User talk:Ideogram: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 21:11, 5 August 2007 editJossi (talk \| contribs)72,880 edits Editing← Previous edit		Revision as of 21:37, 5 August 2007 edit undoNandesuka (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users13,890 editsm →Civility Next edit →
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 105:		Line 105:

	Ideogram, I would suggest that continuing with the kind of behavior exhibited at ] is not a good idea. My interest in the subject was picked when the whole AfD saga started. I have and will continue research this fascinating subject, regardless of the AfD results. My view is that all these authors' opinions about apartheid-like practices in different countries are the bases for an excellent and informative article. Rather than editwar with me or others, I invite you to collaborate with me and others to create good material for this article or a similar article in which viewpoints about apartheid-like practices in all countries about which these concerns have been raised. Edit warring is never a good choice. ] <small>]</small> 21:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)		Ideogram, I would suggest that continuing with the kind of behavior exhibited at ] is not a good idea. My interest in the subject was picked when the whole AfD saga started. I have and will continue research this fascinating subject, regardless of the AfD results. My view is that all these authors' opinions about apartheid-like practices in different countries are the bases for an excellent and informative article. Rather than editwar with me or others, I invite you to collaborate with me and others to create good material for this article or a similar article in which viewpoints about apartheid-like practices in all countries about which these concerns have been raised. Edit warring is never a good choice. ] <small>]</small> 21:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

			== Civility ==

			I'll make this as simple as I possibly can: the next time I see any edit from you, on any page, using language that ''even remotely approximates'' , for ''whatever reason'', I will block you for 7 days. Subsequent blocks will be longer.

			I don't care what your reasons are. Even if you feel you have been provoked, such behavior is unacceptable, and it stops, at least on your part, right now. Consider this your final warning. ] 21:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:37, 5 August 2007

I try to keep conversations threaded.

I generally reply to posts here on this page.

Usually if I post on your talk page I watchlist you.

Welcome!

Hello, Ideogram, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Allan McInnes (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello and welcome

Hello Ideogram, Welcome to Misplaced Pages.
Thank you for the very kind message you left for me. It came as a very pleasant and welcome surprise. I think Misplaced Pages has a lot of potential, although it has its detractors, but I'm glad you've decided to make up your own mind about it and the best way to do that is to get involved. In the long run things usually work out well, and there are lot of very capable and dedicated editors here that ensure the integrity of the project is protected as much as possible. (The abilities of the various monkeys here are diverse but the mix seems to work.) Please let me know if there's anything you ever need help with and I look forward to hearing from you. Once again, welcome! Rossrs 00:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Notice of arbitration review case

Please be advised that an arbitration matter on which you commented has been accepted as a review case at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta/Review. You may present evidence on the case page or additional comments on the talkpage. This notice is given by a clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 01:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration procedure

I saw your post on the review case page. The editor filing an arbitration case should always be considered a party or at least a nominal party for purposes of participating in the case, receiving notices, etc. In fact, I explained this to a party to another case on my talkpage just yesterday, so this is not a unique practice in this case. No reflection on your editing or your compliance with the prior decision is intended. Newyorkbrad 05:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

All right, I can accept that. I hope you understand I'm a little sensitive on the subject. --Ideogram 05:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

re:Medcab

I am trying to help out. G e o. Talk to me 05:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, we really don't want you taking cases. --Ideogram 05:30, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

i have sent you a email using Emailthisuser. Let us continue this discussion through that. G e o. Talk to me 05:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been speedily approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. --ST47Talk 22:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Medcab bot

Yeah, I think that should be the most recent version unless Xyrael has made any changes to it, which I don't believe he has... ~~oh, there's a new operator now? Well you should ask Sean Whitton then.~~ Cowman109 01:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, it's the same person. Should be fine then. Can't hurt to ask him though. :D Cowman109 01:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

RE: MedcabBot

As you have observed it is somewhat broken and I am being spammed with error e-mails. Can I have the fix code of yours, please? :-) Toolserver e-mail is swhitton@tools.wikimedia.de —Sean Whitton / 10:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram/Review

The review relating to the above-named arbitration has been closed without action because User:Certified.Gangsta has not edited for several weeks. Should Certified.Gangsta return to editing, the review may be reopened. This notice is given by a clerk on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. Newyorkbrad 23:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Israeli apartheid - clarification or new case?

It's unclear what you're requesting, but this is probably best framed as a new arbitration case, rather than a review of the old one. It's an old issue, but involves a new group of editors. You might want to read all the information about arbitration. Arbitration on Misplaced Pages, unlike almost everything else, is about people, not content. --John Nagle 04:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It is mostly the same people who were involved in the old case. I was hoping to save some time by framing it as a review and not a new case, but I can certainly make it a new case if necessary. --Ideogram 04:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest starting a new case, if you want to go this route. You have to name editors as parties, inform them, put together evidence sections, etc. You can certainly reference the old ones. Read up on the procedures. This is a very formal process and quite time-consuming. --John Nagle 05:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Pathetic propaganda attempt by *** removed

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

these types of uncivil edits - seen here - (i.e. personal attacks) are not contributing to the community and i request you consider this when in conflict. Jaakobou 17:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I feel I absolutely have to do this.

		The Mighty Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your endless efforts in making sure ROC and PRC/HK editors don't go at war over each other, for standing up for us Chinese editors, and for consistently dealing with buffoonerly and misinformed editors on AfD discussions, I hereby honour you as a Defender of the Wiki. Pandacomics 18:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was refreshing knowing that a fellow Chinese editor wasn't going to let something as ridiculous as that slide. I'm generally not a very good debater, so I kinda popped in and out. I still can't believe what's coming out of their mouths though. Pandacomics 19:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no patience for bullshit. My quick temper has gotten me in trouble many times, right here on Misplaced Pages. Which is why it is such a comfort to have your support. --Ideogram 19:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Bravo for your work on Allegations of Israeli Apartheid and attendant RFA

I only wish I had learned of your efforts earlier. Please do keep me posted on what you feel is of interest and importance on WP. BYT 14:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Computer science

Oh I agree that it wasn't blatant vandalism or in bad faith, which is why I put a mere warning level 1 on that IP's talk page. Groupthink 06:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

AfD China allegations

Hi. It was good speaking with you yesterday. I take breaks on Fri nite and Saturdays. Anyway, I put a proposal on the Talk page I hope you will consider. The idea is to first focus on the NPOV requirements for the TITLE ONLY. Some key keep-voters already support name changes for some other of these apartheid articles, so you may get consensus for a MOVE & Rename. Second step is to deal with your concern with NOR, which may become less relevant after the rename. Thanks for reading this. Take care. HG | Talk 03:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it, thank you. I have read it and am thinking carefully about my response. --Ideogram 03:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Editing

Ideogram, I would suggest that continuing with the kind of behavior exhibited at Allegations of Chinese apartheid is not a good idea. My interest in the subject was picked when the whole AfD saga started. I have and will continue research this fascinating subject, regardless of the AfD results. My view is that all these authors' opinions about apartheid-like practices in different countries are the bases for an excellent and informative article. Rather than editwar with me or others, I invite you to collaborate with me and others to create good material for this article or a similar article in which viewpoints about apartheid-like practices in all countries about which these concerns have been raised. Edit warring is never a good choice. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Civility

I'll make this as simple as I possibly can: the next time I see any edit from you, on any page, using language that even remotely approximates "shut the fuck up", for whatever reason, I will block you for 7 days. Subsequent blocks will be longer.

I don't care what your reasons are. Even if you feel you have been provoked, such behavior is unacceptable, and it stops, at least on your part, right now. Consider this your final warning. Nandesuka 21:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)