| Revision as of 20:10, 9 November 2006 editSuicidal tendancies (talk | contribs)196 edits Please dont waste my time. ~~~~← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:14, 9 November 2006 edit undoSuicidal tendancies (talk | contribs)196 edits whyNext edit → | ||
| Line 218: | Line 218: | ||
| just dont. | just dont. | ||
| == why == | |||
| erm... no it isnt... why are you wasting my time just leave me alone. ] 20:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:14, 9 November 2006
|
Since I am an admin, you can and should track all of my actions. This is my desk, where you can check all this stuff out. |
No barnstars please.
I've been really rouge lately, so don't worry.
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11
Kyle XY - link to a blog - followup question
When something I've added to an article (such as a link to a blog) gets deleted, how do I know that it was a legitimate deletion in accordance with Misplaced Pages policy or -- an act of vandalism? (~~~~);
Kyle XY - link to a blog
I understand that it is generally bad form to create a link to a blog. Is that Misplaced Pages policy? I had created a link to a blog in the article on Kyle XY, but it was deleted. I want to advise Misplaced Pages that there were in fact a lot of hits to the link--about 8 per day. So there was reader interest in the link. Can I reinstate the link?(~~~~);
Intentional vandalism by Derex.
Derex has been consistently removing comments from the John Kerry Misplaced Pages article to reflect his own views. Comments from previous edits often have no justification and include:
- (nope)
- (oh, i've talked plenty. have you bothered to read?)
It started off as a blatant attempt to make the article POV (as evidenced by his willingness to place himself over the talks page), and now he keeps reverting any attempt to point out that Democrats have criticized Kerry as well, and that Kerry apologized in the name of "simplification".
Please, don't encourage the vandals. --PeanutCheeseBar 23:50, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- That's quite an accusation from someone who is now consistently deleting well-sourced material that you don't like. I, and most everyone else, on talk felt this should be at most a one-line section with a link to wikinews. You persisted in adding lengthy details. Ok, but you don't get to pick and choose which detail as it suits your point of view. I've added detail, such as the view of Republican Dick Armey to match your discussion of the view of Republican John McCain. You insert Harold Ford's call for an apology, but you delete his accepatance of Kerry's explanation. I've added sources, going to notability, that almost all pollsters think this amounts to almost nothing in the election. You have removed that as well. Trying to keep a very minor incident in the scope of a lifetime brief in accordance with undue weight provision of npov is not vandalism. Repeatedly selectively removing well-sourced and notable detail that disagrees with the POV you are trying to further is vandalism. Derex 01:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- The article was NPOV before you started making your edits. For example, Kerry initially refused to apologize, and I linked to an article with confirmation of this fact. Repentance is important in politics, as what Kerry did could have amounted to career suicide; several times you deleted the statement that he even apologized at all. Another example is when you added that Democrats accepted Kerry's apology, yet failed to indicate that the White House and Republicans have as well; failure to mention this would only serve to create bias against Republicans when people read this and see that only one side accepted the apology. I've left in your comment that pollsters think that this will have no effect on the elections, though the statements by Dick Armey and the nonpartisan pollster serve to undermine the importance of what Kerry said, and turn attention away from Kerry, respectively. I attribute your refusal to participate in the discussion and continue to delete criticisms of Kerry by Democrats as vandalism because you're undermining the integrity of the article, and even calling me names in the comments and on your talks page. Way to be neutral. --PeanutCheeseBar 01:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Page blanking vandal
Good catch on that IP out of Texas. Thanks! -- Avi 14:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- No prob. Yanksox 01:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Block of User talk:66.226.79.49
What do you mean by contact me via e-mail if anything comes up?? in your block summary?? This is a school IP, that I'm on, and it's part of Internet for Learning. Be careful about blocking the IP address, as it is a shared one for an entire high school, well, two actually - Formby High School, and Range High School, over 300 + computers have this IP, so be careful about blocks, OK?? --Colbber 15:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- See user talk. Yanksox 01:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
U2 band member pages
"it's a detail about where the band is, not about the band"
They're they same thing. A detail about where the band is about the band - how can it not be? And anyway, how is it relevant to a biographical entry about a person? 86.17.246.29 01:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- See User talk. Yanksox 01:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 6th.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 2, Issue 45 | 6 November 2006 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Clergy abuse article
Hi,
I meant to take a copy of the Clergy abuse article so that I could work on it in my userspace but somehow lost track of the fact that the AFD was about to close. Could you undelete it long enough to put a copy in my userspace under User:Richardshusr/Clergy abuse? I think you will agree that the AFD debate was not an obvious consensus (majority vote rather than overwhelming majority). I believe an NPOV article could be constructed from the latest revision. In fact, if you compare the edit history of the article against the votes, you will find that many of the Delete votes were cast before the article underwent substantial expansion and revision.
There are two paths forward: a Deletion Review or a re-write followed by re-creation. I am proposing the second if you will help me by restoring the deleted text to my userspace.
Thanx.
--Richard 16:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- So, wait: Are you bargining with me? I would have been happy to userfy it, but I feel that you are posing mild threats to me. AfD is based on strength of argument, not a head count. Yanksox 17:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- FYI, I did it already. - crz crztalk 17:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
OK what happened there - I made multiple changes to the Brassiere article today, then my computer crashed and they have all gone. Although they can be found in my contributions - is that retrievable?
Massachusetts election
Yanksox, I am with the Healey campaign and we have not conceded. You can confirm this with an IP trace or by calling us at the CHQ (617-523-0844) and requesting to speak to me, Mary Joad. The current feed is at 48 percent. Articles should not be modified at this time.
see above - 10:31 PM
Inappropriate admin conduct
Yanksox,
You should understand that I was acting in accordance with the Healey campaign's request that the articles not be changed until the official count was completed or Ms. Healey conceded, which she did at about 10:40 PM.
It was not appropriate to issue a block in this case on the following grounds:
(1) You, yourself, violated 3RR as well. (2) It is Official Policy that an administrator who is involved in the dispute may not block. (3) In light of the fact that neither an official vote tally nor a concession had been made, any repeated statement that a new governor had been elected (or that the governor elect was now the governor) could be interpreted as vandalism. In response to the seconded issue taken by user:Rhobite on User talk:MJoad, the edits applied to Kerry Healey, Deval Patrick, and Commonwealth of Massachusetts up until 10:40 PM did not state that they represented projected results, but were inappropriately and repeatedly stated as fact.
I am requesting that you take the following action:
(1) Assess your role and possible violation of Official Policy in this dispute. (2) Confirm via an official retraction on my talk page that your actions in this case were in violation of Official Policy. (3) Engage in a continuing discussion with me regarding higher involvement e.g. sysops status for myself as an inappropriately blocked party as, I believe, I am at least as cognizant of the Official Policies and conduct codes as has been demonstrated towards me.
Thank you. -MJoad
>>11:32 PM>> I should add that I believe you were acting without abusive intent and therefore I do not believe arbitration is appropriate at this time. However, I do believe the blocking was an Official Policy violation and should be addressed. -MJoad
As a fellow administrator on Misplaced Pages, I can confirm that Yanksox was acting appropriately to Misplaced Pages's policies. I hope this helps alleviate any potential concerns and feel free to follow up if necessary hoopydink 04:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)- Upon further review, it seems as if Yanksox actually did violate Misplaced Pages policies in terms of using the block feature while involved in the dispute and violated the 3RR given that the dispute appears to be a content dispute over legitimate sources and not vandalism. Apologies for my initial error in assessment hoopydink 05:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- It probably would have been better for Yanksox to get an uninvolved admin to block you. However given the time-sensitive nature of the information and the speed at which you were reverting, the block was appropriate. It's good that you're concerned about the integrity of the information Misplaced Pages reports. In the future, please make more of an effort to discuss your edits on talk pages and come to an agreement instead of reverting articles. I'm sure you understand that if Misplaced Pages changed its articles based on the wishes of political campaigns, it would quickly lose its objectivity. And on a side note, according to the timestamps on news articles (as well as my own memory), Healey conceded around 10 PM, not 10:40 as you say. Rhobite 04:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
>>11:52 PM>> Thank you Rhobite for adding to this discussion. I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment on the desires of political campaigns. My reversions, however, are not a statement of campaign policy, but they are at the request of the campaign that the integrity of the articles in question be maintained until the election results were resolved.
With regard to Ms. Healey's concession, I requested a copy of the Letter of Concession which was sent by mail and hand delivered to Deval Patrick's CHQ, and those of our other opponents, and to the Secretary of the Commonwealth, signed at 10:33 PM.
In terms of article integrity, the statements that anybody had become governor-elect, much less governor, before that was actually the case is detrimental to the integrity of the affected articles. Per your point specifically, it would not have been such a detriment to state that news organizations had projected the victor. -MJoad
- I stand by by block since you were editing with an agenda and because it was 15 minutes. I know my way around the Healey camp, say hi to Athena for me while you're there. This is very agitating, and to be honest, Mary you should be ashamed. Ashamed that you were trying to push and stretch out the election as long as you could, on Misplaced Pages of all things. I probably violated a rule or two, but I did it for the general overall interest and won't back down. Take it up for a review if you want. Yanksox 10:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I just want to note that your request to be sysoped is outrageous and humorous. Yanksox 14:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, the irony. >< Poor Yank. Srose (talk) 19:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- For those keeping score this is on Misplaced Pages Review. Yanksox 23:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, the irony. >< Poor Yank. Srose (talk) 19:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I just want to note that your request to be sysoped is outrageous and humorous. Yanksox 14:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Your question
I've answered your question at my RfA. Please let me know if you have any more quesitons and I'll be glad to answer them. - Mike | Talk 00:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, I sent you an email (although it's not urgent material, so carry on for now). -- tariqabjotu 00:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I responded. Yanksox 00:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ah... you must have been thinking of the one I sent last night (unless my e-mail server is taking awhile). -- tariqabjotu 01:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Australia
Hi, I've entered into a (hopefully good natured) discussion on the Australian invasion vs settlement thing if you would like to come on down :-)
Obsessing over adminship
I couldn't have put it better myself. He really is obsessing over this admin schooling stuff. Compare his overall contribs with his mainspace contribs. A grand total of one mainspace edit in the last 9 days. -- Steel 01:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Help
Can you please take out vote of recently blocked User:Akaneon from Third holiest site article. Please see his comments while voting, in case you think that his vote should remain there. Thanking you in anticipation. --- ابراهيم 12:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
List of people from Pittsburgh
Hi, can you explain why you removed Congressmen Geoff Davis and Mike Doyle from the entry? Thanks, DB13
- See User talk. Yanksox 14:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Akaneon
Thank you for indef blocking this guy. I was very suprised that the first two bans were only for hours and not days considering the level of his disruption. HighInBC 15:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Eh -- I always try to assume good faith. I just assumed that a 1 hour cool down period would end the difficulties. Wow was that wrong, but one can only hope. Alphachimp 15:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I think is a good that you tried to salvage that editor, suprise does not mean disagreement(for me atleast). It was very possible that the short block could have cooled down the user. HighInBC 19:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Kappa
Would you like some help in submitting everything to AfD that Kappa unprodded on his psychotic deprodding episode? His actions fill this deletionist user with Wikistress. --Shrieking Harpy 
19:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I would like help, not for stuff to get deleted, but for the sake of consensus. Yanksox 20:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
ERM
How would it be causing trouble?
Suicidal tendancies 20:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Please dont waste my time. Suicidal tendancies 20:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
just dont.
why
erm... no it isnt... why are you wasting my time just leave me alone. Suicidal tendancies 20:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Categories: