User talk:JzG - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Heicth (talk | contribs) at 21:39, 13 June 2014 (→Shugden socks: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:39, 13 June 2014 by Heicth (talk | contribs) (→Shugden socks: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Note to admins reviewing any of my admin actions (expand to read).
I am often busy in that "real life" of which you may have read. Blocks are the most serious things we can do: they prevent users from interacting with Misplaced Pages. Block reviews are urgent. Unless I say otherwise in the block message on the user's talk page, I am happy for any uninvolved admin to unblock a user I have blocked, provided that there is good evidence that the problem that caused the block will not be repeated. All I ask is that you leave a courtesy note here and/or on WP:ANI, and that you are open to re-blocking if I believe the problem is not resolved - in other words, you can undo the block, but if I strongly feel that the issue is still live, you re-block and we take it to the admin boards. The same applies in spades to blocks with talk page access revoked. You are free to restore talk page access of a user for whom I have revoked it, unless it's been imposed or restored following debate on the admin boards. User:DGG also has my permission to undelete or unprotect any article I have deleted and/or salted, with the same request to leave a courtesy note, and I'll rarely complain if any uninvolved admin does this either, but there's usually much less urgency about an undeletion so I would prefer to discuss it first - or ask DGG, two heads are always better than one. I may well add others in time, DGG is just one person with whom I frequently interact whose judgment I trust implicitly. Any WP:BLP issue which requires you to undo an admin action of mine, go right ahead, but please post it immediately on WP:AN or WP:ANI for review. The usual definition of uninvolved applies: you're not currently in an argument with me, you're not part of the original dispute or an editor of the affected article... you know. Apply WP:CLUE. Guy (Help!) 20:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Note to admins reviewing any of my admin actions (expand to read).

I am often busy in that "real life" of which you may have read.

Blocks are the most serious things we can do: they prevent users from interacting with Misplaced Pages. Block reviews are urgent. Unless I say otherwise in the block message on the user's talk page, I am happy for any uninvolved admin to unblock a user I have blocked, provided that there is good evidence that the problem that caused the block will not be repeated. All I ask is that you leave a courtesy note here and/or on WP:ANI, and that you are open to re-blocking if I believe the problem is not resolved - in other words, you can undo the block, but if I strongly feel that the issue is still live, you re-block and we take it to the admin boards. The same applies in spades to blocks with talk page access revoked. You are free to restore talk page access of a user for whom I have revoked it, unless it's been imposed or restored following debate on the admin boards.

User:DGG also has my permission to undelete or unprotect any article I have deleted and/or salted, with the same request to leave a courtesy note, and I'll rarely complain if any uninvolved admin does this either, but there's usually much less urgency about an undeletion so I would prefer to discuss it first - or ask DGG, two heads are always better than one. I may well add others in time, DGG is just one person with whom I frequently interact whose judgment I trust implicitly.

Any WP:BLP issue which requires you to undo an admin action of mine, go right ahead, but please post it immediately on WP:AN or WP:ANI for review.

The usual definition of uninvolved applies: you're not currently in an argument with me, you're not part of the original dispute or an editor of the affected article... you know. Apply WP:CLUE. Guy (Help!) 20:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

This user is an administrator on the English Misplaced Pages. (verify)

This editor is a Most Plusquamperfect Looshpah Laureate and is entitled to display this Book of All Knowledge with Secret Appendix and Errata Sheet.

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

This user is a
Rouge admin.

This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 19 years, 4 months, and 30 days.

This user has been an admin for
19 years and 2 days.

This user resists the POV pushing of lunatic charlatans.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140
141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150
151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160
161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170
171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180
181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200
201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210
211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

In science, any compromise between a correct statement and a wrong statement is a wrong statement. Thanks, user:Stephan Schulz.
My activity level is 53mKo (milli-Koavfs).
Sad now. Special:Contributions/Geogre.
My Last.fm profile
vGuyUK on Twitter | SceptiGuy on Twitter

Obligatory disclaimer: I work for Dell Computer but nothing I say or do here is said or done on behalf of Dell. You knew that, right?

PresidentistVB

Re: PresidentistVB (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hi JzG. You mentioned yesterday that PresidentistVB's style seemed...familiar. He's slid further off the rails over his most recent edits, getting more offensive ("60 hours a slave" for a 2.5 day block? Really?) and more bizarre in his explanations (secret breaching experiments for Jimmy Wales and Sue Gardner) and legal theories (blocking him somehow infringes his civil right to comment on talk pages).

Do you have any specific alternate user accounts in mind? The WP:NOTHERE issues are pretty obvious, but I don't know which particular banned user he fits. (And incidentally, with this account he's been pretty transparent about his associated real-life identity—so much so that I'm honestly a bit concerned that this is a joe job to damage the real individual's reputation.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I think he is a crank. His claims in respect of doing work for the foundation are, as far as I can tell, without merit. Whether he's a returning crank or a one-off crank is probably moot: I don't think he'll be around much longer. Guy (Help!) 07:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I certainly didn't find his claims plausible or his reasoning sound; I was just wondering if he reminded you of someone we'd seen before. Cheers. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 10:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

He does, but not so strongly that I would wield the banhammer, and in fact the real world identity is easy enough to trace that he probably is not, in the end, a returning loon. Guy (Help!) 06:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Please see

Please see here.Heicth (talk) 19:02, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Shanker Singham

Hi, I have re-written and updated the page of Shanker Singham to no longer be advertorial. Amarkowitz1 (talk) 19:19, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

False ad hominem attacks

Hi Jzg, your explanation some time ago that I made proposals as a supporter of Sathya Sai Baba to make his sleight of hand tricks seem like miracles is hilariously wrong. Just google my name if you do not believe me. Have a good pentecost if you celebrate it. Andries (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I already realised my error there: I was mixing up my partisans. It remans a fact that you are a partisan and should not be making the edits you do. Guy (Help!) 10:48, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Shugden socks

Please see Bushranger's talk page. He seems a little busy in real life.Heicth (talk) 21:39, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:

Misplaced Pages administrators