| Revision as of 20:08, 9 February 2007 editOnly (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users32,384 edits blocked← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:31, 9 February 2007 edit undoFlameviper (talk | contribs)2,325 edits LEAVING ON MY OWN TERMS. Hah.Next edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| :::Thanks! ~ '''<font color="CC0000">]</font><font color="009900">]</font><font color="00CC00">]</font><font color="009900">]</font>''' 19:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | :::Thanks! ~ '''<font color="CC0000">]</font><font color="009900">]</font><font color="00CC00">]</font><font color="009900">]</font>''' 19:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == |
== Feh == | ||
| <center>I've decided to</center> | |||
| For your continuous disruption, you have been blocked for 1 month. You've had this coming and with its threats sealed the deal. ] 20:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <center><big><big><big>'''LEAVE WIKIPEDIA'''</big></big></big></center> | |||
| <center><small><small><small>for one month</small></small></small></center> | |||
| <center>:P</center> | |||
| <center>~ '''<font color="CC0000">]</font><font color="009900">]</font><font color="00CC00">]</font><font color="009900">]</font>'''</center> | |||
| <center>20:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)</center> | |||
Revision as of 20:31, 9 February 2007
Flame's talk page (user | email | contribs | index) Leave a new message
~Archives~
Current talk
001
002
003
004
005
006
Hello. Welcome to Flameviper's talk page. This is a place where you can leave messages for me. I will read them and reply, either here or at your talk page. Please do not troll, flame, or do anything else to piss me off. Thank you. ~ Flameviper
Misplaced Pages:Informal checkuser
Can you explain, exactly, what the intent of Misplaced Pages:Informal checkuser is? It just appears to be some hypothesized thing you've come up with. To claim that it will result in an RfC or de-sysopping is purely your own speculation. Metros232 17:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- It violates WP:BLOCK and negates the need for Misplaced Pages:Checkuser. Any sysop isn't supposed to be able to use checkuser. Why do you think that checkuser, as a user right, is so exclusive? And on a side note, I will file the RfC myself and request de-sysopping. ~ Flameviper 17:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Flameviper, I deleted Misplaced Pages:Informal checkuser. Please don't make up policies and throw them into the WP namespace. If you've got an issue with the way Checkuser is carried out, then discuss it on the talk page. A Train 17:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- You posted on your userpage that the block of User:Squeamish Editor had resulted in your IP being autoblocked and you gave the IP number. That meant that anyone reading that would know you were editing from that IP. There was no use of Checkuser or even any Administrator function involved. It's just a coincidence that one of the people involved is a Checkuser. No one did anything wrong and there's nothing to complain about. If you don't want your IP to be available, I'm sure if you ask nicely someone will delete the edit with your IP number from the history of your archive page. Newyorkbrad 17:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I know that. But in the future, supposing someone wanted to get my IP address, the damage would already have been done. My IP address would be sitting on a Post-It somewhere in a sysop's basement, just waiting for the day it can be unleashed as hell on earth. ~ Flameviper 18:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you know that, then why are you talking about RfC's and desysoppings? Do you have a serious point to make here? Newyorkbrad 18:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm just saying that people get their IP addresses revealed daily in the form of autoblocks. It doesn't take a
rocket scientistJimbo to figure out how to utilize that for evil. ~ Flameviper 18:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)- Users in that situation can post "I need an autoblock listed, can an admin who's online now please let me know so I can e-mail him or her" and then the user will have given the IP information to just one admin rather than anyone who reads the page. So to that extent, your point is a fair one. But making accusations that people have acted improperly, or that people are going to act improperly in the future, is unproductive. Please stop that, it's not helping your mood or the encyclopedia. Newyorkbrad 18:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Dare I say that this is now boring me and I wish it to end? ~ Flameviper 18:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Users in that situation can post "I need an autoblock listed, can an admin who's online now please let me know so I can e-mail him or her" and then the user will have given the IP information to just one admin rather than anyone who reads the page. So to that extent, your point is a fair one. But making accusations that people have acted improperly, or that people are going to act improperly in the future, is unproductive. Please stop that, it's not helping your mood or the encyclopedia. Newyorkbrad 18:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm just saying that people get their IP addresses revealed daily in the form of autoblocks. It doesn't take a
- If you know that, then why are you talking about RfC's and desysoppings? Do you have a serious point to make here? Newyorkbrad 18:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I know that. But in the future, supposing someone wanted to get my IP address, the damage would already have been done. My IP address would be sitting on a Post-It somewhere in a sysop's basement, just waiting for the day it can be unleashed as hell on earth. ~ Flameviper 18:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- You posted on your userpage that the block of User:Squeamish Editor had resulted in your IP being autoblocked and you gave the IP number. That meant that anyone reading that would know you were editing from that IP. There was no use of Checkuser or even any Administrator function involved. It's just a coincidence that one of the people involved is a Checkuser. No one did anything wrong and there's nothing to complain about. If you don't want your IP to be available, I'm sure if you ask nicely someone will delete the edit with your IP number from the history of your archive page. Newyorkbrad 17:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Flameviper, I deleted Misplaced Pages:Informal checkuser. Please don't make up policies and throw them into the WP namespace. If you've got an issue with the way Checkuser is carried out, then discuss it on the talk page. A Train 17:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Be warned, this is just another disruptive action on your part. A lot of people are monitoring you closely now, I'm sure. If you continue any disruption, I'm pretty sure you'll be looking at block sometime soon, Metros232 18:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
BWAAARARRRGH
Stop leaving me messages! ~ Flameviper 18:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Flameviper, you're the one drawing attention to yourself with your edit summaries and generally disruptive activity. If you'd like to talk about other matters, such as building an encyclopedia, then just start acting like you're here to contribute. A Train 18:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not doing anything. You won't neeve me anone!
Mentoring
Flameviper, would you be willing to work with a mentor? A mentor would help you focus your Misplaced Pages contributions and as a bonus, keep me and others out of your hair. What do you think? A Train 18:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- That would be shweet. ~ Flameviper 18:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Would you like me to help you with your wikipedia editing? I hope I can give you ome good advice and help you with problems you may have with other editors. RyanPostlethwaite 19:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm... I'm not actively editing this moment, I'm going to cruise through some juicy backlogs and gawk at the missing users. ~ Flameviper 19:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- To be honest with you I think it would be a good idea, you have the potential to b a very good editor. Its just that some lapses in your temprement have put you at odds with quite a few other editors. If you allow me to, I will help you on your style in talkpage conversations and also help defend your point. I will also look at your contributions and look at ways you could improve RyanPostlethwaite 19:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! ~ Flameviper 19:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- To be honest with you I think it would be a good idea, you have the potential to b a very good editor. Its just that some lapses in your temprement have put you at odds with quite a few other editors. If you allow me to, I will help you on your style in talkpage conversations and also help defend your point. I will also look at your contributions and look at ways you could improve RyanPostlethwaite 19:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)