This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 63.131.4.149 (talk) at 11:43, 14 November 2010 (→Nigger Talk Page: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 11:43, 14 November 2010 by 63.131.4.149 (talk) (→Nigger Talk Page: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Welcome to Jehochman's Talk Page Please feel free to put your feet on the coffee table, and speak candidly. Or for more better relaxation, stretch yourself luxuriously on the chaise longue in Bishzilla's Victorian parlour and mumble incoherently. |
User talk:Jehochman/Archive index
User_talk:LemonMonday#November_2010
Hello, could you as the previous blocking admin comment? Thanks, Sandstein 07:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry again Jehochman but this needs an eye kept on it. I know LM was unblocked stating that they'd raise an RFC on the whole 'British Isles thing' but this as it is currenly presented is an assumption of bad faith cast in a battleground mentality. I have noted to LM at the RFC the issues with it including the lack of evidence; incorrect categorization of the RFC; repetetion of the question asked at the page's recent MFD; and I would ask, as I will be away for the next few days, that this be reviewed over the next 72 hours. LM deserves the chance to reformat the RFC in line with policy within a reasonable period of time but if this is not done or if there is undue delay fixing the POINTY issues I see this as a violation of WP:DE and the terms of LM's two recent unblockings. I will be notifying TWOFR and Sarek of Vulcan of this post--Cailil 15:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
"Premature" Submission
FYI, the situation here, which you participated in, has been resolved. I expected one of the admin coordinators would have seen my reminder on our noticeboard and would have deleted it before it was noticed by anyone else. Sorry for the confusion, Sven Manguard Talk 19:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
- I am disappointed that you're not running. :-( Jehochman 20:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, I actually think I'd do a bang up job, but I've only had an account for a month. I'd be laughed out of contention. By the way, can you do me a favor and take that rap from my "submission" and place it in User:Sven Manguard/Sandbox? I really want it back. Sven Manguard Talk 23:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
- Here you are rap. Jehochman 00:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- That was far too simple for me to figure out on my own. Thanks. Sven Manguard Talk 00:32, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Here you are rap. Jehochman 00:17, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, I actually think I'd do a bang up job, but I've only had an account for a month. I'd be laughed out of contention. By the way, can you do me a favor and take that rap from my "submission" and place it in User:Sven Manguard/Sandbox? I really want it back. Sven Manguard Talk 23:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Harassment of Tothwolf by Theserialcomma
Hello there. I happened to notice that Theserialcomma has been on Tothwolf's case again. I considered filing an arbitration request personally, but all the formatting and templates and instructions there made my head spin, so I decided to come to you instead based on this from the amendment request.
Theserialcomma has been editing Eggdrop again. All of his edits are removal of content, and most are reverted by editors uninvolved with the dispute between Theserialcomma and Tothwolf. This can be seen from the history. He also has been repeatedly accusing Tothwolf of COI in his edit summaries and on the talk page of Eggdrop and the talk page of previously uninvolved IRCWolfie . Also this personal attack, after it was found in the arbitration amendment request that boomeranged on Miami33139 that repeatedly calling someone "paranoid" is a personal attack. Seth Kellerman (talk) 01:07, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Theserialcomma posted a highly offensive rant after I blocked them. They most likely will not be returning. Jehochman 11:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- On a related note, could someone have a look over the Eggdrop article and let me know of any potential NPOV issues from my adding sources and citations? I don't think I violated the neutral point of view policy, and no one other than Theserialcomma has ever really taken any issues with my edits, but a few extra pairs of eyes to check it over would still be good. --Tothwolf (talk) 11:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- I have no idea. Ask User:DGG for help or start a thread at WP:COIN. Jehochman 11:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
- Will do, thanks! --Tothwolf (talk) 03:57, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- I have no idea. Ask User:DGG for help or start a thread at WP:COIN. Jehochman 11:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Still on the subject of Theserialcomma, I'd like to ask your opinion on whether this is worth filing an SPI over. After you blocked TSC, he claimed he'd already registered a new user account.
I mentioned above how Theserialcomma and I crossed paths at Tucker Max. Duke jd made his first wikipedia edit to that article. While new users frequently head straight to that article, this particular one has done something further that makes me suspect it is TSC reincarnated. I'd rather not describe it publicly lest he take note and edit differently to avoid scrutiny, but I'm calling DUCK.
Anyway, if it is TSC, he'd be dodging a block. Seth Kellerman (talk) 06:56, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- While I previously had no reason to go looking, after the recent sockpuppetry threat and one previously, I did some checking and there appears to be a pattern of sockpuppetry that goes back to at least 2007. Per WP:LTA the details probably shouldn't be posted on-wiki (at least not yet) but feel free to ping me via email and I'll provide some links and diffs. --Tothwolf (talk) 04:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Redflag I am not a checkuser. You need one. Hello, do I have a friendly talk page stalker with checkuser ops? Jehochman 00:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- I guess there aren't any lurking about? What should be done with all this material? It really doesn't seem to be the sort of thing that should be posted on WP:SPI. --Tothwolf (talk) 09:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- I've emailed the material to functionaries-en. --Tothwolf (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Redflag I am not a checkuser. You need one. Hello, do I have a friendly talk page stalker with checkuser ops? Jehochman 00:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Climate change
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
I mention you in this request for clarification of the ArbCom Climate Change case. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 05:23, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
I think people have tested limits enough; I wish they'd stop. Jehochman 21:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
- @Polargeo: Are you still allowed to talk about CC, or have you been topic banned? I can't bother to check right now, but when I come back, I will, and if your names are on the list of topic banned editors, I will block you if your comments are still here on my talk page. This page is not to be misused. Get it? Jehochman 12:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- @Polargeo: Maybe I'm joking, maybe I'm not. Jehochman 13:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- @Polargeo: Just one question: are you topic banned from climate change, or not? Please answer with a maximum of three and a minimum of two characters (e.g. Yes or No). Thank you! Jehochman 13:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- @Polargeo: Maybe I'm joking, maybe I'm not. Jehochman 13:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- @Polargeo: Are you still allowed to talk about CC, or have you been topic banned? I can't bother to check right now, but when I come back, I will, and if your names are on the list of topic banned editors, I will block you if your comments are still here on my talk page. This page is not to be misused. Get it? Jehochman 12:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Remember the text I added that you removed reminding you that humorous and sarcastic was welcome on this page (see top of your talkpage) thankyou Polargeo (talk) 14:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't block you did I? Humorous and sarcastic comments are welcome, but I get to be the judge! Haw, my talk page, my rules. Jehochman grins wickedly. Jehochman 14:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Evil. Polargeo (talk) 14:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. I can't wait until my kids see the next Harry Patter movie. When we get them home and put them to bed, I am going to practice my Voldemort imitations. Jehochman 14:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Evil. Polargeo (talk) 14:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following is a summary of the remedies enacted:
- A specially-tailored version of discretionary sanctions is authorized for the entire topic area of climate change. Enforcement requests are to be submitted to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, which is to replace Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement.
- Experienced administrators, and especially checkusers, are requested to closely monitor new accounts that edit inappropriately in the topic area.
- Within seven days of this remedy passing, all parties must either delete evidence sub-pages or request deletion of them.
- The following editors are banned from the topic area of climate change, and may not appeal this ban until at least six months after the closure of this case (and no more often than every three months thereafter);
- William M. Connolley
- Polargeo
- Thegoodlocust
- Marknutley
- ChrisO
- Minor4th
- ATren
- Hipocrite
- Cla68
- GregJackP
- A Quest For Knowledge
- Verbal
- ZuluPapa5
- JohnWBarber
- FellGleaming
- The following users have accepted binding voluntary topic bans;
- The following administrators are explicitly restricted from applying discretionary sanctions as authorized in this case, as is any other administrator fitting the description of an involved administrator;
Not on behalf of ArbCom, but as a public service announcement... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:40, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Notice - COI discussion
Please see Misplaced Pages:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User_THF_and_subject_Arthur_Alan_Wolk. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 14:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Now also at WP:ANI due to issues involving No Legal Threats. -- Cirt (talk) 15:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Jehochman, this arose because you made a false accusation that I violated WP:COI. As WP:COIN states, Please note that the conflict of interest guidelines do not require editors with conflicts of interest to avoid editing altogether. An editor who has disclosed a conflict is complying with the guideline when they discuss proposed changes on a talk page. Since I did not edit mainspace and since I disclosed my conflict of interest, I did not violate WP:COI. Cirt has made false allegations about me to three message boards in retaliation for an editing dispute at Talk:Werner_Erhard_vs._Columbia_Broadcasting_System#WP:COATRACK. Can you stop his harassment, please? I also need oversight, because his false accusation could result in another meritless lawsuit against me (this very real concern of mine is what Cirt is caling a "legal threat"). THF (talk) 15:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- THF continues to make veiled legal threats on multiple pages. Jehochman, my WP:COIN report only references on-Misplaced Pages comments, from THF himself. -- Cirt (talk) 15:24, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Nigger Talk Page
It's no big deal that you removed what was "soapboxing", in some regards it was, but not all of it was. It was a valid contribution to the article with examples. It was done in good faith. The fact that people suppress the truth and aren't consistent on here though is why we have such problems in the world. The point was that the N word gets all this attention when there are other words within Wiki that need to be treated the same way. It's conspiracy and I don't need to prove my point or spread that gospel around to get every one to jump on my band wagon. Points within those "opinions" should have stayed, but I know you're not about taking out what's ok and what's not. Reverting the entire entry was just easier, right? This type of frustration however is why there are problems on the site. I gave input and it was replied to. If you had read the whole "thread", I think you would have seen that. I don't want an edit war, so I'm not going to undo it or prove what is acceptable or not. But keep in mind that discussing these things first is actually the best and correct way of going about it. I wish you the best, as I'm not looking to be right. Just to improve articles and convey the "big picture" (or "neutral" view) which in some regards that article is not doing. It is one-sided. Lastly, the portion about someone claiming "blacks" isn't appropriate, my reply was credible. It supported someone elses answer that it's acceptable and to remind the person that not all blacks are African-American. When we conform to social thinking, sometimes the truth escapes us and we continue to live in ignorance. The same ignorance that fuels hate crimes, hate speech and terrorism. Just keep that in mind, man to man, human to human, and editor to editor. Take care, have a nice day/night! P.S. I don't say this to be argumentative, critical or spiteful. I say it for clarity (as an fyi) so that you know it's not important for me to power-trip as I'm confident in what I know and believe. Sometimes social equality/humanity/morality is more important than rules that have flaws, especially when not followed accurately as a result of some people deciding what they do like and don't or will and won't accept. The truth can hurt some. Admitting it even more painful. 63.131.4.149 (talk) 11:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)