This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Giano II (talk | contribs) at 16:48, 25 October 2008 (→The Russian Page: Gatoclass). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:48, 25 October 2008 by Giano II (talk | contribs) (→The Russian Page: Gatoclass)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Saturday 28 December08:51 UTC
Bookmarks |
articles
|
Talk archives |
OK
Point taken. But do the thought experiment. Giano has defenders against the civility police. Yanni, apparently, does not.
I know I still owe you an email by the way. Glad you're back. Marskell (talk) 11:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and if it wasn't obvious, I typed "fuck" to underscore how preposterous it is to bring somebody to AN/I for typing "damn". I found the thread a gob-smacking example of how AN/I often does more harm than good. Anyway. Marskell (talk) 13:23, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- AN/I has a predisposition to it, just as AfD does. One assumes, before reading the details, that the person typing has a complaint and that the person complaining about is guilty. However, the really nasty part is that it replicates peer pressure. If two "bigger" Wikipedians "Endorse" then I must, too, and then the next one will archive it as a totally solved issue. It's a fucking disgrace when that happens. Complaining of "civility" is uncivil. Utgard Loki (talk) 17:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I disagree - there have been many cases where there's been consensus at ANI, I've been asked to take a look, and stated bluntly that the case is badly mishandled or the user said to be a problem isn't. Making loud noises or exaggeration (as some might do) doesn't help. But actually analyzing the evidence for it in a calm neutral way, does. "If they endorse I feel I have to as well" is very poor reasoning. I've never felt the obligation to go along with others if they have misjudged an editor, and although many cases that come to ANI do merit admin action, I've routinely and successfully defended users on the edge of a ban or block and criticized the would-be blocker when it's clear they haven't done anything deserving of it. You (or anyone) can do the same, just as well. I spent most of 2007 being asked to review and help on difficult cases, including quite a few of apparent bias and bad admin judgement by other concerned admins, and most times you can do something if there's a good reason why it's not been done well so far. (And hi, Bish, hope commenting on this is okay) FT2 23:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- The above person is yet another example of an IRC Chan op who has managed to become an Arb! All very odd. Giano (talk) 09:25, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- The "managed to" was a public vote of 264 - 33, the second highest rating (and 5th highest in support, 2nd lowest in opposes) of any user, in a heavily scrutinized public open election that any non-banned user with a fairly modest level of editing and any views whatsoever could vote in. I work (mostly in the background) on disputes, problems, and content issues to help editors and other users, in preference to getting into conspiracy theories and drama, which probably doesn't hurt. Over time, acting to a high standard earns trust from a wide range of users, which has included admins, non-admins, and banned or sanctioned users alike . Nothing odd about it at all. FT2 10:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Marskell, mentioning Giano without relevance on Misplaced Pages is a poor idea because tends to put a penny in the Automatized Anti-Giano Cliché Minority Gang, especially on the en-admins IRC channel, where I've been lurking a little during my break. They apparently missed your remark this time, I'm glad to say. Not that Giano cares much, I guess, but it makes me type "fuck". (Plus, I don't want people running away with the impression that I've mellowed any from my wikibreak.) What *I* would call an interesting thought in the context would be a comparison between Giano's block log and Yannismarou's block log. You might like to try that thought experiment for size. Bishonen | talk 18:45, 17 October 2008 (UTC).
- Heard my name mentioned - I am conducting a survey at the moment - how many check users and Arbs are chanel ops at IRC? 19:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- See this page. Jehochman 19:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Eleven. And why would you consider that a survey? It's simple checking of a reference source. Risker (talk) 19:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- What? 11 checkusers are IRC chanel ops? You jest? Giano (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- More if you count inactives. Check the list I linked to. Jehochman 20:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- FT2, Lar, Nishkid64, Bastique, Deskana, Jdforrester, Dmcdevit (rarely in channel), FloNight (rarely in channel), Mackensen (rarely if ever in channel), Yellow Monkey (rarely if ever in channel). It's unclear whether Newyorkbrad has chanop access, and he does have checkuser access but (in order not to blow up the wiki) does not use it. Uninvited Company, DavidGerard and Morven are inactive on the channel but retain chanop rights. JWales is rarely in channel, and I don't know that he uses checkuser though he does technically have the permission. Risker (talk) 20:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not a chanop and never will be. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- FT2, Lar, Nishkid64, Bastique, Deskana, Jdforrester, Dmcdevit (rarely in channel), FloNight (rarely in channel), Mackensen (rarely if ever in channel), Yellow Monkey (rarely if ever in channel). It's unclear whether Newyorkbrad has chanop access, and he does have checkuser access but (in order not to blow up the wiki) does not use it. Uninvited Company, DavidGerard and Morven are inactive on the channel but retain chanop rights. JWales is rarely in channel, and I don't know that he uses checkuser though he does technically have the permission. Risker (talk) 20:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- More if you count inactives. Check the list I linked to. Jehochman 20:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- What? 11 checkusers are IRC chanel ops? You jest? Giano (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- That must make you feel very left out in Arb discussions. It seems the Arbcom is little more than a convention of Chan ops with check-user right. Most interesting.Giano (talk) 09:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- And all these people are check users? Goodness me! No wonder they were so frightened when they found out I was there too. Giano (talk) 20:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- So we are checked and then our names are bandied about on IRC? Giano (talk) 20:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
- Heard my name mentioned - I am conducting a survey at the moment - how many check users and Arbs are chanel ops at IRC? 19:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Bish, please note the first two words of my initial post. Je m'excuse, honestly. But the fact that Yanni has no block record is part of what makes it so awful. He wasn't behaving well, admittedly, but he got hounded needlessly. An admin, a massive content contributor, a three year editor. And he's asked to leave because of "damn" and his use of exclamation marks? Elonka would make Kafka proud.
This thread is going in different directions, so I'll say no more. Marskell (talk) 08:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I'll add that a little bit of context never hurts, and that the quick archiving away of AN/I threads doesn't help matters: Yannis often used exclamation points in his everyday writing about minor matters, even with editors he has worked with for a long time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:39, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- The inescapable fact is that "civility" is not "politeness," and "politeness" is not prudishness, nor is it "least offensive to the most offended." The next person will object to "hell," and the one after that will object to "you're wrong," and the one after that will exclaim that all responses must be kindergarten-style positive feedback. Meanwhile, things like FAR are ruder than a wounded sailor's most irate rant. Utgard Loki (talk) 10:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Reply to FT2
Starting a new section to make sure this does not get lost in amongst, as Marskell says, the different directions above. FT2, you seem to be using this page, in my opinion a little irrelevantly, to inform Giano and Utgard Loki and the world in general about your integrity and how trusted you are by a "wide range of users". I congratulate you on your happy assumption that flattery towards the powerful can have no other root than sincerity. But, since you ask, I would actually prefer you to take any further statistics and reflexions to a more appropriate forum. None of what you've written above seems exactly to be anything to do with me, and this is after all my talkpage. Bishonen | talk 15:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC).
- Quite right Bishonen. FT2 if you come to my page you can have the full benefit of my opinion on you and the present "Arbcom." Giano (talk) 18:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- I commented on the view by a user, that one "has" to endorse peer pressure, even in a bad decision. I disagree with that. If you present it neutrally and with careful thought, you will be listened to more. I have enough experience of saying "this is a bad decision" to others when it is a case of bad adminship, to advise how to do it effectively.
- The other post, which you mention, was to Giano, to clarify a point he found odd. I'm well aware Giano has a great dislike of arbitrators generally, many admins, and a number of other matters. If he finds something "odd", I don't want to brush it off, but give the background detail so he can see how it came about. Over time he may gradually realize people aren't "against" him, which is exactly what I've said in the past. FT2 23:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- FT2, you really can't take a hint, can you? I'm sorry, but you're kind of out of your depth in doling out the same hard-won psychological insights over and over to Giano, to me, or to Loki, with the same air of discovery. You're also in the wrong place. (Have you even noticed that this is my talkpage that you're on, HINT HINT?) What's the difficulty, really? I assure you you couldn't go far wrong with the short-short version, which goes like this: Please Go Away. All right? Bishonen | talk 02:37, 19 October 2008 (UTC).
The Russian Page
Thanks for all you are doing there, I have completely run out of steam on it, and cannot see the gilded woodwork for the palmiers. I don't think it will ever be FACd because it's not the sort of page they like, too long and laborious to read, will anyone ever make it to the bottom, butat least it will be useful for anyone genuinely interested. There is no rush to finish the copyedit as this sub page at least has to be in mainspace at the same time, and it is far from finished, barely started. Anyway I think the main page of the series has to rest for a week at least after completion before goining into mainspace. So take as long as you like. Giano (talk) 09:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- I just had a conflict with you, so I'll stay away for a while - the Maples link you want should be to Sir John Blundell Maple, 1st Baronet - Never write a page without a least one baronet I always say - wil ensure at least 20 votes at FAC. Giano (talk) 15:04, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, right. It's the disambiguation page Maples that needs fixing, then, I'll do it later. Sorry about the edit conflict. I see Gatoclass corrected some typo, too. Well intentioned, of course, but... more edit conflicts. (You haven't removed the "in use" template, have you?) Anyway, I'm just going to eat and so on--it'll be at least two hours before I resume--so there's no need for you to stay away. Bishonen | talk 15:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC).
- No don't worry. It's fime, I will go an edit elsewhere, and give Doc on IRC some more topics of converstaion for the afternnon, what would that channel do without me? Talk dirty to each other I expect. What a service to the community I am. I've several ages to work on, so they should all learn something. Giano (talk) 15:32, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- I just had a conflict with you, so I'll stay away for a while - the Maples link you want should be to Sir John Blundell Maple, 1st Baronet - Never write a page without a least one baronet I always say - wil ensure at least 20 votes at FAC. Giano (talk) 15:04, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry about that! Hope I didn't tread on anyone's toes - I just happened to see "The Rusian Page" header here and it tweaked my curiosity, so I went to have a quick squiz, saw a typo and fixed it before I noticed the underconstruction tag.
- Very nice article BTW! Gatoclass (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- no problem - you are absolved. Giano (talk) 15:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks :) Look forward to seeing it in mainspace. BTW, did you ever manage to finish the "exploding houses" one? Gatoclass (talk) 16:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Sadly not, it is next on my hit list; I want it finished bt Christmas. Giano (talk) 16:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- no problem - you are absolved. Giano (talk) 15:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Very nice article BTW! Gatoclass (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Could I prevail
As a fellow sister-editor could you advise me is a photograph 85 years old in copyright or not, I would so hate to fall foul of Misplaced Pages's rules. I have found such an interesting person to make the subject of my next eagerly awaited page. Miss Alice Reighly such a courageous and wise woman - quite like ourselves and little Mrs Risker. No man tackled her and lived to tell the tale. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 16:04, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Don't worry I found a completely free image of the dear lady and her band of valient sisters. A page, Alice Reighly, all our fellow editors should read for their own safety. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 16:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- And remember there is many a male wikipedian who could be described as "a slick, dandified cake eater and glossy lounge lizard." Yes, you Geogre! I have seen that arovering eye running over my poor defenceless body. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Don't worry I found a completely free image of the dear lady and her band of valient sisters. A page, Alice Reighly, all our fellow editors should read for their own safety. Catherine de Burgh (Lady) (talk) 16:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)