| Revision as of 09:06, 25 September 2005 editMONGO (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers76,644 edits →Speedy deletion of my article← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:26, 25 September 2005 edit undo218.101.117.37 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| LISTEN, SHITSTAIN. IT SAYS IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION THAT I CAN CALL FRANCOIS MITTERRAND A FUCKFACE. IF YOU OBSTRUCT THE COURSE OF FREE SPEECH AGAIN, I WILL KILL YOU, DISRUPT YOUR FUNERAL, AND THEN SHIT ON YOUR GRAVESTONE. | |||
| Archived Talk ] ] | |||
| == Featured picture - comments requested == | |||
| ], currently under comment for featured picture ]] Hiya Mongo. I'm nominating one of my photos for 'featured picture'. Voting isn't for two days, but I'd appreciate your comments if you feel to add them. -- ] ] 16:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your gorgeous landscape photos== | |||
| Are astonishing. They really make those articles come to life. The 'Cirque' image is so extraordinary - the mountainscapes are so sharp I thought it was CGI at first! That you live near such beauty fills me with low-grade nature envy. :) | |||
| And thanks for the nice feedback about my Antinous image - I have a few other really special ones that I took, for less notable figures in ancient Greek and Roman history, but I need to match 'em up with the relevant articles, or write new articles for them. I've already created/inserted a few photos - they're reachable from my User page. Be well, and thanks again! -- ] ] 02:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: alumni == | |||
| Hope you had an easier time choosing a major than I'm having. ;) Thanks for the kind words though. --<font size="2" face="garamond" color="#3979BF">]</font><sup><]></sup> 06:01, August 24, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks for the link; I'll look into it if times get rough. ;) --<font size="2" face="garamond" color="#3979BF">]</font><sup><]></sup> 14:20, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Nice. == | |||
| '' Whats with this character? User:Erwin Walsh At first I didn't check his edit history and didn't think anything about him. He asked me to purge a few of the members in the encyclopedic merit (decency) afterburner project and I said I would, but they all calmed down and now he's doing it himself...--MONGO 11:16, August 24, 2005 (UTC) '' | |||
| ::I'm going to say one thing, and then I'm leaving for the day. That (^) was totally out of line, not to mention a lie. Having put my reputation on the line for your project, consequenting in a 24 hour block, it is piss poor treatment. {{unsigned|??????????????|14:19, 24 August 2005}} | |||
| == MONGO hates vandals... == | |||
| Some one with a similar user name to my own vandalized your page this morning, and I fixed the problem, but then RAMA changed it, thinking it was me vandalizing, then Rama changed it back. Confused? Me too. Please note the vandal used a period at the end of their name. Thought an explanation might be in order. See you 'round! ] 16:40, 24 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| I suggest you refrain from removing other people's names from the list of members. ] 05:06, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| If you remove my name from the list one more time you will be blocked from editing. ] 06:38, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| *I was about to suggest the same. People can decide for themselves whether or not they consider themselves members. ]]] 08:15, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| **Repeatedly removing other people's edits after being asked not to is grounds for blocking. You should assume good ] on Zoe, and note that unilaterally removing people from a Wikiproject is not very civil, and has very little effect other than aggravating people. ]]] 08:29, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ***Well, I see three possibilities here. 1) Zoe wants to contribute to the project but hasn't gotten aroudn to it yet; 2) Zoe wants to keep an eye on the project because she disagrees with part of it; or 3) Zoe is being silly and possibly breaking ]. In cases 1 and 2, you have no business removing her name. In case 3, she would be goading you and the mature response would be to ignore it. So any way you turn it, removing her name is not a good idea. So don't. ]]] 08:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ]]] 08:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I am with you on this one MONGO. This Zoe character is way out of line, banning users left, right and center for "disruption and trolling". Her original member listing on the Project, "''I would like to see a standard which requires an obscene image on every page''" was facetious nonsense, given the originally stated aims of the Project, and thus clearly against ]. It was '''definitely''' disruptive trolling, no question. BTW, 'being silly' is the term used when 'admins' disrupt WP by trolling, other users get blasted out of WikiSpace by the good Zoe. Good luck. --] 10:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Will keep an eye on things, 'admin style' ;-). Abuse of admin power is a serious problem here on WP. Give someone a 'block button' and there is a definite power trip that can ensue. I have found most admins to be responsible, but there is a hardcore of power trippers who promote their POV through abuse, no doubt about it. --] 11:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: ]]] == | |||
| *Mongo, don't cite me out of context. Changing a section header to clarify what the section actually is about is entirely different from unilaterally removing somebody's name from a membership list. ]]] 08:54, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| *He didn't revert your signed and commenced conversation for no reason. Zoe didn't violate a project page with a disruptive edit. Your perspective isn't fair. And if many people disagree with you, you should at least consider the possibility that you may in fact be wrong. I have better things to do than argue amount semantics; I suspect that you are smart enough to know precisely what is going on here. Now please go do something constructive. ]]] 09:10, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Mongo,<br/> | |||
| It that you have misunderstood some ] wiki concepts.<br/> No one "owns" the discussion on a talk page. (See changes.) <br/>]]] 09:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| <small>(Copied from other talk page)</small> | |||
| :Basic wiki concepts...nothing wrong with being bold...are you insinuating that you can teach me some new tricks...I'm looking for some article creation on your part...your edit summary suggests that you are more interested in janitorial work, not that this is a bad thing, er somewhat lacking in creativity. I think your edit was more than bold...it was rude...I inserted it along with my timestamped entry...you then post that the title of the subject heading can't be changed...by whose authority? My edit to ]'s talk page was right on.--] 10:07, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::The facts are thus: | |||
| ::*I changed a . Any argument that suggests this action was inapropriate needs a review of ]. | |||
| ::*You reverted without an ]. I asked you to please use the discussion page before reverting again. | |||
| ::*It was uncivil of me to change the header of this talk page, and I apologise. | |||
| ::]]] 12:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Orders == | |||
| You seem to enjoy giving people orders. Here is the apology for altering my subject heading from the person who changed it...gives me ample right to remove the warning and shows you have no right dictating. Taken from my talk page: "It was uncivil of me to change the header of this talk page, and I apologise. | |||
| brenneman(t)(c) 12:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)". You really need to do a deep examination of your behavior. Wrongful accusations of 3RR, calling people trolls with no evidence and making suggestions of vandalism when it involves content dispute is not the way to build a good reputation here. I won't bother Rfc-ing you on all of this because I think they are a waste of time. Don't act so threatened. --] 00:10, August 26, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :I ''do'' understand Wikiquette, if that's what you mean. I did not change your subject header on the talk page; but I think doing that is kinda borderline in terms of wikiquette. One ''definitely'' should not remove someone's actual comments—as you have done ''numerous times'' to various people—but changing a header is a bit more context dependent. The headers are organizational and navigational, and as such are more of collaborative content. Obviously, if a change really undercuts the intention of the original header, that's bad manners... brenneman's change ambivalent enough that I did not myself revert it, but also such that I did not object to your reversion. ] 00:41, 2005 August 26 (UTC) | |||
| == Whats happenin'? == | |||
| Hey Mongo, wassup! Sorry to bother you, again, but I was wondering what is the current status of Encyclopedic merit? I am keeping tabs on the talk page and all I see is a lot of hot air and debate which is simply going in circles. I am not for one minute blaming you, but I was wondering what can be done/is being done with regards to the aims of the project? Or are we in a big debate cycle, putting a stopper in any project activity? ] 13:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==] No. 2== | |||
| MONGO, the page was a good try, but I almost think that Agriculture was correct, not in quitting entirely, but in this page being useless. It is just one big edit war with no productive edit or standard in sight. It is entirely, with just a few exceptions, filled with editors who do not want to contribute anything to the goals except to see it die. I am not an Admin (and have no desire to be one), so I don't know how you control it. And if it is not controlled, then the page is useless. You might note that ] was removed from the deletion category today. The people who want to lower the concyclopedic standard of Wiki, violate all common sense, totally ignore the purpose of Wiki as Jimbo set it up, have won. I don't think there is anything we can do. That's Wiki. --] 20:49, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :For example, see Gibadabmoob below. Just for laughs, here is his post on that page. --] 23:23, August 25, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::Hippies | |||
| ::No censorship on Wiki hippies. Wiki is not for you to censor. Who made you god? The pope? I don't think so. Even the pope understands naked people can be educational. This project is a violation of NPOV and needs be stopped. ] 22:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::How so...a violation of NPOV...in what way?--] 00:14, August 26, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == What you're doing is wrong == | |||
| Misplaced Pages is not for you to censor. Some of us aren't offended by the human body. ] 22:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :You're entitled to your opinion.--] 00:15, August 26, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Thanks again (and again) for the kind words== | |||
| <nowiki>:)</nowiki> -- ] ] 03:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Dude == | |||
| dued, you fucking rock. Bottom line. You're awesome. I'm gone but I just had to say. Out of all trhe people here. You're like the king of wikipedia, if wikipedia wasn'g all trolls. So rock on, peace out, ya;lld vooll. ~ ] | |||
| == 2004 election == | |||
| I've protected the page for now. Hope that helps. Please keep me posted if there are any new developments. ]]] 13:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Your post == | |||
| No, I'm actually heading out. I wouldn't have been editing at all if it weren't for an excessive volume of Bourbon last night that for some reason compelled me to do so. Less hard feelings now towards people, but Misplaced Pages is still full of trolls. Hell, look at what you've done to WfD. Stellar effort, but the trolls don't want you to finish it. Particularly I find it interesting that a number of admins are abusing their powers there and violating WP:POINT repeatedly, but as admins, they get a free ticket and others jump to their defense despite your quite responsible actions to stop them. Thats Misplaced Pages. It's like trying to turn the slashdot comments page into something worthwhile. The Signal to Noise ratio is not good enough. Anyway, thanks for the message. I might drop in from time to time to catch up on your efforts. But no serious editing for me. Peace out. ] 15:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==] and ]== | |||
| Please see my proposal at ]. --] 17:53, August 27, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Give a hand== | |||
| You want to give a hand at ]. People just kept piling on every nude cover they could find. The version I reverted to still has plenty of skin for the skin folks. I don't oppose some minor stuff, but this was childish and unnecessary. Anyhow, it is a stupid revert war, but I think it has broader implications of people intentionally going out and loading up Wiki pages with as much nudity as they can find, even really bad pictures and box covers. --] 03:02, September 2, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Peak Height == | |||
| No problem, I just typed in Heavens Peak, Montana, altitude, into the search engine and I found it. It was pretty easy, feel free to metricate it as I (in South Africa) use the metric system and dont know how to convert, I will see if I can find that lake info, but I reckon that'll be harder though. Might I just say what a beautiful are you live in! ] 08:47, 2 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Yeah, where I live in S.A. (Cape Town) is one really wonderful place. I am quite an avid mountaneer. Regarding Heaven's peak, it looks great now, but I notice that none of the peak articles mention first ascents. BTW, I notice the war a WPEm is dieing down, mabye now we could get to work regarding the projects aims. Cheers! ] 08:59, 2 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Arbitration == | |||
| Would you be happy to go to RFAr, with the intention of stopping users Hipocrite and Lulu of Lotus Eaters - the two biggest trolls, from editing the decency project? I will happily fill out the details, as it's getting to the point where nothing else is going to work. ''' ] ''' | |||
| * Don't feed the trolls. I've reported {{vandal|172.156.178.23}} to ]. Let them take care of it. --]<font color="#008000">]</font> 05:14, 3 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks.--] 05:15, September 3, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes, thank you--] 06:21, 3 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :::Do you have email? I will send you a copy of the RFAr and you can decide to endorse it. I will only file it if there are several supporters. I think the latest episode of personal attacks and trolling by the anon can also be included. ''' ] ''' | |||
| == Thanks for your support == | |||
| Hi, just a quick note to thank you for your support on my RfA. I was pleased to see so much support, especially from people such as you who I do not know very well, if at all. Now that I am an administrator I will do my best to please the community’s expectations. Best regards, ] 17:28, 3 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Important notice, for immediate attention == | |||
| This message has been posted on the talk pages of all users actively editing the Decency project. The RFAr has now been completed, documenting an extensive range of disruptive edits by Hipocrite and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, and is available on request. | |||
| Before the RFAr is submitted, I think a conversation on Noitall’s talk page ] should be read, where Hipocrite seems to indicate he might be open to mediation. Perhaps the mediation process might be productive on this occasion, and I am willing to extend an olive branch before banning is contemplated. I will file a mediation request in the next few days, unless there are any objections on my talk page. Of course, if Hipocrite and/or Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters do not agree to mediation, the case will go immediately to arbcom. | |||
| ''' ] ''' | |||
| == admin (self-) nomination == | |||
| Thx for the (pre-)support, but I've been asked before, and I do not wish to self-nominate, but have an eye on RfA...] 08:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Esperanza == | |||
| Hello again, I liked your comments to that golfing New Orleans thing. Anyways I thought you'd like a new association called ]. Here's weird part... me and Agriculture are both members :O ]]] (]) 08:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Ray Nagin == | |||
| I would like to become an admin, and RedWolf24 strongly recommended that I stay away from heavy POV and contraversy so people won't just vote down my RfA just because they disagree with an opinion of mine. So, until 7 days after October 15, when I will make my RfA, I am avoiding such issues. Good Luck though,:).] 22:38, September 5, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Thanks, and yes, I really don't like vandals/trolls/POV warrior(I have reverted both anti-Bush and anti-Kennedy POV warriors). I will have a look at the article for vandals and see if there is any thing I can do without causing any trouble. But my paticipation will be scarce nonetheless. Article watchlisted.] 02:17, September 6, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Ted Kennedy == | |||
| Please watch this article as TDC, Agiantman or 24 might try to add in more POV.] 18:06, September 6, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == RfA == | |||
| Thanks for your support (and pre-support) on my RfA...I'll try to be good ] 10:49, 12 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Android79's RfA == | |||
| Thank you for your support on my RfA. <font color="green">]</font><font color="purple">]</font> 22:18, September 12, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Just a thought == | |||
| ] may not satisfy ''all'' of your needs, but if you don't show some support, we're not likely to get even this much. — ]]]] 10:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Assistance == | |||
| Ever since the Wiki project, Hipocrite has been trolling my edits and causing major disruption around the globe. First, could you weigh in on ] when I was minding my own business and Hipocrite tried to delete more of my work. Second, would you support an RfC against him, particularly for what he did on the Wiki project? --] 14:01, 13 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Humor == | |||
| ] includes assertion that he should have equiped school buses with pontoons to rescue people of ] ]] --] 05:31, 14 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| I'd be the first to say that wasn't Bush's fault. He's not without blame in general, but that's definetely not pinnable on him. --] 19:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Agreed...I was surprised he "fessed up" since I certainly don't think that the Feds are any more to blame than a half dozen other entities. I got pretty emotional though when I heard about the deperation of those stranded at the Superdome and the Convention Center and I know that they could have gotten supplies into those two areas at least in very short order...oh well...I'm happy I'm not Michael Brown! He'll be lucky (probably all he's qualified for anyway) to get a job as a janitor at Denny's.--] 20:18, 14 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Right. In government, there are always certain jobs reserved for political hacks where it won't get you in trouble. FEMA used to be one of those jobs. A lawyer was fine in the old days. Whoops! Katrina showed that as a problem. But also see this article on as a different perspective on the Bush Admin response, --] 23:03, 14 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == SPAM == | |||
| *'''To whomever is sending me e-mails.''' I'll include those lynching photos with goats.exc in my "list of things I wish I'd never seen". As they took the time to find my e-mail address, create a new hotmail account, collect those photos, and send them to me, I hope they'll take the time time to read this. | |||
| *My comment was not intended to be taken as a racist comment. It was a parody of Tony's suggestion that I should not be hurt or offended because there existed a group for whom this label was self-applied. | |||
| *I did, and still do, believe that anyone who read my comments without prejudice will see that. However, I understand that I have caused hurt with my comments. I deeply regret this, and do wish I had chosen my words more carefully. | |||
| *While attacks against me as a "deletionist" are hurtful, they do at least have ''some'' basis in reality. I do vote delete more than keep. That is no excuse, however, for those who would dismiss myself (and others) as "deletionists". I am more complex than that. | |||
| *Attacks against me as a racist, however, are '''completely''' misguided. Please feel free to examine my contributions, as I can offer no further evidence to the contrary. | |||
| ]]] 00:40, 15 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Bmicomp's RfA == | |||
| Well, ] has not quite completed yet, but either way, I'd like to thank you for your vote and your support, regardless of the outcome. -- ] ], ] 23:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == The charter is here. (Relating to Esperanza) == | |||
| Hello MONGO, the ] for ] is up. Take a looksie :) ]]] (]) 02:52, 19 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Esperanza made less bureaucratic == | |||
| Hello again, I have (unilatterly) taken away the 'assembly' idea, as per my reasons at that edit summary and per ]. I have left the admin general, as some leadership is good. Now, all you have to do is be a member to establish consensus, the whole assembly idea is gone. Also, I have added an advisory committee, of four members, with limited power besides watching over the admin general and making sure he doesn't do anything stupid. Please look at the ammended charter, and I would love a comment. ]]] (]) 00:26, 21 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == The last time I'm spamming you all with Esperanza stuff == | |||
| Hello MONGO. As you may or may not know, there have been some troubles with Esperanza. So now, as a last ditch to save the community, please vote at ] on all neccisary polls. P.S. I'm very sorry for spamming you all with these messages, and this will be the last time. I recommend putting ESP on your watchlist. Cheers and please look at that, let's stop the civil war then. ]]] (]) 02:48, 22 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Latest breaking news == | |||
| ] 04:05, 22 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :I agree with you about Bush and Neuman. The other difference between them is that Alfred E. Neuman has never lied to me. ] 07:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==Admin?== | |||
| Have you been asked if you want adminship yet? You're on the top of my list of candidates to nominate. Let me know if you're interested. --]] 16:03, 22 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| Well consider yourself to be one that I would like to nominate. | |||
| Reasons to nominate you: | |||
| * You've been around a while and you've done lots of different kinds of editing. | |||
| * I've had a chance to interact with you and you're a nice guy. | |||
| * You aren't afraid to stick up for your beliefs. I like that a lot. | |||
| * You take criticism seriously | |||
| * You don't take criticism ''too'' seriously. | |||
| I'm going to leave this to cook for a while. I think you should probably take more notice of "]". | |||
| If you're still interested in mid-October, and I haven't approached you in the meantime, remind me and I'll nominate you. --]] 22:36, 24 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Agreed on most points. I disagree that MONGO "bites newcomers". I think overall he'd be an excellent choice for admin, I would whole heartedly support. We need more administrators who realize '''Administrators have no more rights to edit than any other contributor'''. MONGO understands this, and the basic precepts of Misplaced Pages better than most current admins. ] 22:40, 24 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==9/11, ]== | |||
| I had a complaint from {{user|Jimmywalter}} that you described his addition on 9/11 as nonsense, and vandalism. Well his addition was somewhat POV but I don't think it qualifies as vandalism. It all comes down to whether his sources are credible (most, but not all, educated people would agree that they aren't). Could you please make it up with him? Explain that you disagree with his opinion that these sources are credible. --]] 12:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ==User:Kyla== | |||
| Well, on the Internet, nobody ever knows if you're a cat, do they? Trolls can be very subtle. It's of course possible that the page was put up by someone other than her, someone who wishes her ill, but if so, it's awfully well done; it looks just like what you'd expect someone real like that to do. If it's really her, I already did tell her that if there were any items in the history that she wanted vanished, I would do it. If it's not her, well, how would we find out? You want to try tracking down the real one, and contacting her offline? You could also try suggesting to her that she might not want to put so much personal info online, and ask her if she wants any of it removed from the history. Just give me a list of versions to delete, and I can selectively make them go away (albeit with a bit of work). ] ] 13:45, 24 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletions (from archive 2) == | |||
| :<small> moved from ] <font color=#000000>]</font>]] 19:46, 24 September 2005 (UTC) </small> | |||
| I find it ironic that deleting the data I contributed is vandalism. Howvere, its OK to edit a state page that thinks inbreeding is just swell. | |||
| OKEY DOKEY Out OF HERE. I have requested my removal. Do NOT reply. {{unsigned2|19:27, 24 September 2005 |Whitby Mark}} | |||
| :I haven't supported, in any way, the slander or libel that West Virginia is inbred or is populated by inbred people. I have tried to coach the instigator of such nonsense to NOT put it in there. I am very familiar with West Virginia and personally have no problem with the place...in fact, I consider it to be one of the most beautiful states in the east, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. I'll look again at what you claim to be as deletions and see if I have made an error.--] 19:57, 24 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| == Speedy deletion of my article == | |||
| I wrote in the edit summary that I was the article "Craters of the Moon National Wilderness" was "in progress"...as I went to add an infobox as is standard in all the wilderness articles I create, I saw that you had speedy deleted my article. Admittedly, all I had inserted was the title, but it was hardly a standard vandalism or bogus type of article....I request you try to be more careful in the future. Thanks and see you around!--] 08:28, 25 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :Ah, sorry, I missed the edit summary. Yes that should not have been deleted. But actually it looked like a standard form of vandalism, as many people will create articles with just the title in the context and the leave it, as a test I guess. ] | ] 09:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ::No problem...you didn't do anything wrong as far as I am concerned...I should have saved more info so not to confuse anyone...see you around.--] 09:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:26, 25 September 2005
LISTEN, SHITSTAIN. IT SAYS IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION THAT I CAN CALL FRANCOIS MITTERRAND A FUCKFACE. IF YOU OBSTRUCT THE COURSE OF FREE SPEECH AGAIN, I WILL KILL YOU, DISRUPT YOUR FUNERAL, AND THEN SHIT ON YOUR GRAVESTONE.