Basket of Puppies (talk | contribs) →Blocked (again): will not edit until matter closed |
KnightLago (talk | contribs) →Blocked (again): reply |
||
Line 156: | Line 156: | ||
*Please note, until this matter is resolved I will not continue to edit Wikipedia. I sincerely wish I could simply continue to edit articles, but it may seem best to avoid any further editing until this ends. I really wish this drama didn't exist. [[User:Basket of Puppies|<font color="brown" size="2" face="Constantia">'''Basket of Puppies'''</font>]] 02:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC) |
*Please note, until this matter is resolved I will not continue to edit Wikipedia. I sincerely wish I could simply continue to edit articles, but it may seem best to avoid any further editing until this ends. I really wish this drama didn't exist. [[User:Basket of Puppies|<font color="brown" size="2" face="Constantia">'''Basket of Puppies'''</font>]] 02:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
::My unblock was on behalf of the committee. We are actively working on sorting this matter out. I am sorry I did not post here sooner. I was called away immediately after unblocking, and when I returned Carcharoth had already left a note. [[User:KnightLago|KnightLago]] ([[User talk:KnightLago|talk]]) 03:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:30, 4 January 2010
|
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Article "Julia Lindsey"
Hi Basket of Puppies,
I saw that you tagged the article Julia Snyder out of suspicion of plagiarism. Though I consulted in some sources for some of the information to verify the information, I wrote all of it from my own memory. How would you recommend citing the sources?
I'd appreciate your feedback. Thank you!
Regards, A-Supreme —Preceding unsigned comment added by A-Supreme (talk • contribs) 08:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Article "Brown Aryan Race"
Dear Wikipedia user,
I have created this article for more interested history readers to be aware of scholarly thoughts on the topic of Indo-European origins.
It in no way promotes any sort of racism but merely attempts to examine the question of Indo-European origins, and gives an alternative view to the Nordic/Nazi Aryan Race theories.
- Graphic Diagram—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicogsu (talk • contribs) date
RfC Invitation
Within the past month or so, you appear to have commented on at least one AN/I, RS/N, or BLP/N thread involving the use of the term "Saint Pancake" in the Rachel Corrie article. As of May 24th, 2009, an RfC has been open at Talk:Rachel_Corrie#Request_for_Comments_on_the_inclusion_of_Saint_Pancake for over a week. As editors who have previously commented on at least one aspect of the dispute, your further participation is welcome and encouraged. Jclemens (talk) 23:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Copyedit
Finished the copy edit, check it and make sure it's fine :) NativeForeigner (talk) 20:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- Native, thank you! Your copyedits are terrific! Basket of Puppies 21:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
- Just yell if you need anything else, and thanks! Hopefully it'll get reviewed for GA and pass, it's pretty close. I can see it becoming featured potentially. NativeForeigner (talk) 21:25, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
in need of a pdf?
I have the full text pdf (I think) downloaded onto my hard drive. I daren't upload it cuz I'm not sure if it's free (as in freedom) content or not. It's 446 KB, correct? John Riemann Soong (talk) 19:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
- JRS, that would be hugely helpful! Can you email it to me? basketofpuppieswiki@gmail.com Thanks!!! Basket of Puppies 19:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion moved from WP:RDS
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request#Klippel-Feil syndrome (Clin Orthop Relat Res) - Full article access Nil Einne (talk) 20:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations!
Hey BoP, I just wanted to stop by and say congratulations on the GA pass on Spontaneous cerebrospinal fluid leak -- I know you did a ton of work on it. Great job. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 05:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
- I AM BLUSHING! Thanks, Shirik! There is still some work to do before I apply for FAC. Gonna roll up my sleeves and keep on workin! Basket of Puppies 05:53, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Giropay candidate for speedy deletion?
Hello BoP, I'm the creator of the new article about Giropay and I would like to know why do you think that article meets Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion. Of course, it's true that this very first version of that article is just a modified version of the article about iDEAL but I didn't think this would be a real problem for the very first version of it, especially since (technically) both payment systems are extremely similar. By the way, English isn't my native language (I'm German) and I'm not so sure that my English skills really are good enough for the English Wikipedia. Anyhow, I did want to write an article about Giropay which has a significant market share in Germany. Of course, it is limited to that country, but the same applies to iDEAL, so what is the difference? There is of course one problem with my version of that article: all sources are in German, but it is not so easy to find REALLY GOOD english sources about that system. Are these acceptable? I'm not sure...
- http://www.viaden.com/products/giropay.html
- http://www1.netbanx.com/content/en/giropay_payments.htm
- http://www.paymentsnews.com/2006/02/giropay_launche.html
- http://thebankwatch.com/2006/02/24/paypal-join-giropay-in-germany/
- http://www.pago.de/Acceptance-of-giropay.3149.0.html
And no, I'm not an employee or shareholder of that company. I'm even no costumer until now, but many Germans are and I think it makes therefore sense to write an article about it in the English Wikipedia. I hope you will answer my question. Mintaru (talk) 20:09, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Dear Mintaru, I suggest you look at the following Wikipedia policies of WP:RS, WP:N and WP:V. Also have a look at WP:NPOV. Basically, you needs good news coverage to prove the company is notable. If you can insert those references into the article then it might be able to pass the notability test. I hope this helps. Basket of Puppies 20:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
WikiBirthday
I saw from here that it's been exactly one year since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 23:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- THANK YOU!!!!! Basket of Puppies 00:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
PROD removed from Basket of Puppies
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Basket of Puppies, which you proposed for deletion. I am leaving this message here to notify you about it. Prod is only for articles; Basket of Puppies is a redirect. This appears to reference a joke made by Anthrax (band). You may wish to try WP:RFD. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to it. Thanks! Cnilep (talk) 22:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- Gotchya! I've listed it for RFD discussion. Basket of Puppies 00:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
A. E. Goonesinha
An article I authored bearing the above title was nominated for speedy deletion and was eventually deleted, for unambiguous copyright infringement. I have now modified it and want to add again to wiki. Since it's mentioned that I must inform you before that; I'd like to ask if it's ok for me to go ahead with it. Thanks. Gihaned (talk) 06:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Michael Sterling (entertainer)
I have updated article with sources/references/Discography and listed the 2 billboard hits he wrote/composed. Can you please consider removing your nomination for deletion.Msmayer (talk) 19:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I appreciate your improvements, but the sources do not establish notability. They only mention him in passing. Basket of Puppies 19:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Blocked (again)
I've re-blocked you. I apologize in advance for the stress that this will likely cause you, but I'll try to explain my logic here.
From our page on the right to vanish:
What vanishing is not
The right to vanish is only available to users who are also exercising their right to leave. The "right to vanish" is not a "right to a fresh start" under a new identity. Vanishing means that the individual is vanishing, not just the account. Vanished users have no right to silently return under a new identity. [emphasis in the original]
You previously exercised your right to vanish, but then decided to return to editing. This is unacceptable behavior.
You also ran for adminship (twice) (cf. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Basket of Puppies and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Basket of Puppies 2), and in both cases, you had the opportunity to disclose your previous (somewhat controversial) editing on the English Wikipedia, but didn't.
From Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Basket of Puppies:
I have only with Wikipedia since Jan 1, 2009. Certainly that isn't a huge amount of time but since I've come on board I like to think I've made some contributions.
This is patently untrue.
- You say you've been editing for a year, but only joined in January. Would I be correct in assuming you edited under an IP address for three or four months before registering this account name? ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 02:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- January is close enough to a year AFAIC. Prodego talk 02:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Nearly a year, but yes I did edit as an IP for a month or so before realizing I could sign up and fully participate. :) Basket of Puppies 02:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Again, this is a patently false representation of reality. You realized you could "sign up and fully participate" months or years ago.
From Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Basket of Puppies 2:
- Basket of Puppies: Going by the information you supplied in the Discussion section in your 1st RfA, you confirmed you began editing with your account on 1st January 2009 but subsequently explained away your nom statement of having edited for "nearly a year" by agreeing that you did so as an IP for "a month or so" beforehand. That would take us to late 2008. There is no evidence that you edited earlier than this. On 14 May 2009 you awarded yourself, upon your user page, the Journeyman's Award, which requires 6 months editing and 1,000 edits. At that time, your edit count was less than 800. Two months later, on 21 July, you replaced this with the extant Experienced and Established Editor Award, which requires 6,000 edits and one and a half years' service. An explanation, please? Plutonium27 (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
- Plutonium27, it was a complete and total mistake on my part. I've fixed it. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! Basket of Puppies 06:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Here, again, you had the opportunity to disclose that you were lying to the community, but didn't.
In short, you violated the community's trust after being extended the vanish privilege and then going back on your promise. Subsequently, you ran for adminship twice without disclosing your previous account, an account that was certainly not free of drama and controversy.
The precedents established by some cases on the English Wikipedia, including the Sam Blacketer, Law, and Steve Crossin / PeterSymonds / Chetblong incidents, strongly indicate that your behavior here is unacceptable. While you were not banned under your previous account (as far as I can see, at least), you did intentionally deceive the community multiple times.
If the Arbitration Committee considers this behavior acceptable, they're (obviously) free to overturn the block. I'll refer you to arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- I endorse this assessment 100%. In a collaborative environment, we are meant to assume good faith and trust each other. This also applies to the Right to Vanish. Some may think the policy silly, but it's actually fundamental to the trust needed in a Wiki model. I trusted you to walk away. You didn't. You can't take your ball home and then come back to play later; you quit the game. That is the purpose of this very old idea of societal function and I strongly urge the Committee to review this with utmost scrutiny and remember that the rules are meant to apply to all, and some are not more equal than others no matter the circumstance of the story. That is the point at which things break down. Keegan (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- Noting here that this was already under discussion by the Arbitration Committee (who are in contact with Basket of Puppies and MBisanz), and that KnightLago has unblocked with the rationale "Unblocking while this matter is under discussion. As long as discussion is happening, blocking is not required." Could I ask that no-one else comment here further, as that will likely only make matters worse. If a general discussion about right-to-vanish is needed and other examples of returning accounts, that can take place elsewhere. Carcharoth (talk) 23:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- So he was unblocked because the matter is under discussion, but nobody should discuss the matter? —Emufarmers(T/C) 23:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
- As in the arbitrators are discussing and investigating this matter. - Mailer Diablo 23:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
From a reply to Carcharoth sent by me via e-mail:
Did KnightLago unblock on behalf of the Arbitration Committee? If not, can he explain why he left no note on-wiki (or via e-mail to me) regarding the action? If he was acting on behalf of the Arbitration Committee, is this an endorsement of Basket of Puppies' behavior by the Committee?
I became aware of the block via my watchlist and IRC.
Thanks.
MZ
I'm very surprised by KnightLago's behavior here, but there may be an aspect to this I'm missing. I'll leave a note on his talk page asking for clarification. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- Please note, until this matter is resolved I will not continue to edit Wikipedia. I sincerely wish I could simply continue to edit articles, but it may seem best to avoid any further editing until this ends. I really wish this drama didn't exist. Basket of Puppies 02:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
- My unblock was on behalf of the committee. We are actively working on sorting this matter out. I am sorry I did not post here sooner. I was called away immediately after unblocking, and when I returned Carcharoth had already left a note. KnightLago (talk) 03:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)