| Revision as of 02:32, 24 July 2006 editMSTCrow (talk | contribs)2,779 edits →ArbCom case← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:32, 24 July 2006 edit undoMSTCrow (talk | contribs)2,779 edits →Please be civil: Removed vandalism from Calton, Bishonen, et alNext edit → | ||
| Line 60: | Line 60: | ||
| ::Nooo, it's an accurate description of what he was doing, as opposed to your inaccurate -- to be charitable -- description. But given the undisguised propaganda you keep trying to insert, not to mention the fake vandalism warnings and the fake civility notices, I'm not in any way inclined to be charitable, especially to one who insists on insulting my -- and everyone else's -- intelligence. Attempting to bully people using policies you neither understand nor follow yourself gets you zero slack from me. --] | ] 01:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | ::Nooo, it's an accurate description of what he was doing, as opposed to your inaccurate -- to be charitable -- description. But given the undisguised propaganda you keep trying to insert, not to mention the fake vandalism warnings and the fake civility notices, I'm not in any way inclined to be charitable, especially to one who insists on insulting my -- and everyone else's -- intelligence. Attempting to bully people using policies you neither understand nor follow yourself gets you zero slack from me. --] | ] 01:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ==Please be civil== | |||
| Planting vandalism templates on experienced editors recommending them to use the sandbox and take a look at the welcome page to learn how to contribute is extremely rude. Please think twice before you use these templates on ''anybody''. ] | ] 01:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC). | |||
| :The standard progression in vandalism tags starts with that one. If you wish for the tag to be worded differently, that is not something I have control over. - ] 01:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I see you keep it up. I'm quite serious. Stop now before I block you. Especially never use the <nowiki>{{blatantvandal}}</nowiki> tag without really knowing what you're doing; it's intended for ''extreme'' or ''obscene'' ''vandalism'', not for content disputes. Neither Calton nor Rattboy are vandals. ] | ] 01:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC). | |||
| :::You are mistaken. Calton has been blanking sections of NPR, which is a clear act of vandalism according to the rules. The rules state "vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change to content made in a deliberate attempt to reduce the quality of the encyclopedia," as well as "it needs to be spotted, and then dealt with." Then it goes on to say "if you see vandalism (as defined below), revert it and leave a warning message on the vandal's talk page using the system below. Check the page history after reverting to make sure you have removed all the vandalism; there may be multiple vandal edits, sometimes from several different IPs. Also, check the vandal's other contributions — you will often find more malicious edits." You may disagree with the current vandalism policy, but it is inappropriate to threaten other users with bans for not following the rules as you would like them to be. See ] - ] 01:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::You don't even seem to have read the bits of the policy you ''quote''; you seem to be picking sentences from ] at random. Don't ] with me if that's the best you can do. ] | ] 01:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC). | |||
| :::::You are rude and insensible. I will not deal with any user who does not know what they are doing. - ] 01:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Man, the irony is just ''thick''. --] | ] 01:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Here's another rule you probably haven't read: ]. You're already unambiguously in violation of it on ] -- and no, your tendentious wikilawyering relying upon your misinterpretation of "vandalism" won't help you there. Now cut out the bully-boy tactics, because continuing them aren't going to get you anything but an inevitable exit from Misplaced Pages. --] | ] 01:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I've reverted twice, not three times. Anyone who looks at the history of the NPR article will see that "Bishonen" is either lying, or did not bother to actually investigate it for himself. The fact that he has to stoop to accuse me of "wikilawyering" for adhering to Misplaced Pages Policy shows that "Bishonen" has not ever read them, or that he chooses to openly disregard them. He charges others with "wikilawyering" to obscure that he doesn't pay any attention to WP ''at all''. I will not deal with "Bishonen" any longer, as he is dishonest and unprincipled. If this is to continue, I request that another admin be brought in that is agreeable to all sides. - ] 01:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::(After edit conflict) ''I've reverted twice, not three times.'' Counting, another of your strong suits: | |||
| :::* - 20:43, July 23, 2006 ''r/v'' | |||
| :::* - 21:31, July 23, 2006 ''Reverted, Ideogram is blanking information, refer to talk page. Do not revert edit again, as this constitutes vandalism.'' | |||
| :::* - 00:59, July 24, 2006 | |||
| :::* - 01:38, July 24, 2006 ''r/v due to vandalism (blanking of section)'' | |||
| ::*I could reasonably throw in , since you used it as an opportunity to slip back in an external link -- making 5 reverts -- but I've enough for proof of violations. And since you've made me go to all the trouble of compiling all this to refute your all-too-obvious lie, I'll just go and paste these into the 3RR report page. Honesty IS the best policy: this was simply a warning, but attempts at denial tells me I'd better escalate this. --] | ] 02:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Whoops, looks like someone beat me to it. Too bad, so sad. --] | ] 02:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Block== | ==Block== | ||
Revision as of 02:32, 24 July 2006
| This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than (7) days are automatically archived to (User talk:MSTCrow/Archive/Archive 03). Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
Welcome to my current sovereign talk page. Please do not edit or delete other people's posts. Disruptive or vandalistic posts will be removed. All posts left in objectively good faith will remain as a matter of record (I won't get into circular debates with users who believe that any speech possibly known to man is permissible, per AGF).
Remember to stay cool
Concerning this edit of yours, I'd like to remind you that threatening someone with a block in that tone of voice won't get things anywhere even if you did feel that his edits were a personal attack. I will also speak to Sdeodeo concerning his edits, but I ask that you assume good faith of one another and recognize that you both want to help people get through dispute resolution. Thank you. Cowman109 23:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
- It clearly wasn't in good faith or following WP, so it certainly wasn't a case where there was a question of whether the other user was behaving in an ethical fashion or not. Some users just aren't on Misplaced Pages to contribute.
- I can see where you're coming from, but looking at Sdeodeo's contribs, he has indeed contributed to Misplaced Pages and has mediated several medcab cases. While you and he may have not gotten along for some reason, going as far to say that he isn't here to build a Misplaced Pages isn't going to help. Perhaps it's best to just recognize that you two have had your differences and agree to leave eachother alone? Cowman109 00:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- I am purely defensive, if he ceases attacking and attempting to slander me on project pages, he would of course have nothing to worry about.
Mediation recommendation
I see you jumped into Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-29 Schizophrenia to help mediate the issue there. As a friendly suggestion, you may want to clearly provoke a response by asking those involved a question - you can't expect them to know what to say, they need to be asked a question first such as whether they will accept you as a mediator or not :). Also I recommend using the talk page of the article in question to work things out so the issue is available to a wider audience. Please see Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Suggestions for mediators for some helpful information, and by all means don't be afraid to ask for help should any trouble arise. Thanks! Cowman109 00:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- If you need help, I am brainy when it comes to psychology. If I may be of assistance, do not hestitate to ask. Good luck. Your one true god is David P. A. Hunter, esq. III 09:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Peppered Moth mediation
User:Michael Johnson has suggested ending the mediation. Do you agree? I haven't heard from you in quite a while. Rick Norwood 14:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- What was the current status of the mediation? - MSTCrow 21:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- Since I did not hear from you in quite a while, I closed the case. Rick Norwood 13:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
your opinion please
I'd appreciate your opinion on matters in the Discussion of article "Dissident Voice". Thank you. Ste4k 16:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Transhumanism userbox
Thought you might be interested in the Template I have placed in my user area as per the [[Misplaced Pages:German
An automated message from Werdnabot
Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot /T\ 09:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Check your Wiki settings
You might want to check your password and change it if necessary. Someone's been leaving bizarre messages in your name.--RattBoy 13:01, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Your comments are designed only to provoke, and will be ignored. - MSTCrow 20:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- ¡I guess they weren't ignored, as you responded to them!
- So you're admitting that the bizarre post was your edit, ¿yes? Well, then, pay attention: your attempts to intimidate me with threats will not work. You are not the owner of Misplaced Pages, and you have no power beyond that of a simple editor. As an editor, your interests will best be served in the long run if you use references and information as your tools, not baseless attacks and intimidation. Thank you for understanding.--RattBoy 22:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Civility
Please be civil
Please don't tell lies by inference. At least try. --Calton | Talk 00:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- (rv - noooo, he's removing propaganda thinly disguised as sources) is uncivil behavior.
- Nooo, it's an accurate description of what he was doing, as opposed to your inaccurate -- to be charitable -- description. But given the undisguised propaganda you keep trying to insert, not to mention the fake vandalism warnings and the fake civility notices, I'm not in any way inclined to be charitable, especially to one who insists on insulting my -- and everyone else's -- intelligence. Attempting to bully people using policies you neither understand nor follow yourself gets you zero slack from me. --Calton | Talk 01:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Block
Hi. You have been blocked from editing for 24 hours due to a 3RR violation. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks. El_C 02:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hello. I came here to do the same thing as El C. Here are the reverts you made to National Public Radio within a few hours: I'm sorry, but having studied the talkpage discussion I can't give any credence to your claims to be merely reverting vandalism. Bishonen | talk 02:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC).
ArbCom case
This is not going to work. What other steps in dispute resolution have you tried? Have you thought about a Request for Comment? Mediation? It's inappropriate to run to ArbCom immediately (the "previous attempts at dispute resolution" isn't very optional), and all that's likely to happen is a temporary block to get you to cool down. The edit summary you're using as your case on civility is fairly weak. I honestly would recommend that you ask an admin for help in withdrawing your request for arbitration, apologize to the users involved for moving too hastily through the dispute-resolution process, and then try again from the beginning, including considering walking away from the article you're locking horns over. Captainktainer * Talk 02:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
MSTCrow (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Please provide a reason as to why you should be unblocked.Change
{{unblock}} to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
reported by User:Ideogram (Result: 24 hrs)
Three revert rule violation on National Public Radio (edit|talk|links|history|logs). MSTCrow (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log):
* Previous version reverted to: * 1st revert: * 2nd revert: * 3rd revert: * 4th revert: * 5th revert:
Three revert rule warning diff from before this report was filed here (if applicable) :
* * second warning (removed by MSTCrow as "vandalism")
Time report made: 01:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
* 24 hours. El_C 02:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
There are only two reverts present on the log, not 4. Ergo, the user was improperly blocked and should be unblocked.
Category: