Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:13, 25 August 2010

Requested Comment

So, for whatever reason I've been spammed with e-mails via Misplaced Pages from editors who feel the need to give me their two cents and reveal their true feelings toward some people on here, which I probably agree with; and since I've become a wikiCeleb I can only shake my head at some of the people on this website. My block explanation stated "...General disruption against the intent of the project. This block is pending at least a response from the editor about recent behavior." -- Mmm, yeah. I've sure there has been PLENTY of comment about it from me and the entire website, including Jimbo. Also, I'm disappointed to see how Shirik failed to investigate my claim and blame it on "being busy in real life" and then disappear from the conversation entirely. It makes me believe there is a black covert operation here.

Now I will wait and see how long it will take for someone to cry "personal attack"! --A3RO (mailbox) 18:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, check your mail. --A3RO (mailbox) 19:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Problem editing; hold your horses

As I've indicated here, I believe that your over-exuberance is manifesting in disruptive editing. Just a suggestion -- you might want to slow down, and also tone down your inappropriate officious tone concurrently. It would be less disruptive, and more civil. IMHO.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Considering I've only tagged the article I will take your comment on disruptive editing with a grain of salt. I've only commented on your abnormal way to edit an article after its creation, so your comment on civility goes out the window, along with your comment on my tone. You removed the tags without providing an edit summary and I still disagree with the way it's written. Had you provided even a simple comment to my last message that would of been sufficient enough, even though I have every right to express my disgust for it. --A3RO (mailbox) 06:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I've been editing long enough to have my own views as to whether my editing is normal, and whether your editing is disruptive. I'm sure you are brimming with good faith. So your above missive is another sign that you are simply not reading. The bot removed your tags, as inappropriate. I didn't touch them (or, for that matter, even see them before the bot removed them). I've been here long enough, and am familiar with your disagreement w/GeorgeWilliam enough, to know to ignore your disruption, but I would hate to see you drive away newbie editors who are seeking to contribute. Kindly keep your need to boss others around in check. Give article creators a moment to fix up new articles. If you want to look for articles bereft of refs, or look for vandalism, there are better places for you to play to exercise your desires than by visiting your warnings on editors moments into their initial creation.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Who? The invisible bot? Edit conflicts are a problem with erratic, minimal editing. I do not "drive away" anyone... only those who seek to confront. I also have the ability to "be" familiar with someone's past history... it's called the HISTORY tab. Good bye. --A3RO (mailbox) 06:26, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

As I explained to you before, the refserv bot. You have to read others' missives, to benefit from them.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Wow, really? What I saw is what I see. It seems you rushed through it and didn't even other looking at the concerns expressed. It had nothing to do with your references, other than the comment I made about them. --A3RO (mailbox)

Yep. Really.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikiquette alerts

What was this about? WackyWace 06:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hahahaha! --A3RO (mailbox)

WP:ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Salvio 19:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked you after reviewing the report at WP:ANI pending a response from you about your recent behavior. I note that you have been overall unresponsive to the several requests on your recent disruptive behavior and it has persisted for quite some time now. Feel free to contest this block via the normal process. Preferably, however, the community would like at least an acknowledgement of the problems regarding your recent behavior. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

{originally posted on ANI but blocked while in editing made}You got a problem with my votes? There was nothing nonconstructive about it, and for you to consider it disruptive just because I voted against the person does not give you the right to attack it. If you don't like my opinion, I could care honestly less; no where does it say I have to forcefully provide an explanation; and pointing out the fact I have Rollback and Reviewer rights does not provide to your defense; they were obviously given to me for a reason. --A3RO (mailbox) 19:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)}}

Also Shirik, you blocked me within 3 minutes of the notice of the ANI, care to explain yourself. The allegations, as admitted by yourself, were contestable and pre-mature and does not warrant a block. I could follow the process or you could unblock me and give me the chance to respond before you go blocking as a way controlling the situation. --A3RO (mailbox) 19:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

This is not just about your RFA votes. Comments like these are certainly not constructive, and responding with this when it is brought back to you is equally unconstructive. I did not block you because of a "lack of response at ANI". You can most certainly discuss the issue here. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:48, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

What in the world are you talking about? You blocked me before even posting a response, that was obviously pre-mature. Second, disruptive in what way? The fact I voted the way I did? Your accusations are broad... "intent of the project?" -- how does me voting on an RfA disrupt the intent of the project? Baseless. I'm not going to suck up like everyone else; If I don't like it, then I don't like it. Simple enough. --A3RO (mailbox) 19:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

You don't have to like everyone or suck up to everyone. You do have to remain civil. Businesses make complex decisions all the time, and not everyone agrees with each other, but if you were to make comments like the ones you're making you'd be fired in a heartbeat. The ANI post fairly clearly identifies some problematic examples. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm failing to see the contrast in that example; The edits given to you were clearly posted as comments or opposition votes -- I was asked, not forced, to provide an explanation, I gave it, once or twice, and then moved on. Where does it say I have to explain myself on my decision. You have to analyze it from both views; to me, it seems like they only considered it disruptive because I did not agree with them or failed to give a reason, both of which I am not required to. I know how to disagree and remain civil... none of the comments were directed at anyone specifically, only the nominee. Misplaced Pages is not censored so why is there reason to censor myself? --A3RO (mailbox) 20:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Retracted unblock request, please continue the discussion here. --A3RO (mailbox) 20:24, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I retracted my unblock request. Shirik, please check your e-mail. I have sent you a message to your address via Misplaced Pages. Please read it. --A3RO (mailbox) 20:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I've removed your rollback and reviewers rights. Perhaps you can use the period of your block to reassess your participation in the project. If you come back in a week full of new-found enthusiasm for our goals, it will be easy enough to regain the community's trust and reapply for them. Best wishes, --John (talk) 20:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

And I've removed the icons from this and your userpage. I also removed the part of your userpage that said "F*#$ OFF!" because that's counterproductive to the project, its users, and is inappropriate for a userpage. I strongly advise that you change your editnotice when unblocked as well. —fetch·comms 21:52, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Just for note, I have received your email. I do have a job as well and haven't been able to get a chance to read it in detail, but I just wanted you to be aware that I have received it and do intend to read it and act in whatever manner is appropriate. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 00:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Ok. --A3RO (mailbox) 02:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Trying to cheer you up....

A3RO, do not be mad. It is easy to be mad because you can point to an instance where you have been wronged. You cast a "oppose" view and did not give a reason. Yet others give a support of often do not give a reason. Furthermore, some oppose many RFAs, including a Kurt Weber, who was blocked for opposing nearly all RFAs. You have been wronged and may be mad. But wait....

Furthermore, an ANI complaint was lodged against you causing people to attack you and call for your ban. Again, you have been wronged. But wait...

However, do not stop there. Also look at your edits where an objective person could probably conclude that your edits are not that productive (see a paper encyclopedia and compare your edits with them). Also see some examples of incivility.

So while you might be __% right (say 15% for the sake of argument), please don't overlook the other percentage. You may even argue that 1 week is too long but, as in life, don't harp on the other bad people but look to do good yourself. Try to take the positive (that you are able to recognize what a good edit is) and do positive things.

When I was 5 years old, one boy started crying. Another boy also started crying. The teacher asked the second boy why he was crying. He said because the first boy was. Since you are blocked and may feel sad, I will be with you and pretend I am blocked tomorrow for at least 24 hours, if that makes you feel better. (I take a wikibreak every month to insure good mental health) Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 17:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I am pretending that I am the administrator who blocked Suomi Finland 2009. Please, Suomi, clean up your act and stop causing problems here. Thank you. Keepscases (talk) 17:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

This message was intended to reduce the animosities between the user and the community. I sorry that you think it is causing problems. In real life, criminals often feel they are right because there is a little part that they are correct. Once, I saw a policeman bang a guy on the head with a flashlight. If the guy was a burglar, he was wrong. However, he might point to the 5% of the situation that he was right (being a victim and banged on the head). So he might sit in jail and harp on how he had been wronged. I attempt to avoid this by explaining things. Sorry if you feel this way, Keepscases. From what I know about you, you are 99.99% good but not right in saying I case problems. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 17:13, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want a constructive task, you can help me next week re-do the Rouen article. The more you learn about Rouen, the more interesting it is. It is a gem of an article just waiting to be re-written. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 17:26, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea what in the world you guys are talking about... anyways, I'm still waiting for any checkuser to verify my claims I made to Shirik, but he's being unresponsive, so any checkuser or bureaucrat willing to e-mail me and ask, I'd be willing to share 'cause I wont do it on here(yet...) - Hell, if you can get Jimbo to do it, that would be easier. --A3RO (mailbox) 01:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I've emailed you. –xeno 03:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I've replied but I really need a checkuser to e-mail me so I can give them the information, I can't do it here 'cause everyone will see it. --A3RO (mailbox) 13:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

See Special:Listusers/checkuser. –xeno 13:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Your user page

I removed all the words from your user page it is not appropriate for a user page. I would suggest changing your tone towards wikipedia ALOT. Inka 888 (talk) 02:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

I suggest you learn proper grammar. Undo anything on my user page and the edit will be reverted as vandalism next time. --A3RO (mailbox) 19:41, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

A3RO (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thanks.

Decline reason:

You haven't provided any reason why you should be unblocked early. I read through the discussion above and don't see anything there, either. TNXMan 3:02 pm, Today (UTC−5)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

A3RO (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Requesting unblock; User:Tnxman307 did not do enough investigating, simply reading a user's talk page should not limit the conversation; Also, I do not think he is fit to review my block seeing has he is under scrutiny himself as per his talk page. Read the ANI regarding me. Thanks

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Misplaced Pages, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Smashville 15:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Which ANI posting? I do not see a discussion on the current page and you have not provided a link to any previous discussion. Also, your previous unblock request said "Thanks.". There was nothing to investigate. I would be happy to review a more detailed request demonstrating why your block should be lifted early. TNXMan 03:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I was about to ask the same question. Noone will unblock you if you don't put up somekind of reasoning/ Spartaz 03:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm kinda dealing with a talk page stalker, I will look for the diffs but give me a few while I take care of this kid. --A3RO (mailbox) 03:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Opps, the original request was not posted fully. I copied and pasted it and it only got the "Thanks part" -- It was suppose to say "In regards to the ANI discussion and vote. Please read. Thanks." -- Anyhow, the discussion from the ANI posts spoke volumes but the results were hung; with some people on my side and others in support. --A3RO (mailbox) 04:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

In other words, you were asking another admin to overturn an ANI decision? No, no admin can ever do that - you need to provide new reasonings, as that would violate consensus. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:50, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

No? I honestly can't put the entire discussion posted on the ANI because it was so long, but whoever(can't remember who) took away my rights despite the fact I didn't abuse them. This made no sense and others agreed. I am requesting the unblock to get those rights back. --A3RO (mailbox) 22:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

User Page

Inka 888, Your edit was removed as vandalism, if you continue to edit then you will be blocked. --A3RO (mailbox) 01:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

(P.S.) You've been on Misplaced Pages for a month. I know a lot more than you do, so I suggest you stop and buzz off already. --A3RO (mailbox) 01:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

You have already been warned. Now you are just disrupting my talk page just to prove a meaningless point, which you probably have no idea what you are saying -- User pages are not subject to your liking nor your approval. You are coming dangerously close to being blocked. You are very lucky the edits on my user page are NOT being reverted as vandalism, as I requested, because you are no longer practicing good faith. You were templated for the '3RR' despite the fact that this rule applies directly to content and since my user page has nothing to do with you and wither you like it or not, you are doing nothing more than vandalizing it. You really have no idea what you are saying when it comes to this -- Trolling? Do you even know what that even means? Seems to me you are just spitting out words to make yourself look like you know what you're saying when you really don't. Come back in a couple of years. Thanks. --A3RO (mailbox) 04:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

... and he has been further warned accordingly. I'll keep an eye on both his talkpage, and on your userpage for future similar issues. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

If this user returns with the same behavior as the one that started this block, I'd suggest an indefinite block. /HeyMid (contributions) 17:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Hey Mid, this users previous and current behavior and attitude is disruptive and is a disadvantage to the whole community. Mlpearc powwow 18:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

you are trying to elicit a response when you put that stuff on your user page and that would remotely classify you as a internet troll. i talked to some other users about it and it and they said it was just inmature. But i would still recomend changing your tone towards wikipedia. Inka 00:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Internet troll? Your unbearable grammar is hard enough but rambling on about something you don't really know and yet continuing to defend a pointless point makes you look even smaller than what you appear; I highly doubt you will last long here. End of discussion. I will not be bothered with you anymore. --A3RO (mailbox) 02:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to ignore that last comment preceding this one in that revert 'cause you were just blocked as well. --A3RO (mailbox) 18:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Warning

If you say any of that stuff again, I am advocating an indefinite block of your account to the arbitration committee (which are all checkusers, by the way) per this and this. I have not violated any policy which I am sure Xeno has told you and which I have told you many many months ago. Enough of your dramatics. Tommy! 20:37, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

A Facebook profile is not private. --A3RO (mailbox) 21:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Not my fault you were obsessed with me. --A3RO (mailbox) 21:46, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

• If you violate the WP:OUTING policy again, I will block you indefinitely without talk page access. –xeno 21:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I will open a sockpuppet case then, that's policy. Xeno, you e-mail him our discussion and you are over-stepping your duties as a 'crat. A RfC is needed before you continue with this. --A3RO (mailbox) 21:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

If you have concerns, I would suggest you email arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org rather than initiating anything on-wiki.

I have not and will not email anyone our discussion without your express permission, I consider emails confidential. –xeno 21:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, you just lied to my face. YOU DELETED THE REVISION! How in the world would he be able to see what I posted if you deleted it?! His comment was posted substantially after the revision was deleted and the time stamp from when you e-mailed me. --A3RO (mailbox) 22:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:Popups + watchlists. Your edits were live for 9, 3, and 2 minutes, respectively. –xeno 22:07, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I deleted your SPI page. Send an email to ArbCom or drop the issue entirely. ArbCom already knows some information about this, so they might be able to fill you in if they choose to do. NW (Talk) 22:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocked

You've now been blocked. Again. This time I've placed an indefinite block. You were explicitly told not to violate WP:OUTING and you ignored that warning. This is repetitive harassment. If you wish to appeal this block, you should take it to arbcom appeals. Thanks, Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:06, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

A3RO (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Xeno, you deleted my SPI request? You are deleting everything unfairly. This is abuse. The ArbCom request was legit, you are just merely protecting him. Shirik, you come trolling back to my user page with a block despite my attempts to contact you both on here and in e-mail. You are not justified to be an admin. You are just merely talk page stalking and waiting for a moment to strike. The conversation was not between you.

Decline reason:

using unblock template to continue to rant and attack. No request to unblock or reasons given. James (T C) 22:20, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I told you to take your concerns to ArbCom privately rather than post anything onwiki. Why didn't you take my advice? –xeno 22:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I responded to your email indicating I would deal with it in whatever manner was appropriate. What actions I take with regards to your email are not of your concern. I did not ignore it, you simply did not see any action, nor should you have. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

• As user continued to violate the harassment policy, I've revoked their talk page access. Unblock request may heard by the ban appeals subcommittee, as the Arbitration Committee is aware of the background. –xeno 22:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

to confirm you can start a sock puppet account no one's going to stop you but if you continue to violate WP:OUTING your sock puppet will be blocked as well Inka 02:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC)