User talk:Revolving Bugbear: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 19:20, 12 December 2006 editBostonMA (talk \| contribs)7,570 edits →Thank You ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 00:35, 24 February 2024 edit undo2603:6081:78f0:75e0:d8bf:ab71:355c:9d9e (talk)No edit summary
(590 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Not around\|is not currently active on Misplaced Pages\|date=24 May 2023}}
	<center>'''I'm currently very busy and stressed in actual life; I will continue mediating'''<br>
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
	'''the Starwood case, but unrelated requests may not get a timely response.'''</center>
			\|maxarchivesize = 50K
			\|counter = 12
			\|archive = User talk:Revolving Bugbear/Archive %(counter)d
			\|algo = old(3d)
			\|minthreads = 1
			}}

			<div style="position:absolute; z-index:100; right:50px; top:10px;" class="metadata">{{Friendly}}</div>
	<br>

	<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px darkblue; background-color: lightcyan;">
	<center><big>'''Welcome to my Talk Page!'''</big></center>
	Feel free to leave your questions, comments, or anything else below. You can do so by clicking ! Please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>.

			{{cross}} '''Just Say No''' to "checkers".
	There are a few guidelines for my talk page and, while I will never completely delete a comment made on this page, I may move it to another (probably sub-page) if it does not comply with these simple guidelines.

			<div style="align: center; padding: 1em; border: solid 2px darkblue; background-color: lightcyan;">
	# This is a safe space. You can say whatever you like on this page without fear of retribution or attack, from me or other users.
			<div class="center"><big>'''Welcome to my Talk Page!'''</big></div>
	# This is a constructive space. Positive criticisms designed to better the encyclopedia and its environment are welcome, but negative comments designed to belittle a person or point of view are not.
			Feel free to leave your questions, comments, or anything else below. You can do so by clicking ! Please sign your comments with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>.
	# This is a free speech space. You can say whatever you like on this page without fear of being censored.
	# This is an open space. Anything may be discussed here.

			This talk page is intended to be a safe, constructive space. Anyone is welcome to share his or her thoughts or opinions here. Personal attacks and incivility are unwelcome here.
	This guidelines are hierarchised from top to bottom so, for instance, a personal attack against another user will not be covered under the "free speech" guideline and will be moved.

	So please, leave a message or anything else here. I will always try to respond to your messages (excepting brief ~~acknowledgements~~ and the like which are simply responses to mine), and I will answer on your talk page, unless the thread on my page contains more than one user. In the case that I respond on your page, I will usually ~~copyover~~ your comment to preserve cohesion.		So please, leave a message or anything else here. I will always try to respond to your messages (excepting brief acknowledgments and the like which are simply responses to mine), and I will answer on your talk page, unless the thread on my page contains more than one user. In the case that I respond on your page, I will usually copy over your comment to preserve cohesion.

			Note that this talk page is bilingual. I will be happy to take questions and comments and German, and will respond in German, if you are more comfortable communicating that way. I reserve the right, however, to translate the message for others' convenience.
	You may also want to read my ].
	</div><br><br>		</div><br><br>
			{{Archives\|collapsed=yes\|image=none\|search=no}}

			__TOC__
	]<br>
	]<br>
	]


	I'm currently mediating:

	]

	==Omura article and Crum's underhand actions==

	Dear Che, I have replied to you on the Omura Talk page. Please forgive my repeated quoting of your words, but there is a limit to how much time and effort I can spend catering to underhand, dishonest people. Crum is a very devious character willing to lie if necessary as he has done many times - just look on the Talk page how he tried to pretend he never agreed to anything in the last round of mediation. The only other ''possible'' explanation is that he has a serious medical condition like Alzheimer's and cannot remember things properly. Like you, I and others have lives to lead. Liars cant be tolerated forever. I hope you understand. ] 13:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

	==RfC==
	I opened an RfC regarding ], it is located at ] and would appreciate you comments if you have any. This message is being posted to anyone's talk page who it seems has had much contact with the user in question.

	I know you interaction has been breif but its also been neutral. --]<s>]</s> 22:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Just to give you an update I have little to do with Democratic Underground and the issue with FAAFA that I have takes place mainly outside of that. I had compiled a page following what I felt were bad edits to a noticeboard and have kept it since, this was while he was editing under {{vandal\|NBGPWS}}. After he changed his name I kept the list of incidents and it just happens that many of the people coincide with that articles as they seem to know eachother off wiki, or butted heads in the past. That is why it seems odd that I am introducing it. I am not involved in the Democratic Underground debate at all, the issue stems from outside of it, but contains many of the same people. --]<s>]</s> 03:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Attention ==

	Your attention is requred at ]. ] 20:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Thank you! ==

	You are far too kind, CheNuevara. Your comments were so nice, thank you for them! -- ]<font color="green">]</font> 23:28, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

	== RfC ==

	Thanks for your unbiased input on the RfC, Che. I'm somewhat unfamiliar with these. Let me ask -- Is it helpful for me to point out the similar violations of my accusers, to illustrate that this was a two-way street?

	Here for instance, is documentation of one editor and tormentor creating a sock puppet, solely to taunt and bait me, and even admitting to it.

	- Thanks - ] 07:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Actually it was created You were lacking a ] enemies list so I added a user to it.--] 07:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

	Do you intend to deal with the dispute, or just the users slapping at eachoter? ] 17:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Hey ==

	: Lol, Che. Nice to know that someone agrees with me occasionally. BTW, why are people so hung up about their edit counts? Get over 500/1000 - it all becomes are bit irrelevant, no? Also BTW, you might like to know that I voted for Kim (Bruning) in the board elections, so no hard memories of the minor scrap at your old RFA, right? Cheers, ] 21:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Help and Advice on Starwood Mediation? ==

	I sort of got a recommendation from ] that you could possibly give some advice on the ]. Mediation seems rather stalled for the moment and we have no mediator in charge. Related to this is ] as well. I'm uncertain whether we should move on to ] or what. Since things seem to be heading to another edit war, I'd really like some input from a more experienced hand at this. We really need a help with this situation. If nothing else, we could use feedback on this situation if you have the time to do so. Also FYI, I'm also mentioning this to ], another recommendation from Addhoc. Thanks. --] (] • ]) 19:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	Hi, Che -- I think the Starwood spamming is clear case of policy violation, therefore not a case for mediation. I think ] about ], and how that is a precedent for no internal links from perfomers/presenters to the festival, are relevant. I don't think this case should have ever gone to mediation. As I seriously doubt anyone who is familiar with WP linkspam policies would support this google bombing attempt, how could a "neutral" mediator who is also familiar with WP policy even be found? In addition to WP policy, I think the consensus on the charges against Matisse show community consensus that it was a clear-cut case of spamming. So, my question is, what's the best way to deal with the spammers at this point? --] ]<font color="navy">♦</font>] 23:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	== More on Starwood Mediation ==

	Thank you for your offer to mediate the Starwood mediation (is that a proper sentence?) I would welcome you in that role. I am willing to attend in good faith. I won't throw tantrums. I'll listen to advice. I'll try to be civil at all times and will apologize if I overstep civil discourse. ''(Now if everyone would just agree to these things as well...)'' --] (] • ]) 04:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	Hi, Che - Just to clarify my statement above: I didn't mean to declare that the attempted mediation should be abandoned. Rather that, given some of what has (or has not) transpired, I question whether it was the most effective or appropriate approach to the situation. Perhaps the RfC should have been done first, and maybe the problem could have been taken care of that way. But if you think you can get mediation to work with the parties involved, I certainly welcome you to come on in as mediator :-) --] ]<font color="navy">♦</font>] 06:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	Thank you for your offer of mediation. Might I ask a question regarding how you might conduct the mediation? Will you insist that the mediation address ''current'' issues? What will be your policy toward parties who raise user conduct accusations that have already been list on ] or in user conduct RfC's? Please let me know if you have plans to deal with such situations. Thanks. Sincerely --] <font color = "blue"><sup>]</sup></font> 12:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	I would be absolutely thrilled to have a mediator actually mediate the issues. —] 13:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
	:I withdraw from the proposed meditation and also completely from the situation so please don't refuse the medation b/c of me. I proved to myself and at my own expense that ] gets to play by different rules than the rest of us, and I make it a policy not to play with a stacked deck. If you don't know what I mean, I was indef blocked for making a single joke edit (non-abusive, non-libellous and non-ban-evading) with an alternate account, while ] is still here after using 18 socks, some of them abusively. Please carry on without me, I'll not impede the mediation or remove or replace Starwood links, though I reserve the right to edit the articles in other ways. Sincerely, —] 23:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
	Your mediation is fine with me. Will you open a new mediation page for it? Will it be MedCab or MedCom? ] (]) 15:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	Greetings, Che - I would be happy to have you mediate the issue. Unlike BostonMa, however, I do believe that a look at the history of this issue is important, and the behavior of the people who have initiated it. I feel that my actions have been steered by the very people who turned around and objected to them, some of whom have made some rather nasty accusations and assumptions of bad faith, and now seem to want to set the bars much higher on the standards for inclusion of input than usual. Kathryn's statement above is an example: 3 statements on the futility or inappropriatness of the mediation, 3 accusations of spamming and one of "google-bombing" in a single paragraph! My attempts to find a middle-ground position and my removal of external links seem to only encourage this. I would welcome an objective view. ] 20:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	== Changes to WikiProject Buffyverse (aka When Info Goes Poof) ==
	I discovered this is already being discussed. :) And there is also a more appropriate place for the discussion as well. Feel free to delete away. Not sure how to remove this completely from your talk page. Sorry for any inconvience. ] 14:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	== Future of Adopt-a-user ==

	Hi there - with Flameviper leaving Adopt-a-user for the next generation to take on, and your obvious interest in the project, I was hoping you would find to comment and help out with some suggestions for the future of the project. Please see ]. Many thanks ] 15:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	== Starwood meditation ==

	Thanks! And nobody else had posted yet. I love it when I get to define the discourse before everybody starts accusing each other ;-) ] (]) 14:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	== neutrally and succinctly? ==

	I'm reluctant to respond to Pigman's post on the mediation site since you asked us not to, but I think he's straying into motives and away from the issue, and using negative terms like "gratuitous" and "with little regard" (unlike the other contributors so far). I'm not whining, I just hate to leave his statement unchallenged (which I could do on several points). ] 19:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	* I understand your concerns, and they will be addressed, but everyone needs to be on the same page first. The pertinent issues will be discussed, just not quite yet. - Che Nuevara 19:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	** I shall be patient, though it isn't my best feature. :-) I guess I was just a bit shaken by the success of those who wished to drive Hanuman Das away from the issue; I have a great deal of respect for him and his contributions. Waiting is. ] 19:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	== Participation of ] ==

	Hi, in left on your talk page, Hanuman Das states that he will disengage from the Starwood controversy. Yet, in made subsequently, on Rosencomet's page, Hanuman Das states that he intends to vote '''Keep''' in any related AfD's. Could you request Hanuman Das to clarify whether he will, or will not, engage in further conflicts on related to Rosencomet? Thank you. Sincerely, --] <font color = "blue"><sup>]</sup></font> 22:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	:I'll be happy to clarify for you. I have withdrawn from the mediation, which to date has not concerned whether any articles should be deleted; there has been no discussion of deletion of anything, it has never been on the table. What has been on the table is external and internal linking. I will leave those alone. AFAIK, editors are free to vote and comment as they will in AfDs - I have never seen that challenged as part of a mediation process. I don't believe that editors in mediation can vote to delete an article without putting it out for AfD comment by the whole community. That is, mediation and deletion are completely different spheres of action which operate by their own rules. I don't think that voting keep in an AfD is to engage in conflict. It is simply an expression of opinion which is taken together with other opinions to determine a result. I will not give up my right to express that opinion simply b/c ] chose to intimidate me into withdrawing from mediation by filing a sockpuppet accusation and repeatly tagging my user page to the extent that I almost got indef blocked over an ''intentionally obvious joke''. Cheerio! —] 00:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	::All registered editors entitled to give their opinion on an AfD. Similarly, all editors are entitled to participate in mediation. Hanuman Das, you are welcome to participate in this mediation. You are free to walk away if you choose. However, if you plan on maintaining involvement with the articles, I think the mediation would be more worthwhile if you participated. (Che Neuvera, please let me know if you would prefer that I not communicate with Hanuman Das on your talk page.) Sincerely, --] <font color = "blue"><sup>]</sup></font> 03:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	I'm not sure what's going on here, but I feel that I must point this out as it is relevant to the Starwood mediation. Please take a look at by Mattisse to Paul Pigman. It looks innocent enough, but to one who knows the history of Mattisse's abuse of sockpuppets, it is clearly a disingenuous comment. The article was started by ], who was shown by CheckUser to be a ] by ]. At that time, sockpuppets of Mattisse created several hoax articles intended to discredit the other Starwood articles. Another two were ] and ]. To now bring this article to the attention of Paul Pigman as if it had been created by Rosencomet as part of the Starwood set of articles is clearly manipulatory. ] (]) 15:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
	:I'm sorry if I'm being a bit dense, but I don't see any place where this was confirmed by a CheckUser. I see that Netsnipe tagged Flinders as a sock, but where is that backed up? The RFCU for Mattisse did not list Flinders as a possible sock. There is no RFCU for Flinders. Please point me in the right direction. --<font color="3300FF">] </font> 15:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
	:Never mind, I found it. --<font color="3300FF">] </font> 15:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


	:: I find this to be rather bizarre, and a good example of how the folks on the other side of this issue have had a pattern of manipulating things either for their own amusement or to put the actual editors of the articles in question in a bad light. I had nothing to do with the Musart article, which was created by "Flinders", apparently a sock-puppet. He/she also created the Ann Hill & Anne Hill articles, claiming she was a "frequent speaker at the Starwood Festival" (she exists, but has never appeared at Starwood). At one point the name Anne Rice was changed to Anne Hill. (Someone also accused me of linking to and messing with the Andrew Cohen article, though as far as I know it was never linked to the Starwood page, nor did he appear there.)

	:: I'm not saying Musart isn't deserving of an article, and I could create one, but this one had only two facts that were not false: the very first line ("Musart is a musical art company founded by Muruga Booker."), and the links to the Musart website. (Pigman, oddly enough, just took down those links.) The rest of the article seems to be a cut & paste job from part of the Starwood Festival article as it stood at the time of the Musart's article's creation. (Muruga Booker actually asked me about it in a conversation 2 days ago, assuming I had created it, and wondered why the content was so very wrong.) This kind of behavior - fake articles linked to Starwood, constant demands for citations, subsequent accusations that the citations constituted linkspam and google-bombing - all seems to have started with Matisse just 7 days after my first contribution to a Misplaced Pages article. ] 17:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	:::Rosencomet, let us assume for the moment that someone has "manipulat things either for their own amusement or to put the actual editors of the articles in question in a bad light." Would that mean that ''all'' of "the folks on the other side of this issue have had a pattern of" doing so? Your comment seems to insinuate that "the folks on the other side of the issue" are all bad people, ''therefore'', the points that they raise should be discounted. Sincerely, --] <font color = "blue"><sup>]</sup></font> 18:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	:::: Quite right. I should have said "some of the folks". It's just so confusing not knowing who is a sock and/or egged on to weigh in by others. But admittedly, I was generalizing. And I never called them "bad people"; they might be good people who, in this instance, were engaging in bad behavior. ] 18:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

	#In the interest of transparency, can you (Ars Scriptor) post a link?
	#I do not have the mechanisms to deal with previous user conduct. All I can do is insist that all users act appropriately from now on. If all users do so, then we should have no further problems. If some users act inappropriately, then other channels can be sought. Now that I've been supplied with this background information, let's focus on forward movement. - ] 19:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	::Sorry this is on your talk page. I support CheNuevara's first point particularly. While the ] contained a number of accusations of sockpuppets, it was unclear to me which of these were actually confirmed. I know at least one was. Am I just not reading closely enough? --] (] • ]) 20:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	:::There was never a formal checkuser request. The sockpuppetry was discovered sort of accidently by an admin with CheckUser privileges while investigating an unrelated issue. The only report was a notice by that user to Mattisse the use of socks had been detected: . I agree with Ekajati that this IS a current behavior issue. While the created of the faked page occured in the past, bringing it up just occured recently. —] 20:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

	::::Thank you for the link. I agree that it is an issue, and I will keep an eye out and keep it in mind. However, until I see something that looks disruptive or in bad faith, there isn't a whole lot I can do. - Che 20:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::::In the interest of full disclosure, another Starwood article has been discovered written by one of my suspected sockpuppets: Sincerely, ] 23:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
	::::::Also, there was a Checkuser:
	#] Filed July 26
	#] filed September 6
	#] filed September 6
	#]- filed September 21
	#] filed October 25
	These are the ones I am aware of. Thank you. Sincerely, ] 02:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
	::And is it your honest contention that these users are not you? - ] 02:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::My truest recollection is what I wrote to BostonMA which formed the basis of the latest incident report on me: "Mattisse Reduc": Sorry. I am as confused as you probably are. Sincerely, ] 02:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

	== Thanks ==

	Che, I thank you again for all your hard work. It is very much appreciated. I hope you'll find it in you to ] and realize that all I want is a ] and ] version, of this as well as every other WP article I touch. Of course my idea of 'balance' or 'source' may not be someone else's - I am far from thinking that I am always right. In fact, I hope that I am ''sometimes'' right, no more. I am also very open to ideas and criticism, although it does take time sometimes for me to become convinced and to change course. I do want to see neutral editors in the sense that they have no ax to grind, no conflict of interest. Dealing with COI-SI (] single-issue) editors is very hard, if your target is to end up with a neutrally balanced result. But I think for WP to succeed, and I am sure all of us here want that, we cannot cave in to COI or special interest or any other pressure group for whom our own pillars of well sourced neutrality are not paramount, but their own interests. I think WP will live or die by editors' ability to fight (with ]) for what is right, not what is quick or easy. Thanks again, ] 22:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

	Hmmm. I believe that Crum cant rise above himself in a number of matters, and I have very little if any trust towards him/her. But I will try to continue to act in good faith towards him. Anyone that represents me in some way, that when I correct them, repeatedly does the same thing, for just one example, does not get much respect; someone that reverts his agreements gets even less. Someone that wants others not to act in one way then acts just like that gets a minus figure for trust. Someone that has a declared bias as Che noted, then denies it, get a bigger minus still. I think Crum is the antithesis of the WP spirit as intended. Maybe he/she will prove me wrong in the future. So far has failed any such test.Richardmalter 08:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)] 08:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

	== Barnstar ==

	:''moved to:''

	]

	== Starwood Link History ==
	A couple of fellow editors suggested that I appraise you of these facts. I realize I have already posted some of this information, but for the sake of organizing it I will put it all here together. I'm sorry if it's long.

	The following information is just to show that while ] was wildly tagging articles linked to Starwood Festival with "citation needed" tags, later to call on many editors to help in a campaign to delete them, then have them taken down as linkspam and google-bombing, she was ALSO CREATING articles with links to ] herself, then calling them to the attention of other editors as examples of how there were too many articles linked to it and that I was "out of control". I believe that most of the objections by editors other than Matisse and socks of Matisse (who have weighed in multiple times in discussions about both the links and the notability of individual articles I've written in order to create the illusion that she had major support in the Wiki community) were swayed, in great part, by this campaign to create a "Major Problem" where one did not exist. (Ironic, since a running theme of the event is conspiracy theory & the Illuminati...)


	1. The ] article (linked to ], ], and ]) was created August 25th by ], a sock of ], 12 days after my first Wiki input. The Answers.com text mentioned below about Musart (point 6) is obviously cribbed from the Wiki article she created, yet she speaks as if she "found" this evidence that this issue is not minor!

	2. The "]" article was created on September 3rd by ], another Matisse sock. She returned the next day to add a link to Association for Consciousness Exploration.

	3. ], mentioned below by Matisse on ]'s page as a "Starwood Speaker", has never appeared at Starwood nor has his page been linked to the Starwood page.

	4. There are links to Musart on the "]" and "]" articles that I believe are incorrect, and probably refer to the record company DiscosMusart, which has no Wiki article.


	5. Here is what Matisse said to ] about Musart in November:

	hopeless mediation

	:Hi. I wrote a question on the Starwood Mediation page and got an unsatisfactory answer from Rosencomet. Plus I notices another article waiting in the wings: Musart. Do you think we should ask for another mediator? Ours seems to be missing in action. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 01:39, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Yes, I must agree. It is hopeless and would be a waste of your time. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 02:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


	6. This was posted on ]'s talk page the same day:

	:Hi again! Check out Musart. it is waiting in the wings to have bunches of names added. Mattisse(talk) 01:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Check this out from Answers.com If, by chance, you think this is minor. Mattisse(talk) 03:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	And 8 days later:

			== Nomination for deletion of Template:Eurohistcollaboration ==
	:Maybe you would weigh in on the ] talk page (a Starwood Festival speaker) as there is a discussion on what type of links to include as external links. The particular link in question may not be a good example to defend, but at least it's the start of a general discussion. Mattisse(talk) 16:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
			]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> <span style="color:green">'''Ten Pound Hammer'''</span> • <sup>(])</sup> 04:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

			== ArbCom 2017 election voter message ==

			{{Ivmbox\|Hello, Revolving Bugbear. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
	7. Now this one was on Pigman's talk page just a few days ago. I've included Ekajati's comment.

			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.
	:I just ran across this: ]. The links at the bottom are bad. One goes nowhere. The other pertains if anything to this: Musart Records -- which I wrote (not very well) trying to sort out the problem regarding various (legitimate) artists whose articles list this label -- none of which are in that list on Musart. What to do? Perhaps you know. Thank you. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 02:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

			If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
	:As you can see, it's the usual Starwood Festival crowd listed. I wonder if this is hopeless. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 02:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
			\|Scale of justice 2.svg\|imagesize=40px}}
			<!-- Message sent by User:Xaosflux@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2017/Coordination/MMS/08&oldid=813407029 -->

			== ArbCom 2018 election voter message ==
	::Oh, now this is not funny, Mattisse. That article, as you have to know, was started by ], who was confirmed by CheckUser as one of your sockpuppets. ] (yakity-yak) 14:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

			{{Ivmbox\|Hello, Revolving Bugbear. Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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.
	8. This non-explanation of the creation of the Musart article was posted on BostonMa's talk page. I've included ]' input:

			If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. ] (]) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
	:I clicked on the name, Flinders, and it was identified as a sockpuppet of my account. I don't know what else to say. I was not aware of all the accounts identified as mine - rather I should say I recognise the names now but I don't always know what they have done. I am not clear what was going on at that time. At the time I explained my role in the matter. The result is though that I am not always aware when one of my sockpuppets created an article. If will explain the situation in any degree of detail you desire. I don't know what level of detail is appropriate here. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 16:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
			\|Scale of justice 2.svg\|imagesize=40px}}
			<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2018/Coordination/MMS/09&oldid=866998319 -->

			== Inactivity ==
	:Further explanation: That I personally did not create the sockpuppets but they were created on my computer, as proved by CheckUser. There was an unusual sitation. Relatives, including my daughter and her children, suddenly were in my house. In the middle of this was when I was doing backlogs in the wikify bin (to get away from real life stress) and AFD'd ]. This was just after ] had identified a suite of similar articles and ADFed the whole suite. I asked him what to do but he was busy with his admin election. I used bad judgment and tagged too many articles. ] attacked me. I became upset, being already upset because of outside events. I talked about it too much to my visitors, none of whom were involved with Misplaced Pages. I don't know really what happened. Part of what was going on here meant that I was not home always. I do know that I left my granddaughter alone, at that time not realising that Misplaced Pages was such a dangerous place, so she did somethings on Misplaced Pages unsupervised. I guess I should look back and see exactly what. Someone emailed me that she put her age on her user page and that I should delete that. I tried but was not allowed. Then an admin believed she was my granddaughter and did delete it or do something with it. To tell you the truth, I don't really want to know what these various accounts did because it starts to give me bad feelings about my family -- whether they were trying to harm me or help me I don't know. And it has affected our relationship since then. Let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 17:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

			I hope this finds you well.
	::Please excuse me for butting in here, but this is the same excuse she used for the previous sockpuppet incident (pre-Rosencomet). See ]. I believe that ] was involved in that incident. —] 17:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

			There are ongoing discussions regarding your continued token activity as an administrator. If you have serious plans to re-engage with Misplaced Pages, I would encourage you to put those plans into effect, or, at a minimum, articulate your rationale for retaining administrative rights given that you have not been involved with the project in a meaningful way for ten years. I personally would be happy to see you back, and would like to thank you for your past contributions.
	:::I looked at the discussion and I don't quite get what I did that was so wrong. I asked Paul ] a question. At the time I didn't know it was a Flinders article. ] did whatever in the past. In any case, I would not have done anything to a Starwood article myself. That is why I asked someone. If I repeat the same story regarding events around that time, what else should I do? It's only because Musart Records came up on my watch list as "unsourced" that I even looked at it. Because I write and edit so many record label articles, I did not get the connection at first. I do not understand this place. Sincerely, Mattisse(talk) 22:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

			If you do not plan to stay involved, I would kindly encourage you to voluntarily resign your position as administrator. If that is what you decide, you may post your request at ].
	9. I must say that this is a pretty bizarre situation. Matisse has used sock-puppets for a long time to disrupt the work of a number of editors in various ways, and seems to openly admit it here, and I find that strange enough (since, perhaps because I'm a newcomer, I just don't see what she gets out of this kind of behavior except sowing anger and frustration among hard-working volunteers), but phrases like "I was not aware of all the accounts identified as mine - rather I should say I recognise the names now but I don't always know what they have done." or "I am not always aware when one of my sockpuppets created an article" make me wonder how she can EVER be held accountable for what she does. It sounds bi-polar to me (I'm not diagnosing, just saying what it sounds like). She seems not to know what she has done, or perhaps even what she is doing. In a different way, I find the attempt to shift the blame to unspecified family members even more disturbing.

			Very best and kindest regards, ''']]''' 23:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
	Matisse seems to have a talent for creating trouble and drawing well-meaning people into the fray. I don't see how the issue under mediation can be discussed without at least airing these facts, and allowing those who have been swayed to believe that there is a serious situation that must be nipped in the bud to understand that, at least to some extent, it has not only been exaggerated but increased and manipulated by the very person that brought it to their attention and enlisted their help. ] 00:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
			== Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Buffyverse ==
			]] has been ]. You are invited to comment on the discussion at ].<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> ] (]) 13:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

	== ~~Thank~~ You ==		== You have been pruned from a list ==

			'''Hi Revolving Bugbear!''' You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at ], but you haven't made any edits to the English Misplaced Pages in over 6 months.
	Thank you for your efforts with respect to the impenetrableswampsinkholeblackholefromwikpediahell Yoshiaki Omura entry. You were patient, dedicated, determined, and steadfast. These things, in my estimation, matter far more than any entry. Thank you. ] 00:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

			Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting ].
	== Rosencomet mediation ==

			'''Thank you!'''
	Hi. I would like to call your attention to made by ] which reads in part.
			Message delivered to you with love by ] :) \| Is this wrong? Contact ]. \| Sent at 18:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
	:"I must say, with all due respect, that it seems some folks have decided the entries should not be there, THEN looked for a rationale to support this, one that has changed several times."
	I feel that this remark reflects a lack of assumption of good faith, and is unhelpful. Could you please remove it. Thanks. Sincerely, --] <font color = "blue"><sup>]</sup></font> 19:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:35, 24 February 2024

This user is not currently active on Misplaced Pages. Revolving Bugbear has not edited Misplaced Pages since 24 May 2023. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

This user likes getting friendly notices.

N Just Say No to "checkers".

Welcome to my Talk Page!

Feel free to leave your questions, comments, or anything else below. You can do so by clicking this link! Please sign your comments with ~~~~.

This talk page is intended to be a safe, constructive space. Anyone is welcome to share his or her thoughts or opinions here. Personal attacks and incivility are unwelcome here.

So please, leave a message or anything else here. I will always try to respond to your messages (excepting brief acknowledgments and the like which are simply responses to mine), and I will answer on your talk page, unless the thread on my page contains more than one user. In the case that I respond on your page, I will usually copy over your comment to preserve cohesion.

Note that this talk page is bilingual. I will be happy to take questions and comments and German, and will respond in German, if you are more comfortable communicating that way. I reserve the right, however, to translate the message for others' convenience.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12

This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Nomination for deletion of Template:Eurohistcollaboration

Template:Eurohistcollaboration has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • 04:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Revolving Bugbear. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Revolving Bugbear. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Inactivity

I hope this finds you well.

There are ongoing discussions regarding your continued token activity as an administrator. If you have serious plans to re-engage with Misplaced Pages, I would encourage you to put those plans into effect, or, at a minimum, articulate your rationale for retaining administrative rights given that you have not been involved with the project in a meaningful way for ten years. I personally would be happy to see you back, and would like to thank you for your past contributions.

If you do not plan to stay involved, I would kindly encourage you to voluntarily resign your position as administrator. If that is what you decide, you may post your request at WP:BN.

Very best and kindest regards, Uninvited Company 23:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Buffyverse

Template:WikiProject Buffyverse has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:13, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

You have been pruned from a list

Hi Revolving Bugbear! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject History/Outreach/Participants, but you haven't made any edits to the English Misplaced Pages in over 6 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Misplaced Pages:WikiProject History/Outreach/Participants.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:09, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Categories: