Misplaced Pages

User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Freakshownerd (talk | contribs) at 00:40, 1 June 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:40, 1 June 2010 by Freakshownerd (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Please leave a new message.

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am being blocked for an edit in Wikicommons where I am appealing the deletion of what appears to be every item I have contributed to Wikicommons. The discussion page is there to discuss that very issue, how can a gag order be issued to prevent me from discussing the details of the deletion during the deletion process? That makes no sense. I am being harassed by another editor, but in what is a textbook description of irony, I am not allowed to discuss the details. My blocking should be handled by an RFC in public to determine why I cannot discuss details of this

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I am being blocked for an edit in Wikicommons where I am appealing the deletion of what appears to be every item I have contributed to Wikicommons. The discussion page is there to discuss that very issue, how can a gag order be issued to prevent me from discussing the details of the deletion during the deletion process? That makes no sense. I am being harassed by another editor, but in what is a textbook description of irony, I am not allowed to discuss the details. My blocking should be handled by an RFC in public to determine why I cannot discuss details of this |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I am being blocked for an edit in Wikicommons where I am appealing the deletion of what appears to be every item I have contributed to Wikicommons. The discussion page is there to discuss that very issue, how can a gag order be issued to prevent me from discussing the details of the deletion during the deletion process? That makes no sense. I am being harassed by another editor, but in what is a textbook description of irony, I am not allowed to discuss the details. My blocking should be handled by an RFC in public to determine why I cannot discuss details of this |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I am being blocked for an edit in Wikicommons where I am appealing the deletion of what appears to be every item I have contributed to Wikicommons. The discussion page is there to discuss that very issue, how can a gag order be issued to prevent me from discussing the details of the deletion during the deletion process? That makes no sense. I am being harassed by another editor, but in what is a textbook description of irony, I am not allowed to discuss the details. My blocking should be handled by an RFC in public to determine why I cannot discuss details of this |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Hi! welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Misplaced Pages. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

My wikistalkers

I have a sneaking suspicion that they are either the same person or working together. Most of their contributions appear to be nominating articles that I start.


As it turned out the two were the same along with a third. I am sure there are more. All three personas nominated the same article and the accounts were banned from editing.

New articles

Source: <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9505E3DC113BE633A25753C1A96E9C946296D6CF" rel="nofollow">query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9505E3DC113BE633A...</a>

blocked

This tweak to an edit of the kind you've been warned about many times is not on, since it is nothing more than a means of carrying on trying to skirt the user page and image policies by making claims about another editor in disruptive ways. I have blocked you 72 hours for disruption and WP:BATTLE. You can appeal this block by posting {{unblock|your reason here}}. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

See below

Request handled by: SGGH

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

(Unblock request moved to bottom of the page for continuity.) This block should be reviewed. I am asking the blocking administrator for comment. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:57, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocking admin's comments are at User talk:Gwen Gale#Unblock request. I do not find the case as clear and convincing as she does. Leaving for another administrator to review. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't have blocked for this particular edit, although I do find it concerning that this editor repeats below the allegations that got him banned in the first place, and does not seem to understand why three separate admins asked, then warned, him to stop doing so. Since I'm one of the three, I'm recusing myself from formally reviewing the unblock request, but that's my two cents for the admin who does. Shimeru (talk) 08:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
As another reviewing admin, I - like Newyorkbrad - do not understand how the edit for which this user was blocked (correcting a typo) was in any way disruptive. If there was actual disruption by this user, then surely it did not occur by way of that edit, and I do not understand the explanation given by Gwen Gale on her talk page. Unless other reviewing admins disagree, I am inclined to lift this block as erroneous.  Sandstein  09:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Please see my post below. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I have reviewed the dispute in question between Richard Arthur Norton and User:TreasuryTag over the uploading of images. I have looked at the comments Richard Arthur Norton has made regarding User:TreasuryTag's behaviour, and I do not feel that "TT has nominated for deletion every image I have added to the commons after our encounter at the bilateral relations AFD" to be a personal attack as such if it is in fact true. It may not be a helpful comment to make in the context, though if true is somewhat understandable, and indicative of the need for dispute resolution. Giving a block for a slight ammendment of formatting is not part of Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy as the ammendment was not in itself disruptive. Even though the edit came after a warning, the warning itself is open to debate given the circumstances and the nature of the comment. Block lifted. SilkTork * 11:00, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Glen Gale

Moved from her talk page:

He was not moving on, he was hiding the warnings, knowing he would most likely be blocked for carrying on with his disruption and hoping that a careless admin would think he was blocked for correcting a punctuation typo. This is also why he put his unblock request at the top of the page, far away from the block notice. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:10, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

The issue was dead days days ago when I decided not to start an RFC, the only person continuing to bring it up is Glen Gale on my talk page. She isn't acting as a dispassionate third party to help resolve an issue, the issue was dead days ago. She believes that TT nominating every one of the images I loaded to Wiki Commons as a retaliative measure as ok behavior and keeps bringing up the issue on my talk page. She also feels that I can't discuss it on the very page set up to discuss the issue, essentially issuing a gag order without benefit of formal RFC. She finds me adding a corrective apostrophe to a day old comment as "disruptive". I cleared my page to put the issue behind me, but she can't seem to let go. She should have passed the assignment of settling the dispute to another editor when when she could no longer be dispassionate and took a side on the issue. My arguments are pure policy: Does an editor have the right to nominate every image a person loads to Wiki Commons as a punitive measure when the two are on opposite sides at an AFD?
I don't see how you can say "the issue was dead days days ago" given you posted this edit less than an hour before your archived all the warnings and explanations you'd asked for, followed by making a trivial edit to one of the very edits you'd been warned about, hence drawing further heed to it. Moreover, the last sentence in your (unsigned) post above also shows that for you, the issue is still very much alive. I blocked you because, after many warnings, there was still a straightforward likelihood you would carry on commenting about (which is to say, keep sniping at) another editor on project pages, rather than taking it to dispute resolution (which could be an RfC/user).
"The issue was dead days days ago ] when I decided not to start an RFC, the only person continuing to bring it up is Glen Gale on my talk page."
Meanwhile, the flurry of AfD noms below is worrisome, unhelpful. The timing alone hints very strongly at bad faith and hopefully a CU will have a look at the editor sometime soon. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Miscellaneous AfD nominations

The following deletion nominations are the subject of an WP:AN/I report here - Wikidemon (talk) 04:33, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
  • All of these AfDs have been either deleted or procedurally closed because the noms were made by a likely and now-blocked sockpuppet. All the articles have been kept for now. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Sheep to shawl

I have nominated Sheep to shawl, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Sheep to shawl. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Dreyer Farms

I have nominated Dreyer Farms, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dreyer Farms. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Fama's Nursery & Landscaping

I have nominated Fama's Nursery & Landscaping, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Fama's Nursery & Landscaping. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Perry Joseph Green

I have nominated Perry Joseph Green, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Perry Joseph Green. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Mary Benedict Cushing

I have nominated Mary Benedict Cushing, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mary Benedict Cushing. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Stanhope Wood Nixon

I have nominated Stanhope Wood Nixon, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Stanhope Wood Nixon. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Alexander Hamilton (reverend)

I have nominated Alexander Hamilton (reverend), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Alexander Hamilton (reverend). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of New Jersey On-Line

I have nominated New Jersey On-Line, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/New Jersey On-Line. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Charles Cooper Nott, Jr.

I have nominated Charles Cooper Nott, Jr., an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Charles Cooper Nott, Jr.. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Sarah Barnwell Elliott

I have nominated Sarah Barnwell Elliott, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Sarah Barnwell Elliott. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of George Allen Hancock

I have nominated George Allen Hancock, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/George Allen Hancock. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Anna Thompson Dodge

I have nominated Anna Thompson Dodge, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Anna Thompson Dodge. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Backyard Farms

I have nominated Backyard Farms, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Backyard Farms. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ocean Mystic Researcher (talk) 04:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Dispute with User:TreasuryTag

I strongly urge you to take your dispute with User:TreasuryTag to dispute resolution rather than continuing to make comments in inappropriate arenas. If you wish the mater to be looked into and resolved, that would be your best course of action. If you need any assistance with filing a dispute resolution case, please get in touch. SilkTork * 11:10, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure, show me where to file and RFC. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

There a number of methods of dispute resolution. I would suggest that you first try Misplaced Pages:Editor assistance. A negotiated discussion between yourself and User:TreasuryTag might prove to be helpful. I would offer to handle the discussion myself, but as I unblocked you I am now involved, and what you need is an uninvolved person. You may read through the list of editors and directly contact one, or file a reqeust here. You should state the situation in neutral terms. Something along the lines of: "User:TreasuryTag has been through all the images I have uploaded here and on Commons and nominated many of them for deletion. I feel that User:TreasuryTag's actions are personally motivated as we had a disagrement at a bilateral relations AFD - as such I feel hassled, and wish to resolve any ill-feeling between us."

An equally informal dispute resolution method is Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal - though this can be a little more involved, and I would suggest you try Editor assistance first, and move onto Mediation Cabal only if the assistance fails. Please ping me if you need any further assistance - I won't be watching your page, so you'll need to leave a message on my talkpage. SilkTork * 18:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Alexander Hamilton (reverend)

I have nominated Alexander Hamilton (reverend), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Alexander Hamilton (reverend) (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Edison (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Sheep to shawl

I have nominated Sheep to shawl, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Sheep to shawl. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Edison (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Charles Cooper Nott, Jr.

I have nominated Charles Cooper Nott, Jr., an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Charles Cooper Nott, Jr. (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Edison (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Mary Benedict Cushing

I have nominated Mary Benedict Cushing, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mary Benedict Cushing (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Edison (talk) 21:34, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

I've done some work on this one. DGG ( talk ) 00:58, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Scientistguy

User:Scientistguy, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Scientistguy and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Scientistguy during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:53, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Fama's Nursery & Landscaping

I have nominated Fama's Nursery & Landscaping, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Fama's Nursery & Landscaping (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. mono 23:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Norton-RichardArthur 1958 1966b.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Norton-RichardArthur 1958 1966b.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ╟─TreasuryTag►Lord Speaker─╢ 18:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked under WP:BATTLE and WP:BAIT

This edit is another clear example of how you are not dropping the situation. I have blocked you for 24 hours. You have been told time and again to stop sniping other users, if you don't desist your blocks will continue to rack up. Regards, S.G. ping! 23:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yikes

Sorry to see the usual suspects involved in the harassment and abuse of a good contributor. Your sullied block log will remain even after these villains move on to other prey. This place is very sick indeed. Best of luck to you. Freakshownerd (talk) 00:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Category: