Misplaced Pages

User talk:Chelsea Tory: 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 09:28, 3 October 2006 editKittybrewster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers45,052 editsm →Who?← Previous edit Latest revision as of 14:59, 8 April 2008 edit undo193.201.64.33 (talk) Sorry 
(100 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User EX-WP}}
'''Welcome!'''


Hello, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, and ] to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] on talk pages using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!&nbsp; ]<sup>]</sup> 10:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


== Marxist==
Chelsea Tory hello! You're more than right. ] 20:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


===Blocked===
I think your claims that a Marxist/leftist conspiracy is out to nobble the biographies of right-wingers are a bit misplaced. As an experienced Wikipedian and an administrator who's not been involved in any of the Monday Club-related articles before now, I've had a look at them with what I hope you'll accept are unprejudiced eyes. And I have to say that many of the articles are problematic - many of the subjects don't meet Misplaced Pages's biographical notability criteria (]), the articles are stuffed with trivia such as who went to which dinner, they aren't referenced and they're not particularly neutral. Please bear in mind that ]. -- ] 19:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC).
Per Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sussexman, I have indefinitely blocked this account due to sockpuppetry ] (]) 17:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


{{Unblock reviewed|this can only be some kind of joke, surely? I have supported, at a distance, Sussexman, because we share similar interests. Thats all. I don't know the other guys.|Please read ] - the evidence at CheckUser goes far beyond simply "supporting Sussexman at a distance" and SirFozzie's block is quite appropriate. If you want to seriously dispute the evidence at CheckUser you are welome to, but you will need a far more compelling case than simply describing this as a joke. ] 11:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)}}
I have examined some of your comments on umpteen pages and I would say you were not neutral. It appears to me that there are umpteen, often cotnradictory, rules on Misplaced Pages which, at the end of the day, are used to suit almost any occasion. Reading them I would say that in real terms it is almost impossible to do anything right. ] 09:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC).


As far as I am concerned it is a joke. Reading the theories is laughable. It seems to me that anyone supporting Gregory Lauder-Frost (whose article page is long deleted), and anything he was involved in means we are all him. Sussexman from what I can see was a good contributor, and his block should long ago been lifted according to established policies. I always wondered just how much time I had available for this project. I made a serious attempt to fill out articles which were wanting or inaccurate and for groups which once had thousands of members. I now see that I should not have wasted my time on you sad mediocrities whose prime task in life appears to be feuding. I just feel a bit sorry for the others who are supposed to me be. ] (]) 11:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
A further trawl just reinforced what I've said here. I wanted to make some article contributions and contribute to others but when hagiographers of Marxists and Communists (in Canada of all places!) have free reign, and call traditional Tories in Britain "Xenophobics", "race-baiters", and attack perfectly legitimate articles which they call "right-wing propaganda" (even when they are about people or groups wno are no longer active) I am dissuaded. I have even seen comments that several users use the same grammar or similar ISP numbers and so they must be the same person. Quite pathetic. ] 10:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


*Sorry you've gone. It is now open day for the opposition.] (]) 14:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
== Warning ==

Wholesale deletion is not the way to deal with one fact you dislike within a biography. And accusing everyone who disagrees with you of bias is known locally as ], the polar opposite of the ] required by policy. Blanking articles is considered vandalism, and can get you ]. <b>]</b> 21:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC).

How dare you threaten me. You are referring, of course, to the GLF article which I merely reverted to the previous position because of the directions of the Misplaced Pages Legal Team. I have been unable to find where that team have given the go-ahead for restoration of the illegal materials within it and so I correctly reverted the article. No "vandalism" was involved and you are out of order. ] 06:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

:Information about Misplaced Pages's ] is ''not'' a threat; it is helpful information. Futher, "How dare you" is a contentious and hostile approach to discussion, which is unlikely to yield any results which are beneficial to you or to the project. Finally, you are ], which is almost certain to get you nowhere except possibly blocked as a disruptive element. I strongly adivse you to learn to discuss things civilly. ]<sup>]</sup> 10:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Brad really needs to get more involved in this issue--] 17:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

: He already is. SV and I have communicated with Brad and Jimbo respectively, I think we are clear on the foundation's position here. I am not aware that Chelsea Tory has communicated directly with the foundation. <b>]</b> 08:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

== Take a deep breath... ==

I am clearing the Talk page of ]. You are welcome to help to improve the article, but please read my message on ] before wading in. <b>]</b> 19:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC).

One would hope that the archives would continue to be available. ] 14:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC).

I have been on the continent so unable to visit Misplaced Pages. Back today. ] 07:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

==Who?==
Who are you please? RSVP to .

Dear Kitty Brewster, I amd Chelsea Tory and I have an authenticated email address do I not? Why do you wish to email me? What is wrong with messages on Talk Pages? ] 09:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

No you do not have an authenticated email address. Try emailing yoourself using ] . :) - ] 09:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:59, 8 April 2008

This editor has decided to leave Misplaced Pages.


Blocked

Per Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sussexman, I have indefinitely blocked this account due to sockpuppetry SirFozzie (talk) 17:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Chelsea Tory (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

this can only be some kind of joke, surely? I have supported, at a distance, Sussexman, because we share similar interests. Thats all. I don't know the other guys.

Decline reason:

Please read Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sussexman - the evidence at CheckUser goes far beyond simply "supporting Sussexman at a distance" and SirFozzie's block is quite appropriate. If you want to seriously dispute the evidence at CheckUser you are welome to, but you will need a far more compelling case than simply describing this as a joke. Gwernol 11:51, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

As far as I am concerned it is a joke. Reading the theories is laughable. It seems to me that anyone supporting Gregory Lauder-Frost (whose article page is long deleted), and anything he was involved in means we are all him. Sussexman from what I can see was a good contributor, and his block should long ago been lifted according to established policies. I always wondered just how much time I had available for this project. I made a serious attempt to fill out articles which were wanting or inaccurate and for groups which once had thousands of members. I now see that I should not have wasted my time on you sad mediocrities whose prime task in life appears to be feuding. I just feel a bit sorry for the others who are supposed to me be. Chelsea Tory (talk) 11:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)