This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Breein1007 (talk | contribs) at 18:34, 9 June 2010 (→Re Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result_concerning_Breein1007: grammar :)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:34, 9 June 2010 by Breein1007 (talk | contribs) (→Re Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result_concerning_Breein1007: grammar :))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Rlevse says you are the guy to talk to...
if we need useful images undeleted. Is this true? The images I find that are needed but deleted are originally someone else's, mistagged, and once they are restored, I fix the tagging. Can you do this? Do you take requests? --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 08:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sure ... just list anything here you want me to look at. As long as they are not something plainly unacceptable to use under any circumstances (like recent news media photos) I will restore them and reset the maintenance tags so you will have another 7 days to fix whatever problem caused their deletion. --B (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Don't
Don't try and hide things away. Giacomo 20:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what part of "Requestor consents to closing thread, nothing good is going to come out of this" is inflammatory, but the passive–aggressive behavior is wearing thin. ANI isn't a forum for razzing your opponents or some such thing - it's a forum for bringing a specific problem for a specific solution. You seem only interested in prolonging attacks on TreasuryTag and on anyone who doesn't agree with you. Most of us don't give a flip about him, you, or any other Wikidrama, but you want to personalize the whole thing and make it all about Giano. --B (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Reply about ANI discussion
I am going to explain to you why I did what I did, but (Sigh) I don't even know why I bother. Up until May 14th I did not know that non-free files could not be placed on userspace. Afterward I stopped. Two days ago I update the Misplaced Pages Project Star Trek portal. Considering that all Star Trek images are in some way, copyrighted, and I noticed that other television portals have copyrighted images I added several Star Trek images. Two days later Hammersoft reverted my edits claiming that copyrighted images cannot be placed in portals. Since portals are supposed to have best work displayed, and since they link to articles I though use of images in portals was fine. Hammersoft rudely told me it was not. Forgive me for being blunt, but I do not particularly care for this user. He does not edit pages, except to remove images. He keeps statistics of the number of users he has made angry on his userpage and he is stalking my edits. I checked his edits, on May 31 the only edits he made where to revert mine and to yell at me. When he told me that adding items to portals was against policy I disagreed. I still do not see how files cannot be used in portals. Until you told me otherwise I didn't believe him. The reason I added the nobots template to the page is because I figure Hammersoft changed Dashbot so that it would remove images with certain tags from the portal. The images I had posted in the portal had remained in place until Hammersoft removed them. Then Dashbot all of a sudden started reverting. I felt that this was odd and that is why I added the template. I guess I just won't touch a image again. I won't upload, I won't add image, and I won't remove images. If they are wrong so be it. I don't plan to use them anymore. I would also like Hammersoft to leave me alone. He has been watching me, waiting for me to make another image related mistake. I have made alot of other edits other than adding images. I don't like being jumped on by him every time I make a mistake. I am not perfect and neither is he. I don't like having to worry about getting yelled at by him every time I make a mistake. One of the guidelines is don't worry about making mistakes. If he continues to harass me every time I make a mistake I won't need to be blocked for making mistakes, I will simply leave wikipedia, for good. I very much enjoy editing wikipedia, but having the stress of worrying is not worth it. I am sorry I ranted on your userpage over what I am upset about. I am not angry at you or anyone, I am just upset that Hammersoft won't leave me alone. I have written my response here rather than ANI because I do not want to be further yelled at by Hammersoft. Apologies, --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 22:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry your experience has not been positive. If there are other TV-related portals that have copyrighted images, please let me know and I will remove them. I briefly scanned Category:Television portals and didn't see any, but if there are, let me know. --B (talk) 23:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
- Alpha Quadrant, I was very patient and polite with you, even when you became quite insulting towards me . Despite this, you continued to willfully violate our policies. People can and will over time lose patience with a person when they continually violate our policies, despite having them explained to the person committing the violations many times. Between May 14 and June 1, you committed no less than 14 violations of this policy, despite being told so many times that you were in error. Then you treat the person warning you as a vandal . I am not here to yell at you, but to point out why patience was being lost with you. I have no desire to follow you, and didn't have reason to do so until today when I put together the WP:AN/I thread. Your violations were appearing on this list, which I routinely patrol on a daily basis. If you don't commit violations of WP:NFCC, it's likely you won't see me on your talk page ever again. As to your extreme distaste for my editing, as I mentioned before, I'm sorry you don't like it . However, I'm not seeking your approval or disapproval of my work here. I frankly don't care about your opinion of me, and that attitude on my part is why my userpage exists as it does. I'm not keeping "statistics of the number of users (I have) made angry". Rather, my userpage serves to dissuade people from insulting me. Personally, I think it's worked for the most part.
- B, thanks again for your time and attention to this matter. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:25, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
epic name is epic.
don't you agree? Rohedin 18:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- No idea what you are talking about --B (talk) 18:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
for this catch. That had slipped right past me :P EyeSerene 18:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- No problem ... I don't know if you were working off of WP:AN3 or if you had just so happened to notice the users, but when I hit the block button, you had beaten me by one minute. ;) --B (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
- Heh, it's on my watchlist due to past problems... Thanks again :) EyeSerene 19:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Direktor disruption and break of 3RR on Flag of Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
Hello. I see the article has been corrected by another user, and having the article in right way is my only purpose here. But, unfortunatelly, I also saw that you declined taking action on that case against a disruptive user that has intensively and purposly reverted all changes 3 times in couple of hours. I also noteced that you decided to warn me about edit-warring (???), giving me same treatment as the disruptive user... Where did I edit warred? You conclude I edit warred because I decided to report another user edit-warring? I did take as offensive the warning that you gave me because I have been very cooperative on that, and associated articles, I had been editing all with prior accordance of the project, I have been completely agreed with another 5 editors of the article, and I have been taking action against disruption on those articles. Also, regarding the disruptive editor, I have been discussing with him on the article talk page for months now, I gave him entire freedom to let him compose the article in the right way and I had asked him politely to make some changes that are supported by all I already mentioned. I honestly hope the disruptive user will change his behavior from now on, because if he doesn´t, I will remind this failure of taking action by your side. I will also remove your comment from my talk page since I consider it completely inadequate and unfortunate for the situation, and it follows a comment by a user that was already several times forbiten to edit my talk page, so the entire section will be deleted. Best regards, FkpCascais (talk) 19:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- I don't believe that I warned you about anything - I replied to a comment that DIREKTOR left on your talk page in which he bragged that he only reverted exactly three times. The context and the indentation should make it clear that DIREKTOR was the party I was addressing. --B (talk) 19:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- I sincerely apologise than. I missunderstood it, but I removed it anyway, so any further missinterpretation is avoided. I have been a litlle bit of "traumatised" by the ammount of bad faith and disruption by that user, so I may act jumpy when it comes about (not) dealing with him. Please ignore my entire previous comment than, and I honestly hope that the situation there is clear and no further action would be needed there (althouth I doubt because that user does take all edits as competition and doesn´t rest when something like this happends). But, I´ll WP:AGF and hope we can all have as good articles as possible here. I apologise for taking you time on this. FkpCascais (talk) 19:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- No problem --B (talk) 20:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, B. It seems your warning wasn't understood at all.
- Take a look what the user is doing at Josip Broz Tito's article: .
- At the same time, when I tried to change no more than 2 lines in another article, (changing "a collaborating force" into "a force seemed to be collaborating that time")see the diff] I was immediately reverted by another user, and in the talk page User:DIREKTOR start harassing me way and this way (look at the third point, just after your warning).
- I actually renounced to give my contributions to those pages since the user approach me that way, and since int could seem I am involved in an editwar (for two lines??). But I don't think that's right. Thanks in advance for your help, and please accept my apologies for bothering you with this not fun issue. - Theirrulez (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- The user seems to be talking it out on the talk page, which is what he should do. I don't see a problem. --B (talk) 12:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
- No problem --B (talk) 20:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- I sincerely apologise than. I missunderstood it, but I removed it anyway, so any further missinterpretation is avoided. I have been a litlle bit of "traumatised" by the ammount of bad faith and disruption by that user, so I may act jumpy when it comes about (not) dealing with him. Please ignore my entire previous comment than, and I honestly hope that the situation there is clear and no further action would be needed there (althouth I doubt because that user does take all edits as competition and doesn´t rest when something like this happends). But, I´ll WP:AGF and hope we can all have as good articles as possible here. I apologise for taking you time on this. FkpCascais (talk) 19:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Thnx, i understand now...
I was not trying to hide/block the referances. I was trying to remove clutter just like the article of Adolf Hitler, but now i know that neither collapsible tables/scroll boxes should be used for citations. I understand it is impossible to remove as much cluter as far as organizing by columns. :D
Thnx again, i learned my lesson. :D 序名三 「Jyonasan」 23:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
- The scrolling list in Adolph Hitler was incorrect, too. Nothing that mangles the plain rendering of references is permissible. --B (talk) 23:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hot ice pun
Heh..."creates a chilling effect" on the Global Warming RFARB...I like it....;) Dreadstar ☥ 06:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- I try. Maybe if we have more article probation measures, we can stop global warming completely. ;) --B (talk) 14:54, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Special Order 191
You earlier gave a 24 hour hard block to IP 72.87.183.32 (see ) -- I am the one who made the original referral. I had also alleged that the IP was a sock puppet of USER:Lostorder. The block has expired and the IP resumed by making the same type of edit he/she was blocked for (see ). There was no discussion by the IP even though I originated a discussion on the article's discussion page. Any help would be appreciated. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 17:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- Blocked 72 hours. --B (talk) 17:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks again. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 17:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
PD ?
Pls look at this thread: User_talk:Rlevse#Jerome_Tiger_DYK which refers to this image: File:Jerome tiger stomp dance.jpg on commons. Can you advise here? If it's free license I want to use it in a DYK set with the image. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC) and File:HOR Philippines Session Hall.jpg, facebook is a PD source? — Rlevse • Talk • 23:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
- See latest posts on my talk page. Ck your mail too. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Falcon Crest
Did you get it? Thanks, --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:17, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Uploaded as File:Falcon Crest.svg. Please edit the page to include appropriate attribution and fair use information. --B (talk) 13:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding my undeletion request.
Hi, B
You seem to have been very busy when you were attending to this undeletion request, since you mistakenly tagged it with "Fixed"! Of course, I do understand that such errors occur when people are busy.
I took the liberty of undoing your change. Please read the request carefully before tagging it. Note that the undeletion request pertains to a previous version.
Fleet Command (talk) 15:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, I understand your request now. Please see my comments there. --B (talk) 15:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- The new version that you have uploaded is in blatant violation of Copyright Laws as it is a misrepresentation of a proprietary product. I am tagging it for speedy-deletion. In the mean time, I advise you to study copyright laws. Besides, there was nothing promotional about a freeware media player showing a video that is as free and open-source as Misplaced Pages itself. Fleet Command (talk) 22:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
J. K. Ralston
I just created this article and listed at DYK. Any realistic chance of one of his paintings being free? Is a FUR possible? — Rlevse • Talk • 18:24, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Anything he published before January 1, 1923 is in the public domain. Anything after that is possibly public domain, if it was published before 1963 and the copyright was not renewed or before 1978 without a copyright notice, though both of these are likely to be difficult to prove unless someone else (like the Library of Congress) has already done the legwork on it. Anything else would still be copyrighted and could only be used under a claim of fair use. To use it under a claim of fair use, it would need to greatly enhance the article such that not having it would be detrimental to the reader's understanding. For example, if one or two of his paintings are useful for showing his style, they could be included ... just make sure that their inclusion has some transformative effect on the text and that they aren't just for decoration. --B (talk) 20:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- OK, see File:Sacajawea At The Portage.jpg. please improve FUR and I'm not sure I used the right nonfree license. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me --B (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- Cool. I guess we could put up an image of him too but there's none I've found that I really like. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me --B (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
- OK, see File:Sacajawea At The Portage.jpg. please improve FUR and I'm not sure I used the right nonfree license. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Bachir Attar
When you restored this at REFUND I suspect you hadn't seen that this had already been refused twice before. It appears that JzG was acting on behalf of OTRS when he took that out of mainspace. Obviously you can do as you like but I referred the requester back to OTRS and wouldn't have restored it without discussing privately with Guy. Spartaz 02:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- In what forum was it refused before? If the action was an OTRS action that should not be reverted without consulting an OTRS member, then he needs to say that in the move log - we're not mind readers. When I said something to JzG at his talk page, he said nothing about it being an OTRS action. I obviously must have failed the admin mind reading test. ;) If he doesn't say somewhere along the line that it's an OTRS action, then it's an editorial decision subject to WP:BRD, which, incidentally, is what I did. He didn't protect the mainspace title or delete anything, so any person on the face of the earth could have moved it back - moving it back wasn't an exercise of the admin tools. If you want to move it back to userspace, just do it, but please indicate in the move log a reason for it beyond "userfy". "Userfy" doesn't provide any information to anyone. --B (talk) 02:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you look at the very top of REFUND I rejected as part of dual request with Claire Nutting and there was one a few days before that that was also refused. I agree about the edit summary by the way but OTRS volunteers can sometimes prefer not to advertise the nature of actions as that can attract attention just because some editors disapprove of OTRS. Since I don't have OTRS access myself any more I can't see what it was about. JzG is very experienced at OTRS so I'm sure he knows what he is doing. oh well. Spartaz 03:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, I see it now. But it doesn't look like the request was rejected unless he blanked the comment in question. It looks like the request is still pending. While I recognize that stating OTRS can invite unwanted attention, there are ways around that. He could just say "see me for more info" or if it were really necessary to not advertise that it was an OTRS decision (eg, a serious privacy concern or something), then he could use the cool new revision hiding function to hide the move summary from public view, but leave it visible to admins. The bottom line is that, though I have disagreed with JzG on certain things in the past, I wouldn't dream of reverting an OTRS action. If it's an OTRS action, he needs to indicate in some way, "this isn't a normal editorial decision - don't reverse it". He didn't. --B (talk) 03:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with that point and I wasn't suggesting for a minute that you were acting unreasonably, just that you clearly hadn't picked up this was a multiple request that had previously been refused. I agree by the way that OTRS actions need to be clearly labeled, Its just that they are not always labelled for good reasons and its sometimes impossible to read how much an editor is action independantly or for OTRS without looking up the tickets. Its probably nothing more then I suspect that I am just slighty more cautions having been an OTRS volunteer in the past. Still, no harm done except wasting your time as I see Guy is aware of the change and no doubt can contact you privately about this if he feels it necessary. Spartaz 13:23, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, I see it now. But it doesn't look like the request was rejected unless he blanked the comment in question. It looks like the request is still pending. While I recognize that stating OTRS can invite unwanted attention, there are ways around that. He could just say "see me for more info" or if it were really necessary to not advertise that it was an OTRS decision (eg, a serious privacy concern or something), then he could use the cool new revision hiding function to hide the move summary from public view, but leave it visible to admins. The bottom line is that, though I have disagreed with JzG on certain things in the past, I wouldn't dream of reverting an OTRS action. If it's an OTRS action, he needs to indicate in some way, "this isn't a normal editorial decision - don't reverse it". He didn't. --B (talk) 03:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- If you look at the very top of REFUND I rejected as part of dual request with Claire Nutting and there was one a few days before that that was also refused. I agree about the edit summary by the way but OTRS volunteers can sometimes prefer not to advertise the nature of actions as that can attract attention just because some editors disapprove of OTRS. Since I don't have OTRS access myself any more I can't see what it was about. JzG is very experienced at OTRS so I'm sure he knows what he is doing. oh well. Spartaz 03:08, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Enforcement
Hi, I am avoiding making any comments on AE because the user who filed the report has a long history with me and has been banned and warned before for battling in the Israeli-Arab topic on Misplaced Pages, so rather than getting involved arguing over the frivolous report I'd rather it end quietly. I just wanted to ask you, where exactly did I cross the line of civility in that edit summary? I have seen many users in the past tell other editors not to comment on their talk pages, including admins. The user who left me that comment was previously involved with me and he knew very well that I didn't want to hear from him. I had already deleted other comments of his and asked him not to comment on my talk page, but he persisted. The fact that he was a desysoped admin is totally true, and the only other thing I said was that he was harassing me... which I don't really see being a civility problem. So can you please help me understand where I went wrong? Thanks, Breein1007 (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- That he has been desysopped has nothing to do with the appropriateness or lack thereof of his advice. Removing his post without comment is the best alternative. Little good is going to come from referring to something as harassment unless it really is harassment. --B (talk) 21:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Granted. Like I said, it was quite a harassing thing to do after I made it clear to him previously that I didn't appreciate his advice, and more specifically, him following me around to find ways to pick on me. Anyway, that's a different story. Basically, to classify that edit summary as a violation of WP:CIVIL... doesn't seem appropriate in my opinion. Maybe my understanding of the line people can safely cross in civility has been skewed because of the great amount of animosity found between editors in the I-A conflict on Misplaced Pages. Breein1007 (talk) 21:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Comment: B, when I asked you to comment about some things, you did not answer about the canvassing part. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Re Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Result_concerning_Breein1007
Re " unless the user is so irredeemably biased/disruptive/whatever "
I think a quick run through this user's contrib history would reveal this to be true. NickCT (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Just a note that NickCT was recently blocked for personal attacks (ie:calling me a bigot), so I would take that with a grain of salt. But please do feel free to look through my contribution history and determine whether or not my edits warrant a topic ban, which I personally think is a ridiculous notion. Especially when the user requesting it is the one who was already topic banned for 30 days for extreme battleground mentality, and is continuing that behaviour with this report of things that I have mostly already been sanctioned for, combined with other laughable accusations like canvassing when someone else asked me to help them. Breein1007 (talk) 14:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Breein - I've made continued efforts to work constructively with you for a long long time. Your attitude is intractable. The "bigot" comment came out of exasperation for this attitude, which, frankly, I still think could be defined as "bigoted". If you would make any attempt to reach out, any attempt to compromise/apologise I've always stood ready to change my opinion. Perhap you will now? NickCT (talk) 15:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi B, sorry for all the trouble, but I noticed you cited WP:AGF at AE. Is there not a problem with bad faith in the report itself? For example, is stating that I "secretly" conversed in Hebrew with another editor in order to hide what I was talking about consistent with WP:AGF? Was it not possible that I realized the other user was struggling with English so I switched to Hebrew to make it easier for him? is this not something that the reporting user should consider? I empathize with Shuki calling the report frivolous because he knows Supreme Deliciousness from past encounters, as do I, and this is not the first time he has done something like this. WP:AGF only goes so far. When Supreme Deliciousness just came off of a topic ban for battleground behaviour such as repeatedly stating that Jewish/Israeli sources are unreliable simply for being Jewish/Israeli, and then submits a report like this requesting a topic ban for things such as speaking Hebrew, it really is quite clear that something is very very wrong and that his 30 day topic ban didn't lead to a change in attitude. Breein1007 (talk) 18:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I suppose that's true that some of the report could be interpreted as an assumption of bad faith. WP:TPG#YES says that if you are speaking in a talk page to another user in a non-English language, you should provide an English translation, but the characterization wasn't necessary unless there was something direct that was objectionable in the text - just because someone speaks in a language you don't understand doesn't mean that they are plotting murder and mayhem. Perhaps I overreacted, but frivolous litigation is a legal term (and words mean things) and accusing someone of a frivolous report is going beyond "I don't agree with you". --B (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- The TPG#YES link didn't work, but okay - I will keep that in mind in the future and if I encounter a situation where I'm speaking another language, I'll provide a translation. In terms of over-reacting, I don't think that you are the one over-reacting at all. On the contrary, I appreciate everything you have said so far and you come across as a very good admin who is analyzing things fairly and objectively. The problem is that the editor who filed the report went way overboard and over-reacted, it seems desperate even... trying to come up with every possible thing to make me look bad and get admins who don't do a good job of investigating to quickly come to the conclusion that I should be topic banned. I mean, it's even slightly funny to be honest... asking for sanctions against me because someone tried to canvass me, because I spoke another language... after the laughter wears off though it is quite sad to realize that this is what we are dealing with, and that previous sanctions against the editor in question for this exact behaviour did not lead to any improvement. Anyway, I guess all I'm saying is that I think it would be very unfortunate if the result of this case is sanctions against me, because the effect is that Supreme Deliciousness will be rewarded for his actions and convinced that what he is doing is the right thing to do on Misplaced Pages. In the long run, it will only serve to make tensions worse in the Israeli-Arab area on Misplaced Pages. In terms of your suggestion for civility parole, maybe that's fair - there were some situations in the past when I should have bitten my tongue. But I don't think 1RR is fair here; I lost control at the Gaza Flotilla article and was banned for it. Since then I haven't done anything close to edit warring. All the other diffs that Supreme Deliciousness provided are months old, I was already sanctioned for them, or worse: he was the other party involved in the edit war. But I do appreciate your time and fairness here, thank you. Breein1007 (talk) 18:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry ... left out the WP: --B (talk) 18:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- The TPG#YES link didn't work, but okay - I will keep that in mind in the future and if I encounter a situation where I'm speaking another language, I'll provide a translation. In terms of over-reacting, I don't think that you are the one over-reacting at all. On the contrary, I appreciate everything you have said so far and you come across as a very good admin who is analyzing things fairly and objectively. The problem is that the editor who filed the report went way overboard and over-reacted, it seems desperate even... trying to come up with every possible thing to make me look bad and get admins who don't do a good job of investigating to quickly come to the conclusion that I should be topic banned. I mean, it's even slightly funny to be honest... asking for sanctions against me because someone tried to canvass me, because I spoke another language... after the laughter wears off though it is quite sad to realize that this is what we are dealing with, and that previous sanctions against the editor in question for this exact behaviour did not lead to any improvement. Anyway, I guess all I'm saying is that I think it would be very unfortunate if the result of this case is sanctions against me, because the effect is that Supreme Deliciousness will be rewarded for his actions and convinced that what he is doing is the right thing to do on Misplaced Pages. In the long run, it will only serve to make tensions worse in the Israeli-Arab area on Misplaced Pages. In terms of your suggestion for civility parole, maybe that's fair - there were some situations in the past when I should have bitten my tongue. But I don't think 1RR is fair here; I lost control at the Gaza Flotilla article and was banned for it. Since then I haven't done anything close to edit warring. All the other diffs that Supreme Deliciousness provided are months old, I was already sanctioned for them, or worse: he was the other party involved in the edit war. But I do appreciate your time and fairness here, thank you. Breein1007 (talk) 18:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
B, I don't think it is alright that this conversation is held here instead of the AE, It is inappropriate. It really needs to be noted that all the people who have defended Breein there, including Shuki, are people who edit in the same side as him in these conflict article. They are not neutral in what they say. There was no bad faith from me and Im sorry if it was misinterpreted. If you look at that entire section, a user had contacted Breein to edit war with him, and then while Breein went to the article and started edit warring as the otehr had requested they started to speak hebrew with each other, adn if you run this comment through google translate although Google translate is not perfect, you can clearly see that they are speaking with each other about they're edits to the article. I just felt that it was important that this was mentioned because I'm sure it is inappropriate to have a conversation in another language specially involving canvassing, It was not in bad faith from me. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 18:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kim Ki Whang
Hi, B. At the above AfD, you asked: Is there a reliable source that is actually about him, not just mentioning him in passing?—and I rather think I'd linked one during the debate above. Did you miss it, or do you just disagree that it's reliable?—S Marshall T/C 21:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Meh ... maybe borderline in terms of establishing notability. There are plenty of human interest stories about random people off the street that we don't create Misplaced Pages articles on. When I was a kid, there was an article about me in the local newspaper for winning a scholastic chess tournament - I don't think anyone would claim I'm notable though. Also, please note that WP:N says (and elaborates on) "sources" (plural). (Really, it seems to me that it's to keep out just this kind of thing, where a profile was done on someone one time.) --B (talk) 21:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I dunno. I think notability's there to keep out the marketing spam, and I think this wasn't spam. Personally, I'm satisfied that Kim really was a pioneer of Taekwondo in the US in the 1970s, that he really did chair the US olympic taekwondo team in 1988, that he really was awarded a 10th dan black belt on his deathbed (making him one of the tiny handful people ever to get that award in Taekwondo while still alive), and that he really did learn from Kanken Tōyama and go on to train Sang Kee Paik, Mitchell Bobrow, John Critzos II and Chuck Norris. I'm also quite satisfied that he was a very big fish in the small pond of early US taekwondo. He seems to have been not just influential, but revered and respected and loved. I can see the sources for all these things, and there are lots of them... I just can't bring myself to call them "reliable sources" with a straight face. Only the Black Belt Magazine source might pass muster.
I also think the Black Belt magazine back-issues, taken as a whole, amount to a whole lot more than just a profile that was done on someone one time—but I can see your side of it too, and I do respect what you say. It's a tough one.—S Marshall T/C 00:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I dunno. I think notability's there to keep out the marketing spam, and I think this wasn't spam. Personally, I'm satisfied that Kim really was a pioneer of Taekwondo in the US in the 1970s, that he really did chair the US olympic taekwondo team in 1988, that he really was awarded a 10th dan black belt on his deathbed (making him one of the tiny handful people ever to get that award in Taekwondo while still alive), and that he really did learn from Kanken Tōyama and go on to train Sang Kee Paik, Mitchell Bobrow, John Critzos II and Chuck Norris. I'm also quite satisfied that he was a very big fish in the small pond of early US taekwondo. He seems to have been not just influential, but revered and respected and loved. I can see the sources for all these things, and there are lots of them... I just can't bring myself to call them "reliable sources" with a straight face. Only the Black Belt Magazine source might pass muster.