Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:30, 21 September 2012

Mark your main account

Can you mark your main account on this accounts user page in a more explicit way, the use of ] is unnecessary obfuscation (I only found it after looking at the source and I knew what I was looking for). IRWolfie- (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I don't think it's confusing. Anyone who's trying to find out who ESAL is can click on the link and discover that its BMW's alternative account. Electric Catfish 20:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

• I agree with Electric Catfish, it is clear who EatsShootsAndLeaves is, and there has been no intention on his part of obfuscating the past. Kurtis (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

No it is not clear, and that's the way this person wants it; below he or she says he or she has intentionally distanced him or herself from his or her other account. If I have a hard time accepting the declared rationale for this (and I do), it's because when I complained about running afoul of anti-sockpuppet measures for what I feel is the entirely legitimate reason of trying to get around Chinese censorship in an entirely transparent way as far as my (single) username is concerned, this person responded to my request for assistance by coming out of supposed admin retirement to tell me that my edits had just best be left reverted! This was soon followed up by instructing me to not be a "dick".--Brian Dell (talk) 13:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Now hey there, lying about what was said about your edits and about instructing you do do something will not get you far. dangerouspanda 13:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I asked about how to get an IP block exemption and described the content I wanted to restore and the circumstances I was in order to suggest that an exemption might be warranted in my case. You addressed the content, saying my source(s) "sounded like a blog" (which obviously implies a view that the article could do without material with such sources) and then referred me to the reliable source noticeboard (which most seven year plus Wikipedians like myself are probably already aware of). I took issue with your content view and after a back and forth you linked to WP:DICK. Now you've just claimed that this version of events constitutes "lies." Look, you could have referred me to WP:IPBE right off and avoided all of this drama. I came here to call attention to the drama in order to make the point that we might have less of this sort of drama and dubious behaviour generally if people were not so insistent on anonymity. You know where I normally live (from my Userpage), where I currently live, and my real name such that if you have any further issues with me you know where to find me.--Brian Dell (talk) 14:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

• I agree as well. There's no reason to change the way he marks this. I discovered the main account in half a second when I first saw EatsShootsAndLeaves. Ryan Vesey 22:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

If it's clear then why is Bwilkins edit warring to retain the obfuscation? Why is it an issue to reassure other editors by making it even more clear? IRWolfie- (talk) 23:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Why is someone edit-warring on my own userpage to re-add it? Some admins have alternate accounts that are named in such a way so that the "transference of power" to that account is obvious: everyone knows it's an admin behind it - I do not want that. My statements anywhere right now do not hold that behind them, because ANYBODY's statement should be as powerful as anyone else's without the implied threat. Indeed, I went so far in ANI to use "non-admin comment" for awhile. Once or twice, when involved in a discussion about policy, I have said "well...as an admin, I understand that". In a very recent discussion, someone has misread where I supposedly outed myself as an admin to force something, but it's obvious to all in re-reading it that it is not the case. I never said "do this or be blocked" using my main account, why would I ever do it using an alternate with no admin powers? dangerouspanda 10:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Basically your just confusing everyone if you refer to yourself as not an admin, and your userpage and user talk page doesn't help (you have a note about your admin account in it and admin actions) ; you can hand in your bit temporarily via a bureaucrat if you want to get a break from having it. You can then just ask a bureaucrat to put it back on again after your rest period. IRWolfie- (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know, he can't do that because he runs 7SeriesBot. Ryan Vesey 12:46, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

@Ryan: At first, I didn't bother to question this. But when I went and looked at the contribution history of "7SeriesBot", 09:24, 14 October 2010 was the last activity of this little bot. If it is so important, why has Misplaced Pages been able to live without it for almost 2 years? As IRWolfie said, "you can hand in your bit temporarily via a bureaucrat if you want to get a break from having it. You can then just ask a bureaucrat to put it back on again after your rest period" -- Avanu (talk) 14:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

User:7SeriesBOT does not make edits, it deletes. See its FAQ. dangerouspanda 15:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

User:Jasonasosa

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Greetings! To follow up on your query here, to my recollection I had never heard of Jasonasosa before yesterday. I replied to a thread in which he had also posted at the RSN, and was looking at his other recent edits due to his expression of a novel opinion about evaluation of source reliability when I saw the post at ANI. I then posted the link to WP:TPO on Joefromrandb, with the intention of then replying at ANI that he probably could have just started at the user talk page and that the matter should be considered resolved unless the deletion was repeated. I edit conflicted with Niceguyedc who astutely observed that the removal was almost certainly not intentional, at which point I figured the matter was adequately resolved and did not post a redundant reply at ANI. When Joefromrandb asked for more information at the thread on his talk page, I provided the diff. Overall, you and I appear to agree that starting a thread at ANI was unwarranted, and I think you will find from a quick perusal of my edits at Talk:Genesis creation narrative and WP:Articles for deletion/John Feinberg that I have thus far shared few opinions with Jasonasosa. Regards! VQuakr (talk) 00:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

IP may be on to something

Regarding the back-and-forth on the Wikiquette page. The IP may be on to something. The user Beyond My Ken -- well I have had problems with BMK before, too, regarding civility; my photos were reverted by BMK without much deference or explanation; and I let it happen a few times without challenging it until finally one reversion escalated into a mini edit war. Just FYI.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:06, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

It's still not uncivil or WQA material dangerouspanda 17:18, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Depends on how you define civil I suppose.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

To someone with tens of thousands of edits

I'm fine with the whole new name, distancing from old identity whatever it is, but you need to pick a name *and* a role and stay with it.

As I write this section, I see the following: "you want me to sign into my admin account to take care of something: odds are very good that it will not happen right now - I'm taking a break from my admin roles, and it would take some extra-special reason to go against that"

Yet, I just saw a post where you say: "Why not answer an admin here on your talkpage?"(link)

You've got a signature that makes your username appear to be "dangerouspanda", even though your username is "EatsShootsAndLeaves". On your user page, you have obfuscated your primary username, Bwilkins, with a promise to not act as a sock. In essence, you are doing several things that mix up who you are and what your intentions are. This is bad form and bad practice and unbecoming for a guy who is trusted with administrative rights and claims the status of "thousands of edits".

My two cents is that you need to either transfer the admin bit to this account or drop it. My other two cents is that you need to stop using a misleading signature that makes it appear as if you are some other editor. You claim this is all approved. I'd like you to request a review of these behaviors from your fellow admins. Thanks. -- Avanu (talk) 23:47, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree - this is a misuse of multiple accounts. StAnselm (talk) 08:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Avanu: no, our signature policies are clear, thanks. StAnselm, no, it clearly is not socking. Intentions are obvious, and this misreading is pretty bad faith and brutal. I'll be happy to go back to Bwilkins - it's never been retired, and never intended to be retired. dangerouspanda 08:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Let me give my interpretation of the "issue" that's causing the ruckus here. We have an editor A who, rather than try and politely deal with another editor B directly, they went straight to complain at ANI that they "removed their post". Editor B was obviously quite confused for being "taken to ANI for your behaviour". The response at ANI was "looks like a simple edit conflict - no problem". Editor A said "oh, I'll AGF then". Editor B is still a bit pissed off. The only thing I have tried to get editor A to understand is that as Misplaced Pages is a community, they should have tried to work it out with editor B directly before calling the cops. Editor A instead became belligerent, insisting that he ONLY needs to respond to admins in ANI, rather than simply say "ok, I learned from this". It makes no difference if an editor, an admin, a buro asks the simple question - it's simple with no threat involved.

Regarding my signature: our signature policy quite clearly states that you may sign differently from your username, indeed, it's the preferred method to asking for a rename. This account is ancient, and there`s nothing illegal or improper.

Regarding the link on my userpage: it's been discussed ad nauseum, but has also been found to meet the policy.

More questions or misunderstandings? dangerouspanda 08:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate that you responded so quickly, both here and at my Talk page. I don't agree with the sockpuppet case below or an AN/I for this, however, to be clear, I asked *you* to take it upon yourself to ask the admins en masse for their guidance on the issues I presented to you above. I personally feel that you are flaunting a line here, and I feel that this is unbecoming. I won't bring it up again; I dislike having to repeat myself over and over, but I believe this should make clear what my previous statement intended. -- Avanu (talk) 11:31, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Avanu, it's already been debated by numerous admins before - from the moment I temporarily abandoned my Bwilkins account. As it's already been debated and found to be fine, I'm not going to have a secondary (I think it would be fourth by now) debate. I'm AGF'd that you didn't see the first debates, a bit shocked that you of all people would edit-war on my userpage about it. I'm intentionally distanced from my admin account, and have gone out of my way to NOT claim to be an admin. At the same time, both accounts link clearly to each other through a single click dangerouspanda 11:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Misuse is too strong a word. IRWolfie- (talk) 12:12, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, unfortunately StAnselm's similar comment on Jason's talkpage due to his own misunderstanding of the related policies is what caused the ANI report. dangerouspanda 15:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

It's your deceitfulness that caused the misunderstanding when you make claims of being an admin or just a regular editor as stated in your comments to IRWolfie and Avanu.  — Jason Sosa 21:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh, for God's sake, his userpage has a direct link to his other account, and it's not like one has to dig around much to find it. When I first saw ESL's posts on AN/I, I went to his userpage, and figured out in less than 10 seconds who was the "man behind the screen". There is no deceitfulness, and you really ought to step away from the equine carcass and drop the stick. It's starting to get quite tedious at this point. If you were complaining about a potential lack of transparency from User:Bwilkins, you might be able to get a little more traction (since that userpage doesn't directly link to this userpage) but not by squawking about User:EatsShootsAndLeaves, who has had an explicit link to his other account since July 26th, which is well before your first interaction with him. It's the very first thing one encounters on the userpage, so it's not like it's something easily overlooked. The account he links to has two userboxes and a top-icon identifying him as an administrator, so that shouldn't be a big surprise, either. Horologium (talk) 23:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

It's not so much about the link as it is about how he communicates himself as I brought out here, but was removed by him. Thanks,   — Jason Sosa 07:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

You're continuing to claim something there that I did not. As we had already both clarified the case, shook hands, and backed away, your return with new taunts based on your same previous and proven-uncorrect reading of the situation meant you were not here to work collaboratively, you were hear to restart your incorrect POV. Fine, agree to disagree, but stop repeating what was your opinion and had since been proven wrong. You're entitled to your opinion: keep it to yourself, and keep extremely sincere apologies when they're offered like you originally did. dangerouspanda 07:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Preparing an ANI case against you for wp:Sockpuppetry; User:jasonasosa vrs. User:EatsShootsAndLeaves

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

In accordance with WP:ANI: "please discuss the issue with them on their user talk page." I am going to discuss with you a case of wp:Sockpuppetry that I am preparing against you. It is already apparent by other editors in the community of your abuse of this account by:

A) Flaunting around as admin when you are not, or...

B) Being an admin, but using this non-admin account to assume the roll of an admin.

Thanks,   — Jasonasosa 08:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll let you respond the comments made above first. However, seeing as you have come here to actually discuss before going to ANI or SPI, perhaps that means you've acknowledging now that you have learned that you're supposed to try and work it out first? That's all that's ever been asked of you by either joe or myself dangerouspanda 08:49, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, then, we are finally all agreed then. :) See you in "court".   — Jasonasosa 08:51, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. You appear to have allayed my concerns then. My apologies if there was a bit of a misunderstanding: my focus is on editors working things out, and I appreciate that it's sunk it. (PS: Don't get riled up by editors who don't understand policies well). dangerouspanda 09:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I have opened the case: WP:ANI#An alternative account of an admin. Thanks,   — Jasonasosa 09:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Err, but we have resolved the issue between us, have we not? That's why you came here dangerouspanda 09:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, their are multiple issues between us, just like the multiple accounts that you have access to. :)   — Jasonasosa 09:27, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Well then let's TRY and deal with those multiple issues right here in one spot (rather than across 3). I wouldn't want to see anyone make an accidental WP:SPI report (which is where we report sockpuppet violations) or ANI report. There's nothing wrong with my use of my two accounts - according to policy, it's not a WP:SOCK, and cannot be treated as one. This is what I mean about discussing things nicely before calling the cops dangerouspanda 09:32, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

The multiple issues have already been discussed on this talkpage. Now we are on to ANI. Thanks,   — Jasonasosa 09:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

The intent of a discussion is to try and RESOLVE them. Did you try and resolve them? You haven't even said what your issues are, or what type of resolution you're looking for? dangerouspanda 09:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

To offer an outside view: I'm fairly well established here, and I was perplexed about who this "Dangerous Panda" person was. It did seem to me it was a new editor who was trying to rack up the dramahboardz edits, prior to an WP:RFA that would have been closed as WP:TOOEAGER.

Seriously, it is a bit confusing. To avoid misunderstandings such is happening here, it would appear to me that it may possibly be for the best if you went back to editing, administratively or non-administratively, under your main account, Bwilkins.--Shirt58 (talk) 10:30, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Heh! Never thought of it that way. Do you find it at all wrong that the request of a non-admin holds less weight with an editor than the request of an admin? Don't you find that wrong? When an editor says "I will only respond to an admin at ANI" (which is especially ironic because it was a non-admin who closed his original thread there), it's an especially damning study of power. Maybe I was naive in believing it was otherwise dangerouspanda 10:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Postscript to Collector of Souls

By the time you had posted on his page, he had already reverted the decline message from another admin, so when I reverted it (to restore the block message) your comment was deleted. Don't take it personally. :) I'll keep an eye on the page and lock it down if he tries to play games with the unblock template. Horologium (talk) 14:59, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

No issues ... the decline was pretty much identical. I need to get back to my admin account and do those myself :-) dangerouspanda 15:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Andre Wisdom

Now that Andre Wisdom has (or will in approximately 20 minutes' time) made his professional debut, I think it is fair enough for the article to be accepted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frailea (talk • contribs) 16:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Also, perhaps read WP:NOTNEWS? dangerouspanda 17:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)