Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:46, 14 July 2009

Graph isomorphism problem

You wrote "Reverted 1 edit by Tim32; Rvt disruption. Establish consensus please. (TW)" this is false! There was not consensus that any alternative approach is not possible! Aslo you should not remove Refimprovesect tag! As well as my messages from this your talk page! Sometime ago you said me "sorry" for similar actions (see, my talk page)!--Tim32 (talk) 10:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no agreement for the edits you are making. I'm beginning to think you should be topic banned. Verbal chat 15:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, Tim, I've never apologised for my actions involving you - indeed I have nothing to apologise for. Except, perhaps, I'm sorry if you misunderstood. Verbal chat 16:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

But I'm beginning to think you should be topic banned, because you reverted all my different edits without discussion -- it looks like vandalism. Some time ago you said some words about me, and apologised for it (see my talk page). Now you said COI about me without any reason.--Tim32 (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood what I wrote. Verbal chat 20:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, nobody can understand absurd reasons :( --Tim32 (talk) 11:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Please don't go down the road of making personal attacks again. My previous comment ("I think you've misunderstood what I wrote") refers to the fact that I have not apologised to you for my actions, which have all been proper. Your CoI is documented and known, and your disruption to those articles has been noted. Verbal chat 11:46, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

• Where is personal attack? Is "absurd reasons" personal attack?--Tim32 (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
• You wrote here "I have not apologised to you for my actions", but following cited from my talk page:

• You wrote here: "Your CoI is documented" -- Where had been documented my so-called "COI"?--Tim32 (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
• You wrote here: "your disruption to those articles has been noted" -- Yes, this so-called "disruption" was noted by you, for example. But you should prove this disruption. From my side I also noted your disruption to those articles. And I proved it, unlike you.--Tim32 (talk) 18:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Re the apology, I'm sorry when anyone is upset, it's always something I would wish to avoid. However, I am not sorry for my actions, which were caused by you, only that they upset you. If you didn't make accusations of racism etc they wouldn't be needed. Verbal chat 19:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It looks like word play only, but "call a spade a spade" ;) Also, I see you have nothing to say about my so-called "COI" and your disruption to those articles. You did not answer my questions.--Tim32 (talk) 19:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

You know the answers, if not read through the talk page and archives at Graph isomorphism problem. You have a WP:COI and have been the subject of WP:WQA reports for your disruption. No more here please. Verbal chat 19:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ghost Hunters

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, you may not know that Misplaced Pages has a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia, as you did in Ghost Hunters, makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. The addition you added to Ghost Hunters violates WP:BETTER. It should be expanded, to match the coverage in the body of the article, but single sentences, unsourced in the lede, need to stay out. Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 16:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

This is stupid. Have you read wp:lead? I'll add references if you insist, but they're in the body. Not needed. The "welcome to wikipedia" to a well established editor is highly offensive. Verbal chat 16:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

How is this stupid? According to WP:BETTER, single stand-alone sentences should be avoided. Rather than continually insert material which has been challenged, and willy-nilly attaching the is subject to criticism line, why not expand to more than one sentence, or incorporate into the existing paragraph(s). As for appearing to be offensive or the purported personal attack, no offense meant, and I apologize if it appeared as such. As for entering into discussion on the talk page, your only foray onto the talk page was thanks, I'll add it to that article too disregarding the contention made. As for WP:NOTVAND, your edit could be considered disruptive, epecially since the Ghost Hunters article is under dispute, and changes should me proposed on the talk page first. Again, you might need to read over WP:MOS, take a look at some FA's to see how the lede is structured. And, as an added FYI, I appreciate your expertise in this (Seeing as you are a Ph.D), but imagine an abstract on a paper you submitted having a single, unsourced, contentious statement in it? Bad style, yes? Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 17:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Removing the information is not the way to fix the problem you describe. We seem to have miscommunicated here, I hope we get along better now we've sorted it out. Verbal chat 18:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

prod2

Hey there, if you have something to add to the prod reason, you can add it into the prod2 template; for example {{prod2|also fails ]}}. I've done this for you at RenDianXue(RDX). But hopefully that will help you in future :). Regards - Kingpin (talk) 08:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't realise you could do that. I was just on my way over to your page to let you know what I'd done. Cheers, Verbal chat 08:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Simone

Pls consider the fact that all sources come form her offcial web site and major Newspaper. You reverted without consider the new sources. Jackiestud (talk) 18:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

You undid much good editing, and restore much material against BLP policy. You must cease this behaviour and engage on the talk page or you will be blocked again. See the article talk and your own talk page. You cannot simply revert to the previous version and add a few sources that do not address all the issues. Please do not comment here about this again, use the article talk page. Verbal chat 18:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

ATTENTION:Legal action

I advice you not to continue. My lwayer was noticed and you damaging her image ina very srious way, damaging without knowing her work. Jackiestud (talk) 18:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I better take this to WP:ANI. See WP:NLT. I notified EdJohnston. Verbal chat 18:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Note This user has been indef blocked for these and other threats. Verbal chat 19:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Levine2112

Don't waste your time hoping that he'll behave better when his actions are called out. --Ronz (talk) 19:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Good point :) I thought I was very civil, so I don't understand the wp:pot reference! Verbal chat 19:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

He meant WP:POT. I've found meta:What is a troll? describes how to best address this behavior. --Ronz (talk) 20:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I understood the pot/kettle thing (but I didn't know we had a WP-space page on it), I just don't think it works as I was very nice. Thanks, Verbal chat 20:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

your sig

Your current sig:

• ] <small>]</small>
  w/the wrong spelling of “gray” could be achieved with:
• <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] <small>]</small></span>

Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

The spelling was a copy-paste I should have noticed :) I was working on fixing this when you posted... Verbal chat 11:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Whole story please

It is fine that you deleted what I had written to Shot Info but why did you not delete what he wrote? Did you give him a warning for simply attacking me?

By the way, I do think my comments about pseudoscience and frontier subjects is on topic and will be discussed more and more in the real world as people seek to find alternative approaches. What I am saying is that despite Shot's crack at me, I was trying to make an appropriate comment.

Please delete Shot Info's comment and I wil go away. Tom Butler (talk) 18:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

SI didn't link to an attack site that outs wikipedia editors, itself a violation of our policies. I have collapsed his comment, however it was a reply to another off topic comment that I have placed in a collapse box. Do not restore your comments as this will violate several policies. If you have a problem with this take it to ANI, though realise your behaviour will come under scrutiny. Verbal chat 19:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I have to admit that I do not have time to escalate this, but please be aware that all you are allowing someone to attack me yet you have no proof that I am acting in bad faith. I attempted to keep my reply on topic. There are articles in Misplaced Pages which I consider attack articles yet I do not say you are an attacker ... or are you?

All you are doing is confirming my sense that this wiki is biased-- inside and out. Tom Butler (talk) 20:23, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

You linked to an attack site which outs existing editors. Your comments were off topic - wikipedia is not a forum for you to promote your ideas or peddle your websites. If you have nothing to add to the project, then maybe one of the other sites you suggest will be more to your liking. I'm not interested, and over the last few days I've dealt with worse than you can come up with. Please consider this conversation over, I have nothing further to say. Verbal chat 20:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Please do not remove messages I have left to another user, see Tom Butler's talk page. 217.44.114.146 (talk) 21:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Do not vandalise the page, and do not make personal attacks WP:NPA. Verbal chat 22:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I fail to spot a personal attack 217.44.114.146 (talk) 23:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

That's no excuse. Verbal chat 23:08, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Well if you accuse me of personal attacks then the burden of proof is on you, until you supply said proof, please don't make accusations. 217.44.114.146 (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

IP's edit to someone else's talk page removed here also . Dougweller (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Jackiestud

Given the IP's other edit, I'm assuming this is a dynamic IP. It's her, of course. Dougweller (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Compare the English. I am (reasonably I hope) eloquent and fluent, whereas this other user seems to use it as a second language, seeing as her user page states that she is from Brazil. I merely asked that my (non-abusive) comments are left untampered. This is a shared IP, so I have no objections whatsoever to you removing the edits to MBisanz's user page. But please, leave my messages be and don't accuse me of personal attacks. 217.44.114.146 (talk) 10:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This is a different section, and a different IP address. Nothing to do with you. I suggest you stay off of other people's talk pages if you have nothing constructive to say. Dougweller (talk) 10:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, I mistook it for being directed at me (as you added to the section above for no apparent reason). And given my confusion, it was constructive as it was a defense. Thank you 217.44.114.146 (talk) 11:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Doug. Verbal chat 12:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

It was this edit I was thinking of: ]. Dougweller (talk) 12:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

That was the edit I was thinking of per WP:NPA, and the edit summaries to Tom's page are at the least WP:UNCIVIL. Hopefully (on the topic of this thread) JS will stay away or at least behave. Verbal chat 12:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for clearing that up. I apologise if my summaries seemed uncivil, I was just a bit annoyed at the time. 217.44.114.146 (talk) 13:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

RfAr

You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#William M. Connolley (2nd) and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Requesting Arbitration;
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration guide.

Thanks, --Abd (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2009 (UTC)