishment here to anyone. The IP was ''never'' punished. (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 20:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | : I'm sorry, I don't do punishment here to anyone. The IP was ''never'' punished. (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 20:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
You blocked them. They made correct edits. They cited amazon.com as the source. An administrator continually reverted edits. You blocked the IP and did nothing to the administrator. It takes two to create an edit war. If by ''never'' punished you mean blocking someone is not a punishment, then that is quite an astonishing statement. Still, here's your chance to prove it now your technical issues has cleared and issue the same block to the other side of the edit war; to the protagonist who was proven to be wrong in reverting the correct edits made by the banned editor. That way we will all see that it was a genuine error on your part and not a punishment at all. Then I'm sure you will wish to post an apology on the IP editor's page. ] (]) 20:52, 17 May 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:30, 17 May 2012
This is DangerousPanda's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15Auto-archiving period: 15 days |
Why delete A-fu Teng?
"disrespect" and incivility gets one nowhere. I'll note that WP:REFUND request has already been made. Offer to userfy has apparently been declined (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please read the page carefully before you do something like deleting a page. It was relisted after references were provided, and the consensus after the relist is to KEEP. It's obvious from your comment "Consensus is to delete" that you have not read the page carefully like you should. Please respect other people's work who provided references as requested. http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/A-fu_Teng Timmyshin (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I guess you didn't come here to discuss it nicely. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:00, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's the response you can provide? Whether I'm nice or not is beside the point, the point is you have not been responsible when you deleted the article, and you don't have the manhood to admit your mistake. You claimed it failed WP:Music. For the criteria listed on WP:Music, even if you had read the article for 1 minute, you can see the artist met #2, #4, not to mention 3 references from non-trivial national sources which meet #1. An editor doesn't have to be perfect, but making a major decision based on 2 inaccurate pieces of information and then refusing to admit & correct it only shows at the least that you are not qualified and not responsible. Timmyshin (talk) 16:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Whether you're nice is part of the point: civility is part of the code of conduct. There are probably editors who will look less favorably on a deletion review request if the discussion is a string of personal attacks by you than if it is a polite discussion about your differing interpretations of the sourcing of the article and the consensus from the deletion discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Stop diverting the issue. In my original post I used 2 "pleases" and talked about "respect other people's work" and somehow that is interpreted as uncivil, and "personal attacks"? So only begging is allowed on wiki? Look, we are all unpaid volunteers on wiki. From your link I can see wiki emphasizes "respect". When the page was first deleted, I spend hours finding and properly citing sources, romanizing the name, translating the titles of the sources, and he comes in and deletes it just like that, without even reading the page. I don't need to be personally attacking him, he knows well how much time he spent before he deleted the article. If he can honestly say he spent as much time as the other reviewers on that page, then he has my apologies. Timmyshin (talk) 22:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Whether you're nice is part of the point: civility is part of the code of conduct. There are probably editors who will look less favorably on a deletion review request if the discussion is a string of personal attacks by you than if it is a polite discussion about your differing interpretations of the sourcing of the article and the consensus from the deletion discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's the response you can provide? Whether I'm nice or not is beside the point, the point is you have not been responsible when you deleted the article, and you don't have the manhood to admit your mistake. You claimed it failed WP:Music. For the criteria listed on WP:Music, even if you had read the article for 1 minute, you can see the artist met #2, #4, not to mention 3 references from non-trivial national sources which meet #1. An editor doesn't have to be perfect, but making a major decision based on 2 inaccurate pieces of information and then refusing to admit & correct it only shows at the least that you are not qualified and not responsible. Timmyshin (talk) 16:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
If I may ask, did you do any vetting of the sources, or did you just go by the discussion on the talk page? I noticed there were three sources in the article, though I don't think any of them were in English. Also, one of the delete !votes was kind of conditional: the user indicated that he might have to reconsider if sources were found. Based on that, I'm not sure there's a clear consensus; I don't think you made a "serious mistake," but I think I might have relisted or closed as no consensus, if I'd been the closing admin. Do you think that at least restoration to user space might be a good solution, to allow Timmyshin to continue to develop the article and hopefully to pull in more sources? —C.Fred (talk) 16:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- This is one that I dug for some additional resources, combined with the discussions. I found some translated articles, none of which convinced me of meeting WP:BAND...in part due to reliability, but also content. I'm never beyond userfying, but discussion has to be polite first. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- That wasn't clear from the closing message; thank you for clarifying. I'm happy with the close of the AfD; I'll leave it for Timmyshin to indicate if he wishes the text moved to his user space. —C.Fred (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll have to be a heck of a lot more civil, if that's the direction he chooses :-). But he already knew that because it's visible every time he edits this page (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Where is your response to me pointing out the artist meeting #1, #2 and #4 on WP:Band? Stop using civility as an excuse to divert the issue. Timmyshin (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll have to be a heck of a lot more civil, if that's the direction he chooses :-). But he already knew that because it's visible every time he edits this page (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:04, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's clear from the closing message that you did not "dig for additional resources" before you deleted it. Where is your response to the fact that there was no consensus but you insisting there is? Timmyshin (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- Really? How do you determine "consensus"? Even if it was a !vote, you have a nominator, two well-reasoned deleted !votes, and a keep !vote - 3-1 if tally mattered. You're really going to have to work harder at your WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. I'm not using Civility to skirt the issue, so that's a red-herring: when you edited this page, you read the top that says I will not, period, discuss the deletion if your discussion included incivility and attacks. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- That wasn't clear from the closing message; thank you for clarifying. I'm happy with the close of the AfD; I'll leave it for Timmyshin to indicate if he wishes the text moved to his user space. —C.Fred (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
War criminals in Canada - to the point
In case I am ever in your shoes:
- when would you censure a 3 revision revert violator and when would the article be fully protected and for how long.?
- To what extent an admin's self-associated with an article's subject be considered involvement (e.g. you have delared to be a Canadian Admin - would that even be considered WP:Involved when you help out in a dispute on an article critical with Canadian policy?
- After protecting an article is is customary for the protector to follow development on the talk page? or should other channals like ArbCom be used to sort things out?
- when can we expect to see the protection removed ? BO; talk 02:18, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm literally aghast at how much of this you have mistaken (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:07, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- I hope this revised version is something you can better respond too - I have removed much of the background and assumption. Thanks! BO; talk 10:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- ...oh great, now you have refactored it, and completely changed the meaning of my reply. Don't ever do that. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hey I am trying to get your input in good faith ? Why are you avoiding the questions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- I'm not avoiding: I'm teaching a man to fish :-) Refactoring is bad, bad, bad ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I tried to reintoduce the original version using <DEL> but it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- Yes, did you see the mess your edits made to this talkpage? I was forced to undo them all (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yep I was tryin to fix it - when you reverted. BTW The preview looked ok but the saved version was obviouly broken. I'd have opened a bug in Bugzilla - if I figured out the issue. Anyhow I'd prefer at this point if you deleted this section altogether. BO; talk 21:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, did you see the mess your edits made to this talkpage? I was forced to undo them all (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- I tried to reintoduce the original version using <DEL> but it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- I'm not avoiding: I'm teaching a man to fish :-) Refactoring is bad, bad, bad ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hey I am trying to get your input in good faith ? Why are you avoiding the questions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrenBochman (talk • contribs)
- ...oh great, now you have refactored it, and completely changed the meaning of my reply. Don't ever do that. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I hope this revised version is something you can better respond too - I have removed much of the background and assumption. Thanks! BO; talk 10:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
User:Cla68
What do you think about User:Cla68 now that he has changed it? I'm inclined to withdraw the DRV on the grounds that the MfD is no longer necessary, but I'd like your input first. ‑Scottywong| chat _ 14:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- It could be closed ... however, the concern would be that once the heat is off, he adds it again. Granted, DRV is just going to re-open the MFD and not make a real decision - OTHER than confirming that early closure of such discussions in wholly inappropriate. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Some people just don't listen…
So basically, on Escape the Fate I removed all these bands under this associated acts section that have like barely (if not anything) to do with the band and and this guy non-stoppingly reverts it. He's been blocked for these reasons before. And today, I left him this talk page comment clearly saying it's in a guideline not to do what he's doing (which it is) and then he goes back to the article, reverts me again and gives a threat. Can you do something about this? • GunMetal Angel 21:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Geez, reminds me of someone else whose case recently slipped into my archives (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:48, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, things are getting weird now, you may want to check the history for Escape the Fate. I'm feeling the page may need to get a full protection soon because there's other users (if not sockpuppets) that are doing the same thing to the page and re-adding all those bands. I've decided to stop reverting at this point (I've done two more reverts since the last 24 hours that I've reverted) so I'm staying in the safe zone now and not going beyond that. But have given each and every user a talk page comment telling them to stop before going on. This guy seems to be the most recent concern. ………Why is it so hard to follow the rules? • GunMetal Angel 22:59, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- We've reached a consensus on my page, I was confused and thought he was a vandal but now that I've checked his contributions I can see I was mistaken. I will leave you to your edits Gunmetal. TJD2 (talk) 23:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
War criminals in Canada - Request for Unprotection
I am requesting the page be unprotected per WP:RUP. The request is to allow updating the sourcing of the article since 20 new sources have been uncovered on the talk page. This is neccessary to sort them in such a way that WP:N and WP:Vis not only established but also demonstrated. The same goes for WP:NPOV. BO; talk 04:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- ...and how about WP:CFORK? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:49, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I follow your meaning? BO; talk 11:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- You want to be an admin. Does the article deserve to stand alone on its own, or is it a mere content fork from something else? This is quite possibly the easiest question out there (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I follow your meaning? BO; talk 11:36, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Good question but the question is not that simple to me. First of all I have become invested in that article. Second from an info-centric view there is a good argument to give it a specific article - It covers a non trivial intersection of material from other article while introducing new and specific information that is either too specific for the other subjects or altogether off topic for them. Thirdly from a wikipedia point of view it satisfies WP:N since there are so far about 4 (academic) books on the specific subject. BO; talk 14:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hi - I wish someone would nominate it and get rid of it - if its going to be kept, we need to do something with the article sooner rather than later, especially the lede - User OrenB is working on the lede in his userspace, which I great and this is what he has so far - User:OrenBochman/ToDo#Alternate Lead Sections - Youreallycan 05:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
GUMS - Galway University University Society
Wondering on what basis you deleted the Galway University Musical Societies wiki page? I can't seem to think of any explanation.
We recently composed a 7 page booklet on the history of the society. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.203.219.138 (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- That doesn't make it notable. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Recall clerking
I'm updating User:MBisanz/Recall and was wondering if you would be willing to serve as a clerk? MBisanz 21:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Wow, that's complex ... but I will agree to be one of the clerks. I'd say it's an honour to be asked, but I'm sure that's a mixed message! :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! Mixed emotions are a good thing. I grabbed you because our paths don't cross often, but you still seem like someone capable of making reasoned judgments. MBisanz 23:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hopefully I never need to be used :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:22, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! Mixed emotions are a good thing. I grabbed you because our paths don't cross often, but you still seem like someone capable of making reasoned judgments. MBisanz 23:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Funny angry people
I just read your exchange with the uncommonly tempestuous Seeker4262, and I was highly amused. I have never seen anything quite like it, Misplaced Pages will be a much duller place without him/her. Nicely handled. ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃ (talk) 07:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- I have to admit, the entire thing was quite surreal. The guy was provided every piece of assistance possible, so an indef block is unfortunate. If only he'd put that kind of energy into making an article that actually met the policies/requirements, then it might have been as a minimum a DYK. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
User:123.243.76.19
Hi BWilkins, could you please see my proposal on User_talk:123.243.76.19 to move content discussion to Talk:Bob_Carr. I was blocked on my first good faith edit to Bob_Carr previously. I'd like a community consensus sought. Thanks. —Preceding undated comment added 13:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC).
- All article discussion should have taken place on the article talkpage anyway. Blocked users may only use their talkpage to request unblock, not other dicussion (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:40, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Jay's Musik Blog
Here is my proposal that I am working on to post to RSN. Give it a look over and your opinion on your talk page if you want to? Thanks!HotHat (talk) 00:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's a ridiculous argument. The articles I write that appear in various newspapers may meet WP:RS, but my personal blogs sure as heck do not (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- if that is your stance then we need to change the USERGENERATED policy because as I see it the website above meets the criteria right on because of his past work experience with regard to Christian Music Review and now New Release Tuesday. Sorry, that I just don't quite see it like you do on this issue.22:47, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
2011–12 NHL season
This edit where you wrote "can never be the top of bracket for the #8 team" is wrong. Immediately below the ladder it reads "During the first three rounds home ice is determined by seeding number, not position on the bracket." See also ] and 2011 Stanley Cup playoffs and 2010–11 NHL season and read the discussion at Talk:2011 Stanley Cup playoffs#Playoff bracket: Conference Finals ordering of teams. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:46, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- Odd that ... this is, after all, the beginning of the third round - which puts my edit squarely in line with what you quoted (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Users not adhering to WP:SPEAKENGLISH on talk pages
Hi Bwilkins,
Sorry to bother you, but it has been drawn to my attention that a user has engaged in an edit war over Template:History of Georgia, and has since started to canvass other users by posting comments in Georgian and not using English, as per guidance at WP:SPEAKENGLISH. I've posted a polite caution to the users, but you may wish to hop over and intervene if you feel it is necessary. GeorgianJorjadze (talk · contribs) has been warned once before about not communicating in English. Wesley☀Mouse 23:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry case
Hello can you please check these accounts: user:wakwakwiki, user:banimustafa, user:soufray, user:StrictWikiEditor, user:Jerashray all these 5 accounts refer to the same person.--94.249.93.242 (talk) 00:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- For block evasion and admin shopping while blocked, I have extended the block on your registered account to 1 week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:45, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
HELP ME PLEASE
Go look at my talk page one editor is trying to get notable stuff deleted from this encyclopedia.HotHat (talk) 21:55, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- I suspect the user to be a SOCK, just look at the other times Asjetruss0009 tried to get Dara Maclean speed deleted, and W23fffd tried to get The Rescue deleted.HotHat (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- You appear to be canvassing, and I suggest you stop (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, I will stop, I will even go one better, I am out! Have fun dealing with the trolls.HotHat (talk) 20:53, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
- You appear to be canvassing, and I suggest you stop (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
AJona1992's AN/I
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Best, Jonayo! 23:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Request for confirm status date 10/05/2012
Dear Sir, I think there might have been a miscommunication as my heading mentioned that I would write about brands and organisations. I was mentioning you of the fact that I do take up assignments from them in writing creative prose. I would similarly like to share what i have discovered while doing so in to wikipedia so that the people around the world will gain a glimpse of inside Sri Lanka.
I do not represent any company or an organisation in wikipedia in my username, please do provide me with an advice on how to obtain the confirmed status as I would greatly appreciate the assistance of yours. I am however currently have edited minor changes in few articles. Looking forward to hear from you. (Thewordbar (talk) 05:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC))
- The best way to obtain confirmed status is to actually edit articles! Remember that all information must be verifiable through reliable sources, and that articles must be about notable topics. There are millions of articles that need your help ... it only takes a few positive edits to become confirmed (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 08:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Article deletions
Hello Bwilkins I created two pages for ‘Bastian Gotter’ and ‘Jason Njoku’ and they have been deleted instantly. I believe these pages should not be deleted because they represent the co-founders of iROKO Partners, a company backed by a US hedge fund who have brought the second biggest movie industry online from a region still believed to be a sleeping giant contrary to popular belief. As a result, the company and its founder have been receiving a lot of media coverage. Please see the following links: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17896461 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/9190749/Facebook-investor-Tiger-Global-takes-stake-in-Nollywood-film-distributor.html http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2012/04/04/tiger-global-backs-nigerian-internet-entepreneur-in-8-million-round/ http://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/08/02/jason.njoku.nollywood.love/index.html
How can I proceed with getting these pages approved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bayoak (talk • contribs) 13:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Let me just say that the iROKO article is barely allowable - I'm contemplating nominating it for deletion now. As such, the two personnel are clearly not notable outside of the company itself, and should not have article of their own (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Bwilkins What do you mean barely allowable? The company itself has significant media Coverage from BBC, CNN, Forbes, Techcrunch, Telelgraph (Just a few to mention) and Jason Njoku is at the forefront of the company and is mentioned in various articles as the founder of the company and is clearly notable outside of the company. If you feel that's not enough, what can we do to get an article on Jason Njoku allowed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bayoak (talk • contribs) 11:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- Who is "we"? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:30, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi Bwilkins, I mean we as a representative of the company iROKO Partners. So, when i say we, I mean the company. Excuse the miscommunication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bayoak (talk • contribs) 15:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Your forgot to sign
Hey Bwilkins. Feel free to ignore and delete this, you forgot to sign ]. Just thought I'd let you know. MrLittleIrish 申 14:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
- Twinkle/Friendly seems to forget to do that these days ... a lot. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Need a diff to be deleted.
Can you please delete this diff please? It is a bit crude and there is no need for someone to need to go back and view it.
Thank You, Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:02, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Unblock?
Re User talk:Spc 21, it sounds like they messed up and won't do it again - would you be agreeable to an unblock? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- If you think it's believable this time, go ahead. I'm not overly convinced, myself. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:57, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the user understands what to do differently now. I would unblock per WP:AGF.—cyberpower Online 23:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll has pretty much shot himself in the foot based on his latest comments (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I'll leave the block as it stands.(See their latest edit summary too!) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think he shot himself in both feet. It's a strange feeling to be blocked, believe me I would know. I don't know why but one tends to lose it if they can't get themselves unblocked as quickly as possible. I remember showing some impatience when I was waiting for ArbCom to review my unblock request because I couldn't stand being blocked.—cyberpower Offline 12:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- And I sympathize. WP:GAB really suggests that people shut up and calm down before requesting their unblocks. I smell a new essay ;-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, no essay today. Today's Mother's Day so I'm not going to be very active today but, get yourself indefinitely blocked and have your only way to get yourself unblocked to send an appeal to ArbCom and you will start to lose it after a few days. You can't imagine how I felt at that time because I was violating a policy, that I didn't even know about at the time, left and right.—cyberpower Offline 12:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, I mean I'm going to write one :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oh. Have fun.—cyberpower Online 16:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, I mean I'm going to write one :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, no essay today. Today's Mother's Day so I'm not going to be very active today but, get yourself indefinitely blocked and have your only way to get yourself unblocked to send an appeal to ArbCom and you will start to lose it after a few days. You can't imagine how I felt at that time because I was violating a policy, that I didn't even know about at the time, left and right.—cyberpower Offline 12:30, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- And I sympathize. WP:GAB really suggests that people shut up and calm down before requesting their unblocks. I smell a new essay ;-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think he shot himself in both feet. It's a strange feeling to be blocked, believe me I would know. I don't know why but one tends to lose it if they can't get themselves unblocked as quickly as possible. I remember showing some impatience when I was waiting for ArbCom to review my unblock request because I couldn't stand being blocked.—cyberpower Offline 12:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I'll leave the block as it stands.(See their latest edit summary too!) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- he'll has pretty much shot himself in the foot based on his latest comments (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the user understands what to do differently now. I would unblock per WP:AGF.—cyberpower Online 23:50, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Sympathy
I happened to come across this while going through the recent changes, and I have to say, I feel sympathy for the user, as I went through the same thing of not really listening to advice and such. I, too, edit warred, but I don't think I was as uncivil. I was at first around when I joined, but my last block for edit warring, which was indefinite, might I add, I wasn't much so -- not that I can recall, anyway. Just something I noticed. Hope you don't mind me commenting. =) - Zhou Yu (talk) 00:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- I too am sympathetic but the community awareness sure is missing (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Near-incoherent rants
(note: I, Bwilkins added this heading as none was originally given to either of their posts from different IP addresses)
WHO ARE YOU? YOU ARE ANONYMOUS AND SEEM TO HAVE INFINITE POWER TO BLOCK WHOEVER YOU DISAGREE WITH. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME ADDRESS AND AFFILIATIOINS. CLEARLY YOU HAVE AN HIDDEN AGENDA. PROFESSOR GEORGE PIECZENIK
I NOTICED THE EDITORS IN GENEWIKI ARE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. ARE YOU A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT? PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND YOUR ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS. YOU ARE SPREADING ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF MISINFORMATION. YOU ARE THE INTELLECTUAL EQUIVALENT OF SNOOKI AS A SOCIAL LEADER, EXCEPT SHE HAS THE COURAGE TO IDENTIFY HERSELF. THOSE SHE SLEEPS WITH ARE ANONYMOUS. NICE TO HAVE A LOT OF CONTROL AND POWER WHEN YOU ARE ANONYMOUS. DOES THAT REMIND YOU OF ANY POLITICAL REGIME? YOU HAVE ASKED FACULTY TO SUPPORT YOU AGAINST THE GOVERNMENTS DESIRE TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS ON WIKI. I HAVE GIVEN WIKI THAT SUPPORT BOTH IN GETTING STUDENTS TO SUPPORT WIKI AND FINANCIALLY. NOW, I HAVE TO REVISE THAT OPINION. I WILL INSIST THAT STUDENTS NEVER USE WIKI REFERENCES AS THEY ARE JUST MADE UP BY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITHOUT TRAINING IN PROPER REFERENCING. WHAT YOU ARE GOOD AT IS FORMATTING, NOT AT SUBSTANCE. YOU HAVE MADE FORMATTING THE CRITERIA FOR A KNOWLEDGE BASE. AND BEING ANONYMOUS. MORE IN SORROW THAN IN ANGER, PROF. GEORGE PIECZSENIK — Preceding unsigned comment added by GPieczenik (talk • contribs) (or at least block-evading socks thereof)
- I have put these incoherent rants back on to show a) the person clearly is not the educated "professor" they claim to be, and b) how misguided some people are. Heck, they cannot even identify the correct Wiki - this is "Misplaced Pages". (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- Dear "professor", thanks for your kind words, and all in caps too! My profession is listed on my userpage - indeed, I write for a living, and like you, I teach the occasional class at one of the local universities. I'm obviously far from being anonymous. Like you, I have an advanced degree - which is useful when it comes to content, but obviously does nothing for behaviour.
- Misplaced Pages (not "the wiki") is a beneficial project, however is not (and likely never shall be) a reference for students. As a professor, you already know that. It's user-edited. Although all articles/statements must be sourced, it's not the same as academic work,
- I have never edited the same articles as you - so really, you're not someone I "disagree" with in terms of article content. As an administrator, however, I am required to uphold the rules and policies that you agreed with when you began editing this project. I repeat: you agreed to the rules and policies. That include conflict of interest, no legal threats, but more important right now, not evading a valid block. If you were a student and behaved the way you are in a classroom, you'd be blocked from entering the class - just as you are right now.
- Financial support and even political support are great: what we need from you are supporting the rules and policies that, once again, you agreed to. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
- ... and couldn't be bothered to identify his posting here ... thank God for Sinebot! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Reading this has made me chuckle! And has put me in a really good mood! --Chip123456 (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- I found it amusing too. More in sorrow than in anger. Oh well, back to high school I go. :) Toddst1 (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Have you seen the teenagers these days? I'd be in sooo much trouble if I was back in high school right now (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- If only ... one can dream ... -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Careful; this isn't American Beauty (film) :-P (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- If only ... one can dream ... -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Have you seen the teenagers these days? I'd be in sooo much trouble if I was back in high school right now (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- I found it amusing too. More in sorrow than in anger. Oh well, back to high school I go. :) Toddst1 (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Reading this has made me chuckle! And has put me in a really good mood! --Chip123456 (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I'd gamble that you've got the real Professor George Pieczenik there. See http://federal-circuits.vlex.com/vid/pieczenik-v-domantis-20894040 and http://nj.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20110323_0000600.DNJ.htm/qx ( key word being "conspiracy" ). DeistCosmos (talk) 06:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm torn. Yes, the original edits struck me as being him. However, the tantrums do not strike me as someone with an education. You see where the problem lies (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Wow, did he ever get a serious beat-down from the judge in one of those two cases. In other words, he's carrying over a civil litigation fight onto Misplaced Pages. I was right: his WP:COI is preventing him from editing objectively in certain areas of this project. His original legal threat also cannot be ignored: he represented himself at least more than once as a litigant, and could therefore be expected to do so again. The threat was therefore probably more pressing and with substance than most of our day-to-day NLT violations (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Is this better?
Talk:List of CAD programs. Greg L (talk) 18:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Discussion is good....seems to be well-restrained. Key argument in any list: if the product is not worthy of having a article, it does not belong on a list. Lists are effectively disambiguation pages. Cheers (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:03, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Is this in jest or a joke?
Closing this - turns out, the editor is just a little pissed off that they were rightfully blocked, so they came here hoping I'd take their bait. Seeing how much fiction they've written since on this topic, they're still tryingThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
What do you mean with this: “dangerous”? Of course I can (may) talk to anyone I chose in real life. I’ve run my edits by cited Ph.D.s to make sure the material I write is correct and factual and correctly paraphrases what they mean. And everything is properly cited. Is there something wrong with that? Without even a ;-) emoticon at the end of that post, it looks like a breathtaking personal attack. Please explain yourself. Greg L (talk) 20:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Obviously no rational human could read it as a personal attack - and even some irrational ones would not have been able to stretch their imagination that far. Thanks for checking, just in case. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- You wrote as follows: “You're actually calling the PhD's? Turns out you're more dangerous than I realized.”
Not everyone has the same sense of humor as you do. On Misplaced Pages’s talk pages, the lack of in-person interaction deprives the recipient of facial expressions and body language. Without the courtesy of even an emoticon (they exist for a reason), one can easily assume that what one writes is what they mean.
None of this is helped by your above response, which lacks the word “sorry” or anything of the sort, and instead speaks of “rational” people. That sort of thing can actually come across as flippant and glib.
Given that you blocked me three days ago for being up front and writing precisely what I thought of another editor (I don’t admire editors who can be disruptive beyond all comprehension on Misplaced Pages but get away with it because they can use faux wiki-pleasantries while doing so), perhaps it ought not shock you that I actually took you at your word. Greg L (talk) 21:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
P.S. But, thank you—I think. If you actually meant this:
- You wrote as follows: “You're actually calling the PhD's? Turns out you're more dangerous than I realized.”
You're actually calling the PhD's? Turns out you're more dangerous than I realized. ;-)
- …then I very much appreciate your stopping by on my talk page with the complement. Greg L (talk) 21:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- No matter what was meant, there is no way that it could even be considered a violation of civility or personal attack....even if read out of context. As such, any level of anger - misplaced or not - is pretty much moot. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:44, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- …then I very much appreciate your stopping by on my talk page with the complement. Greg L (talk) 21:39, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
John R. Palmer
Hello Bwilkins, I would like to say Hello! to you, and I also wanted to inform you that the page http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=John_R._Palmer&action=edit&redlink=1 has become a redlinked page unfortunately. Your user page states that you were a major contributor, so I would love to inform you of this change! Thanks, Ax1om77 (talk) 20:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I do know it's been deleted, and took part interest deletion discussion. I still believe he's more notable than 10% of the people we do keep articles on. I do maintain a draft in my USERSPACEDRAFT. Someday all that past work will pay off, I'm sure. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
AKA
Good decline, I missed the previous block for BLP violations, else I would have blocked him myself - probably indefinitely, considering the user's past history. Dreadstar ☥ 00:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
- I must have been in an excessively chipper mood to have not extended it myself :-) Cheers (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you!
Helpful Hero | |
Thanks for all your help on Misplaced Pages! *-Ax10m77-* (talk) 16:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC) |
Could you please do something about that?
--Shrike (talk) 15:49, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- What; block 2 or 3 more people in addition to the 2 from yesterday? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know but personal attacks continue.If we want to maintain some level of discussion those things should be dealt but of course as admin its your discretion--Shrike (talk) 16:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- Constantly sanctioning multiple users who are reacting to AnkhMorpork's behavior is not going to solve the problem. Take the diff that Shrike supplied for example Andy calls out Ankhmorpork for substantially editing comments that have already been responded to. Ankh says "unfuckingbelieveable". Andy responds in kind, Shrike runs to an admin to look for sanctions against Andy. Maybe its just me, but that doesn't seem right. Dlv999 (talk) 22:49, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's not right. It's running to mommy (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- Constantly sanctioning multiple users who are reacting to AnkhMorpork's behavior is not going to solve the problem. Take the diff that Shrike supplied for example Andy calls out Ankhmorpork for substantially editing comments that have already been responded to. Ankh says "unfuckingbelieveable". Andy responds in kind, Shrike runs to an admin to look for sanctions against Andy. Maybe its just me, but that doesn't seem right. Dlv999 (talk) 22:49, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know but personal attacks continue.If we want to maintain some level of discussion those things should be dealt but of course as admin its your discretion--Shrike (talk) 16:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Let's deescalate
Brendon111 just is not, and will not hear you any more -- it's become personal for them if not for you. Now that he's raised his concerns at ANI, it will be better from them to get advice from others, and more prudent (and less work) if you walk away. Nobody Ent 14:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Acknowledged. Thanks for notifying me of the ANI ... first I've heard of it. It doesn't take much searching through his talkpage to see that I've busted my ass to a) help him, b) inform him, and c) get him unblocked. It's not personal for me, I'm simply trying to diffuse his meltdown (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
ANI notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Brendon ishere 14:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, yes ... filed more than 2-1/2 hours ago, and regardless of the big orange box saying you had to advise me of the filing, and at least 2 others who said the same thing, I'm finally getting this message. Thanks. I'm quite pleased that I was actually advised of it one section above. Cheers. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:41, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- On the internet, banners are invisible. As I noted on Brendon's talk page, my efforts (back in January) to simplify the wall o text atop ANI failed. Expecting editors unfamiliar with ANI to know to notify folks isn't realistic (as indicated by the many editors who don't). Nobody Ent 14:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Blocking
Yesterday, you blocked an editor for making accurate edits to a page, which were being continually reverted by an administrator. The edits have since been verified and posted by other editors. I suggest you now apologize to the editor in question and block the administrator who started the edit war, who so far, has avoided all censure. But then, they're an administrator. Enough said. TVArchivistUK (talk) 19:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Edit-warring was still edit-warring - no matter the WP:TRUTH. As I noted on ANI (if you bothered to read) I was unable to take action on the other edit-warring party because of connectivity issues. Next time, read the policies and entire situation before making such rash comments (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)And on top of that, the reason why RedRose was reverting was because the IP wasn't citing the source whey got it from. They say they got it from amazon.com but where from? This user was calling advice given to them a threat and called the reverts threats too. So I support BWilkins on this one.—cyberpower Online 20:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Of course you support each other. There's a shock. Nice to know that one of the vaulted administrators escaped a block due to a "connectivity error". No such error impeded the poor editor who was proven to be correct. Now your connectivity error has cleared, I'm sure you'll be imposing the same ban and punishment. As you say, an edit war is an edit war. But it takes more than one person to create one. But only one victim was punished. And "if you bothered to read" you'll see that the editor cited Amazon.com as their source. But alas, they're not an administrator. I'm ready for my block now. TVArchivistUK (talk) 20:41, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't do punishment here to anyone. The IP was never punished. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)