Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:51, 3 March 2006

See the histories of /archive and the /archive2 for old conversations. For more recent conversations, see /archive3.

User User:Why you so hawny? has reincarnated himself as sockpuppet User:Sue me Jeff

His new name is inappropriate. What a joke, I am still hurting from my sides laughing so hard when I saw it. He is back to his old tricks of stalking and user page vandalism and harassment. Waya sahoni 16:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

What a blatant lie. My account is the first and only I have at WP. Its name may be deemed offensive only *if* Waya sahoni is actually the banned gadugi whose real name is Jeffrey Vernon Merkey. Otherwise, he should not worry about any Jeff, should he?

And if Waya sahoni and gadugi are one person, User:Waya sahoni should be banned per the peemament bar of User:Gadugi.

Please take note that Waya sahoni has continues a history of vandalization of Jeffrey Vernon Merkey page started by gadugi.

If and when Waya sahoni is banned my nym de guerre becomes unnecessary and will be discontinued whether you ban it or not. I do not want to create an account which may help Jeff Merkey learn my true identity because of his history of litigation against anyone who disagrees with him. Sue me Jeff 17:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

My first account Sue me Jeff has been banned because of its name, without any insight into my contributions. OK. Because the ban was not connected to my input, I believe I am free to contiunue demasking the new incarnation of Gadugi under my new nym de guerre. As you can see, I've chosen a non-offensive name this time. Friendly neighbour 17:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but this time it is a misnomer. No "friendly neighbour" exists only to stalk someone. I've blocked this one indefinitely as well. —Guanaco 19:15, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

What I don't understand is how the serial vandal and litigant Jeff Vernon Merkey is still allowed to post after being banned. There is now no doubt that Waya Sahoni is Jeff. See my user page (you tripped up again Jeff!). This is the Jeff Merkey that ranted about Misplaced Pages on his website Merkeylaw thusly:

"These websites are controlled and sponsored by Jimmy (JIMBO) Wales of the Wikimedia Foundation and Bomis.com, a porno distrbution business controlled by Jimbo Wales. Both websites are a front for a bogus 501-3(c) Charity (Wikimedia Foundation) which solicits moneys from the General Public to pay for its cost of operations and which is also used as a tax shield for Wales various business interests, including his porno distribution businesses. Misplaced Pages is an on line chat room frequented by sexual predators, and internet libelers and is used as a tool of libel by Wales and the Internet Community at large."

http://www.johncollins.org/ml/2005-12/30-20:01/index.html

I notice that Jeff/Waya has put a nice badge on your userpage, Guanaco.

Vryl 00:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Is the account User:Waya sahoni behaving inappropriately? If you post diffs of inappropriate edits by this account, I will block him. —Guanaco 00:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The easiest place to see Jeff's real purpose in being here is between my revert and the long list of his edits, completely trashing the page that had been worked on by lots of people for many, many months:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jeffrey_Vernon_Merkey&diff=41300793&oldid=41295696

Everything went, and only things flattering to Jeff remained. Now, when I reported this to AIV, people there chose to view it as a 'content dispute'. Aside from it being a Vanity Edit, I believe it is true vandalism, and blatant whitewashing of relevant, documented facts, of interest to many people for a variety of reasons. Jeff is a controversial, public figure. He should not be allowed to clean his own page of information just because he thinks it is embarrassing to him.

Vryl 00:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Waya is making valid contributions to Cherokee-related articles. Jeff's article can quickly be reverted, so I think blocking Waya at this time would do more harm than good. —Guanaco 00:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

So even though someone vandalizes a talk page, as long as he's made valid contributions somewhere else, it's alright? Please explain how *any Talk page* can be tag with a Wikiproject tag when the refering article is not also so tagged? As an administrator, don't you find that strange? While I believe Waya sahoni is a sock-puppet, the fact remains that the Talk page tag shouldn't be there and the continuing reverts of that tag by Waya sahoni is ultimately vandalism. --Jerry 03:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh well. You will see. I spose we have to leave it at that.

Also, now that he is definitively outed as Jeff, it is easy to see that he has been making false allegations against people who recognised him and saw straight thru his sock-puppet. See this page, my page, and others. Shouldn't he be warned against that kind of thing?

I quote from this page: "User is attempting to expose another use to danger, social, and /or political attacks by falsely associating them with the subject of the article and attempting to reveal them."

Vryl 01:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I have several responses to this dialogue. The way I understand Guanaco's statements, he wants you to locate inappropriate edits made by me, Waya sahoni, not Jeff or Gadugi. In response to his requests, I see the normal banter proffered by this group of "editors" and I use the term loosely, personal attacks, sockpuppetry accusations, and SCOX style message board dialogue. I see no discussion of an intellectual nature relative to why that article should not be restructered, why it does or does not meet the appropriate standards -- only meaningless chatter. You need to provide the requested content. I am also sick and tired of being accussed of being Jeff. Please stop it now.

Also, here are the proposed changes to that article to bring it into compliance with Wikipedias quality standards:

Photographs of Jeff (if any can be found or perhaps we should email the subject of the article or post a message on his Gadugi talk page and ask him to post them on a website somewhere).

Move of LKML materials and matters to the LKML article, where it belongs. Primary and Secondary sources may not be used from weblogs, mailing lists, bulletin boards, or any other medium where anonymous posters place content which cannot be verified by based on the Policy and Gidelines of Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources. LKML is a public mailing list, and these sources can be used in the LKML article, since LKML was deemed notable enough to have a Misplaced Pages entry. It's also appropriate since these are Linux controversies that originated there.

The ruling language fails as a secondary source for the same reason. It came from the Groklaw weblog and I cannot locate a PDF copy on any legal websites with the seal of the Court and a judges signature, as is typical with all public court documents. I also called the Court in Utah and they told me the case was settled nd sealed. Without a signed copy or a legal reference cititation where the ruling has been published, this content also fails verifibility.

Based upon this I plan to preserve all of the content and move it to LKML. These editors can leave a link in Jeff's article and move their LKML editorial there. The Court ruling material subjects both articles to {Afd} and {disputed} status.

Given these matters, I plan to move the LKML content to the LKML article without deletions and use Jeff's article to be about him and his life, not Linus Torvalds problems. These editors can continue editing that content from there. The simple fact here is that SCOX and Linux folks want to POV push their ownership of their own actions and controvesies into articles and the press as a "look there's Elvis" tactic to divert attention away from their ownership of these issues. This is creating (by design) a distorted picture of the facts. Linus took code from IBM which was alleged to be stolen from SCO. SCO sued IBM. Groklaw reports that Linux infringes 300+ patents. That's 300 more potential Linux lawsuits at some point. Linus and SCOX responds by saying the Patent Office should not issue patents due to Linux people stealing other peoples patents and intellectual property. LKML needs ownership of its content, just as Linux needs ownership of its issues to create a balanced and accurate picture. The article is POV pushed to keep out content which discusses Linux controversies. In that article, this content is wonderful and really enhances it and paints LKML as a colorful place indeed. The LKML article is seriously lacking on content as it stands.

These are the changes I intend to make to that article. Waya sahoni 03:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't bother Jeff... It will just be moved back. If not by someone else, then by me. Burr.. Saddle.. --Jerry 03:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

: If you vandalize the edits you may subjected to dispute resolution. That goes for your associates. Making statements you will revert edits for any reason indicates WP:OWN and possible stalking violations. You also referred to me as Jeff, for which you can be blocked for continued personal attacks WP:NPA. Waya sahoni 03:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Burr.. Saddle.. --Jerry 03:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Please stop making legalistic threats. Misplaced Pages is not a system of law. —Guanaco 03:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Jeff's world.. Aren't you glad you got involved with him? --Jerry 03:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

That helps to clarify when that particular perception engages. Comments redacted. Waya sahoni 03:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Are the proposed edits allowed by Policy? Please advise, so I can proceed. I have other articles to complete as well. I want to close this one and move on to the others. This one is the hard one -- the others are easy -- no one fights with me on them. Waya sahoni 03:46, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

There is no specific policy prohibiting those edits, but before making edits that are sure to be controversial, you should discuss the proposed changes and reach a consensus, or your edits may be reverted by another user. This content discussion can take place at Talk:Linux kernel mailing list. —Guanaco 03:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I think I know how to proceed with the edits now. Based upon "The Policy", I do not require concensus to remove materials which fail Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources the way it is currently worded. Comments Please?

Also, on the previous issue you raised regarding dispute resolution, I am a little confused. Perhaps you can explain. Stating dispute resolution is exactly what WP:NLT says to do in cases of WP:OWN -- I quote, Instead, first attempt to resolve disputes using the dispute resolution procedures. This will oftentimes lead to a solution without resorting to the blunt tool of the law. If the dispute resolution procedures do not resolve your problem then you can use the law in the knowledge that you have taken all reasonable steps to resolve the situation amicably. Perhaps it was the tone, and not the content. I think I have an idea, I'll fix the approach so this doesn't happen in the future. I can see why you would take it that way, but someone needs to update this policy to include "demands" for dispute resolution as a legalistic threat. It also needs to add this term, since it is not listed in the official policy so people don't make the same mistake again. Waya sahoni 03:58, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

There is a serious disconnect with reality here. What do you think he is going to say? It's Jeff Merkey here. He is capable of anything. Read the Merkeylaw.com mirrors to get a sense of him. -Vryl 04:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Respect for Process

Whatever happened to respect for process and consensus? Should a single administrator be unilaterlly deciding to ignore the results of two Arbcom cases? Does the ban pronounced against Mr. Merkey mean nothing at all? I can't believe that anyone who has looked at the evidence could doubt that Waya sahoni is Merkey. Surely you don't actually believe that a user in Texas would just happen to be sharing the same address range and even an email account with a banned user in Utah, whom he claimed :to know only slightly. When Waya sahoni first appeared, he became involved in a revert war with Bookofsecrets (talk • contribs) over Cherokee society. I helped defend his edits in that revert war because he was making useful contributions and he had promised not to involve himself in any dispute over the Jeffrey Vernon Merkey article, even though I was fairly sure even then that he was Merkey (see Talk:Cherokee_society/Archive2#This_Page_is_Bunk). Perhaps that was my mistake and I should have pressed to have his ban enforced at that time. If so, then several others made the same mistake. How bad will his behavior have to become before his ban is enforced? — MediaMangler 04:00, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Couple of things:

• Theres no ban

• You can edit that material to your hearts content over at the LKML article.

• I am not Jeff

• The bad behavior is your own in stalking me on this site and attacking everything I do, and engaging in personal attacks.

• Stop calling me Jeff.

• Argue on an intellectual basis and not an emotional basis. an quit being a whiner.

Thanks. Waya sahoni 04:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jeff... Since you haven't reached a consensus with the other editors on the article or with the folks at Talk:Linux kernel mailing list, don't bother making the edits, because it will just be changed back.

• I was a user here *long* before Waya sahoni so I would guess you are stalking me.

• Burr.. Saddle.. --Jerry 04:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

YOU ARE JEFF VERNON MERKEY. Your use of the tjarcher@comcast.net email address proves it definitively, as does your fascination with editing the Jeff Vernon Merkey page, as do the IPs you post from, as does the language you use. No-one is fooled. Watching the JVM page, and pointing out the beyond-reasonable-doubt fact that Waya Sahoni is a Jeff Merkey sockpuppet does not equate to stalking or cyberstalking. Your wish to clean from the page the personally embarrassing true and relevant facts posted there is understandable, but not acceptable. -Vryl 04:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

From Arbcom case: "This case is rejected and Merkey is banned until all his barratrous threats are withdrawn, settled, or judged." Sure looks like you were banned to me. — MediaMangler 04:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Bookofsecrets has not edited Cherokee society, to which Waya has made significant contributions. Waya, do you plan to take legal action against Wikimedia or any Misplaced Pages editors? —Guanaco 04:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is one of the best things to hit the internet. Jimbo Wales is a saint, and a true internet pioneer.

Ha ha!

Quote Merkeylaw.com:

"These websites are controlled and sponsored by Jimmy (JIMBO) Wales of the Wikimedia Foundation and Bomis.com, a porno distrbution business controlled by Jimbo Wales. Both websites are a front for a bogus 501-3(c) Charity (Wikimedia Foundation) which solicits moneys from the General Public to pay for its cost of operations and which is also used as a tax shield for Wales various business interests, including his porno distribution businesses. Misplaced Pages is an on line chat room frequented by sexual predators, and internet libelers and is used as a tool of libel by Wales and the Internet Community at large."

http://www.johncollins.org/ml/2005-12/30-20:01/index.html

-Vryl 04:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I was asking Waya. —Guanaco 04:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Serious reality disconnect. Waya is Jeff. Jeff is a known, provable, serial liar. What do you expect him to say? Here, on this page, you have yet another example of Jeff reality. (Did I mention that Jeff is banned from the wiki?) -Vryl 04:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not going to enforce an Arbitration ban (especially one that may not apply) under any circumstances, but if the account Waya sahoni threatens Wikimedia or any users with legal action, I will block it. —Guanaco 04:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC).

Thank you. I have work to do. Time I got to it. Waya sahoni 04:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

And if you check the Arbcom ruling, you will find that Jeff withdrew his threats and The ARCOM also withdrew the threat of a ban. These people are quoting snippets out of context. These people will not stop here, but I'll leave that in your capable hands. Waya sahoni 04:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Thanx for not very much. Here is what will happen. Jeff will not leave the JVM pages alone. Nor will those who are interested in them being factual and relevant. Result: Continuing reverts. -Vryl 04:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I have no intentions of ever taking legal action against Misplaced Pages or Wikimedia, other than perhaps the legal action of having transferring a very large grant and funding source to help them and setting up a foundation to raise money for them. I have no intetions of ever taking legal action against any editors of Misplaced Pages based on any matters pertaining to Misplaced Pages, Wikimedia, Jimbo Wales or anyone else. If one of them smashed into my car at a stoplight, or something, then I would probably call the police to make a traffic report if my insurance did not cover it, but that would not be wikipedia related. Waya sahoni 04:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I am satisfied with this statement. Waya is not going to be blocked for being Jeff or for legal threats. —Guanaco 04:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Please explain

How a talk page can be tagged as a Wikiproject and the upstream article is not tagged? Once again Waya sahoni is adding tags to a talk page without adding them to the appropriate article. When the tags are reverted, the usual threats are posted. I will revert one more time, and I expect Administrators to do their job. --Jerry 05:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

You always tag only the talk page. Never tag an article with a Wikiproject notice. —Guanaco 05:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

And so.. Even though Waya sahoni has not gotten a consensus from the other editors, has not attempted to get a consensus from the other editors and then continues to apply the tag to the Talk page, that's alright. While the removal of that tag by the other editors who disagree with it's applicability is vandalism? Sheesh. Seems I've got a lot to learn about the Misplaced Pages processes. --Jerry 19:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Jerry please replace the tags. I mean really, I cannot even put tags in the talk page of the article without revert wars. Don't you think this is ridiculous and wasteful? And deliberate. Thanks. Waya sahoni 05:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll replace the tags again after the 3RR time period expires. The then next time they get removed, it really is vandalism, because it has been explained. Again, instead of spending the evening editing I have had to engage in endless personal attacks and defend myself from the SCOX message board and their POV pushing into that article and personal attacks. Thanks. Waya sahoni 05:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Bookofsecrets Editing of Cherokee society

Bookofsecrets (talk • contribs) is a self-confessed sockpuppet of Bumpusmills1 (talk • contribs), see User_talk:Bookofsecrets/Archive_5. He was using multiple sockpuppet accounts to revert Cherokee society before apologizing and abandoning that behavior. He has behaved impeccably since then, so I regret being forced to mention his sockpuppetry just to prove to you that a revert war had taken place on Cherokee society and that I had helped defend Merkey in that instance. — MediaMangler 05:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Vryl has placed a large section at Talk:Jeffrey Vernon Merkey violating WP:NPA

This is too much. Vryl has placed a large section claiming I am Jeff. This is intolerable. I want this content taken down and this user dealt with. This goes way over the line of attempting to expose a user (falsely I might add) and associating me with Jeff. And his "proof" are postings from the SCOX message board. ENOUGH!!! What more evidence do you need? These people are SCOX trolls here at Linus Torvalds bidding to harrass anyone who goes near this article -- they are not editors. Waya sahoni 06:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The proof was the whois database Jeff. I am sure they keep backups, for legal reasons. The posting proves that that address was known to be used by you BEFORE you started using the Waya Sahoni sock-puppet. You tripped up.

You are lying. You use an SCOX post as evidence, written by who? I checked the domain and its registered to JEFF and it has an email address directed to JMERKEY@WOLFMOUNTAINGROUP.ORG and .COM. You have made an excellent argument for removal of the LKML content to the LKML article. Tommorrow, guess what -- I am moving the content to that article. Waya sahoni 06:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Nice work Jeff. The page from SCOX was October 2005. Now it has been changed (as I noted). Tell me, why in October 2005 were people quoting the Whois database as having tjarcher@comcast.net as the admin contact for wolfmountaingroup.org? What was their motivation?. Your Waya Sahoni sock-puppet did not exist then. If I have to, I will get a historical copy of the public Whois records for wolfmountaingroup.org domain. Do I need to go that far?

Go that far, by all means. You are lying and POV pushing. You lost your technical arguments now you resort to attacks and POV pushing. Waya sahoni 06:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Answer these questions, if you please:

1. Was the tjarcher@comcast.net email address used as the admin contact for wolfmountaingroup.org in October 2005?

I don't know that it was. WHOIS shows it was not. If all you have is an SCOX post from an anonymous user, you don;t have any evidence of this.

What was their motivation in October 2005? Waha Sahoni did not exist then. Can you explain that? You know it's true information, and I will prove that it's true information.

Anyway, lets just let lie there for a LITTLE while. I can't get to http://www.whois.sc at the moment, but they have historical records going back to 2001, apparantly. As soon as it's up and running again, I will run the query. I know you're Jeff, you, know you're Jeff, and sometime very soon, I will have even more proof that you are Jeff (not that we need any more, but just to ice the cake.)

See you then, Mr Merkey!--Vryl 07:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

See you then. Whatever you bring back will fail Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources because I believe most of it has been fabricated. I also read posts claiming everything from Toad Farms to marijuana fields owned by Jeff to a Rhodium Mine????????. I have a hard time believing anything you say after how you have treated me on this site, or any of your third party sites (which you probably control). Waya sahoni 07:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

What was the MOTIVATION to use the tjarcher@comcast.net email address in a post in October 2005. Waya Sahoni did not exist until January 2006. Occam's razor gives the simplest, most reliable answer. It was taken from the Whois database for wolfmountaingroup.org. (This can and will be verified from historical whois sources). Any other explanation, especially ones that do not deal with this point, are simply unbelieveable. tjarcher@comcast.net belongs to Jeff Vernon Merkey. Waya Sahoni uses this account also. Waya Sahoni is Jeff Vernon Merkey. --Vryl 08:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

2. Why did you say to bookofsecrets to contact him on the tjarcher@comcast.net email address?

tjarcher@comcast.net is my email address -- Thomas Jerome Archer. About 60% of all Cherokee's from Oklahoma have a last name of Archer (derived from You Are Cherokee (ArCherokee) from the Dawes Rolls. Thomas is a common name also among Cherokee -- Thomas Jefferson, herro of blacks and Indians).

3. Why do you post from the small section of IPs that Jeff Merkey posts from

Jeff and Gadugi have never posted from those addresses. CheckUser verified this.

4. Why are you so interested in removing content from the JVM pages?

I am putting together his Cherokee Nation info (which I have already) and all his native projects and moving your POV smut where it belongs, to LKML. Since it is POV pushing, unverifiable, and relegates that artcle to B-CLass status forever (because the editors that wrote it are not really editors).

--Vryl 06:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hope this helps. Waya sahoni 06:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

What is this paranoid conspiracy thing about Linus? Anyone care to call that a FALSE ALLEGATON? --Vryl 06:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I have read Linus posts to Jeff in that article, and his emails on LKML talking about Jeff and Misplaced Pages. I think the record is clear. I also just found Peter Anvin's posts (Linus right hand liuetenant) and what they discuss about Jeff. Waya sahoni 06:37, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

ARBCOM Imposed no Ban on Jeff

Also from the ARBCOM, - Exabit has pointed out to me (thanks, Exabit!) that Merkey has withdrawn his legal threats, leaving only his threat (vide supra) of "going to the press with this." None the less, since we arbiters are entirely unable to help Merkey defend himself and his family against the alleged death threats he has allegedly received, I strongly encourage him to contact law enforcement or hire an armed security force. My decision remains to reject this case. ➥the Epopt 14:02, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Wow, the arbitor stated that Jeff should get armed guards to protect himself from the editors of this article. Waya sahoni 06:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocks

Please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#User_talk:Why_you_so_hawny.3F_and_User:Waya_sahoni. I have already indefinitely UsernameBlocked User:Why you so hawny?. I was wondering if you objected to me blocking the other sock. Superm401 - Talk 06:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I object to blocking Waya sahoni unless Waya makes new disruptive edits. —Guanaco 21:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

When does someone start to get disruptive? So far, Jeffrey Vernon Merkey article has been hit by numerous attempts to fill it with unverifiable vanity information, the talk page is now a chronicle of the waya sahoni vs the rest of the world grudge match, LKML is the subject of a wierd revert war, There's an RFC going on, which Merkey *will* ignore because he's losing, there's a huge pile of Merkey related wibble on the Administrator's noticeboard and the user talk pages of almost everyone who's been anywhere near the Jeffrey Vernon Merkey article is filled with Jeffspew about the article, the blockings, the allegations of sockpuppetry, the counterallegations of 'role accounts', you name it. Everybody involved has far better things to do than clean up after Jeff Merkey and this crusade of his against the internet that, for some reason, doesn't see Jeff the way he sees himself. Since you're opposed to blocking him, do you have any other suggestions as to how to stop Jeff/waya becoming an enormous waste of everyone's time and effort? --Aim Here 22:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

It isn't only Waya who is wasting time. —Guanaco 22:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

At what point do the rules for subverting a block get applied?

The evidence that Waya sahoni is actually Jeffrey Vernon merkey seems very strong. User Gadugi (Jeff Merkey) was indefinitely blocked. Waya Sahoni is an apparent attempt to circumvent that block. When do these rules get applied?Vigilant 07:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Users are allowed to circumvent blocks if they do not continue the behavior that got them blocked in the first place. For example, a vandal can return to Misplaced Pages with a new account if he uses it to create useful articles. —Guanaco 21:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

When you violate 3RR, you will certainly be blocked. I know. :-) Waya sahoni 08:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

MarkSweep

Thankyou for reverting th damage to my user page from MarkSweep.

My personal feeling is that while userboxes may/may-not be a problem, categories are a diffeerent thing.

I feel that (self-)categorising of users is important, in that it allows potential iases to be explicitly exposed for discussion and consideration. I have written and edited a number of articles on Christian groups, and feel it is improtant to put myself outthere as non-christian.

The other issue with categories is that they allow meta-communities to form, potential small scale project recruiting to happen etc.

Alex Law 00:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I came here for the same reason. Thank you for reverting Mark's vandalism of my userpage. Looks like I'll have to pay closer attention to it in the future. MiraLuka 02:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Forgot to add my thanks for fixing my warboxen userpage. Keep up the good work.--God Ω War 02:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Another thanks for rv'ing the "work" of MarkSweeps... only now he reverted it back. Any idea what we can do to desysop him or something similar? --SuperNova 03:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Currently, only Jimbo Wales and the arbitration committee can desysop people. I don't think Jimbo is going to intervene, and the corrupt arbcom would probably end up desysopping me. —Guanaco 03:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Template: User review

Please see CSD criterion T1. I'm not making any judgement of its rightness or wrongness. I do think it's arguable though. The template is not designed to help build an encyclopaedia.

Why encourage organised shitstirring, Guanaco? Selina can link her trollboard from her userpage. I don't have any problem with that. I was linking it from mine until recently. But templates are supposed to be a way to help edit the encyclopaedia. I don't really support the MarkSweeps and other crusaders, but I can understand their POV. How does it help that people whose purpose is destructive can round up other destructive trolls, using Misplaced Pages's own mechanism? How does it help to have people promote anger, "anti-ness", bitterness? Grace Note 02:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Review is a valid forum for discussing Misplaced Pages. I use it, and I don't vandalize or troll. I use it to help the encyclopedia. Pushing contributors around by deleting userboxes only tears Misplaced Pages apart by driving users away. —Guanaco 02:36, 3 March 2006 (UTC)