Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jehochman: 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 editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:41, 24 October 2009 editMr Unsigned Anon (talk | contribs)454 edits →Advice please.: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 02:35, 19 November 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,373,986 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Jehochman/Archives 25. (BOT) 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Inline image
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|image = File:Naturhistorisk Privatundervisning.jpg
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 16 |size = 500px
|align = center
|algo = old(7d)
|alt = Placeholder alt text
|archive = User talk:Jehochman/Archive %(counter)d
|fullwidth = yes
|capcenter = yes
|caption = <br/>{{big|{{big|"Hold on, I zoned out for a minute. Which one of you was the Icewhiz sock again?"}}}}{{small|]}}
}} }}
{{AutoArchivingNotice|age=7|target=./Archive {{CURRENTMONTHABBREV}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot}}
<!--my archives are messed up so I have removed the links. They might be fixed some day-->
<div class="plainlinks" style="
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
background-color: {{{bgcolor|#BBDDFF}}};
|archiveprefix=User talk:Jehochman/Archives
{{#if:{{{extra-style|}}}|{{{extra-style}}};}}
|format= %%i
{{#if:{{{width|}}}|width: {{{width}}};}}
|age=168
border: 1px solid RoyalBlue;
|minkeepthreads=1
{{#if:{{{border-color|}}}|border-color: {{{border-color}}};}}
|maxarchsize=350000
{{#if:{{{color|}}}|color: {{{color}}};}}
|numberstart=25
font-weight: bold;
|header={{aan}}
margin: 2em 0 1em;
|archivenow=<nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}</nowiki>
padding: .5em 1em;
}}
vertical-align: middle;
clear: both;
__TOC__
">
{| style="background: transparent;" valign="middle"
|-
|]
|
Please leave a .
# I generally prefer to keep conversations on the page where they start.
# Please follow ]'s advice, "Omit needless words!"
# Unblocks: If I block a user, any administrator is free to refactor the block unless I have specifically requested contacting me first.
# I may remove comments posted here if no response is needed, or if I respond elsewhere.
|}</div>
{{TOCright}}

== Congratulations ==

]<small><sup>]</sup>]</small> 00:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)]]

:Congrats! ''']''' ] 01:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
:Indeed; congrats and best of luck. –''']'''&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;] 01:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
:Congratulations! <span style="font-family:Segoe Print;">] <sup>] • ]</sup></span> 01:19, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
:<u>Major</u> congrats! ] (]) 02:30, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
::I think you get a week of paternity leave. It's in the admin contract. See you back here soon. :P ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 02:48, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
::Congratulations! Take as much time as you can with your new addition because the years go by fast. The little tyke will be borrowing your credit card and staying out past curfew before you know it. ] (]) 03:09, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
::Excellent news, congratulations! Now focus on fun with the family, as Boris wisely says. Time flies! . . ], ] 08:48, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

:::Thank you, all! ] <sup>]</sup> 14:04, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

::Congratulations! 8lb 9oz is a big little guy. All the best to the mom. ] ] 17:44, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

:::Yes, he's a moose. ] <sup>]</sup> 17:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
::::Big time congratulations! All the best, nothing in the world compares -...] (]) 22:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Congratulations! Life will never be the same :) ] (]) 23:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::You're in for some fun times. Good luck. :) ]<sub>(])</sub> 23:19, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
::::::Congratulations from me too. You will be very familar with nappies in the next months, perhalps too familiar. Good luck with it! ] (]) 00:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent) Wonderful new, enjoy! I wish you and your family the best in everything. --]] 15:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
:: All the best <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] <small>]</small></span> 16:04, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I obviously missed something, but it's not hard to guess what it is. Congratulations! I wouldn't mind another one myself, actually. ] ] 11:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

== Not! ==

With regard to your edit summary ; things will not be normal for you for at least 18 years. Congratulations. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 19:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
:That's quite true Jman, but congrats!<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 20:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

== Regarding Jacurek and the IP ==

Hi, Jehochman. I don't know if you've gotten a chance to review the question about Jacurek's possible socking and the IP whose edits on the Holocaust topic I'd mentioned earlier, but I guess I should withdraw my concerns about him. The IP I was talking about registered as ] and came to my page to discuss his edits, clarifying that I misread his comments on the Jedwabne talk page as a Holocaust revisionist interpretation. We've clarified the issue here , and he has my apologies. Sourcelat0r did not come across the way Jacurek did, despite the notable overlap in article interest I'd noted earlier, and I should say that I don't think it was him. Thanks for looking into my SPI question earlier.

Best,
] (]) 22:44, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

:Note however that A-N/PU has adamantly refused to apologize to Jacurek for calling him a Holocaust revisionist and accusing him of sockpuppetting, even after he found out he was completely wrong, and perhaps more disturbingly, even after he apologized to the anon IP that made the edits.] (]) 01:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

== Problem with Daedalus969 ==

Thanks for warning Daedalus969. Should I do anything else or should I leave things as they are now that you're aware of the problem? ] (]) 12:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

: Save the diff of my warning. If there are further problems, show that diff to any administrator. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

::Thanks again. ] (]) 14:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

== ] ==

Is the IP user 24.187.199.178, on ANI about Ckatz, a sock? Ckatz reply on ANI seems to suggest it, could you go there and reply? Cheers. ] (]) 15:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

: Please ask ] and show him this thread. Hersfold ran a checkuser. Normally we protect IP privacy, though that protection can be voided if the IP is engaged in mischief. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

== Shallow analysis ==

Your admonishment said this was original research. This is incorrect, it is entirely backed up by the provided reference on that page - please correct this. Thanks.
:Had another look at this edit, recast to remove synth, didn't spot it before cut and paste - also changed the title of the section, as that too must be viewed as synth. ] (]) 10:42, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

]. Hmm. Actual lies and deceit?

If I may quote ], 2. Other uncivil behaviors c)''lying to mislead, including deliberately asserting false information''

It would appear clear that this is exactly what Ckatz & Ruslik have done.

In the ANI, what is to be done about their removal of cited material? What reassurances can you give that this won't happen again? What of the other issues raised there? Ckatz accusation of harassment for which there is no evidence provided, or to be found - I looked, perhaps you will be more skilled than I and find the obvious evidence for this harassment.

I trust that you will re-evaluate your judgement of this situation with deeper analysis, re-open the ANI, and address Ckatz & Ruslik vis-à-vis ]. Thank you.

] (]) 13:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

: Not likely. You had best disengage from this conflict. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

::I'm impressed! You are a quick thinker! An evaluating, deep analysis in under 4 minutes of all the evidence provided in the ANI! I will waste no more of my, or your, time. ] (]) 13:59, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

:::Oh, I've been watching that thread for several days. It's not like you can suddenly convince me to change my view by posting half a dozen lines of commentary on my talk page. I've been deliberating on whether to block you for a month or indefinitely. You've been around since 2007 and seem to have some capacity for making useful edits, so I decided not to block you at all. I am really hoping you'll try much harder to follow ] and ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

===Teach me===
You are a smart guy, I'm a reasonably smart guy. Maybe I'm overlooking something without realising it.

Here is the edit I made to the ] article
:Auroras are the result of the emissions of photons in the Earth's upper ], above 80&nbsp;km (50 miles), from ] ] atoms regaining an electron, and ] and ] atoms returning from an ] to ]. They are ] or ] by the collision of ] particles being funnelled down, and accelerated along, the Earth's magnetic field lines; excitation energy is lost by the emission of a photon of light, or by collision with another atom or molecule.
:;] emissions: Green or brownish-red, depending on the amount of energy absorbed.
:;] emissions: Blue or red. Blue if the atom regains an electron after it has been ionized. Red if returning to ] from an ].
:Oxygen is a little unusual in terms of it's return to ], it can take three quarters of a second to emit green light, and up to two minutes to emit red. Collisions with other atoms or molecules will absorb the excitation energy and prevent emission. The very top of the atmosphere is both a higher percentage of oxygen, and so thin that such collisions are rare enough to allow time for oxygen to emit red. Collisions become more frequent progressing down into the atmosphere, so that red emissions don't have time to happen, and eventually even green light emissions are prevented.
:This is why there is a colour differential with altitude, high altitude oxygen red dominates, then oxygen green and nitrogen blue/red, then finally nitrogen blue/red when collisions prevent oxygen from emitting anything.
:Auroras are mostly only visible when a ], or similar events, fires ], and also ], from the surface of the ] toward the Earth. The relatively high density of material means a higher intensity of Aurora, and the snapping of some field lines of the Earth's own magnetic field, and their subsequent reconnect, funnels and accelerates the charged particles down in a large circle around the Earth's poles. Seen from space, these fiery curtains form a thin ring in the shape of a ], or man's bald spot.

In the ANI Ruslik said {{Quote|Referenced? The only link (web link, not reference) that you managed to insert is this one<sup>+</sup>, which, however, contains almost no useful information. So, your version is uncited and contains serious errors and omissions. You removed a lot of useful information about auroral emissions, and you are trying to use a confusing terminology, which you invented yourself.|Ruslik}}
+

Which I picked out these points
#only one reference
#"''contains almost no useful information''"
#"''removed a lot of useful information about auroral emissions''"
#I am guilty of ]

How do you think I should have described these points in Ruslik's comment? ] (]) 11:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

: I have no feelings on the initial content dispute. That's something I looked at, and could not figure out who was right. Your subsequent interactions were not particularly helpful. If you'd like my help mediating the content dispute, please start a discussion on the article talk page, and issue invitations to the relevant parties. I'll be glad to help. I've written a top importance, featured astronomy article. My opinions are not entirely ignorant. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:00, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

== RFA spam ==

{{user:Kww/RFAspam}}
:&mdash;](]) 18:59, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

== ] ==

This arbitration case has been closed, and the final decision may be viewed at the link above.

* All editors are reminded to be civil at all times and seek consensus where possible, and encouraged pursue dispute resolution when necessary.
* {{user|Brews ohare}} is warned for his conduct in this dispute, and placed under a general probation for one year, under which any uninvolved administrator may impose sanctions if Brews ohare fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages or general editing and behavioral guidelines, policies, and expectations, despite warnings.
* {{user|David Tombe}} is also warned for his conduct in this dispute and during the course of the arbitration case, and is placed under the same general probation but for an indefinite duration. David Tombe may not appeal his probation for one year, and is limited to one appeal every six months thereafter.
* Both Brews ohare and David Tombe are banned from all physics-related pages and topics, broadly construed, for twelve months.
* Violations of the topic bans or general sanctions may be enforced by blocks of up to a week in length for repeated violations, to increase to one year after the third block. All blocks and other sanctions applied should be logged on the case page ].

For the Arbitration Committee, ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 22:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

]

== Hello ==

Thanks for comming to the conclution and closing the ARE case. And I can assure you that if you run checkuser there is no blocks or restrictions on whatever eventually found. Regards ] (]) 02:57, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

: You are welcome. If there was a former account, just make sure not to use it concurrently (at the same time) as the new one. If the account is retired, please keep it retired. Then you have much less chance of any problem. If you are attacked or provoked by other editors, please ask me or another administrator for help. It is much better to stop a problem before it happens, than to have to try to untangle the mess of accusations and counter-accusations after a fight begins. If you are right, there is no benefit in getting into a fight. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

== 15 minutes too late ==

. ;) ] (]) 14:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

== Brews ohare ==
{{discussion top}}
You counseled me to try working with others. Here I am trying to pour some oil on troubled water, and you are jumping on me. Why? Is this topic anything to do with the ban? Absolutely not. No technical issue has come up at all. It all is about handling a dispute, which is exactly what you want me to engage in. Please explain yourself. ] (]) 19:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

: You are assuming bad faith. I am not jumping on you. I am trying to steer you away from trouble. If somebody gets a ticket for speeding, it does not make sense for that person to take up the cause of another party who's been accused of speeding. Please find other things to do besides intervening at ANI in discussions about tendentious editing. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

::You have not explained why this activity is heading toward trouble. If my proposals for resolution are not acceptable, so they won't be tried. ] (]) 19:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

:::What you are doing is adding noise and length to the thread, which prevents it from resolving. If you had good judgment, you would not have gotten topic banned. Please, stop disrupting Misplaced Pages with voluminous posts and argumentum ad nauseum. I'm hereby banning you from my talk page. I'm tired of dealing with you and your assumptions of bad faith. I see that you posted about me at ] and did not tell me. That reinforces my view that you're a disruptive editor out to make trouble. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
{{discussion bottom}}

==More problems with Daedalus969==
] left several messages again today on my talk page. He even reverted me after I removed his comments despite the fact another administrator told me I can remove anything I like.

Keep in mind these comments have nothing to do with an edit but rather the contents of my talk page.
Below are his diffs:

*
*
*
*
*
*
*


== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message ==
He then tracked one of my edits on an article and reverted it:


<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
What should I do about this? ] (]) 01:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.


The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
==Mr Unsigned Anon==
I think it is lame that the other editor in the dispute was blocked and Mr Unsigned Anon was not but I think both of them needed a simple warning (like you did) so I'm happy to see him not blocked. I would be curious about the check user. It looks like the requesting editor could be assuming bad faith but the duck test appears damning here. I personally am just curious and wouldn't be surprised if it is a user who was trying to start fresh and was never blocked but we won't know without the check user. Is it a complicated process and would the check in itself reflect negatively on the editor if the results are negative?] (]) 03:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)


If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small>
== Advice please. ==


</div>
This is apart of a long going debate/dispute around the lead section. I like to ask you if ] (]) way of arguing is according to the discretionary sanctions. I was to answer and confront him about lot of statements in this post but that might inflamate the debate even more and/or become a conflict.
</div>
Short background. User ] put lot of effort keeping it a policy baseed discussion. ] (]) stongly oppose him but keep discussion on a fair level and motivating his disputetagging of the article well. Advice or intervention appreciated. Regards ] (]) 10:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 -->

Latest revision as of 02:35, 19 November 2024

Placeholder alt text

"Hold on, I zoned out for a minute. Which one of you was the Icewhiz sock again?"Source


ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)