This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kashk (talk | contribs) at 03:25, 18 March 2006 (→What I should understand about admins). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 03:25, 18 March 2006 by Kashk (talk | contribs) (→What I should understand about admins)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Archives: Archive 1
Palatino
Hi Jdoorjam!
The solution to me is to put:
<div style="font-family: Palatino">
as the first line of the template and
</div>
right at the end.
Palatino is not the most common typeface for people to have on their computers, so "font-family: Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Palatino Roman, Palatino LT Roman, serif" would pick up the most common ones people would have on their computers, and allow for "serif" at the end to force them to Times or the like if they have nothing like it.
Hope this helps! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 21:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
- PS: I'm red/blue colour blind and your "click here to leave a message" box at the top of the page is unreadable because of it! Any chance of substituting #F8BF24 for #E94903 to boost the contrast? :o) ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 22:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Cheers
Cheers. --Spondoolicks 23:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Ledmonkey
Thank you for your concern, but I was actually editing my own page not logged in, to test a script.. Ledmonkey 00:14, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: DOS Master
Whew... Yeah that was momentarily frustrating, but I think its all good now. Thanks for the heads up. I know that your job is important here. --PZ 00:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
JDoorjam deleted "Fields of Rock"
So... why was it deleted while I was in the middle of actually writing it? (non-encyclopedic non-notable non-article.) does not really mean much... and besides... if Ozzfest is there, why can't Fields of Rock be there?
--SeanJA 00:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. There has been a rise in vandalism tonight. I have a feeling that it is going to get worse. Thanks, CharlesM 01:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
What? I felt the article on Chaney was disputed, just like the one on GW Bush. EKN
70.50.55.246
You block conflicted, you should probably fix that. :) --Rory096 01:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
My user page
Thanks for quickly reverting vandalism on my user page! It was actually the first time this had happened to me, and I'm glad you found it. - Tangotango 04:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- lol, I'll be sure to put the relevant userbox on my page :) - Tangotango 04:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Some CSD's tonight
Hey, don't know if you even noticed, but on a few occasions tonight it appeard as if I recreated some CSD's after they had been deleted. I just wanted to let you know why that was happening. I've got a script that automaticly edits in the appropriate CSD tag. I had added in safeguards to see if there was a tag already posted (Between me viewing and my script editing) and to see if it had been deleted, but it turns out a blank article has a value.length of 1, not 0. I've updated my script to reflect this, and it shouldn't recreated deleted CSD's anymore. Just thought i'd let you know, seeing as how you've deleted quite a few of my misshaps tonight. Cheers! --lightdarkness 04:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
rvrt
Always a pleasure!
nn corp
I attempted to add an article about the history of my company but was told that it was deleted by you with error ID "nn corp"
Please Advise
kind words
Thanks for the kind words, re Metacarpus. If I can ever be of service, let me know. --Arcadian 01:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Checking out
I'm not really involved with this user, but I remember he used to copy-paste long, unsigned (usually bold-faced or capitalized) comments into various discussion pages. It took me more than a week (with repeated messages on his talk page) to get him to start signing his posts at least. He has been quiet for a while, but it looks like he's back with the usual stuff. I never really formally warned him against personally attacking people (although I left some messages here). I just wanted him to get a formal warning and that has been done. I'll let you know if he doesn't improve his behavior. Aucaman 03:03, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO ERASE OTHER PEOPLES WRITING IN DISCUSSIONS
You erased what I left for Acuman is is not suppose to tampored with 69.196.139.250 03:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Neologism
Hi there Jdoorjam. I noticed that you speedy deleted a neologism about 10 minutes ago that I was about to list for AfD. To the best of my knowledge, neologisms are not speedyable. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:14, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppet tags
Um, you might want to talk to Chadbryant about that. He's doing the exact same thing, only with a greater fervor and in a more blatant and vandalistic (is that a word?) fashion. The only sockpuppet tags I have placed are on Master Of RSPW and I believe one other, while Mr. Bryant has for months now been placing sockpuppet tags all over the place without any recourse taken by the Misplaced Pages administrators. --FARVA 03:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I SUGGEST YOU READ THE POLICIES
It was not a personal attack and I suggest you read the policies yourself. You can not erase what is written on a talk page. 69.196.139.250 04:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
IP socks of Roitr
Sorry to interrupt, but what method are you using to tag all of those suspected IP socks? JDoorjam Talk 04:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Easy - I was just making per-article comparisons of their respective contributions with edits made by Roitr (talk · contribs)/Tt1 (talk · contribs)/Alexr23 (talk · contribs) and Markdanil (talk · contribs)/Sergeybakh (talk · contribs). The edits are the same up to the last byte (he probably keeps text files on his hard drive, because his edits are always reverted).
- I'll add some explanations to Misplaced Pages:Long term abuse/Roitr at the next stage, though definately not today (I've already spent all night tracking this dude down...) --DmitryKo 04:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. It should have been done way earlier, I've been actually following this guy since last December because he nearly destroyed my favourite articles, but I just didn't think he's been using so many socks... --DmitryKo 04:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
LOL... thanks for being so caring...but
You reverted an edit made to my user page. But that was my IP, I had forgotten to log in. So thank you for reminding me to make sure I'm logged in before editing my profile. Thanks! =)
User:FARVA
You may want to take a look at Category:Misplaced Pages:Suspected sockpuppets of Dick Witham - User:FARVA is the latest in a long line of sockpuppets (over 150) employed by the same disruptive user in a year-long campaign of harassment, personal attacks, and vandalism. Numerous admins have blocked his accounts (usually on sight), and he can be easily identified in a new incarnation by his vandalizing of my user/talk pages and removal of sock tags from his previous accounts' user pages. - Chadbryant 05:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- As usual, Chad has no proof of his claims and is once again going against Misplaced Pages administrator request by placing sockpuppet tags on User accounts. First you make the request on his talk page for him to slow down/stop, but even before that he was asked to leave the tag off of a certain account that he continues to place the tag on. I am not that person who he claims I am, and his paranoia is a common trait in his Misplaced Pages dealings. For some reason he seems to have a persecution complex of which this "DickWitham" person is the manifested result. At any rate, I have once again removed his vandalism from my talk page, removed the sockpuppet tags from others, and request that you please block him as a result of his obviously trolling and vandalism. --FARVA 14:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hi. Me again. I just wanted to let you know that Chadbryant is still placing sockpuppet tags on account -- mine included. This is exactly what I meant by leaving and not coming back because some jerk like him did something like that. Could you please remind him to cut it out? He's been told that before, so he more than likely won't listen to you...maybe a 24 hour block is in order? --FARVA 03:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- I have appended the currently existing RFCU on User:FARVA. Thanks for your understanding and research. - Chadbryant 04:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
- With FARVA (talk · contribs) blocked for a month, you'll want to watch Eat At Joes (talk · contribs) and SteveInPrague (talk · contribs) - the blocks on those accounts (which necessitated the creation of User:FARVA) expired, and this user will undoubtedly return to one of them to continue his abuse. - Chadbryant 21:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Welcome new admin!
Congrats on your adminship JDoorJam. I'm currently sending you (and in fact all recently made admins) a quick request which to use your new admin powers to assist in an important area: deleting images that have been tagged as having no source information after 7 days. The category is at Category:Images with unknown source. Most of the images have been removed from articles, but some may have been skipped. It would be fantastic if you could assist in this matter! - Ta bu shi da yu 14:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
About Acuman
- I have problems with reacist comments and one-sided edits bu user:Acuman. I am not even Persian, but what he says about Persians along with other groups such as Kurds and Lors offends me and is uncalled for and untrue. Here is an example of what user:Acuman has written to other editors in discussion: "Long live Iran! Now go after your business. "Dead-worshipper." "You illiterate mental." And your Cyrus the Great was nothing more than an illiterate murderer. At least he had a good excuse. But you...??? And the mercenary is your dad.
- I ask you is this right? This is not only a personal attack attack it is an aatack on a whole ethnic group. 69.196.139.250 16:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Reverting changes in article "Education in the United States"
Please give a reason for reverting my changes on Talk:Education_in_the_United_States
69.196.139.250 (talk · contribs)
Okay this guy has clearly crossed the line now. Check your noticeboard. Aucaman 18:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Update
Thank you for your attention. The user has been blocked for incivility. As for your other comments, the RfC case is a little more complicated than it might look. You might want to read it a little more carefully. I'll take the time to write something to defend myself later, but first I need to make sure people stop spamming my user talk page with personal attacks and irrelevant comments.
I have to say I've never persoanlly attacked anyone except this one case where I have outlined here. You might want to read my explanation carefully. The case is somewhat old and has been closed but some other users keep bringing it up to justify their personal attacks (which number far more) against me. Aucaman 04:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Clarification
Sorry I am not too sure if I understood the last part of your comment here:
"In any case, long story short, I don't think InShaneee is "out to get" anybody, and the notion that InShaneee was gearing up to ban anybody (barring, of course, the type of gross policy violation that would get anybody banned) is just silly."
He did mention that he is going to get me blocked..you do realise this, correct?
Thanks again, --Kash 00:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Recent Aucaman-related craziness
Whew. I can't thank you enough. I've recently gotten dragged into the the war between the Iranian users (the Aucaman crucifixian being simply the latest disaster), and I was actually going to start looking for who else was keeping tabs on this. I don't know if you were aware, but this sort of thing was actually going on with several users on various talk and user talk pages before Aucaman even rolled into town. Frankly, I'm starting to wonder if anything is going to resolve this aside from dragging both sides before the ArbCom. But yes, now that I've been involved, I do feel obligated to stick around until this gets resolved, so count me in to any related discussions, and thanks again your for your involvement in this mess. Here's to a peaceful, speedy resolution! --InShaneee 00:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- InShaneee as much as I respect you, because of the many times you have warned Iranian users while not warning the non-Iranian users when you were invited to look at the case, I would like to beg you not to stick around to fix this situation, and let more neutral admins to do so, I could not thank you more if you would agree to this. --Kash 00:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for the suggestion. Will get started as soon as I get some time. ~~User:Stanley011
What I should understand about admins
Firstly, thanks for your reasonable comment. However I have to get my voice heard here.
I did not accuse Aucaman to be a bad editor. I have accused him of being racist. To me and nearly 20 others who signed or did not sign the Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Aucaman which came about after he refused to stop the dispute on Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-02 Persian people.
I understand your view is to enforce policy, now as I understand it admins in my view have to support the new commers and when they see an older user is causing all these problems, they should be helpful toward the 'victims', who are protesting against these actions. If they are not doing anything right, admins should help them to do whatever has to be done, not just warn and then threaten them to be blocked! How wonderful and friendly is that? Surely you all understand the problem here - and if you don't I can put it in simple English in an email. (Hint: Them calling us ULTRA-NATIONALIST, us simply pointing at what they are doing), its simply politically motivated. If you would like to know more on the origin of this matter, it would also be helpful to read this (very good read).
Now I know..I know you are too busy, all admins seem to be TOO busy to be fair. I know. I have written an article on it (you can read it here. But your job is way too important to just be too busy and do everything like how this case is being dealt with.
You speak of us reminding the users about policies, we have done a full mediation, request for comment and now we are getting the.. ArmOrb? or whatever. It's just funny how things are dealt with here. It's almost impossible to get such a simple issue across to people who can deal with it.
Something else you mentioned, no one ever asked Aucaman to apologize. I for one, only asked him to comment why he said it, and I also invited admins to what he said and what they think of it. Some admins responded rather nastily. InShanee told me he is going to ban me and another one here basically told us to go away (a few messages above he had similar attitude to other Iranians). So we are complaining about the issues, we know about the policies but no one seems to be bothered.
I suggest you ask InShaneee to get himself familiar with the policies because he is the one who was obviously wrong in this case, no? I don't want to waste both mine and your time, but there is enough evidence for me to open a request for responce with all the 'bad' assumptions he has made about Iranian wikipedians, while not caring at all what the other side has done. I have to express that the other side did not use to report things to him, it was US who was reporting the things to him, he simple came back and gave us warnings instead of dealing with what they had done. Similar thing happened tonight, I told him about Aucaman and this time there was the harsh 'block' word being mentioned. This has happened several times with this admin.
So if there is anything else we have to do, beside learning about policies, perhaps a miracle?, let me know. I will try to find a prophet.
ps. If there is anything I have mentioned here which offends anyone, I am sorry. I really am, however this is just becoming ridiculous --Kash 02:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
(Moved discussion to talk pages)
Sorry I am not sure if this was a great idea. I would have liked to get my message across here, that an admin wrongly threatened me to be blocked! --Kash 02:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your honesty and civility. I also admit I have not followed the wiki policy 100%. Now, I don't want you to comment on any facts beside Misplaced Pages policy: tell me, was InShanee right to threaten me that he is going to block me because of my personal attack? Bearing in mind this is the steps of events:
1- I reported to him that Aucaman has made the specific remark 2- He came and warned me that I have personally attacked Aucaman, then he threatened that he will block me because of this (Basically because I asked Aucaman to comment on why this he called Cyrus an illetrate murderer - reason why I did this was because Aucaman was defending him self on RfC claiming he is Iranian, and then editing Iranian articles daily, putting up disputes as he likes, etc) 3- He went and deleted my messages on Aucaman's talk page. 4- He never made any action against Aucaman.
Is it me or is this matter just too suspicious? I just wanna know your view. Is this how admins deal with things? They go after the people who report things and make sure they are threatened enough not to report anything again? because I am sure what I reported was clearly against the wikipedia policy. If I was wrong to ask the user to comment, he could have said so in a much nicer way. --Kash 03:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)