This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JzG (talk | contribs) at 07:10, 31 May 2007 (→WP:AMA: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:10, 31 May 2007 by JzG (talk | contribs) (→WP:AMA: reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:JzG/Archive-Dec-2024. Some may be manually archived earlier than that, if no further action is required or productive debate is at an end. |
Guy Chapman? He's just zis Guy, you know? More about me
If you need urgent admin help please go to the incident noticeboard. To stop a vandal, try the vandal intervention page. For general help why not try the help desk? If you need me personally and it's urgent you may email me, I read all messages even if I do not reply. If next time I log on is soon enough, click this link to start a new conversation.
Terms of Service
By posting on this page you accept the JzG Terms of Service. I endeavour to satisfy good-faith requests to the best of my ability, but if you act like a dick, I will call you a dick. If you act like a troll, I will probably ignore you and may tell you to fuck off. If you want something from me, your best bet is not to demand it on pain of shopping me to ArbCom, because that way is pretty much guaranteed to piss me off to the extent that I will do whatever I can to thwart your plans. This page may contain trolling. Some of it might even be from me, but never assume trolling where a misplaced sense of humour might explain things. I can be provoked, it's not even terribly difficult. You may find, if you provoke me enough, that I will do something I later regret. Only remember, you may regret it more. I am a middle-aged surly bastard who spends his working day wrestling spammers and beating Windows with a stick, but I am capable of seeing good in the most improbable people if they don't go out of their way to make me do otherwise. Guy (Help!) 22:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
This user posts using a British sense of humour and does not repress those instantaneous motions of merriment.
Today was an interesting day for me, as far as Misplaced Pages is concerned. As well as exchanging emails with people spanning pretty much the entire gamut from banned trolls to Jimbo, I had a talk with Danny and another with Jeff Merkey. And you know something? Despite deep-seated differences about many things of pressing importance to the project and its future, the one thing that was never in doubt was that all of us - Jimbo, Danny, Jeff, various admins and several long-standing editors and former admins - want the same thing.
We want to build a credible online encyclopaedia.
We may disagree about how best to do that, what precisely constitutes credible, what should be done to attract the right kinds of people, how ready we should be to kick out the wrong kinds of people, but in the end there is no doubt that success is going to look pretty much the same to all of us, at least from the outside. It's going to look a lot like Misplaced Pages does right now, almost certainly with some form of stable versions (which will be a massive boon in fighting vandalism, perhaps allowing me to get back to writing articles more - this may not be altogether a good thing). It's going to have a many fewer "biographies" of kids who once did something stupid or maybe whose friends did something stupid, many fewer news stories of no lasting historical or societal consequences, a tighter focus on sourcing and good writing.
Hell, even Larry Sanger wants the same thing. Everybody who has been involved with Misplaced Pages in more than a trivial capacity seems to be fundamentally in agreement on the core objective. We have built an online encyclopaedia, we proved that could be done. Step 2 is to make it more credible. Right now it is a curate's egg - parts of it are excellent.
I suspect we all share much the same general view of the enemies of this aim. Trolls. Vandals. Abusers of the project. You can abuse the project in many ways: self-promotion, pursuing your external political or personal agenda, violating the privacy of others, harassment, perpetuating the harassment of others. There are some things it is safe to leave to other sites.
If your aim is the same as mine, then we probably are not going to have a problem getting along. And if we do, it's because we haven't had a talk a bout it. You can send me email. Guy (Help!) 19:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel 18:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
WP:AMA
Hi Guy, FYI: I agree with the protection of the AMA page which you recently did. However, I don't agree with Administrators making changes to the page without having a discussion. This is a double standard which shouldn't be tolerated, specially if you consider that making a page "historical" is only a guideline... and we can revive the group by advertising! I have left a message on the two users talk pages in question. --CyclePat 19:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Pat. It's like this: AMA IS DEAD. It is staying dead. It was a liability before it died, and the war over trying to reactivate it is even more pestilential than AMA was. How many times do I have to tell you to drop it? Guy (Help!) 21:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello Guy, I noticed you removed my good faith attempt to have a discussion on the "Misplaced Pages proposal's" page. I was wondering what you consider "disruptive", as stated in your edit, with my request for comments and my proposal? Perhaps you could find a reference for me in the widely accepted guidelines Misplaced Pages:Disruptive editing because I can't seem to find anything. Furthermore, I do take offense to the accusation and the comments which where directed towards my mannerism and the presentation of my comments and not the issues within the "verbios" and "long" comment I added to the proposal page. --CyclePat 22:16, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Pat, how many times do you have to be told to drop if before you listen? Just give me the number, I'll organise the chorus. Guy (Help!) 22:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Guy, thank you again for response. My understanding is that you are willing to try and show me that there is in fact much support to close down AMA, however I haven't seen this support. If you could please show me (organise) this chorus of support that would probably be sufficient for me "listen". A suggested venue of chorus' could be a Proper MfD, (which someone had actually started (a 3rd one) but it was closed right after) or how about a discussion at the community portal (archived) or an RfC or something that resembles a process (for GOD's sake we're talking about closing AMA which according to all the allegations was the WORST WIKI LAWYERING ASSOCIATION (according to the propaganda out there). Perhaps you have another venue? Surely if it was the worst lawyering association then WHY is it that there was no real lawyering for a proper procedures in closing it down. (except for when I decided to step up). I believe most AMA members worked via email. I also believe that there is just a handful of biased administrators that have decided the community doesn't want AMA anymore. Finally, how about having a discussion on the AMAs talk page where there is more than just 2 lines and comments from the other side saying and repeating "It's dead" (propaganda). Surely, as per WP:CON consensus rules we should be able to have an educated conversation and show that the AMA came to a consensus to close down (and wasn't forced by one person or a 3 - 8 biased administrators that simply didn't like being waved rules and contradicted by the advocates). If you do that I will be happy! You will also be vindicating the idea that AMA was closed down by a bunch of admin's that just "couldn't handle the truth!" Again, if you could do that, I would be very grateful. Thank you. --CyclePat 23:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you can't see the support I suggest you open your eyes. Seriously. Guy (Help!) 07:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
WP:ANI
Just a heads up. Your recent block of User:Ben-w is being discussed at ANI. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- My bad, i now see you started the thread. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment
Doing some recent changes patrolling yesterday (thank god for Firefox tabs), I came across Sports Club, and a long running edit war that both sides would violate a 20RR if there was such a thing. I have a request for page Protection in, but do you think the IP's could use a time out? SirFozzie 21:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Will Johnson/Shawn Hornbeck
My article in an example of how to Copy Verbatim under the license. How is that inflammatory? The page does not fall under any speedy criteria. Therefore you have no cause to delete it. Wjhonson 01:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
- As if you weren't aware of the controversy, ongoing arbcom case, changes to two policies and other brouhaha in respect of trivial biographies. Nice try. Guy (Help!) 07:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)