| Revision as of 22:30, 16 July 2006 editAvant Guard (talk | contribs)4,472 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:30, 16 July 2006 edit undoAzmoc (talk | contribs)184 edits →ThanksNext edit → | ||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
| :I second Socafans request. He is warning me on my talk page that I should be civil, but he states he "doesn't care a flying fuck" about my proposals . Such language used to mock my proposal is clearly uncivil itself. ] 22:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC) | :I second Socafans request. He is warning me on my talk page that I should be civil, but he states he "doesn't care a flying fuck" about my proposals . Such language used to mock my proposal is clearly uncivil itself. ] 22:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::Crap. Colourful lagnuage isn't by any means the same thing as incivility. He doesn't ''have'' to care about your proposals. I still reject the case. ] | ] 22:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC) | ::Crap. Colourful lagnuage isn't by any means the same thing as incivility. He doesn't ''have'' to care about your proposals. I still reject the case. ] | ] 22:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::: I don't give a fucking shit about what you call a colourful language. He doesn't have to care but he should respect me, right thats the fucking principle of civility, right? JzG just abuses his priviledges, he hadn't edited You should check what is happening here. You are rejecting his Socafan's RfArb, so that JzG will be able to fill a counter-RfC against him later? ? I have seen this link on netscotts page, so he is already soliciting people to help him comment Socafan to death (I mean to an indef ban per ruling of the admin cabal). Moreover, JzG didn't have much mainspace edits recently, but when he does, he injects his POV into various articles, like here , sorry but I am fucking lazy, so please search for your evidence yourself. That's fucking clear POV pushing together with the fucking Lance Armstrong article protecting etc. whatever I the flying fuck might think about it. Denk doch mal nach. ] 22:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == E-mail address request == | == E-mail address request == | ||
Revision as of 22:30, 16 July 2006
archive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Welcome to my talk page. If you've come to complain, whine, moan, question my judgment, my intelligence, my sanity, or tell me off in any way, that's fine. I'm a big girl who can take it. If you've come to chat, compliment me, have a laugh, or discuss articles that's even better.
Please don't delete discussion
I believe that's considered bad form here on Misplaced Pages. Especially when it's appropriate discussion like discussion of criticism of Misplaced Pages on the Talk:Criticism of Misplaced Pages page. Thanks in advance. -Advocron 16:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Personal attacks and trolling are not discussion. As I alread explained to you that page is for discussion of the article not for you tp personoally rant and rave. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 19:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
"Welcome!"
Sorry, I knew you'd been here a while, the welcome notice was an accidental VandalProof click. I was trying to revert the vandalism to your page (notice my facetious "I'm a genius" edit comment when I finally did). Thanks for the help in dealing with the vandal. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 20:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks and important note
Thank you for deleting YaR GnitS's personal attacks against me on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Gay ICP. I personally don't mind when people attack me... they usually only make themselves look bad. But it's nice to see another editor taking action to keep things civil. :) Kasreyn 21:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
NOTE: FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES OF User:YaR_GnitS
I see you've already blocked User:YaR_GnitS. However, you might not have noticed the worst of what he's done. He fraudulently altered User:Koosh's words from a delete vote to a keep vote, and deleted User:Rosicrucian's vote. Diff Would this justify a longer block in your opinion? As far as I can tell, User:YaR_GnitS is a vandalism / POV push account only. Kasreyn 22:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Well I tend to keeps blocks short in the first instance. If he comes back after a first block and disrupts again I'd be happy to indefinately block, but I'm hoping that 24 hours will be enough to teach him to bahave.Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
- Evidently too short. He resumed vandalizing the deletion nom and changing all the votes to "keep" and is becoming increasingly hostile and slanderous to Kasreyn. Examination of the contribution history of YaR_GnitS indicates a vandal-only account.--Rosicrucian 22:16, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- He's been blocked by another admin. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Good to hear. I'd literally just went to fix myself a sandwich and came back to see this. Glad he's out of our hair.--Rosicrucian 22:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- He's been blocked by another admin. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Research
Can you look at the history for deleted imagesImage:D hed shot.jpg & Image:Jobs Gates Mossberg 2005.jpg - if these were uploaded by User:Wmossberg they most likely were uploaded without understanding the license criteria. This user is Walter Mossberg and I will follow up with him to get permission to use these again. Also the history at Walt Mossberg should probably be merged with Walter Mossberg thx in adv --Trödel 22:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes they were. I'm a bit tired to do a merge right now but I'll take a look in the morning. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
I could not have removed the warning myself. I am pretty sure I would have been blocked for vandalism if I did. Anyway, thx. Azmoc 13:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hello Theresa knott, save for your effort to defuse the situation User:JzG's warning made sense in light of User:Azmoc's own warning placed on User:Zoe's user page. (→Netscott) 14:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- This too was a hot-headed warning. I wouldn't object if Zoe removed it, I have removed it myself. However, I was not uncivil, I was paraphrasing what Zoe said and using his/her argument as an example for my proposal. Azmoc 15:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Spelling
If I see you have a typo (like you do in the first section =D), can I correct it? I understand if you want me to leave them as is =P --mboverload@ 13:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Please do! I welcome anyone who wants to correct my terrible spellings. (See
Thanks
Re: Azmoc - Cool heads prevail as ever. Well done.
Re: Armstrong - I'm pretty sure I did not behave well but I did behave in accordance with my interpretation of the best interests of the project, which is hopefully good enough. Phil disagrees vehemently. I'll see what I can learn from him. Just zis Guy you know? 16:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Please review your rejection of the case. I do not care if an arbcom case or another way to solve the dispute is chosen, but protecting articles and blocking users when in a conflict of interest over a content dispute is abuse of admin power. All allegations are sourced, claiming that they are libelous is absurd, and this view is supported by Phil Sandifer, too. Comments by JzG shows he has no interest in a civil resolution of the conflict, the latest at my talk page: . Socafan 16:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- I second Socafans request. He is warning me on my talk page that I should be civil, but he states he "doesn't care a flying fuck" about my proposals . Such language used to mock my proposal is clearly uncivil itself. Azmoc 22:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Crap. Colourful lagnuage isn't by any means the same thing as incivility. He doesn't have to care about your proposals. I still reject the case. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- I don't give a fucking shit about what you call a colourful language. He doesn't have to care but he should respect me, right thats the fucking principle of civility, right? JzG just abuses his priviledges, he hadn't edited You should check what is happening here. You are rejecting his Socafan's RfArb, so that JzG will be able to fill a counter-RfC against him later? ? I have seen this link on netscotts page, so he is already soliciting people to help him comment Socafan to death (I mean to an indef ban per ruling of the admin cabal). Moreover, JzG didn't have much mainspace edits recently, but when he does, he injects his POV into various articles, like here , sorry but I am fucking lazy, so please search for your evidence yourself. That's fucking clear POV pushing together with the fucking Lance Armstrong article protecting etc. whatever I the flying fuck might think about it. Denk doch mal nach. Azmoc 22:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Crap. Colourful lagnuage isn't by any means the same thing as incivility. He doesn't have to care about your proposals. I still reject the case. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
E-mail address request
Could you please let me know why you request my e-mail address?--Conrad Devonshire 16:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- I suspect that this has to do with Template: User antifeminism. Please note that I distinguish feminism from the basic human rights that women are due and that I didn't intend for the template to be offensive. But if it is going to cause a great deal of controversy, then please delete it. I have already removed it from my userpage.--Conrad Devonshire 17:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
E-mail address
I will probably provide an e-mail address soon, though I am currently in the process of changing ISPs, so mantaining a conversation via e-mail may be difficult.--Conrad Devonshire 19:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
This is beginning to concern me. Please e-mail me at c.devonshire@yahoo.com.--Conrad Devonshire 22:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppets
You say that I have been creating sockpuppets? I know that my user creation log shows that I have created two accounts, User:Brad Pitt's second penis and User:Lesbian courtesan, however, these two accounts were created by others while my account was logged in as a joke, not me. It also shows that I have created accounts with names similar to those of notable Wikipedians, however those accounts were doppelgangers intended to prevent sockpuppetry.--Conrad Devonshire 22:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Pleeeeeeeeease don't take me for an idiot! I'm talking considerably more than two here, most of which were not dopplegangers. I find it very hard to believe that they are all jokes Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Before treating me like a villain, please explain yourself.--Conrad Devonshire 22:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)