HJ Mitchell (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
:::::::::Well, let's just say that if there is many more fire lighting and vindictive, trolling behavior from the so called Gender Gap people, then they are going to find that I most certainly am not a member of the fire brigade. So far, I have stayed well away from them, observing them from a distance, but many editors here have had quite enough of their ridiculous claims and attempts to pervert people words (have we forgotten the ridiculous, trolling "''F------ victim''" affair already? These people must be barking mad if they think the rest of us are so easily fooled by such paranoid rubbish. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:Giano|<font color="blue">Giano</font>]]</span> [[User talk:Giano|'''(talk)''']] 16:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC) |
:::::::::Well, let's just say that if there is many more fire lighting and vindictive, trolling behavior from the so called Gender Gap people, then they are going to find that I most certainly am not a member of the fire brigade. So far, I have stayed well away from them, observing them from a distance, but many editors here have had quite enough of their ridiculous claims and attempts to pervert people words (have we forgotten the ridiculous, trolling "''F------ victim''" affair already? These people must be barking mad if they think the rest of us are so easily fooled by such paranoid rubbish. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:Giano|<font color="blue">Giano</font>]]</span> [[User talk:Giano|'''(talk)''']] 16:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
::::::::::Or you could just leave them to it. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''HJ Mitchell'''</font>]] | [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]] 17:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC) |
::::::::::Or you could just leave them to it. [[User:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Teal" face="Tahoma">'''HJ Mitchell'''</font>]] | [[User talk:HJ Mitchell|<font color="Navy" face= "Times New Roman">Penny for your thoughts? </font>]] 17:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC) |
||
:::::::::::Are you suggesting that we should all sit back and let these people drive and persecute valuable editors from the project - a crime that, with less evidence, is often leveled against [[User: Eric Corbett|Eric Corbett]]? I'm sorry HJ, I know you are one of the good guys, but we can't let one group of self-appointed and self-opinionated editors walk all over us. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">[[User:Giano|<font color="blue">Giano</font>]]</span> [[User talk:Giano|'''(talk)''']] 17:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== User:HJ Mitehell == |
== User:HJ Mitehell == |
Revision as of 17:38, 8 February 2015
This talk page is archived regularly by a bot so I can focus on the freshest discussions. If your thread was archived but you had more to say, feel free to rescue it from the archive.
UTRS Appeal 12952
HJ - I am having trouble figuring this issue out. I read the pages this user was supposedly disrupting and I see what appear to be constructive edits. I reviewed the SPI and the CU data appears to cleanse the user. Could you give more insight because I'm not seeing how this user qualifies as a NOTHERE. URL is https://utrs.wmflabs.org/appeal.php?id=12952. Thanks.--v/r - TP 03:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- @TParis: I can't access that, but I've requested a UTRS account because I've been thinking about getting involved in that for a while. Am I likely to be approved in a reasonable timeframe to handle that appeal? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- The two most active tool admins (that I know of) are TParis and DeltaQuad. I know I personally needed help setting up (the exclamation mark was messing things up). And even if you don't participate actively, I think it is worth it for most admins to at least have access to viewing UTRS tickets. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm perfectly aware, as you know, of the Ryulong trolls that sprung into action recently, but this one seems like it might genuinely be an innocent caught in a crossfire -- he is a productive editor over on Commons. Do you object to unblocking and seeing what happens? ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 05:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- No, go for it. If they've appealed to UTRS it suggests it wasn't a throwaway account, so I've no objection to giving them some rope. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:58, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- DarknessSavior, Fidsah, Cactusjackbangbang (which is the appeal TParis asked about just above), FlossumPossum all appealed to UTRS, FYI. They're neither socks nor throwaway accounts per se, just dormant accounts of Reddit (mostly) people who resurrected them for their own nefarious purposes. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, they've had a time-out, so to speak, and the dust is beginning to settle from Ryulong's ban, so there shouldn't be too much danger in unblocking. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:15, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- DarknessSavior, Fidsah, Cactusjackbangbang (which is the appeal TParis asked about just above), FlossumPossum all appealed to UTRS, FYI. They're neither socks nor throwaway accounts per se, just dormant accounts of Reddit (mostly) people who resurrected them for their own nefarious purposes. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 14:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
UTRS Account Request
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?
Michelle Kim
Hey. I'd like to use the Michelle Kim page to create a redirect (to a Neighbours character), but it appears to be protected. Is it possible to have the protection removed? - JuneGloom07 Talk 16:17, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Sure. It's been salted for two and a half years, so it's reasonable to assume that the issues have gone away (and worst-case scenario, I can always protect the redirect). :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for that! - JuneGloom07 Talk 20:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Request for advice
Hi,
Im hoping you could provide some advice on what I might want to look at next. I have done (what I consider) a fair chunk of anti-vandal new page and recent change patrolling as well as being willing to throw my oar in at WP:ANWP:ANI and WP:ANEW where I think my two cents might be useful or where i can deal with and clear up some mess. I dont have a creative bone anywhere in my body so am looking for other areas I might be useful in. As you seem to have a pretty honest and level headed approach around here your advice would be appreciated. Amortias (T)(C) 22:47, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm. I'm always dubious about the value of getting heavily involved at the drama boards. I know anti-vandal can be monotonous, but it's important work—the admin corps isn't big enough to be everywhere all the time, so we rely on patrollers to tell us where the tools can be most useful. Have you tried using some of the automated tools like Huggle or STiki? But if you're looking for something new to do, have you done any reporting to WP:UAA? That's another area where the admins would be quickly overwhelmed if it weren't for the efforts of patrollers; essentially you're looking for obviously offensive usernames, vandals with mildly offensive/disruptive usernames, and usernames that represent companies/organisations, especially if they're editing in connection with (or spamming on behalf of) the company. When WP:RFPP is heavily backlogged, a well-considered non-admin comment on some of the more complicated requests can make a big difference to the admin trying to clear the backlog. Or, if you feel you're good at patiently replying to questions, OTRS is always looking for more help. If you're technically inclined, the edit filter people might appreciate an extra pair of hands. DYK could always use more reviewers, the folks at ITN should appreciate well-considered comments, the Signpost is looking for new blood, and there are always article needing categories/references/copy-editing/formatting. The work never ends! ;) Any of that sound interesting to you? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:43, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I dont mind the anti-vandal work and can see that its quite a useful place to be involved in.
- I've tried Huggle and Stiki but im much more a hands on person and prefer finding the more sneaky things they dont always pick up on.
- I report to WP:UAA when im patrolling new pages or the abuse log so ick thos up i the course of what I do now. I can pick up some slack from there pulling out the bad bot reports. OTRS might be a good palce to start as my work involves handling queries and complaints when they havent ben able to be dealt with over the normal channels. I'll have a look over there. Thanks. Amortias (T)(C) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Hot-blooded, check it and see.
Hi HJ, if you're around, could I get you to take a look at these edits. The user Barbaro is a bit quick-tempered and I've had to revert some of their stuff and warn them about personal attacks. A different user, JustPlaneEditing came by and reverted an edit of Barbaro's that was a few days old, escalating my warning from L2 to L4 for what was essentially the same spate of problematic edits. I tried to contact JustPlaneEditing to explain this in a friendly way and to suggest they remove the bitey warning, but Barbaro saw the warning and came back with more heat. Though I would normally be tempted to drop an L4 on Barbaro for NPA at this point, I wonder if maybe some input from an uninvolved party might help quench the fire. I'm hopeful anyway. I'm not asking for admin intervention so much as I am asking for friendly intervention from an admin, since my participation again might not be well received. Noticing JustPlane's talk page history, I wonder if this biteyness is becoming a problem with them as well. Anyhow, Thanks in advance! (I say as I drop this in your lap and run away as fast as I can...) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:55, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm rarely about at 02:55 (and when I am, I really shouldn't be!), but it seems Bishonen has sorted it out by blocking one party and giving the other a bollocking Britishism for "robust verbal chastisement"!. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:50, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm, I probably should have looked at the little clock icon that appears in on your talk page edit window. Too bad about this one. I tried! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:12, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you
I myself may have been an anon, but I've been keeping his childish antics at bay, and notified a user in order to get word to an admin to take action against a vandal-like user. Thanks for your assistance. 70.45.65.243 (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome. That guy was clearly just out to make a nuisance of himself. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:24, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Xander756
This user is requesting an unblock in UTRS appeal #13126 to allow them to edit under the restrictions of their topic ban. It's now a community/Arbcom action so I cannot do it unilaterally.--v/r - TP 18:36, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- No. Sorry. He egregiously violated BLP, edit-warred to restore it, got blocked for it, came back and personally attacked the admin who blocked him then repeated his BLP violation on the admin noticeboard. I'll try not to hold it against him that he grossly misrepresented the reason for the block off-wiki, but his UTRS request suggests he's as intransigent as ever and still misunderstands or misinterprets the reason for the block, and he wants to go and edit a BLP (albeit in a different topic area). I'm not willing to unblock him and—unusually for me—would oppose any other admin doing so at this time. He needs to show some sort of comprehension of the problem with his edits, and understand that he must follow policy, even if he disagrees with it, and must not use Wikipedia to libel people, even if he disagrees with them. Clearly he doesn't. And considering the dust is only just settling from the arbitration case, I think it's premature to be considering unblocking people who were indef'd during the height of the disruption. Three months (from the original block, so another two months from now) and an understanding of what got him blocked in a first place and I'd seriously consider it. In fact, as a gesture of good faith, I'll alter the expiry to 7 April 2015, which is three months from the date of the original block, and I'll give him back his talk page access; iff he shows he understands that personal attacks and BLP violations are unacceptable (and that that's what he did) and gives assurances that he won't do anything like that again. I suggest he appeals to ArbCom if he disagrees with me, but I think that's a good offer, and probably better than the offer he'd get from ArbCom. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Also, @TParis: would you mind kicking UTRS appeal #12952 over to me? I'm sympathetic to the idea of an unblock, but I'd like to ask a few questions first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I've released that appeal. I sent the Xander one to BASC.--v/r - TP 21:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, TP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I've released that appeal. I sent the Xander one to BASC.--v/r - TP 21:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Also, @TParis: would you mind kicking UTRS appeal #12952 over to me? I'm sympathetic to the idea of an unblock, but I'd like to ask a few questions first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)I have to 100% agree with HJ here, the editor definitely still does not understand BLP policy, or doesn't care. He is still claiming that making unsubstantiated accusations against living persons is fine, and that editing Talk or Wiki pages with the same accusations isn't against policies. Dave Dial (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Dave, is he still going on about this off-wiki? I rarely venture over to Twitter (heat:light). If he's still misrepresenting the reason for the block while simultaneously requesting to be unblocked, that makes me much less inclined to offer conciliatory gestures. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- He's mentioned it within the past week or so. Still claiming he never edited a GG article. To him, as long as he never edited the specific Gamergate controversy article, then the Talk page, Zoe Quinn(and Talk), Anita Sarkeesian(and Talk), etc. don't count. I've tried to explain a couple times, but he's either not understanding or refusing to understand. Perhaps if Tom explained specifics it would go over better, since he is uninvolved. But I doubt it. Dave Dial (talk) 20:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Looking at his Talk page though, the specifics for the ArbCom restrictions are pretty well laid out. There is no getting around that. If he's read that and understands it applies to Talk pages etc.., then your suggestion may be best. Dave Dial (talk) 20:20, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, once the dust has settled it should be less of a problem, but he needs to grasp that BLP and NPA are non-negotiable first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Dave, is he still going on about this off-wiki? I rarely venture over to Twitter (heat:light). If he's still misrepresenting the reason for the block while simultaneously requesting to be unblocked, that makes me much less inclined to offer conciliatory gestures. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Don't try to hush things up
If the gender gap task force want a fight they can have one, no matter how many Admins attempt to revert and hush things up. I have kept very quiet up until now, but many here are sick to death of them and their Gestapo like posturing. Giano (talk) 21:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Would you like to know what I'm sick to death of? I'm sick of people starting petty feuds all over the wiki, and I'm sick of people who should know better fanning the flames. Why can't everyone just leave each other the fuck alone and get back to writing the encyclopaedia? I'd much rather interact with you and Eric and Lightbreather at FAC, where the result is something that people actually give a shit about, than at AE or the drama boards where admins have to waste inordinate amounts of time putting out the fires that people insist on starting. And if you really feel the need to insult Gamaliel, do it on his talk page, were can insult you back if he's so inclined, rather than in a closed thread at AE. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:55, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have fanned no flames at all until this evening, when I became totally sick to death of this ridiculous persecution of Eric Corbett, by a group of self-appointed feminists who would not know the meaning of the word feminism if it jumped and bit them on their over-rested behinds; and what's more if it comes to fanning flames, I suggest you look to the top of the Wikipedia tree, not amongst us twigs at the bottom. Giano (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- That you personally haven't been fanning the flames previously does not mean that fires haven't been needlessly started, nor that flames haven't been needlessly fanned. This weaponisation of gender issues by parties on both sides is really quite tiring. Imagine how much nicer Wikipedia would be if everyone just focused on writing the encyclopaedia, and we could have intelligent discussions about the issues that affect that (which include under-representation of women in the editor base), regardless of which set of genitals we were born with. Wouldn't that be so much more enjoyable for all concerned? So why not work towards peace and harmony? And then if other editors don't share your pacifism, it becomes very clear to outside observers hat the problem is with them and not with you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- As closer, consider moving Giano's comment on the ARBCOM request page out of the admin section, please. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 23:34, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I considered it when I saw it. I decided that closing the thread before the discussion deteriorated further (regardless of who posted in what section) was preferable to procedure for its own sake. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, let's just say that if there is many more fire lighting and vindictive, trolling behavior from the so called Gender Gap people, then they are going to find that I most certainly am not a member of the fire brigade. So far, I have stayed well away from them, observing them from a distance, but many editors here have had quite enough of their ridiculous claims and attempts to pervert people words (have we forgotten the ridiculous, trolling "F------ victim" affair already? These people must be barking mad if they think the rest of us are so easily fooled by such paranoid rubbish. Giano (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Or you could just leave them to it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that we should all sit back and let these people drive and persecute valuable editors from the project - a crime that, with less evidence, is often leveled against Eric Corbett? I'm sorry HJ, I know you are one of the good guys, but we can't let one group of self-appointed and self-opinionated editors walk all over us. Giano (talk) 17:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Or you could just leave them to it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, let's just say that if there is many more fire lighting and vindictive, trolling behavior from the so called Gender Gap people, then they are going to find that I most certainly am not a member of the fire brigade. So far, I have stayed well away from them, observing them from a distance, but many editors here have had quite enough of their ridiculous claims and attempts to pervert people words (have we forgotten the ridiculous, trolling "F------ victim" affair already? These people must be barking mad if they think the rest of us are so easily fooled by such paranoid rubbish. Giano (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- I considered it when I saw it. I decided that closing the thread before the discussion deteriorated further (regardless of who posted in what section) was preferable to procedure for its own sake. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:40, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- As closer, consider moving Giano's comment on the ARBCOM request page out of the admin section, please. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 23:34, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- That you personally haven't been fanning the flames previously does not mean that fires haven't been needlessly started, nor that flames haven't been needlessly fanned. This weaponisation of gender issues by parties on both sides is really quite tiring. Imagine how much nicer Wikipedia would be if everyone just focused on writing the encyclopaedia, and we could have intelligent discussions about the issues that affect that (which include under-representation of women in the editor base), regardless of which set of genitals we were born with. Wouldn't that be so much more enjoyable for all concerned? So why not work towards peace and harmony? And then if other editors don't share your pacifism, it becomes very clear to outside observers hat the problem is with them and not with you. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have fanned no flames at all until this evening, when I became totally sick to death of this ridiculous persecution of Eric Corbett, by a group of self-appointed feminists who would not know the meaning of the word feminism if it jumped and bit them on their over-rested behinds; and what's more if it comes to fanning flames, I suggest you look to the top of the Wikipedia tree, not amongst us twigs at the bottom. Giano (talk) 22:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
User:HJ Mitehell
It appears you've attracted an impersonator. Care to do the honors and block him? Everymorning talk 23:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Everymorning: Thanks for that. I needed a good laugh! As impostors go, that's actually quite a good one. The list of potential culprits, though, is worryingly long. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Request for your assessment of discussion
User:HJ Mitchell, Hi! There is currently a discussion on Talk:Flood myth, in the sub-section entitled, "Suggested Sub-Section," in which there is some talk between editors about whether or not the current article is balanced, or shows "neutrality" about the Flood at the time of Noah. Can I please ask your advice about how I should proceed in reaching a consensus about the need for a more balanced article? Any advice will be appreciated by me. Davidbena (talk) 12:04, 8 February 2015 (UTC)