| Revision as of 19:13, 26 June 2016 view sourceSchroCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers113,480 edits →No personal attacks: jeez... The bloody mos nutters really do have issues to deal with....← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:35, 26 June 2016 view source SMcCandlish (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors201,792 edits Template:Ds/alertTag: contentious topics alertNext edit → | ||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
| :It's not uncivil to point out the truth. Your behaviour is creepy and your attempt to open up a heated discussion after {{u|Ritchie333}}, an admin, hatted it is disruptive. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 19:09, 26 June 2016 (UTC) | :It's not uncivil to point out the truth. Your behaviour is creepy and your attempt to open up a heated discussion after {{u|Ritchie333}}, an admin, hatted it is disruptive. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px Black;">]<sup>]</sup></span>''' 19:09, 26 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
| :*Raising the point of someone's block log to be ] is a twattish thing to do, so stop being so obnoxious here and elsewhere. You went into the Dr No article being obnoxious and trying to throw your weight around: it hasn't worked, and your ridiculous and petty point about quote boxes is unnecessary. I see you've got a bee in your bonnet about the boxes (and have bludgeoned enough people in previous discussions that didn't go your way). Ever thought you might be barking up the wrong tree, and that other people may have a different idea that you might way to step not? Time for you to be disruptive/obnoxious elsewhere. – ] (]) 19:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC) | :*Raising the point of someone's block log to be ] is a twattish thing to do, so stop being so obnoxious here and elsewhere. You went into the Dr No article being obnoxious and trying to throw your weight around: it hasn't worked, and your ridiculous and petty point about quote boxes is unnecessary. I see you've got a bee in your bonnet about the boxes (and have bludgeoned enough people in previous discussions that didn't go your way). Ever thought you might be barking up the wrong tree, and that other people may have a different idea that you might way to step not? Time for you to be disruptive/obnoxious elsewhere. – ] (]) 19:13, 26 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
| === This seems worth mentioning before the name-calling escalates any further === | |||
| {{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.'' | |||
| '''Please carefully read this information:''' | |||
| The ] has authorised ] to be used for pages regarding the English Misplaced Pages ] and ], a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is ]. | |||
| Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means ] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the ], our ], or relevant ]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as ], ], or ]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. | |||
| }} <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — ] ] ] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 20:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC){{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> | |||
Revision as of 20:35, 26 June 2016
|
Please leave a message; I'll reply here.
A yes for No?Hi Cass, You have previously been good enough to review one of the previous Bond novels; I have recently filed Dr No, Fleming's sixth Bond novel, at PR for further consideration. If you have the time or inclination, I'd be grateful for any comments you may have. No rush and no compunction at all, obviously. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 13:12, 25 May 2016 (UTC) May 2016You probably shouldn't be directing what you said here at anyone. Just sayin'. Misceditor1000 (talk) 00:19, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Blocked for personal attacksFor calling another editor "piece of shit" and "a filthy, disgusting specimen" I am giving you a 72 hour block for personal attacks. I have warned you instead of blocking you on many occasions and it has not prevented this behaviour so a block is the next step. HighInBC 00:40, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
I was confused at first because I was not sure who they were talking about. I see now the person in question self identifies on their user page and it is clear they were indeed implying you were homophobic when you were in fact just belittling a another user for not having your illustrious editing history. The comment was beyond the pale and I have given a block accordingly. In the future you can report this sort of thing to me or a noticeboard instead of choosing to engage in similar behaviour. HighInBC 00:59, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Given that Newyorkbrad has unblocked Curly Turkey and their last edit indicated they are away from the wiki I have removed your block as time served. I see no value in one of you being blocked and the other not. I appreciate that you were provoked but you were also engaging in provocative statements. Let us chalk this up to a learning experience. I would also like to say I think you have misjudged User:BU Rob13. In their 11 months here they have made over 30,000 contributions to this site. If you take the time to look at their contributions you will see they have given a lot to this project. HighInBC 02:39, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Revision to Scotland YardYou reverted my change adding the radio program The Black Museum to Scotland Yard with the simple comment "fascinating". Was that in error? "The Black Museum" was set in Scotland Yard's building and dramatized cases solved by its officers. I didn't want to simply revert your reversion without reaching out to you, but I don't see why it should not be included in the article, and your comment would tend to support that. SixFourThree (talk) 14:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)SixFourThree
(talk page stalker) I often think the "in popular culture" sections are just trivia magnets. I'd suggest deleting it all and leaving the opening sentance about how it is cultural shorthand for policing in popular fiction: there is no need for any of the multiple (and rather tenuous) examples given. – SchroCat (talk) 16:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC) Petite messeThank you for your comments for Rossini's damned good music, - I feel it could be a FA some day, and if you want to be part of improving and nominating you are welcome. - Regarding the thread Oh man, where my name was often mentioned but I can't reply: I can't help thinking that a load of words on talk pages could have been avoided (or used for better purposes, like writing articles) if what I called "a little extra service for readers" about a year ago (13 August, to be precise) would have been kept or changed, instead of deleted. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)  It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Dr NoHi Cass, Many thanks for your comments and edits on Dr No. This is now at FAC, so if you happen to be passing through at any point and wish to make further comments, I'd be grateful to receive them; no problems if you are tied up with other matters, of course. Cheers. – SchroCat (talk) 07:50, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
No personal attacks
NB: Addressing the same user's arguments about the same thing on two pages, especially after that user explicitly referred from one discussion to the other, is standard operating procedure, not "stalking". User talk pages are not webforums for free-form venting. Please stay off my talk page if you have nothing constructive or substantive to communicate (especially given that you were very recently blocked for WP:NPA violations). If you have a substantive disagreement with my positions at either the Dr. No or Grant pages, then those are the places to post them. (PS: I have no fucking problem with vulgarity; you're just not in a position to make indefensible accusations of WP:HARASSMENT, a serious charge, nor to tell me where I can and cannot post in article-talk space, and I know you've been around long enough to know that.) — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅ᴥⱷ≼ 19:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
This seems worth mentioning before the name-calling escalates any further
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Misplaced Pages. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information: The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the English Misplaced Pages Manual of Style and article titles policy, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here. Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ⱷ҅ᴥⱷ≼ 20:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC)Template:Z33 |
