→That...: clarify |
|||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 206: | Line 206: | ||
...was not a personal attack. [[User:Srobak|Srobak]] ([[User talk:Srobak|talk]]) 21:55, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
...was not a personal attack. [[User:Srobak|Srobak]] ([[User talk:Srobak|talk]]) 21:55, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
:Yes, calling someone a troll is a personal attack. Let me try to make this very clear: you need to disengage from LikeLakers. Stop speaking ''to'' him, stop speaking ''about'' him, and stop finding users who've had conflict with him and trying to discuss him with them. You were told to leave him (and he you) alone when the issue was brought to ANI, and I'm telling you again now: you are unable to operate non-disruptively on the topic of LikeLakers, and you will either stop harping disruptively on him, or you will end up blocked. If he were harping on you in the same way, I'd be telling him the same thing, but I see only one of you calling the other a troll, and that's ''you''. It will stop, and it will stop now. Is that clear? [[User:Fluffernutter|A fluffernutter is a sandwich!]] ([[User talk:Fluffernutter#top|talk]]) 22:07, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
:Yes, calling someone a troll is a personal attack. Let me try to make this very clear: you need to disengage from LikeLakers. Stop speaking ''to'' him, stop speaking ''about'' him, and stop finding users who've had conflict with him and trying to discuss him with them. You were told to leave him (and he you) alone when the issue was brought to ANI, and I'm telling you again now: you are unable to operate non-disruptively on the topic of LikeLakers, and you will either stop harping disruptively on him, or you will end up blocked. If he were harping on you in the same way, I'd be telling him the same thing, but I see only one of you calling the other a troll, and that's ''you''. It will stop, and it will stop now. Is that clear? [[User:Fluffernutter|A fluffernutter is a sandwich!]] ([[User talk:Fluffernutter#top|talk]]) 22:07, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
::First, you need to read [[meta:What is a troll?]]. I didn't create the criteria. Second - you need to clearly understand that this issue is nothing about him, but it is indeed about <u>'''''YOU.'''''</u>. The user in question - along with others - have been brought to the repeated attention of ANI for TPO and other violations and have been repeatedly been given a pass, over and over again, having plain, cold hard facts of repeated policy vios flat out IGNORED - while also getting backhanded under the guise of [[WP:BOOMERANG]] (which is utter bullshit in these instances). Understand this - and read it over and over until you do - the topic at hand is not LL. It is this absolute garbage mentality of a small group of admins in shielding, harboring, protecting and actually enabling blatent, repeated policy violators. The number of times I have been told by the same few admins to stop reporting/reverting/warning over a dozen repeat policy offenders is staggering and is flatly unacceptable in its supplement to the cesspooling of WP. Policies are not in place to be ignored at whim of editors nor admins! Operating this way is a major detriment to the WP project, and it is far outside the scope of your expected conduct. This kind of gross misconduct by you guys under the color of authority will stop now, or the entire matter and everyone associated with it will be brought to bare for a complete and thorough administrative review. There is a lot of discussion about this problem offline that I have been recently made privy to, and things have pretty much been brought to a head by the little clan (read: clique) a few of you have going on there in adminland. It will stop now, or it will be stopped for you guys... is '''''that''''' clear??? The time of letting the inmates run the asylum is over. Follow and enforce the policies when violators of them are brought to your attention, or people will be put into place who will. [[User:Srobak|Srobak]] ([[User talk:Srobak|talk]]) 06:17, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:35, 19 September 2011
Thank you
I am really obliged to you for unblocking me and giving me one more chance. Ill try my best to contribute error free articles to wikipedia. Please help me doing that as i am just a beginner but really keen to learn and take the maximum out of such innovative methods. Thank you so much again! :) Anu2033 (talk) 06:15, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Advice
Since you've weighed in on the POV dispute for Elizabeth Rauscher I thought I'd ask your advice on how to deal with negotiation that's going nowhere. Thanks, Agricola44 (talk) 05:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC).
- Honestly, that looks pretty intractable to me. I don't think your side and SlimVirgin's side will ever come to terms among yourselves, judging by that talk page. It might be time to open an RfC on the issue. The question put to RfC could be something as broad as "Does Elizabeth Rauscher have neutrality problems?" or as specific as "Are these sources reliable for the purposes of calling Rauscher a parapsychologist?", but either way, I think you're going to need to bring in outside opinions to get this resolved. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. RfC seems to have failed to open any sort of gap in the stalemate. Not sure what's next. Is it conventional to leave an NPOV tag on the article for an extended period time if no resolution can be negotiated, as it seems to be the case here? Agricola44 (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC).
- Give it some time. RfCs usually run for more than just a few days - ideally, the uninvolved people will trickle in as time passes. What's happened since yesterday is, as you noticed, just the usual suspects weighing in. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just noticed that Dreadstar has redacted more of my comments, sprinkling-in various policy-based reasons for those actions. I've never run into this sort of thing before on WP. This strikes me as attempted censorship, but I wanted to get a disinterested opinion. Thanks again. Agricola44 (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC).
- If you feel like things are just intractable, I think your best option, assuming the RfC doesn't resolve the issue (or the issue is something other than the RfC topic at this point) would be to take the issue to WP:ANI, post the most neutral explanation of the situation that you can, with diffs, and let people weigh in. It's a contentious enough issue that no one person like me will be able to hash out what should happen, so wider community input somewhere like ANI might be helpful. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:19, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just noticed that Dreadstar has redacted more of my comments, sprinkling-in various policy-based reasons for those actions. I've never run into this sort of thing before on WP. This strikes me as attempted censorship, but I wanted to get a disinterested opinion. Thanks again. Agricola44 (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2011 (UTC).
- Give it some time. RfCs usually run for more than just a few days - ideally, the uninvolved people will trickle in as time passes. What's happened since yesterday is, as you noticed, just the usual suspects weighing in. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. RfC seems to have failed to open any sort of gap in the stalemate. Not sure what's next. Is it conventional to leave an NPOV tag on the article for an extended period time if no resolution can be negotiated, as it seems to be the case here? Agricola44 (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2011 (UTC).
Indian education unblock requests
Hi Fluffernutter...Unblock requests were placed at User talk:Ds731992 and User talk:Saumya1025 after your blocks for copyright violations. I have placed those unblock requests on hold for the time being to defer to you. Do you think that they have learned and now understand what they did and that they won't do it in the future? I'm not sure who the "ambassador" is for this project, but if you do, maybe you can talk to them and see if the amb. feels that they are ready to edit again at this time. either way (talk) 14:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Urgh. I hate to play the bad guy on this, because I really want to unblock these kids so they can go on with their class, but neither unblock request fills me with confidence. I asked them to have their ambassadors post on their talk pages to verify that they've understood our copyvio policy, and neither has done that; plus "I wasn't aware that the source I was wholesale copying from was copyrighted" shows a pretty large misunderstanding of our standards for content, and "I didn't know your policy" says nothing about whether they do now. Their ambassadors and their instructor are aware of the issue - these two are among a group of 10-15 from the same class who all ran into copyright trouble, but only Ds731992 and Saumya1025 have so far failed to obey warnings about copyvios.
- My recommendation is to decline both requests for the moment and reiterate to the students that we cannot unblock them until they explain that they now understand and will follow policy, and their ambassador backs them up on that (especially Saumya, who got not only a regular copyright warning but an explicit, explanatory one from me before I was forced to block them for continuing to do it); you can feel free to do the declines, or if you'd prefer, I'll do it. Just let me know. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:45, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- I've declined for now and will watch their pages to see if any one pops in to vouch for them or if they can explain their understanding better. Thanks!
- Hi Fluffernutter, I am Campus Ambassador for Wikipedia India Education Program. Thanks for avoiding Copy-righted stuff.Today I conducted special session and explained Copy-right policy.I wasnt aware of your previous warnings to students. I just read on your Talk Page.I will speak with students tomorrow again regarding same. AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 11:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Can you look over something
Hey fluff. Would you please look over Straight edge and give me some feedback on the article. I think its getting ever closer to a GA. (Also, please don't waste the time to fix my grammar. I would feel bad messing up your corrections if i come across something that I need to add/re word) thanks --Guerillero | My Talk 04:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- I'm by no means a GA genius or anything, but I'll try to give it a look at some point today! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you :) --Guerillero | My Talk 17:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- Here ya go! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 23:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you :) --Guerillero | My Talk 17:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Help please
Hi. I am Jivesh. I edit strictly Beyonce-related articles on Wikipedia. I was wondering if you could do a copy-edit of 1+1 (song) for me? Please reply on my talk-page. Waiting in anticipation. Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:48, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Blackgaia02
Blackgaia02 is deleting all my and other users' edits. Please do something about it. Tama Fan (talk) 13:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- The two of you have a content dispute. You must resolve this by discussing it with Blackgaia02, on the article's talk page. If that doesn't work, pursue further steps of disupte resolution. This is not something an administrator can fix for you, since admins have no power to rule on content disputes. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
But Blackgaia02 don't want compromise. You must blocked her for ever! 87.205.25.169 (talk) 13:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
- Have you gone through the steps outlined in the dispute resolution page? All of them? If not, please do that. There's a reason we have these guidelines: there is usually a better way to solve a dispute than "blocking someone for ever". A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
COPYRIGHT VIOLATION
Hi, the user Ds731992 has been blocked from editing due to repeated copyright violation, i request you to please unblock her at the earliest possible, and hereby confirm that she will not repeat it. This is the link to her talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ds731992 Devanshi tripathi (talk) 12:37, 7 September 2011 (UTC) [Campus Ambassador, SSE ]
- I have unblocked the user. Thank you for speaking to her about the issue! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 13:56, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Thankyou so much, I will make sure that the user Ds731992 will adhere to the rules and wikipedia policies, and not repeat any violations or infringements of copyrights. Devanshi tripathi (talk) 14:13, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Request on behalf of a blocked user
Hi, As per our earlier discussions, we have advised all the students who are part of India Education Program about the copyright issues. We have also conducted a session on the same issue. The user Saumya1025 has been blocked, this user now understands the repercussions of using copyrighted material on Wikipedia. I would request you to kindly help in getting this user unblocked, so she can proceed with her assignments. Kindly let me know if this request can be granted.
Thanks in advance!
Regards, Gurmeet (Campus Ambassador - India Education Program) Gsinghglakes (talk) 06:35, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
- I've unblocked the user. Thank you for helping them understand our policies! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks a ton for your help...! Regards, Gurmeet Gsinghglakes (talk) 06:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, There are a few more users who have been blocked for the same reason, we are taking one case at a time. Currently, the user "karanlalchandani" have been blocked and understands his mistake. I would request you to kindly help in getting this user unblocked, so he can proceed with his assignments. Thanks Again!!
I might have more such requests in the future.
Regards, Gurmeet Gsinghglakes (talk) 16:51, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- I have unblocked karanlalchandani, per your assurance. I have recently had to re-block ds731992 (talk · contribs), who I unblocked after their ambassador had explained copyright to them and the student claimed to understand it, so please just make doubly sure that any student you request an unblock for definitely understands the idea of copyvio. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks...! we are taking steps to avoid such things. Regards, Gurmeet Gsinghglakes (talk) 06:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Great work with the copyvio issues. Much appreciated, Fluffernutter! Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:54, 8 September 2011 (UTC) |
- Aw, thanks. I still kind of feel like I should've had a better handle on it from the start, but at least we're getting it under control now! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
You keep beating me to vandalism. Great job and keep up the good work! -- Luke (Talk) 01:46, 9 September 2011 (UTC) |
- Thanks. Nothing better on a boring Thursday night than some huggling! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
why did you delete my religion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.186.192 (talk) 03:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
OTRS
- Yeah I deliberately unlocked that ticket so someone else could deal with it (though I notice I neglected to add a note to that effect, oops), because I didn't/don't have time to give the customer the complete walkthrough they need right now - the initial ticket was easily handled, and then circumstances changed, and now he needs someone to work with him in-depth. I can add a note saying that I'm happy for someone else to pick up the ticket, if it helps? A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 23:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Hatticism
I'm curious as to why you deleted Hatticism - as it isn't Vandalism. There's even a Bible being made for it. Pshh, you keep up Pastafarianism or whatever. Not fair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azreth (talk • contribs) 00:29, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
- It was deleted for being a fairly obvious hoax, not solely as vandalism, though a hoax like that is treated the same way as vandalism. If there are sources showing that the "religion" isn't actually a hoax, those would be the way to go in creating an article that didn't walk, talk, and quack like a hoax. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 00:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
GiveWell
Do you mind if I ask where you posted to so quickly draw in so much attention to the article? Green Cardamom (talk) 01:41, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- I did not ask, or even hint, that anyone should do anything. I commented (immediately after I made the changes to the article, before you opposed any of them, at a point when I had no idea that you would contest them) on the Metafilter thread that drew my attention to the issue (when someone else in the thread linked to it), essentially saying that I didn't think the article was appropriately phrased and I had tweaked it, and then I deliberately commented no further because, as I'm sure you're aware, we don't tolerate canvassing here, and I wanted to be very careful that no Metafilter members decided to leap into the discussion I started. I would ask that you please, please stop assuming bad faith of me. It's not helpful to resolving the issues at hand on the article. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 01:51, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- Ok thank you for telling me. Not all surprised that every single person in that discussion is also on Metafilter (only way they could have found it so fast). It's a great big WP:COI (Close Relationships) party. The culture at MeFi is extremely biased against GiveWell which shows up on the edits it makes at Wikipedia, about once a year we get a flare up. Your edits by comparison are excellent (though I believe are a matter of balance or degree of coverage). The bigger issue is MeFi users editing the article at all on a topic it was directly involved with. Individuals at MeFi are part of a community, a community which is proud of catching GiveWell in self-promotion, and which is not shy about trumpeting its accomplishment. You can see why this is difficult for MeFi users to write about objectively, they see the 2007 incident as major and important. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:20, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- Please see my overall response to your position on the article talk. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- Ok thank you for telling me. Not all surprised that every single person in that discussion is also on Metafilter (only way they could have found it so fast). It's a great big WP:COI (Close Relationships) party. The culture at MeFi is extremely biased against GiveWell which shows up on the edits it makes at Wikipedia, about once a year we get a flare up. Your edits by comparison are excellent (though I believe are a matter of balance or degree of coverage). The bigger issue is MeFi users editing the article at all on a topic it was directly involved with. Individuals at MeFi are part of a community, a community which is proud of catching GiveWell in self-promotion, and which is not shy about trumpeting its accomplishment. You can see why this is difficult for MeFi users to write about objectively, they see the 2007 incident as major and important. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:20, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
COPYRIGHT VIOLATION ADDRESSED
Hi fluffernutter, I know I have been warned repeatedly about copyvios, I am really sorry that I did not adhere to wikipedia policies, but now i will make sure that i adhere to all the policies and not infringe any copyrights further. i completely understand that cut pasting is not allowed from copyrighted works as it would violate copyrights or constitute plagiarism. and i also realise that a work which is not copyrighted constitutes public domain and can be freely used by any one. I did not realise while referring to books that i am violating copyrights as i tried my best to rephrase the language as much as possible. now i completely understand all the rules and policies,please unblock me as i have to complete the article on Socio-economic issues in India as a part of my assignment in college, so it would be really nice if you could unblock me at the earliest possible. apologies again :) Ds731992 (talk) 18:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hey, I just wanted to let you know that I missed seeing that User:Ds731992 was re-blocked. There is no way that I was encouraging "block evasion". Im sorry for advising in the wrong direction, but it wasnt intentional. I understand that copyright violation is a big issue and we're taking several steps to make sure that students refrain from doing it. Nitika.t (talk) 20:10, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#User:La goutte de pluie and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,OpenInfoForAll (talk) 22:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
A cookie for you!
Thanks for actively checking for copy vios and keeping Wikipedia clean.
Cheers! Ram (talk • contribs) 07:36, 14 September 2011 (UTC) |
quick question
Just vaguely curious who you are over at MetaFilter. Feel free to send me a MeMail there if you don't mind making the connection. Otherwise totally okay to stay this way. Jessamyn (talk) 20:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
- Sent you a Memail :) A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Your message is coming across
I was hovering on the recent changes when I saw this! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:53, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hahaha. Soon, my plan of sandwich-directed world domination will be complete! A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 16:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
- Fluffernutter! Are you trying to take over the world with sandwiches again? :P LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 12:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the anti-vandalism barnstar for your tireless efforts in the cleanup process. とある白い猫 chi? 18:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi
Omar-Toons and Tachfin are the same, and Ceuta are not part of Morocco, see Conquest of Melilla or Conquest of Ceuta. He change it all without any sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.155.236.99 (talk) 22:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Late congrats
On becoming an admin :) keep up the good work :) good thing I didn't miss your RfA! —James (Talk • Contribs) • 1:14pm • 03:14, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
That...
...was not a personal attack. Srobak (talk) 21:55, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, calling someone a troll is a personal attack. Let me try to make this very clear: you need to disengage from LikeLakers. Stop speaking to him, stop speaking about him, and stop finding users who've had conflict with him and trying to discuss him with them. You were told to leave him (and he you) alone when the issue was brought to ANI, and I'm telling you again now: you are unable to operate non-disruptively on the topic of LikeLakers, and you will either stop harping disruptively on him, or you will end up blocked. If he were harping on you in the same way, I'd be telling him the same thing, but I see only one of you calling the other a troll, and that's you. It will stop, and it will stop now. Is that clear? A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 22:07, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
- First, you need to read meta:What is a troll?. I didn't create the criteria. Second - you need to clearly understand that this issue is nothing about him, but it is indeed about YOU.. The user in question - along with others - have been brought to the repeated attention of ANI for TPO and other violations and have been repeatedly been given a pass, over and over again, having plain, cold hard facts of repeated policy vios flat out IGNORED - while also getting backhanded under the guise of WP:BOOMERANG (which is utter bullshit in these instances). Understand this - and read it over and over until you do - the topic at hand is not LL. It is this absolute garbage mentality of a small group of admins in shielding, harboring, protecting and actually enabling blatent, repeated policy violators. The number of times I have been told by the same few admins to stop reporting/reverting/warning over a dozen repeat policy offenders is staggering and is flatly unacceptable in its supplement to the cesspooling of WP. Policies are not in place to be ignored at whim of editors nor admins! Operating this way is a major detriment to the WP project, and it is far outside the scope of your expected conduct. This kind of gross misconduct by you guys under the color of authority will stop now, or the entire matter and everyone associated with it will be brought to bare for a complete and thorough administrative review. There is a lot of discussion about this problem offline that I have been recently made privy to, and things have pretty much been brought to a head by the little clan (read: clique) a few of you have going on there in adminland. It will stop now, or it will be stopped for you guys... is that clear??? The time of letting the inmates run the asylum is over. Follow and enforce the policies when violators of them are brought to your attention, or people will be put into place who will. Srobak (talk) 06:17, 19 September 2011 (UTC)