This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 16x9 (talk | contribs) at 21:15, 18 January 2010 (→OPPO Digital: removed troll). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:15, 18 January 2010 by 16x9 (talk | contribs) (→OPPO Digital: removed troll)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
 Archives | |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
accusations of bias
What is the merit in Yosh's claim to bias in discussion on deletion of article about Joey Fisher? --97.81.16.78 (talk) 06:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- very far removed nudging completely unfounded 16x9 (talk) 06:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- So there is no personal connection to the subject of the article? --97.81.16.78 (talk) 06:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Not from me, never met, talk, seen him (in person). 16x9 (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- I'd suggest, then, countering that claim. After a first reading, I immediately took his side, but now am beginning to see some merit in the case for deletion. Sounds like people are personally connected to this somehow, based on his comment. I got the impression that you were merely playing out some personal vendetta or something. --UgaBullDawgFan08 (talk) 06:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Is that satisfactory? 16x9 (talk) 06:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, as much as it can be. --UgaBullDawgFan08 (talk) 06:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Not from me, never met, talk, seen him (in person). 16x9 (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- So there is no personal connection to the subject of the article? --97.81.16.78 (talk) 06:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Please be more careful in your Wikipolicing efforts
I've reviewed your edit history just now and it seems you are not careful enough in your wikipolicing efforts against spam. You are flagging too many articles for speedy deletion without exercising due restraint, deleting sections for lack of citations instead of attempting to find citations or flagging appropriately and often deleting external links which do add value to subject articles and qualify WP:EL criteria. Your efforts to police Misplaced Pages are appreciated but please be more careful.
I'm posting this anonymously to prevent petty politicking. 109.66.37.172 (talk) 15:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- LOL wrong. Grow a pair and comment with your login
- Be nice. It's about the message, not the messenger. I've been involved with enough skirmishes to know making it personal won't improve Misplaced Pages. I'm not in this for the drama or the power trip. Also note that people like you, while they do serve a role in our community, can also scare away valuable contributors with their heavy handed tactics. We've lost enough contributors as it is. Remember that anonymous contributors are not a second class citizen in Misplaced Pages.In fact, that's where most of the content is coming from.
109.66.37.172 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC).
- What are you talking about? you come to my talk page accusing me of wrong doing with no specific diffs. you imply you have an account just aren;t using it. Not that you are "second class". So if you want to leave a message with substance and not veiled personal attacks please go for it. If not please go away. 16x9 (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry maybe I confused you. There were two separate points in my comment. One regarding careful wikipolicing conduct. The point wasn't to build a case against you with diffs and wikilawyering references to Misplaced Pages policies. The other regarding treating anonymous contributors with less respect than a logged in editor. Whether or not I have an account or whether I should be using it while contributing to Misplaced Pages in whatever fashion is none of you business. Your remarks regarding "growing a pair of balls" are uncivil. 109.66.37.172 (talk) 18:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't say anything about balls. Maybe what wikipedia needs is heavy handed tactics as you put it. We are way past quantity or articles and should focus on quality. It almost seems like you are editing annonymously because you are not allowed to edit logged in. Please keep you filth all my talkpage. 22:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Don't be coy you know what you said. Instead of investing your energy in making it difficult and unpleasant for others to contribute to Misplaced Pages it would be nice if you could redirect your energy into a more positive role. Uncivil self-styled wikicops such as yourself are scaring the real contributors away. Please, there are more appropriate outlets for your aggression.109.66.37.172 (talk) 23:31, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- LOL again what the fuck are you talking about? diffs would be nice? if not leave me alone. 16x9 (talk) 23:47, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Don't be coy you know what you said. Instead of investing your energy in making it difficult and unpleasant for others to contribute to Misplaced Pages it would be nice if you could redirect your energy into a more positive role. Uncivil self-styled wikicops such as yourself are scaring the real contributors away. Please, there are more appropriate outlets for your aggression.109.66.37.172 (talk) 23:31, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't say anything about balls. Maybe what wikipedia needs is heavy handed tactics as you put it. We are way past quantity or articles and should focus on quality. It almost seems like you are editing annonymously because you are not allowed to edit logged in. Please keep you filth all my talkpage. 22:35, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry maybe I confused you. There were two separate points in my comment. One regarding careful wikipolicing conduct. The point wasn't to build a case against you with diffs and wikilawyering references to Misplaced Pages policies. The other regarding treating anonymous contributors with less respect than a logged in editor. Whether or not I have an account or whether I should be using it while contributing to Misplaced Pages in whatever fashion is none of you business. Your remarks regarding "growing a pair of balls" are uncivil. 109.66.37.172 (talk) 18:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? you come to my talk page accusing me of wrong doing with no specific diffs. you imply you have an account just aren;t using it. Not that you are "second class". So if you want to leave a message with substance and not veiled personal attacks please go for it. If not please go away. 16x9 (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Ruby on Rails
Hi. You recently marked all the sites in the "Rails in Production" with {or}s (one of them twice) and even applied that to an HTML comment. Also, I am not sure how this is applicable; the section cites a source at the beginning and all the sites listed publicly state that they use Rails. If you still feel that listing these sites constitutes "original research", can you elaborate? Thanks! Josephgrossberg (talk) 15:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- The section cites a first party source making the claim original research. I highly recommend you not label my edits as vandalism and you revert your previous edit on Ruby on Rails. 16x9 (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- You may be right that I labeled it "vandalism" prematurely, but your edit lacked an explanation and resembled such. I will not revert my edit, but thank you for your advice. Josephgrossberg (talk) 19:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- Don't use tools if you need to edit slower. 16x9 (talk) 19:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
- You may be right that I labeled it "vandalism" prematurely, but your edit lacked an explanation and resembled such. I will not revert my edit, but thank you for your advice. Josephgrossberg (talk) 19:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Miami33139
I did not attack User:Miami33139, he attacked me. and the rest of the IRC community. Putting every IRC-related article on the deletion spot for no reason is not appropriate, it's badfaith. -- Jordan "Eck" Samuel (talk) 01:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about that. I do know that you called another editor an idiot which is a personal attack. Please Assume Good Faith. 16x9 (talk) 02:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
What's that ???
Just move ahead and block me from editing. I am not going to contribute to delitionpedia anyhow. I am running my own fork, 93.207.223.113 (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)