Revision as of 03:39, 23 May 2020 editPackMecEng (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers11,500 edits →Steve Carell on All My Children← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:45, 24 May 2020 edit undoSchroCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers112,909 edits →May 2020: new sectionTag: contentious topics alertNext edit → | ||
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
If you want to still be in denial that he was on All My Children, be my guest <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | If you want to still be in denial that he was on All My Children, be my guest <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
:No, you are correct. He was certainly in that one episode #1.6729 back in 1996 as "Squidhead". The problem is without a ] source we cannot add it to the article. Youtube videos are not sufficent for that and create copyright issues. Neither are sites like IMDb which is user generated content. I did some digging and could not come up with anything, I will continue to take a look later though. ] (]) 03:39, 23 May 2020 (UTC) | :No, you are correct. He was certainly in that one episode #1.6729 back in 1996 as "Squidhead". The problem is without a ] source we cannot add it to the article. Youtube videos are not sufficent for that and create copyright issues. Neither are sites like IMDb which is user generated content. I did some digging and could not come up with anything, I will continue to take a look later though. ] (]) 03:39, 23 May 2020 (UTC) | ||
== May 2020 == | |||
{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. ''It does '''not''' imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.'' | |||
You have shown interest in discussions about ] and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called ] is in effect. Any administrator may impose ] on editors who do not strictly follow ], or the ], when making edits related to the topic. | |||
For additional information, please see the ] and the ] decision ]. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. | |||
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> _ ] (]) 17:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:45, 24 May 2020
Archives |
LOL
Your poor little +1 agree keeps getting moved down. You might want to move it back up to where it belongs. Talk 📧 16:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- I think you linked to the wrong reassessment there! But yeah I keep seeing it migrate on down. PackMecEng (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Fixed...I am such a dork. I keep getting distracted by phone calls from the US regarding my livelihood, so just turned-off the phone so I can focus on more important things...like Misplaced Pages!!! Talk 📧 19:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
May 2020
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Misplaced Pages's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Misplaced Pages page, as you did at Peter Strzok. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:06, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- @NorthBySouthBaranof: Seriously? No, that is not a BLP vio. Not even a little bit. PackMecEng (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please enlighten your (talk page watcher) as to what constituted a BLP vio? Talk 📧 21:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Talk:Peter_Strzok#New_Documents this apparently. PackMecEng (talk) 21:23, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please enlighten your (talk page watcher) as to what constituted a BLP vio? Talk 📧 21:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Arbitration Enforcement request
There is an arbitration enforcement request regarding your behavior at Talk:Peter Strzok at WP:AE#PackMecEng. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello
I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that you are banned from posting comments on my talk page, unless, of course, you are required to by Misplaced Pages policy. If you are required to post a notice on my talk page, please clearly indicate in the edit summary what policy you are doing so under. Any other posted comments will be deleted without being read.
Please note that this ban also applies to pinging me. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
- If you say so, I will avoid posting on your talk page unless out of necessity. You are always welcome here though. I have yet to ban anyone from this page nor do I have any issue with you. PackMecEng (talk) 05:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
All I ask
Re the AE thing, I plan to close it with no action, since I'm apparently the only admin who thought it needed more than a trout. But if somebody says that you are misrepresenting a source, could you please take a minute to double check yourself? Please? ~Awilley (talk) 22:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please assume good faith. I have said my piece at AE. PackMecEng (talk) 00:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Talk page
It's mostly Grawp, but the last couple of years--and most CUs and SPI clerks can confirm this, I think--it's been sort of a free-for-all all over Misplaced Pages between the "usual" LTAs who are now also impersonating each other, including Willie on Wheels and that Bling person and...oh I forgot all their names, the ones that have been here for years and years. Who was that idiot living in his mom's basement in California... And I'm not the only one, of course--apparently I'm a trannie and at least one of these clowns regularly publicizes my home address and my employer, and threatens my children. It's pretty disgusting. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
- I was only half joking. I do see a lot of the crap admins have to go though here and I have to say I am not a huge fan. Some of it is down right scary, like the examples you mention. Though I am sure if I went though a RFC it would at least be entertaining. PackMecEng (talk) 01:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
- Drmies I do not know the NoCal100 story at all. You mention racist and such, what happened? PackMecEng (talk) 00:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- There's an LTA page--if you click on the sock user page, there's a link to the SPI, which has a link to the LTA page. Take care, Drmies (talk) 00:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- To be honest I never knew such a page was a thing. Interesting, thanks. PackMecEng (talk) 00:16, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- There's an LTA page--if you click on the sock user page, there's a link to the SPI, which has a link to the LTA page. Take care, Drmies (talk) 00:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Trump hat
I have generally high regard for you as an editor, so I'm lost as to why you keep siding with this person. First, they think "We should do x" is an actual argument, and any editor with their experience should know better. When challenged to say "why" we should do x, they say our first paragraph is "sloppy". Sloppy! Really? Does it look "sloppy" to you? After I spent a good 15 minutes of my volunteer time on a clear explanation of why we in fact have a consensus in the latest discussion, the best they could do is say that "we obviously disagree on this matter"! They are persistently evasive, unaffected by logic and reason, and unable to construct any articulate argument, all strong indicators that they haven't much leg to stand on. That certainly does not warrant hatting my comment because it contained the word "you", and I think I've shown remarkable restraint with this editor. ―Mandruss ☎ 15:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Mandruss: I am not siding with anyone. I have not voiced any opinion in the discussions and probably won't in the end. I do have an issue with how you are acting in that discussion though. Things like
Are you sure you're at the right article?
andNo one can force you to respond to reason.
do nothing but inflame the situation. Questioning the competency of another editor instead of focusing on countering their claims is never the way forward. Also judging by the votes so far it looks like it will go your way anyhow, so why keep pushing it? PackMecEng (talk) 15:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)- Quit badgering people that disagree with you shows your failure to understand the situation. This is a lot more than disagreeing with me, and if I badgered people for merely disagreeing with me I'd spend most of my time badgering. I think you know that I do not.
it looks like it will go your way anyhow, so why keep pushing it?
That's perfectly logical if my only objective is to WP:WIN on the content issue. It neither is nor should be. ―Mandruss ☎ 15:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)- Then what is your goal? Because if it is to show them the error of their ways I can say you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. PackMecEng (talk) 15:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Rest assured I would prefer to be a purveyor of honey. It's a bit late for a personality transplant. When the rare experienced editor brings such lame tactics to a discussion, it seems the best I can do is to call them out in the hopes they will improve or retire, in that order of preference, for the sake of the project. I can think of only one other who I address in that manner. And there are some "flies" who don't respond to honey, I think you'll agree. I'm only one of a large contingent who don't think it serves the project to be nice all the time.I wish we had a discussion moderation system where we weren't required to moderate the very people we're expected to collaborate with, but I'm a lonely voice in the wilderness on that issue. We're pretty much on our own except when there is serious misbehavior. I play the cards I'm dealt. ―Mandruss ☎ 16:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- I will say I was surprised by their edit count and length of time here. I also get that it can be a pain in the ass to deal with stuff like that, goodness knows I am not always the nicest person around either. But I do try to be and have gone back and revised what I said if I felt I was being to harsh or mean. PackMecEng (talk) 17:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Me too. But I don't feel I was too "harsh or mean", so I didn't go back and revise anything. As I suggested, if anything I pulled my punches to try to keep my response proportionate to the offense (i.e. I reserve both-barrels responses for worse than that).It occurs to me that, if honey advocates like yourself would employ honey more often in such situations, vinegar advocates like us would have less need for vinegar. Instead, you criticized me – twice – when you know I was objectively in the right. Not one solitary word of honey to the other editor, there or on their UTP, as far as I know. Sorry but I think you have your priorities backwards. I also recognize that neither of us is likely to change their mind-set in these matters. ―Mandruss ☎ 13:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- I did not go to their talk page or comment on what they were saying because they did not personalize their comments. They appear to be incorrect sure, but they also did not call you incompetent as far as I could see. That is the difference in my eyes. If I were to go off on everyone wrong on the internet it would really kill my free time for walks or going on rides. PackMecEng (talk) 16:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- That's fine, that's your choice and the choice of other silent honey advocates. But plural-you leave vinegar as the only remedy, and it would help if plural-you understood that.By the way, I did not call the editor generally incompetent, I'm sure there are areas where they are competent. This wasn't one of them, and there is no rule or even widely-accepted principle that we should not call out narrow, case-specific incompetence when we see it. The object is not to avoid hurting people's feelings, in my view, although it's nice when we can. ―Mandruss ☎ 17:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- I did not go to their talk page or comment on what they were saying because they did not personalize their comments. They appear to be incorrect sure, but they also did not call you incompetent as far as I could see. That is the difference in my eyes. If I were to go off on everyone wrong on the internet it would really kill my free time for walks or going on rides. PackMecEng (talk) 16:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- Me too. But I don't feel I was too "harsh or mean", so I didn't go back and revise anything. As I suggested, if anything I pulled my punches to try to keep my response proportionate to the offense (i.e. I reserve both-barrels responses for worse than that).It occurs to me that, if honey advocates like yourself would employ honey more often in such situations, vinegar advocates like us would have less need for vinegar. Instead, you criticized me – twice – when you know I was objectively in the right. Not one solitary word of honey to the other editor, there or on their UTP, as far as I know. Sorry but I think you have your priorities backwards. I also recognize that neither of us is likely to change their mind-set in these matters. ―Mandruss ☎ 13:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- I will say I was surprised by their edit count and length of time here. I also get that it can be a pain in the ass to deal with stuff like that, goodness knows I am not always the nicest person around either. But I do try to be and have gone back and revised what I said if I felt I was being to harsh or mean. PackMecEng (talk) 17:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Rest assured I would prefer to be a purveyor of honey. It's a bit late for a personality transplant. When the rare experienced editor brings such lame tactics to a discussion, it seems the best I can do is to call them out in the hopes they will improve or retire, in that order of preference, for the sake of the project. I can think of only one other who I address in that manner. And there are some "flies" who don't respond to honey, I think you'll agree. I'm only one of a large contingent who don't think it serves the project to be nice all the time.I wish we had a discussion moderation system where we weren't required to moderate the very people we're expected to collaborate with, but I'm a lonely voice in the wilderness on that issue. We're pretty much on our own except when there is serious misbehavior. I play the cards I'm dealt. ―Mandruss ☎ 16:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Then what is your goal? Because if it is to show them the error of their ways I can say you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. PackMecEng (talk) 15:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Quit badgering people that disagree with you shows your failure to understand the situation. This is a lot more than disagreeing with me, and if I badgered people for merely disagreeing with me I'd spend most of my time badgering. I think you know that I do not.
I can see what you mean, I should of been nicer with my comments. We both should of. Also I'll plural-you you! Sorry I just have not heard that phrase before so kind of surprised me. Could just be a semi-ESL thing. PackMecEng (talk) 23:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- I just made it up as the concisest way to clarify that "you" did not refer only to the editor known as PackMecEng, but rather to a large group of editors. I felt that clarification was important, and I knew you could figure out what it meant. ―Mandruss ☎ 09:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Steve Carell on All My Children
I've sourced that Steve Carell actual scene from All My Children is on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McdaePeD4BA
And we him actually credited on the show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFU6T3w5SDo go 39:41 to see him credited as Steven J. Carell
If you want to still be in denial that he was on All My Children, be my guest — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.73.84 (talk) 00:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
- No, you are correct. He was certainly in that one episode #1.6729 back in 1996 as "Squidhead". The problem is without a reliable source we cannot add it to the article. Youtube videos are not sufficent for that and create copyright issues. Neither are sites like IMDb which is user generated content. I did some digging and could not come up with anything, I will continue to take a look later though. PackMecEng (talk) 03:39, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Misplaced Pages's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.