Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:35, 9 January 2006

Political Correctness

I wanted to let you know that I reverted your blanking of 2/3 of the Political Correctness article. While I agree there are improvements to be made to the article, I don't think that erasing most of it is moving in the right direction. -- MicahMN | μ 20:13, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

It was a simple mistake, I didn't mean to delete anything and was trying to fix it when you did. I have now restored my intended edit, SqueakBox 20:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that. -- MicahMN | μ 20:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

The map

The map doesnt state who speaks second or first lanuage as there is only ONE offical lanauge in Brazil all it clearly says is that there is a large minority of Spanish Speakers in Brazil which is true and clearly states on the Spanish Lanuage page.

Users 66.146.157.211 and XGustX

Hello! Thanks for replacing that block message. It was placed on User talk:66.146.157.211 by User talk:XGustaX - I think this is a new user who was blocked too harshly, but was fortunately unblocked. Perhaps XGustaX thought that the IP caused him to be blocked? The block log is . I've left some messages for the user here, but I think there is not much else to do too. --HappyCamper 18:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Three-revert rule

You have been blocked for 24 hours for a violation of the three revert rule on Costa Rica. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Izehar 21:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

No i didn't. This is anunjust block. Proviide diffs, and not the mess XGustaX, who is still editing, provided. i contend |I did not break the rule, SqueakBox 21:33, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Either reply top me or, unless you can prove I reverted anything 4 times, I will place an rfc against you for abuse of admin powers, SqueakBox 21:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

This is wikipedia where admins who can't count block people. Please unblock me now, SqueakBox 21:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 - You reverted almost every edits XGustaX made! Anyway, I have blocked 24.60.161.63 for 24 hours (I'm assuming it's XGustaX evading his 24 hour block as he signed using the name "XGustaX"). I'll be watching this page if you want to tell me anything. Izehar 21:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I never reverted to the sanm version 3 times. The others were compromises. THAT IS THE OPPOSITE OF 3RR. I deliberately avoided 3RR trying to make compromises and you have no right to block me for not doing 3RR, SqueakBox 21:47, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I've unblocked everyone involved, and instead protected Costa Rica. I cannot work infinitely fast, so please, please, please everyone calm down and check back in a little bit when I have finished writing up everything. I will do this extremely thoroughly on Talk:Costa Rica. --HappyCamper 21:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Well I am still blocked but I agree that protecting the page was the right thing to do. As I have clearly stated I did not break the 3RR rule, nor did I tell XGustaX to shove everything up my mouth, etc, SqueakBox 21:53, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Nope - read Misplaced Pages:Revert:

A revert is to undo all changes made after a certain time in the past. The result will be that the page becomes identical to how it used to be at some previous time.

You certainly did that more than three times within the same 24 hour period. Also, according to Misplaced Pages:Three-revert rule:

Reverting doesn't only mean taking a previous version from history and editing that. It means undoing the actions of another editor, and may include edits that mostly undo a previous edit and also add something new, page moving, admin actions such as protection, etc. Use common sense.

You see - there is no requirement to revert to te same version - what you have to do is revert more than three times. Izehar 21:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll go to the block list and see if I can unblock your IP. Izehar 21:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Try editing now - if you still can't, e-mail me your IP or list it here. Izehar 21:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes I am. You have a Happy New Year also. =) User:XGustaX

You do know that you have made it on to The Hit List along with the rest of us? That list is growing day by day - soon every registered Wikipedian will be on it ;-) Happy New Year (here in the old country that it in c. 1:30 hours - I don't know when in Honduras). Izehar 22:33, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Well, I wrote about 8 paragraphs offline until I noticed and -- I think these speak for themselves :-) Let's enjoy the rest of 2005 as we welcome 2006! --HappyCamper 22:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Newbie help

Thats for that informative little post... I've already started to integrated myself into the wiki community

--Mikesan230 00:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice pooch

Hey, i like your dog! Woof woof. Spum 20:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

The Poll

Hi, would you like the honour of closing the poll? It's easy - you add a "this poll is closed, please don't edit it" sign and pronounce the result. Izehar 20:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Voluntary Simplicity

Thank you sir, for your patience over at voluntary simplicity. You showed good grace and reason with this discussion and although I was annoyed at the original NPOV concern, it is definitely a better article for your help and efforts. Happy New Year! Rorybowman 02:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Ed Poor

• Why are you suggesting it should be deleted? He has been renominated as was suggested could be done at the RFA that was brought against him. What basis do you have for deletion?Gateman1997 21:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Actually no voting should be taking place yet since he hasn't accepted yet. But beyond that there is little wrong with him being renominated. And obviously he has a good number of supporters when he does accept it.Gateman1997 21:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi squeek box

From waldo ! Hope you have a great 2006! 0waldo 01:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Costa Rica

From alf, thanks for the support on making the San José more objective. I'm new to wikipedia and i'm unsure about when to edit, crop, change or delete other people's contributions. The Climate section of the article says the province is blessed. Is that neutral? Should it only say the region posses a mild weather. Some people might actually find this weather overly humid and hot most of the year though. Blessed just doesn't sound encyclopedic to me. Should I edit it? alf 15:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Doire

Who is this Doire (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? I blocked him for a 3RRvio, but after going through his contributions I have been getting more and more bewildered. Is he anti-English or something? Izehar 19:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Ultimatum

I give you seven days from now to ask for a mediation process. If you don't and you don't recognize explicitly that your behavior has been unjustifiable then I will be forced to use every mechanism to have you blocked. Zapatancas 17:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

SqueakBox, everything that happens in the Misplaced Pages is registered. Never forget that. You have destroyed articles unjustifiably, you have started edit wars by introducing spelling and grammar mistakes you recovered as soon as they were deleted (remember how scared you got when Katefan0 protected the article), you have insulted other users, you have introduced NPOV tags without reporting a single disputed passage no matter how many times you were asked, you have not respected the result of an AfD, etc. I could go on but it is too tiring.

It is you who must start the mediation process because you have never explained why you attack the article and those editing it. I could not start it myself. Why do you want me to say? To improve the article on Zapatero is impossible as the User SqueakBox deletes things, destroys extended articles or introduces mistakes on purpose. He also likes to insult those working in the article. He has been asked why he behaves like that. No answer. Please, help is needed to reach an agreement about a conflict whose cause nobody knows.

Furthermore, I must remind you that in spite of your four million edits you are not an administrator because the community does not believe you should have that responsability. Don't forget everybody always leaves you alone. It has happened recently, during the AfD. Tell that thing about how much respected you are to other. I know you.

Regarding my opinion about your mental health, I can only say that I cannot lie. If a person says in his user page that other user wants to attack him, and that other Wikipedians must warn the police if something happens to him (how can wikipedians who live thousands of kilometers away know if something has happened to that user? as usual, no answer), I think what everybody else would think in that situation.

To end, I want to make clear that I am simply giving you the last opportunity to justify your behavior (1), apologize (2) or face the consequences of your actions (3). Nothing else. Zapatancas 18:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't want ot be an administartor, the community has not, for the record, made a judgement on the matter. But save it for mediation or the arbcom as your are, IMO, giving a very distorted, one sided view of the process. Mediation has been initiated, now I suggest we wait for that. I am very aware that everything anyone does here is recorded, SqueakBox 18:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)