Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:44, 24 December 2006

NOTE: I frequently do new pages patrol. If you have come here to debate an article I have nominated for speedy deletion, please take the time to review the speedy deletion criteria policy and attempt to improve the article. If you are new to Misplaced Pages, please take the time to review WP:WELCOME. Review of the relevent policies will help everyone in building the encyclopedia. Thanks!

Age questions

Hi Malber, I feel your age questions for RfA candidates are inappropriate. I urge you to reconsider. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 02:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

It's been 3 days, while I wasn't asking a question, I would appreciate some feedback on my concern. There's a conversation thread on the WP:RFA talk page regarding this, and your input would be valuable. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Malber; I would appreciate it if you would hold off on asking about people's ages on RfA until there is a consensus one way or the other. It seems to be contributing to a certain amount of disruption and wasted time. Tom Harrison 14:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Malber, it's obvious that you feel strongly about this issue. In light of the fact that this has generated such controversy and strong emotion, I think it's reasonable to request some insight from you on why, in the face of all this, you persist in asking the question and reverting other editors. What aspect of this question is so important to you that you're willing to (apparently) revert war over it? For the record, I'm 30 years old, so if you feel I'm arguing from the position of "this will affect me directly", please adjust that perception appropriately. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

One more post about RfA questions

Malber, I'm a little annoyed about your posting the same RFA questions to every candidate. I don't know how long others spent on your questions, but it took me a good 40 minutes to write thoughtful answers to them. I wouldn't be annoyed if you seemed more discriminating in asking them, but you ask them of other candidates who are doing well (Ceyockey, Cbrown1023) and frequently don't participate in an RFA beyond asking those questions (like the last five in which you've asked them). If they are helpful for your evaluation of a candidate, then fine, but I'd expect you'd then participate in the RfA by registering a !vote. If they are helpful for other members of the community evaluating candidates, then other members of the community should ask them. This is a volunteer project. If someone asks me questions in RFA, I expect that they are seriously evaluating me and are on the fence about my candidacy. If that person never participates in the RFA again, then my expectation of some kind of evaluation of them is essentially negated. I'm sorry if I seem angry. (I'm not; just annoyed.) I think these are good questions, I just think it's pointless asking them of people that you aren't serious about evaluating. I await your response.--Kchase T 09:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply on Kchase02's talk page

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I'm going to let it bounce around in my head for a few days and then reply, hopefully in a less strident way than the initial post.--Kchase T 18:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you cogently explain to me what's going on?

- crz crztalk 15:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Block

I had to regretfully block you for trolling, disruption and putting fake warnings on other users' talk pages. As you might have learnt from the past it is always better not to disrupt Misplaced Pages to illustrate a WP:POINT. — Nearly Headless Nick 15:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a punitive block placed by an administrator involved in a dispute with an editor. It is contrary to the

Your comments are available for public viewing on WT:RFA; and your constributions. You have been uncivil, disruptive, unwilling to heed to consensus etc. — Nearly Headless Nick 15:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see his blocklog for previous history of disruption. — Nearly Headless Nick 15:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no consensus on RfA questions. Your block is intended to stifle discussion and promote your personal view. You obviously have an axe to grind. Your punitive block will be taken up at ANI when the block is lifted. —Malber (talk • contribs) 16:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

He did that himself. By the way, Malber, if you even consider leaving Misplaced Pages because of this, I will whack you. -Amarkov _edits 16:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Although I disagreed very strongly with Malber's position in the discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for adminship#Malber's age question, I believe this is a highly problematic block. In particular, Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington, being involved in an active dispute with Malber at the time, should not have been the blocking administrator. While the weight of opinion in the discussion on the "age question" was against the question continuing to be asked, it can hardly be said that Malber's continuing the dialog was inherently disruptive, and while some of his comments (particlarly the suggest that Sir Nicholas should be desysopped) displayed a far from exemplary degree of civility, I saw nothing going so far as to warrant a block. See also discussion at WP:ANI.Newyorkbrad 16:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I see you've been unblocked. Now, please do give thoughtful and careful consideration to the points that were made in the ANI discussion. Regards, Newyorkbrad 17:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Unblock request due to punitive block

I unblocked you on process grounds. Please be more civil, and please note that there appears to be consensus that your age question at RFA is inappropriate and you should not ask it. Chick Bowen 16:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

...there really isn't consensus. I don't know where people see it. -Amarkov _edits 16:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see this

Here ] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Simbirskin (talk • contribs) 09:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC). Forgot to sign my comment, sorry. Simbirskin 09:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I like this version better. . —Malber (talk • contribs) 13:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Anthony Appleyard

Re this entry in Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Anthony Appleyard:-

• # Oppose Regrettably so. I'm concerned by this candidate's views on punitive blocks. I've already been the victim of a punitive block by an administrator on a crusade. (Full disclosure: I did give the candidate an opportunity to review the policy and revise the answer.) —Malber (talk • contribs) 15:55, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry: I thought I was quoting the official rules. I have read the rules page again and I have revised my answer. Anthony Appleyard 17:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Before this becomes a serious matter

Hello. I have just been looking at your contributions and I noticed that you have been following the edits of administrator Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington. Now I know that you two don't get along with each other, but that is not a reason to stalk his edits. This is not a warning, but a gentle reminder to you so that you control your actions before they are termed to be disruptive. Regards, - Aksi_great (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply on Aksi_great's talk page

It is not a matter of sides. It is a matter of disruption and WP:POINT. If you are going to nominate every cat that he has created and comment on every AfD he has closed, then you'll get in trouble. That is why I am warning you before things get out of hand. Sir Nick may be wrong, but that does not give you license to disrupt. If you want to start an ArbCom case then it is up to you. But that is in no way related to your following and commenting on his edits. - Aksi_great (talk) 19:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply on Aksi_great's talk page

I know you have nominated only 1 cat, and hence the heading of this discussion is "Before this becomes a serious matter". But I don't see this discussion going anywhere. I just wanted to bring this to your notice. Whether you heed to my advice or not is up to you. - Aksi_great (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply on Aksi_great's talk page

I have reverted your edit here. A user page of a blocked user is really not the right place to ask a question. If you really want to know, I would suggest that you ask User:Deepujoseph. Kuntan is an improper word in Malayalam. - Aksi_great (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply on Aksi_great's talk page

...Kuntan is the name of a town in Malaysia: http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:P9FOB313zwYJ:www.travour.com/tours-to-malaysia/malaysia-tourist-destinations/tours-to-pahang.html+kuntan+%2B+malaysian&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8.

And F****** is a town in Austria. Please do create a username based on that argument. The meaning of the other one in Kuntan's own words can be found in one of the earliest versions of the article that was deleted as per this AfD. Any administrator will look it up for you (though I must say that in my college days, we used it to mean something slightly different). Tintin (talk) 05:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Malber: please see my talkpage, beginning with "Nearly Headless Nick" to "Ongoing draft of RFC against Nick"--would you like to just collaborate on going straight to Arbcom? All best, Cindery 09:24, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to User talk:Heligoland

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. --Kind Regards - Heligoland | Talk | Contribs 21:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reply on Heligoland's talk page