Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:15, 4 May 2009

Blocked for 3RR

Quartermaster chiming in on Obama article and Rezko edits (as well as other stuff)

You come across as an exquisitely honest editor regarding the Obama article. You're a good shepherd. I will tread lightly per your suggestions. Have a barnstar.

		The Anti-Flame Barnstar
		Thanks, Mom! Quartermaster (talk) 20:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): I'm not seeing edit warring at the article, and I believe this was a simple mistake after reviewing the contribution history of Scjessey and the filer of the original 3RR report. Wikidemon CENSEI is not completely innocent in this whole matter, and these type of reports and tenacious/gaming editing practices is becoming tiring. That said, I don't think that ceasing editing at Barack Obama is necessary, but please be aware of the sanctions that are in existence and save wholesale reverts for blatant vandalism. Cheers, seicer | talk | contribs 04:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC) Request handled by: seicer | talk | contribs 04:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I have left a note directly with the blocking editor suggesting that the block is a mistake and that the editing in question was routine, uncontroversial article patrol. The 3RR report itself is an over-the-top act of wikigaming by a problem editor. Wikidemon (talk) 00:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, Scjessey, as peculiar as this is, to eliminate any possible argument for the ongoing block will you kindly signal that you will not do more than 3 reverts per day on the main page, even unrelated uncontroversial ones, until and unless we clarify per the terms of article probation that this is okay? Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 01:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been away from Misplaced Pages for a few hours, and this block has come as a complete surprise to me. I agree that this is a highly dubious piece of wikigaming, and this is clearly confirmed by the reporting editor's attempt to ensure the block remains - an agenda-based 3RR report, basically. Oh well. No real harm done. -- Scjessey (talk) 01:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Re unblocked

I'm glad you got unblocked. I'm sorry you experienced problems with an autoblock. I hope that my comments, with perhaps an overly-strict interpretation of 3RR enforcement, didn't have too much adverse effect on your ability to edit freely. ☺ Coppertwig (talk) 02:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles

Hello. Due to frequent mentions of you in the evidence for this case, as well as frequent activity in the scope of this case, I added you as a party. If you have evidence of your own,wish to respond to any, or have suggestions for this case, you may post in the appropriate case areas. Wizardman 02:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not that you're being singled out but rather I'm adding parties in gradually as I begin to read the evidence. More will be added as I continue. Wizardman 17:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Presidency of Barack Obama

SCJ,

Regarding your comment here suggesting closing of the new Presidency of Barack Obama thread, if you check around I think you'll see that User:Multiplyperfect was advised to post his question there. Whatever you (we) think of the editor's approach to date, that is a legitimate place to make such a proposal - and having advised him what to do, we as a group should probably let him go ahead and do it without sending mixed signals / left-hand right-hand thing. At least give him a path and chance to edit and good faith. If he takes it, great. If he continues, I think the admins are more than ready for a longer term block. If you're okay with that, would you mind noting that as an update to the comment? I'm here on your page because I personally don't want clutter the talk page with this procedural stuff. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 20:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree, and I think the suggestion was inappropriate for any of the Obama articles (since the matter seems to bear no specific significance to Obama). The pattern is for him to find something bad (anything will do) and then try to get it included in an Obama article, as if it is somehow the president's problem. I'm sorry, but I am not prepared to give this guy any good faith at this point. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It appears this guy has been indefinitely blocked, at last. Normal service has resumed. -- Scjessey (talk) 21:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's moot now. Editors like that aren't a real emergency, not if they're isolated cases. Okay, until next time... Wikidemon (talk) 00:47, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Mediation

Are you opposed to me asking Lady of Shallot or Wikidemon to comment? You can even approve of the message I'll send:

Hi, could I please get your opinion on this topic: . Thank you for your time. ~~~~

Soxwon (talk) 01:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Your 3RR report

Please consider my comments here. Both of you are perpetuating the edit war, and therefore continuing to edit in a disruptive manner will result in either (or both) of you being blocked from editing. Nja 09:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Pink-thunderbolt

I have added a report on User:Pink-thunderbolt at Wikiquette alerts. Since you are also involved in this, I wanted to alert you to this in case you wanted to say anything. --13 17:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009