Revision as of 01:40, 4 August 2005 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 edits Vampire← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:44, 4 August 2005 edit undoDreamGuy (talk | contribs)33,601 edits revert harassment from editor with RfC and RfA against him and from admin with clear bad faith against me...Next edit → | ||
Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
: See here ] to see what I am talking about. | : See here ] to see what I am talking about. | ||
== its not harassment== | |||
i just tried towarn you, but you got you blocked. guess that means your a lost cause, becasue you wont liten. | |||
] 01:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
==]== | |||
You've been reported for a 3RR violation at ] and have been temporarily blocked from editing. I've reduced the block by 12 hours because the violation was a few days ago and wasn't spotted immediately. The reason I've acted on it now is that I received a complaint that others involved in the dispute were being blocked for 3RR while you weren't, and my repeated attempts to discuss it with you met with aggression and deletion of the messages from your talk page. If you feel the diffs have been misread and this was not a violation, or if you feel the block is unfair, please feel free to e-mail me using the link on my user page, and I'll get straight back to you. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 00:47, August 4, 2005 (UTC) | |||
:DreamGuy, I've reversed the block, because one of the reverts was against a sockpuppet of Enviroknot's and may not count toward 3RR (but this may be interpreted differently by other admins, so don't count on it in future). I urge you to reconsider your editing style. You reverted the same section of ] 14 times in eight days, which led to the page being protected, and several complaints against you. Please try to reach a compromise with the other editors on the page, no matter how frustrated you are, or perhaps take a break from editing pages where you can't reach consensus. Also, once again, it's regarded as bad form to delete messages from your talk page. That's particularly true of 3RR issues, as other admins may need to see them. Cheers, ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 01:40, August 4, 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:44, 4 August 2005
I've deleted a welcome message and several posts from someone upset that I removed links to her site that were inappropriately added to several pages. If you feel like reading those, they are in the history.
Please add new comments below.
DreamGuy 01:38, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
I have archived some comments. Click a link if you want to see them.
Gwine
Thanks for looking over Scipiocoon's contributions. I'm bothered by the casual use of words and phrases like "darkish dialect" and "smoky entertainment." I'm at work, and can't roam the Wiki as freely as I can at home. Glad someone else is watching out. Let me know if there's any way I can help. Joyous 13:36, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
Ripper victim
If I remember correctly Gordon is a new member. He might not be aware of the policies regarding moves. And I could be wrong, but I think he hasn't had all that much time to respond. He was busy editing the reference sections. I'll talk to him and change the link as soon as the page is moved. ] 21:59, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Yeah, he's new. He's been going through and changing it to Catharine other places too even after seeing my concern on his talk page at least (as he responded to it, though he may have missed the explanation). I have no problem with waiting for it to be cleared up, but then if he starts hunting down all mentions of "Catherine" on other pages (suspects, famous prostitutes, people famous in death, etc.) it's just that much more to undo later. The article was previously on an article with the correct spelling, which he has since forwarded to the new one he made, so would we have to have the original deleted and the new one moved? DreamGuy 22:04, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
- I've changed the title on the Ripper letters template, technically speaking the postcard wasn't a letter, but you're right. The title was misleading. I'll keep an I on the Catharine links and see how it goes. ] 08:37, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
George Chapman
Hi DreamGuy;
Thanks for your message regarding Dr. Thomas Neill Cream. Thanks for fixing the page up a bit too with regards to my misspelling of his name.
I've recently added an entry for George Chapman, the Polish guy listed as a possible Ripper suspect (it needed a Disambiguation because it's also the same name as some poet or other.) I did not put a huge amount about the case because I only have one book that mentions him and I can't find too much on the web other than those that list a brief description of him under the heading of 'Ripper suspects'. I'll see what else I can find to expand it a bit. I also put in a note about how he is considered a suspect by Frederick Abberline but how he is also disregarded by some as a suspect because it is unlikely a nutcase would go from ripping women open to just poisoning girlfriends. Obviously you are more than welcome to add to the cross-referencing between Chapman and Jack T. Ripper; I figure myself quite knowledgable on most things serial-killery but not so much on historical cases, so you sound like the best person to inject such Ripper-related info into the Chapman article.
Take care. User:Robert Mercer, December 23
Ads
There is Misplaced Pages:External links, which also links to Misplaced Pages:Spam#External link spamming.
When an administrator goes to the User contributors , or difference between revisions (clicking "compare selected versions" in the page history), there appears next to each edit which is still the most recent of each article a "rollback" button which undones the edit and creates an automated message.
I'll take a look at that edit history. Hyacinth 04:32, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The High Road
I'm impressed at how you're handling the harassment on your talk page. You seem to be staying calm while dealing with others who are acting childishly. Joyous 22:48, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
Harpy
Good work on the Harpy article man :) FrancisTyers 00:42, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll see if I have time to round up an image or two for that also. DreamGuy 02:27, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
Medusa Edit
Wow that was a pretty dry edit to the Medusa page. I agree it needs a lot more and there are so many versions of the tale that some facts can get skewed but, really--a little literary voice doesn't hurt. 16:50, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Hi... encyclopedias typically don't have "literary voice," if what you mean by that is the part that was there about fountaining blood from a decapitated stump of a neck or whatever it was that used to say. It's like they say on Dragnet: "Just the facts, ma'am." DreamGuy 01:39, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Mythology is an oral tradition---not so much about hard and fast "facts". It's true there are some basic things that should be adhered to, but a little embellishment in the form of strong description doesn't interfere with that. Part of the fun is the gore. 17:23, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- You are talking about styles of storytelling when you should be concerned with encyclopedia style. We're here to give information about topics, not to emulate their style of writing. I would also disagree strongly that "gore" is a typical part of mythology, as very often those details are entirely glossed over. DreamGuy 17:52, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Request for comments
I just placed a request for comment on Gabrielsimon's behavior. Please read it and sign it if you agree. --Pablo D. Flores 13:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Apparently another sockpuppet
I see you blocked User:Existentializer as a sockpuppet of a frequently banned user. I think we have another sock of his now...
User:Ni-ju-Ichi, based upon his edit history, looks to be exactly the same guy... note how he reverts Vampire and Vampire fiction to same states he was edit warring over earlier (with same false claims of reverting "vandalism" -- although this time in abbreviated form) anmd also the preoccupation with Islam.
I'd appreciate it if you could undo his edits on Vampire and Vampire fiction if he starts warring over them and then blocking this new one... since he keeps coming back I think more severe steps, if any exist, need to be taken, as he has proven himself unwilling to work within the rules. DreamGuy 05:08, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
- I've got my eyes on User:Ni-ju-Ichi. He does look like a possible sock, but I haven't made my mind up yet. I thought I was doing okay to nail the User:Existentializer sock. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 06:39, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
Otherkin captions
Bing. How about "perception of ...yadda... difference" for the captions in the otherkin article? Vashti 00:25, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
- Captions? Oh, subheads... uhm, perception is something actually through senses and not something internal to the brain, so it wouldn't really be accurate as I understand it. "Claims of", "alleged", or some completely other way of putting the subheads there would be better. DreamGuy 00:33, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
Copyright comments Image:Mark 48 Torpedo testing.jpg
Hi. It seems I have mixed up the sources, and the images originate from the Australian Navy. In this case, the source images have not been in public domain. About my relicensing: As I understand it, Images in the PD can be used, and if modified can be given another copyright. (That is why there are CC and GFDL licenses, otherwise we could just use PD on Misplaced Pages). The arranging of the images (cutting, stitching together, adding lines, etc.) was not a huge job, but still took some time. And I think at least US courts have very low standards for adding artistic value, this compiled image being one example of it. Hence I added a free license so that the derivatives created by me would stay free. I do not wish to clame fame for this work, but merely to keep it free. In any case, this is no longer a point for this image, since the source images were not PD to begin with. Hope this clarified my point, please let me know if you have a different legal view. Happy editing. -- Chris 73 Talk 10:23, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
- No, sorry, but simply compiling images in a utilitarian way and adding lines for functional purposes in no way counts as adding artistic value for the purposes of granting a new copyright. DreamGuy 19:48, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations
You have 3,000 edits now. Congratulations. Glad your RfC is closed, now let's move onward! Take care, D. J. Bracey (talk) 14:44, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
- See here ] to see what I am talking about.