Misplaced Pages

Directory:
Archives
March 2006 – July 2006 August 2006 – October 2006 November 2006 – April 2007 May 2007 – September 2007 October 2007 – May 2008 May 2008 – July 2009 August 2009 –

User:Mccready violating topic ban

FYI, at AN/I.(section); (diff). You and Vassyana (CC'd) were the blocking admins. Thank you for your efforts back then, and for any you may see fit to undertake now. best regards, Jim Butler (t) 16:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks! FWIW, I did explain my edit at Talk:Acupuncture#My_reasoning.2C_FWIW and explained why I don't think a couple of decent edits should be enough to undo the ban. regards, Jim Butler (t) 08:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Discussion missing

Somehow or other I can't find any discussion in response to my request on the topic ban at AN/I. It seems to have disappeared in other updates (if it's still listed as unresolved should this happen?). I wrote as I promised to do and concluded by suggesting the topic ban be lifted. I said it could be swiftly reinstated if needed, that I had definitely learned a lesson and would respond to community concerns. Could you let me know what's happening. Thanks Mccready (talk) 00:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me for chiming in. (Yes, the discussion was archived.) You've stated in the past that you've learned a lesson. Then this happened. (There have also been episodes of WP:GAME... admin shopping (repeatedly, for block reductions), canvassing, "interesting" IP edits, and posting to AN/I that I'd ignored a message on my talk page that you had posted a mere half hour before.) Sorry if this seems bluntly put... but why should we trust you at this point? Since the sanctions were imposed for a longstanding pattern of poor behavior, why wouldn't a reasonable person ask that you demonstrate the ability, over a fairly sustained period -- as Guy put it -- "to engage properly with those of an opposing point of view"? There are plenty of articles to do that. --Backin72 (n.b.) 13:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like this user wants to defend the acupuncture page and his extreme views rather than improve the project. Despite acknowledging my good edits he has failed to revert his reverts. McCready 123.200.168.233 (talk) 23:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The facts say otherwise:

• Several days ago, I addressed your recent edits at the article's talk page.
• My "extreme views" are completely in line with notable sources such as the WHO and AAMA, according to sources in the article. Anyway, it doesn't matter what my views are if I wear my Misplaced Pages hat, instead of some sort of advocacy hat, when I edit. Which I do, as the record shows. (Compare to your likely COI and other misadventures.)

I won't engage further on this topic unless an admin indicates to me that your sanctions are actually under reconsideration. I believe they were justified, and have no wish to keep arguing. regards, Backin72 (n.b.) 18:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

(undent)JB, you are wrong. (personal information redacted per WP:NPA and WP:VANISH) McCready 123.200.168.196 (talk) 02:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello Mccready. You know perfectly well that my words, on- or off-wiki, have nothing to do with the question I and others have posed: when you say you've learned a lesson, how do we know you can be trusted? I suspect the reason you insinuate stuff about me is because you don't have a satisfactory answer to that simple question. Instead, you seek to portray me as some kind of extremist (which is false equivalence, or more like WP:KETTLE)... and guess who, alone, can save the acupuncture article from said extremism, if only he were taken off the leash....

So, sorry dude, but you're not going to succeed in sliming me with bullshit accusations of COI. Nor are your inaccurate assertions that I don't respond to your edits, or that nobody ever warned you of an indefinite ban, etc. etc., going to fly. Nice tries, but the plain facts contradict you, and all you do by ignoring them is portray yourself as (at best) dense, and (at worst) untrustworthy. None of which advances your cause in the least, of course.

Scientizzle, sorry for the argument here. I shouldn't have responded initially at all; Mccready took it as baiting, whereas I just wanted you to be fully aware that this guy is a bad actor. Still, Mccready seems convinced that I'm his nemesis or something, so his attacks were bound to come out somewhere. Back to our usual programming. Happy editing! -- Backin72 (n.b.) 04:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC) (addenda - 09:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC))

The timing...she is no good

Sorry guys...inclement weather+pending manuscript deadline+upcoming holiday vacation=Scientizzle has to sign off for the rest of the year.

I should be back around the New Year, but I'm not sure exactly when. I hate to leave this dispute unmediated, but I have to. In the meantime, here's a few things:

• McCready, please consider your topic ban still in effect. The fact that your ANI post was generally missed is unfortunate, but we shouldn't consider anything to have substantially changed in this regard.
• That said, upon my return, I'll be willing to work with you in some capacity to get a fair and clear re-evaluation of the topic ban as you wanted. You are, of course, welcome to pursue this in the mean-time without my input (i.e., start a new thread on WP:ANI).
• Please do disengage.

Cheers, — Scientizzle 01:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for Comment on College Football logos

Users opposing the use of College Football team logos being used in articles through out the College Football project have filed a Request for Comment trying to ban use of team logos. As I am sure you know our current standard/system of using logos legitimately with fair use rationales do not violate any wikipedia policy. It would be appreciated if you could take a moment and voice you opinion on the subject here: RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. Thank you in advance and thank you for your contributions to the College Football Project. Rtr10 (talk) 04:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Good break

Trust you had a good break. Can I ask you to focus on this quickly and let me know your decision.Mccready (talk) 04:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Very cold, must type about the Oregon COTW to stay warm

Hello again from WikiProject Oregon’s Collaboration of the Week HQ. Since there was no notice last time, thanks to those who helped improve Mike Riley and Mike Bellotti at the begging of the month and to those who helped create Oregon Department of Justice and Lindsay Applegate last week. Those last two were the red links with lots of links to them from other articles (DOJ was #1). For this week, in honor of Arctic Blast/Winter Storm/Damn its Freakin’ Cold Outside 2008/Storm of the Century/Is there ANYTHING else going on in the world?/We Might Actually Have a White Christmas, we have Snow Bunny. Then as part of the Stub elimination drive, we have state senator Margaret Carter, which could easily be turned into a nice DYK entry once expanded 5X. As always, click here to opt out of these messages, or click here to make a suggestion for a future COTW. Have a Holly Jolly Christmas/Hanukah/ Kwanzaa/Winter Solstice. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas from Promethean

Scientizzle,
I wish you and your family all the best this Christmas and that you also have a Happy and safe new year.
Thankyou for all your contributions to Misplaced Pages this year and I look forward to seeing many more from you in the future.
Your work around Misplaced Pages has not gone un-noticed, this notice is testimony to that
Please feel free to drop by my talkpage any time to say Hi, as I will probably say Hi back :)

All the Best.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk)

Topic ban

Welcome back. I'd be grateful if you could focus on this when you get a chance. If you still have doubts please contact me. My point was and remains that any ban can quickly be reinstated if needed. Thanks. Mccready (talk) 09:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

...I'm not ignoring this. I just haven't been able to give it my full attention. — Scientizzle 17:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you say when? And why would not the option of reinstating with a statement that ban will be reintroduced if necessary not be quick and simple?Mccready (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2009 (UTC)