Misplaced Pages

User talk:Surturz: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:05, 21 August 2012 editBilby (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators40,170 edits Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Wilson Affair. (TW)← Previous edit Revision as of 02:54, 24 August 2012 edit undoHiLo48 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers91,157 edits →Julia Gillard / AWU scandal: new sectionNext edit →
Line 97: Line 97:


If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit ''']''' to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with ]. <!-- Template:Db-attack-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 13:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC) If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit ''']''' to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with ]. <!-- Template:Db-attack-notice --> <!-- Template:Db-csd-notice-custom --> ] (]) 13:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

== ] / ] ==

You think my language is unhelpful to the project? It's far less of a problem than the creation of blatantly politically motivated bullshit articles like the ].

I don't add political crap to the project. You do.

Don't threaten me, when your behaviour is so appalling. I don't bully and threaten people. ] (]) 02:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:54, 24 August 2012

Workshop

The case de quo is quite difficult to follow due to the high number of people commenting, who have wildly differing opinions on the matter being discussed; that's why all editors wishing to chime in must try to be as constructive as possible. This proposal was as unhelpful as humanly possible and, as such, I've just removed it. I have to ask you to please a. not restore it and b. not disrupt the Arbitration process. Salvio 12:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow, tough crowd :) --Surturz (talk) 20:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is free content

Hi. :) Misplaced Pages's content isn't public domain. While you are welcome to copy content from one page to another, our licenses require that you provide attribution to the original contributors by, at minimum, including a wikilink to the original page. I have repair the attribution with Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is free content. You can read more about this at Misplaced Pages:Copying within Misplaced Pages.

Beyond this, I don't agree that the page should be marked a policy. I've changed the tag to indicate it is proposed and approached my concerns at the talk page. I'd welcome discussion there. :) --Moonriddengirl 19:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs/Selina Kyle

Given this, you may want to hold off on this story. pablo 11:16, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Discussion report

Suturz, hello. I commend your bravery on running the gauntlet of the drama report after last week's festivities; I've left some comments in the text, history and talkpage of this week's report on the sort of direction and procedure I'd thought we might take it in future, do let me know what you think. Skomorokh 20:41, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Surturz/AdminWatch

User:Surturz/AdminWatch, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Surturz/AdminWatch (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Surturz/AdminWatch during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 23:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your support at my RfA, which was successful and nearly unanimous. Be among the first to see my L-plate! – Fayenatic L (talk) 13:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

MFD

Spamming every single MFD with "Keep. Editors should find better things to do than police userspace." seems rather disruptive and tendentious. Furthermore, it's rather accusatory — we are not "policing" user space, but rather submitting content that for the most part meets the criteria of WP:STALEDRAFT and WP:MFD. As far as I can tell, every MFD you participated in was made in good faith, not some attempt at "policing". Spamming your mantra across many MFD discussions reminds me of now retired user Kmweber, who would often flood AFD with "Speedy keep, it clearly exists, nothing else matters". Ten Pound Hammer • 23:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Peridon (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback, I will give it the attention it deserves. In response to your specific concerns:
  • I have not violated WP:POINT - no articles were disrupted. I think too often this policy is quoted with the real meaning of "I don't agree with you". Indeed, it is so oft quoted on talkpages that the accusation has become meaningless IMO.
  • neither have I violated WP:TEND - again, not in article space - where is the possibility of exhibiting bias?
  • I agree I have copy-pasted the same text on a number of MfDs but this is not any more spammy than the countless "Delete as per nom and STALEDRAFT" votes elsewhere at MfD
  • The dogwhistle accusation that I am a sock of Kmweber is neither appreciated nor justified. Feel free to start a checkuser (however that is done).
  • The substantial issue here is that the harm of annoying genuine editors by deleting their userpages far outweighs the benefit of deleting some tiny minority of the crap pages in userspace. Unless there is some egregious policy violation (e.g. libelous content or copyvio), I don't think userpages of non-perma-banned users should be deleted, and specifically, the pages which I voted as "keep" were not so bad as to warrant the time spent deleting them.

If there is any spamming here, it is the cluttering of MfD with unnecessary nominations. --Surturz (talk) 02:16, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I never said that you were a sock of Kmweber and have no idea how you extrapolated that I was implying that. I only said your behavior reminded me of him in the scale of its disruption. I fail to see how any users are being "annoyed" since most of the WP:STALEDRAFTs sent to MFD are by users who haven't edited in years. You have good intentions, but you're being outweighed in at least this discussion if not elsewhere. Ten Pound Hammer • 21:37, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
  • I third the above - your spamming MfD with your opinion about the nominator and/or those editors participating in the discussion is towards being disruptive and incivil. Feel free to comment at MfD on what should be done with the nominated page. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 02:55, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages guidelines and policies do not support your position that "don't think userpages of non-perma-banned users should be deleted", no matter what. You are, of course, perfectly free to propose a change in policy, but, as long as the policy is what it currently is, it is disruptive to keep opposing deletion on those grounds, particularly when you also make gratuitous attacks on other editors. 79.123.76.131 (talk) 09:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

Speedy deletion nomination of Wilson Affair

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Misplaced Pages has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Misplaced Pages and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Thank you.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Bilby (talk) 13:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Julia Gillard / AWU scandal

You think my language is unhelpful to the project? It's far less of a problem than the creation of blatantly politically motivated bullshit articles like the AWU scandal.

I don't add political crap to the project. You do.

Don't threaten me, when your behaviour is so appalling. I don't bully and threaten people. HiLo48 (talk) 02:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)