Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:39, 8 March 2008

Welcome to my talk page.

• Please continue a discussion on the page where it was started.

• This means that if I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here.
• Reply on your talk page instead. I will still be notified of your response.

• Click on this link to start a new discussion.

• I will reply on this page.

This is Equazcion's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 10 days

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Template:Recap

I'll look into it tomorrow. I impose a pretty strict 7:00 UTC bedtime on myself, I'll be back in 10-12 or so hours. RyanGerbil10(Kick 'em in the Dishpan!) 07:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem, it's no emergency. Thanks again. Equazcion •✗/C • 07:03, 25 Feb 2008 (UTC)

Your final warning to User: Victor64

You made a final warning to User: Victor64 earlier today. At the time of your warning, the new user in question had made two constructive edits (fixing vandalism by others), and only one destructive edit. Issuing a final warning under this circumstances is completely outside any of the guidelines for dealing with vandalism. In fact, it fits under the description of What vandalism is not - tests by experimenting users. The guidelines note that "Rather than be warned for vandalism, these users should be warmly greeted, and given a reference to the sandbox (e.g., using the test template message) where they can continue to make test edits without being unintentionally disruptive.".

Can you please follow guidelines in the future when dealing with new users, and place an apology to the user on his talk page. Thanks, Nfitz (talk) 22:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The user was a clear vandal, blanking pages and writing abusive language. The user since been blocked indef. Igor Berger (talk) 22:50, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The user was clearly not a vandal - as documented above. I've been looking into this further. I'm now realising that you reported on Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism that this was a vandalism-only account - despite the evidence suggesting that this was merely a new user experimenting. Why did you misrepresent this? 50% of his edits were constructive. (60% actually, as I note that a fifth edit was made from the IP without being logged in? Nfitz (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The admins who perform blocks don't just take the reporting user's word for it, or shouldn't. The user may have made a couple of good edits but was clearly a vandal. The definition of a vandalism-only account notwithstanding, I thought it was an appropriate way to describe the account to communicate its state. The user clearly intended to continue vandalizing, and an indef block was appropriate. Equazcion •✗/C • 00:28, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

I fail to see how you can conclude from two virtually simultaneous acts of vandalism, that the user clearly intended to continue vandalising. As documented on my talk page, the user stopped vandalizing after receiving the first warning - and then proceeded to make constructive edits. I also don't know how you can make a claim that it is a vandalism-only account, when not all the edits made by the account were vandalism. By definition, it is not a vandalism-only account, and your description as such was misleading. Nfitz (talk) 06:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)-

It appears we are in disagreement. Equazcion •✗/C • 09:04, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

To me, and I think to most people, "vandalism-only account" means an account that does only vandalism edits and no constructive edits. If you want to use this phrase to mean something else, please add words to your sentence to make your meaning clear, in order to avoid misunderstandings that could lead to inappropriate blocks or other problems. --Coppertwig (talk) 13:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

But the real reason I came here was to let you know that I've posted a message to you at Misplaced Pages talk:Huggle#Distribution?. :-) --Coppertwig (talk) 13:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Toolbar

Whoa! Thanks a lot. I tried making a customized one, but it got faulty. This surely helps. Thanks again, Lex /_C Guest Book 23:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Equazcion •✗/C • 00:29, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

dxm

Hey, thanks for cleaning up the DXM article that I did a sloppy job adding to. I was gonna come back to it, but you beat me and saved me the work in the process! Thanks again. Flypanam (talk) 00:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Equazcion •✗/C • 00:29, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Red Barnstar
		I like the way you think on that discussion page on the service awards! I like it so much, that I, Nothing444 will award you a barnstar. :) Happy editing! Nothing444 01:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated :) Equazcion •✗/C • 01:43, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

No, Thank You! You showed that is doesn't matter what awards you have as long as you are editing for a good cause! :) --Nothing444 20:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Question

Have you ever considered becoming an administrator on Misplaced Pages? Your work here clearly shows your devotion and access to the tools may help you become even more productive. If you would like to become an administrator, just to let you know I have your full unconditional support. I'll nominate you if I have your consent. y/n ? :) -- penubag  (talk) 03:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure that access to the tools would help me and perhaps Misplaced Pages, but access to the tools isn't all being an admin really entails, is it? :) I appreciate the offer, but for now I think I'll just stay here in the trenches with all you regular folk. See you 'round the third-class cabin :) Equazcion •✗/C • 03:24, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

It's always the best people who refuse :\ -- penubag  (talk) 03:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't go sacrificing lambs in my name yet. I'm partially refusing because my RfA would be a heated ordeal that will divide the Misplaced Pages community and be a large headache I won't want to pay any attention to. And, I don't feel like going through the running-for-public-office political campaign that's required for an RfA. And I don't want to answer questions and explain past experiences with the steady stream of politically-correct and family-friendly bullshit meant to lick as many asses as possible. It just ain't me. I've said this before, RfA is a process that I just have no respect for. Also, being that admins are supposed to just be editors with mops, I'd say anyone who actually wants to be an admin probably has the wrong idea, and we should all be wary of them. I mean, who the hell wants a mop?

Yeah that's perhaps a virtuous-sounding motivation for declining, but a lot of it is just plain laziness, too. Equazcion •✗/C • 04:04, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

Wherest I understand your position, some admins don't do newbie-helping business at all, they just benefit from the tools. But I also understand that being an admin means you can't break as many rules as if you're just a regular user. However, if you do happen to have a revelation, you can always ask me to nominate you. Cheers -- penubag  (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind newbie-helping; the RfA process is what I'm not looking forward to. But thanks, I'll keep your offer in mind. Equazcion •✗/C • 02:10, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Trivia tags

Thanks I am in the middle of taking a look at these tags and seeing if there is some way to fix any problems that may have been caused. Assuming that formatting wasn't adulterated, what would be the problem with adding trivia tags? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 05:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Fix These can be fixed by inserting a linebreak; you don't have to undo/revert. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 05:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, adding trivia tags massively like this has caused problems in the past. I can find the relevant pages of discussion on it if you want. Trivia tags aren't a necessity. It's best to just tag sections when you happen to come across them, than to systematically go on a campaign. We had a bot that used to do this, but it's no longer active for this reason. Equazcion •✗/C • 05:10, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

And thanks a lot, now I have another hundred articles in my watchlist :) Just kidding :) Equazcion •✗/C • 05:14, 29 Feb 2008 (UTC)

Have a read at my essay WP:SEI

Maybe you will find it useful. Igor Berger (talk) 11:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you understand what this is all about. Thank you for your objectivity. I hope an uninvolved admin can comment on the discussion and if posibly close the deletion process. I feel adminUser:VirtualSteve has WP:WEIGHT and is not quite objective in the process. I would like to WP:AGF but it is difuclt to do without a third opinion of an univolved admin being that it looks like VS id presiding over the discussion and it is hard to keep NPOV in that respect. If the essay is deleted, so should it be and there is not much I can do. This is the life of Misplaced Pages. And that is the whole point of the essa that it it very hard to achive NPOV on Misplaced Pages because inadvertent or devised social engineering inclanation of POV. Again that you for your objectivity and I am sorry I have bothered you in this matter. Igor Berger (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Abortion and Mental Health

I probably shouldn't belabor this, but after thinking about it I find your pattern contributing to this page rather strange. For someone who doesn't really participate in the David Reardon or Abortion and Mental Health discussions much anymore, I'm confused as to why you will occasionally come to the page, call me names, and then threaten to ANI me. Especially when you you used to have such thoughtful participation in the past.

I don't normally pay much attention to name-calling; however, it just strikes me as odd that now your only consistent participation (which, happens only every few months) is to compare me to Strider - not to discuss my edits, not to discuss the merits or demerits of the Abortion and Mental Health page, and not to discuss your vision of what the page should be. My question is, what's going on here?--IronAngelAlice (talk) 02:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

My participation has not been consistent at all. Most of the time I'm just watching the edit wars from afar. I left once and came back once, aside from intermediate unrelated comments about other sporadic issues (such as anchor linking in the lead section). I tried discussing things but that didn't quite work out, because of what I would classify as disruptiveness mainly caused by you. So now I feel it's best to get outside input from ANI. If you were in a dispute with someone and discussion didn't seem to get anywhere, would you not go the same route? Equazcion •✗/C • 02:58, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

But that's the thing. I don't know what we are disputing exactly. From my point of you, you came to the page, called me prepubescent, compared me to Strider, then threatened to ANI me. I don't know what you are attempting to accomplish.--IronAngelAlice (talk) 04:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Well you should know as I've already stated it at User talk:Saranghae honey, and you already replied. I'm not going to restate it on every page in which we're exchanging comments. See there for details. Equazcion •✗/C • 04:56, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Now I see... You've accused me on the other pages of POV pushing without providing evidence. You've accused me of not being civil without providing compelling evidence - and yet you call me a "prepubescent" "radical" with impunity. Again, I don't get it.--IronAngelAlice (talk) 06:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, again, see User talk:Saranghae honey. There's plenty of specifics and evidence there. Again I'm not going to restate it all here. Equazcion •✗/C • 06:09, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Not really equazcion. You haven't said much in the way of proof. I'm going to bed. --IronAngelAlice (talk) 06:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

'Night. Equazcion •✗/C • 06:11, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Equazcion, I think at this point it is simply best if I WP:SHUN. You aren't interested in making the article in question better. You seem interested only in making judgements about me, though you have never engaged my talk page.--IronAngelAlice (talk) 14:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not interested in you or anything about you. I'm only interested in improving the article. I tried to do it but you and Strider wouldn't let me. The only reason I've engaged in this argument with you alone is because you inquired as to what my problem was -- on three different talk pages, no less. I didn't do this. You did. Equazcion •✗/C • 20:50, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Talk page removals

Listen Sancho Pancho Do not delete other people's contributions from talk pages. Add to them if you have the cortical ability in between taking up burritos in your hind end. OK?

Added: You just deleted second time (vandalized consistent with your culture) my contribution to the articles talk page as well as yours. Removing talk contributions is a violoation and you are an abuser.!72.74.116.197 (talk) 23:38, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You blanked the talk page (Talk:Cemal Gürsel). That's vandalism. So please stop. Equazcion •✗/C • 23:39, 1 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Ah, you've met my little buddy. He's not particularly happy with me but I do have to admit that he is more verbose than the typical vandals we get. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I am sorry, but the damn troll (me) wants to know what you are doing. Are you going to revert every single edit I make? Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Not "ever". Perhaps "every". But no, not even that. Only the troll-ish edits -- you know, the kind meant to provoke and disrupt. This would be an example. You seem to want to get something posted to my talk page, no matter what it is. So now I've let you. I hope this makes you happy. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:11, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry. Do you want me take a WikiBreak? To just leave and re-grow grapes (which I never lost)? And I don't really appreciate being called a troll. Another: I'm not a nasty "almost-vandal" that needs to publish something on a talk page, or else they'll die. Happy editing, Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, I have to say you've been a bit trollish yourself:

"that portion of the discssion was irrelevant and should be removed. file a report about this like you said you would. i feel these should stay deleted though, as they're only disruptive, not helpful"

In bold is what I think is a comment "to provoke". Also, I never said I would. Someone else did. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

(ec) Ah. Forgive me, I thought there was no point to these comments you've made now on my talk page. If there was a point then I wholeheartedly apologize. I must be blind. I'm sure you don't appreciate being called a troll... no one does. Your taking offense at someone classifying your actions does not remove credence from their claim. As for the provocation, that was an edit summary. I didn't make an edit simply to provoke. And, I really did feel that the editor in question would do well to "file" a report, because those comments really didn't belong in the discussion, and I felt rather strongly about that. And, the bold comment in question was not aimed at you, it was aimed at SqueakBox. Happy editing. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:19, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

I did. I was asking if you thought I should take a small WikiBreak. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with you at all so I'm ill-equipped to answer that question. I do think you made many inappropriate comments at the deletion discussion. If you feel this is a product of fatigue, then yes, you may want to consider a break. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:28, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I will withdrawl my comments from the page except for the original. Happy editing, Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that's much appreciated. I've removed my responses to those comments as well. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:43, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

I will suggest to Uga Man to delete the comments on his user page. Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 19:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That's good, but don't expend too much energy on this. Focus your efforts on the future instead. It's not all that important to remove traces of exchanges you might regret, in my opinion. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:58, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm now going to take a short break (an hour or two). Happy editing, and sorry, Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 20:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That's alright, and no problem. Equazcion •✗/C • 20:05, 2 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Image:Israel protected.jpg

Unfortunately, Google Maps screenshots are not free; a free map that you might want to use as a basis for a similar picture is at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/maps/is-map.gif —Random832 03:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I uploaded a new version using that image. Thanks for the heads-up. Equazcion •✗/C • 03:47, 3 Mar 2008 (UTC)

For All Your Hard Work, Assistance, and General Awesome-ness

		The Special Barnstar
		Eq, for all your help with template coding, tolerating my constant bothering while I was working on making a cool signature, and adjusting my talk page to improve it without request... You are AWESOME and should never forget it! Truly a great Wikipedian, willing to help, seeking out ways to assist, and collaborative to a fault.             Many thanks, now and always! • VigilancePrime • • • 02:00 (UTC) 4 Mar '08

Thanks :) Equazcion •✗/C • 02:40, 4 Mar 2008 (UTC)

New messages from Voyagerfan5761

Tuvok 10:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Huggle

I assume you got it ;) I am a little concerned however. It would be easy to make Huggle a virus, and now the maker has disappeared. Chances are that he has just had something crop up IRL, but :S Tiddly-Tom 18:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I wanted Huggle, I don't have it. Can you send it over? MBisanz 20:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)`

It would be easy to make it a virus, but but only if one has the course code, I think. So far no one's been able to get their hands on that. MBisanz, sure I'll send it to you. Just send me an email. Equazcion •✗/C • 22:29, 4 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Got it. thanks. MBisanz 01:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Question

Would you happen to know if there's a tool that tallies the number of articles an editor has created? Thanks, Enigma 23:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't know of any tool like that, sorry. I thought the edit count tools might do it but I checked both of them, and user logs, and nothing seems to give that info. Let me know if you find one though. Equazcion •✗/C • 23:08, 4 Mar 2008 (UTC)

I will. I'm going to keep looking. Enigma 23:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you point me to the edit count tool? I like to know how many edits I have done seen I joined WP. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/count_edits?user=Igorberger&dbname=enwiki_p Equazcion •✗/C • 23:27, 4 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Thank you great tool. I need to think how I can make some tools for Misplaced Pages. PHSDL Spam list right now will not be useful because it is mostly Malware domains, but if I can change the honeypot to optout from optin I would catch much more Spamm domains and then I cane share the list with Misplaced Pages. I use to get 500 Spam domain post a day. Mostly Zlob Trojan Malware, but now get about 20 Spam posts a day. I wrote the whole thing in PHP and MySQL. Can you tell me what happens when we add a domain o Misplaced Pages Spam project list? Can a user still add that link or the edit will not be allowed once on that list? Because my honeypot forum does not allow a post with a domain once it is on PHSDL Spam list. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 23:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't know much about the spam list, sorry. You should post your question at that project, maybe someone there can help you. Equazcion •✗/C • 23:45, 4 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Thanx for the suggestion. Igor Berger (talk) 23:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is a counter for what I was talking about. Enigma 01:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that's interesting. Although from using it on my own name it looks like it doesn't list created subpages, template pages, talk pages, or Misplaced Pages: pages. It only lists top mainspace pages created. Just FYI. Equazcion •✗/C • 01:45, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

I have my own wiki here, and on it you can see how many pages you have created. The new pages page on WP has a usename box, but retunes no results. Maybe becouse so many pages are created each day? Tiddly-Tom 07:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Huggle

I removed my request Sorry for the confusion. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 01:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I was actually in the process of moving it the talk page when you did. That's alright, no harm done. Equazcion •✗/C • 01:52, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

"Removing right to use Huggle." Maybe that was the wrong way to phrase it, but administrators can disable your Huggle privileges, I believe. There's potential for abuse with such a powerful program, so I think you can be blocked from using it or something. Enigma 01:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice if there were a way, but I don't think it currently exists. Equazcion •✗/C • 02:01, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Here. I don't know what that's referring to specifically, but if there were no other way, an admin could remove it from the css page and then protect the page. That's just an example of a way you could be prevented from using Huggle. Enigma 02:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think of that at all, good catch :) We'll have to include instructions for blocking in case it becomes necessary at some point. PS a user could just create a new account to get around that... but it's something at least. Equazcion •✗/C • 02:09, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a user could create a new account. The problem is that once you release a program, it's very difficult to control what happens to it. Obviously we don't want people to do this, but anyone who had Huggle sent to them could post the file on a major website and then anyone could get it. I'm hoping there will be a way to prevent usage of Huggle for users with less than a certain amount of mainspace edits (that would preclude just anyone from being able to sign up and start using it). Enigma 07:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

All these things are possible if we had the source code, but as soon as someone gets their hands on that we'd just add a check similar to AWB and VandalProof, where the user needs to be on a list of approved users in order to use the program. Til then, all we have is the CSS method, unfortunately. Hopefully Gurch will start paying attention again soon and hand over development to other users, since he doesn't seem interested in it himself anymore. Equazcion •✗/C • 07:42, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Although, here's a way to at least check who's using it: http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Search?ns2=1&search=huggle.css&fulltext=Search We could check periodically for new unapproved users in that search, or something. Equazcion •✗/C • 07:45, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

When you exit Huggle, it automatically updates the whitelist. I noticed this yesterday and began using that page as a reference. Enigma 08:07, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

True, but that can be disabled from the config options. Equazcion •✗/C • 08:19, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Allay and Fears

Eq, I replied on my talk page and the ANI. I have been catching up on so much stuff and editing that I totally missed your original inquiry. Anyway, it looks like it's all taken care of now anyway, and I'm more than happy to see that. Hope it didn't disrupt too much of your night/morning/day to work it. • VigilancePrime • • • 05:48 (UTC) 5 Mar '08

just so you know

Just so you know, Eq, I have no less faith or admiration of you and your editing because of the ANI thread. Of all the people who have posted there, I feel you are probably one of the best-faithed, rational wikipedians. I'd hate for you to see it any other way. • VigilancePrime • • • 15:41 (UTC) 5 Mar '08

Huggle

Just wondering if you ever got my email response for huggle? Both you and TheHelpfulOne asked for responses which I sent. Since you both use gmail, I thought maybe my hotmail might be blocked to you guys. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 18:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll give it a shot. Enigma 18:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Enigma, I got it. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 18:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

(ec)I apologize, I received your email but it seems I misunderstood you. You said TheHelpfulOne already sent "you this", and I took that to mean he sent you the program file already. I sent it out to you now. Equazcion •✗/C • 18:30, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I shoulda been clearer. Thanks though. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk | Contribs) 18:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) Equazcion •✗/C • 18:37, 5 Mar 2008 (UTC)

E-mail.

One more filling up your inbox. · AndonicO 00:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Got it, see my two replies. Equazcion •✗/C • 01:06, 6 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Replied to both. · AndonicO 02:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Replied to your replies :) Equazcion •✗/C • 03:14, 6 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Please respect my edit

Here is the image that was deleted from User:WebHamster user space. It is from commons, here is the link Image:Vulva.jpg The image is of a legal age adult woman as stated by the license, taken by Dutch artist Peter Klashorst This file is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 It was not determined by policy to be deleted. I also took out the incoregment to reupload. Igor Berger (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I like to ask you to remove this comment I have said I have left the discussion, and there is no need for "ignore him he will go way" statement. I consider this WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. Igor Berger (talk) 05:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Equazcion •✗/C • 05:58, 8 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 05:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• I reinserted the derogative and baid faith comments you made in ANI here please do not delete them. By you deleting the comments you are refactoring the ANI thread and changing the meaning of your intent. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 10:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
  • I only removed them because you complained about them. You can't have it both ways. And besides, anyone is allowed to remove their own comments, so please don't reinsert mine. Equazcion •✗/C • 11:02, 8 Mar 2008 (UTC)
    • You should strike them out not remove them! Igor Berger (talk) 11:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
      • Different situations call for different remedies. Striking out comments is usually done when a person's opinion changes or they made a factual error. These comments were considered by another editor to be a personal attack, and in those situations, the comments are generally removed. I wasn't all that attached to them anyway, so I didn't mind removing them completely. Anyway it's my decision and I've chosen to remove them. If you want to remind people of what a bad person I am, simply link to the diffs. Equazcion •✗/C • 11:09, 8 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Igor

I have tried to get this ANI back on track also. I understand your frustrations with this editor. Continue with your thread is my advice.--VS 09:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I saw, and I appreciate it. Don't worry, I haven't given up -- just took a break to play a new game :) This guy is just impossible... it would be so much simpler if he were intentionally malicious. Equazcion •✗/C • 10:41, 8 Mar 2008 (UTC)

• Understood - it is hard sometimes but be assured that many editors have a similar opinion about the disruptive behaviour of this editor. I appreciate your bravery in attempting to deal with such a problematic person.--VS 11:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)