Shawn à Montréal (talk | contribs) |
Shawn à Montréal (talk | contribs) m →McGill |
||
Line 122: | Line 122: | ||
:I think the only thing you could really do is request page protection, which would force the IP to get an account, which would make it a lot easier to stop the bad edits. I dont know how far you would get at [[WP:RFPP]] but if you happen to be on the good side of an admin, that may be your best bet. Other than that just keep on reverting (dont break 3RR though). I really dont see anything else that could logically be done, except for maybe tagging the anon with {{tl|uw-npov1}} until you get enough violations to report to [[WP:AIV]], you could also report a 3RR violation, or maybe your best bet would be to bring it up at [[WP:AN/I]] where some knowledgeable admins could help you out. Hope you guys get this figured out.<br/>[[User:Gonzo_fan2007|<font face="Harlow Solid Italic" size="3px" color="teal">Gonzo fan2007</font>]] <sup>''[[User talk:Gonzo_fan2007|talk]] ♦ [[Special:Contributions/Gonzo_fan2007|contribs]]''</sup> 06:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
:I think the only thing you could really do is request page protection, which would force the IP to get an account, which would make it a lot easier to stop the bad edits. I dont know how far you would get at [[WP:RFPP]] but if you happen to be on the good side of an admin, that may be your best bet. Other than that just keep on reverting (dont break 3RR though). I really dont see anything else that could logically be done, except for maybe tagging the anon with {{tl|uw-npov1}} until you get enough violations to report to [[WP:AIV]], you could also report a 3RR violation, or maybe your best bet would be to bring it up at [[WP:AN/I]] where some knowledgeable admins could help you out. Hope you guys get this figured out.<br/>[[User:Gonzo_fan2007|<font face="Harlow Solid Italic" size="3px" color="teal">Gonzo fan2007</font>]] <sup>''[[User talk:Gonzo_fan2007|talk]] ♦ [[Special:Contributions/Gonzo_fan2007|contribs]]''</sup> 06:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
||
It is continuing today and I have already reached my 2 revert limit. I have requested a page protect, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#McGill_University_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29 here]. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 17:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
It is continuing today and I have already reached my 2 revert limit. I have requested a page protect, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#McGill_University_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29 here]. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 17:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
||
It has been protected, but as the admin says, it may well crop up again in a week's time. The admin suggests dispute resolution (see his/her comment bly clicking on the above link_. So please continue to do what you can to get the vandal to engage in a dialogue.[[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 18:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
:It has been protected, but as the admin says, it may well crop up again in a week's time. The admin suggests dispute resolution (see his/her comment bly clicking on the above link_. So please continue to do what you can to get the vandal to engage in a dialogue.[[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 18:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:53, 5 January 2008
Previous archives available here.
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | ||
Thanks for all your work. I appreciate it. Keep it up! Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 02:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC) |
Speedy deletion
Nice catch on Talk:Rated RKO Discussion Page. For future reference, you can just tag the talk page WP:CSD#G8 instead of create the article page with {{db-empty}}. -- KTC (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Catching The Point
Thanks for the catch on the WGA strike. I've very new to editing and I was somewhat confused on how to express my disapproval for a given article's content. Have a pleasent day! -Icarus'sNewBag
Randy Moss
Why did you remove Randy Moss's middle name? --Phbasketball6 (talk) 21:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for reverting the comment from the sockpuppet on my Talk page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for cleaning up the (space) and 'is'/'as' change I made to 'Quiet Riot' (that had been subsequently reverted). I knew 'as' was correct, but also realized that the whole sentance was gramatically tedious. Your change makes it much clearer. --12.26.232.203 (talk) 23:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Hannity
I replaced the best-seller claim, with sources. - Crockspot (talk) 07:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I also added a reliable source about Olbermann to the talk page here. Crockspot (talk) 08:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. -Helper2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helper2008 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again. Helper2008 (talk) 03:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I've made a proposal on the Olbermann talk page. - Crockspot (talk) 00:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Sapience/Sentience
Go look at the definitions for yourself, and if you still feel that your consensus is correct, then I respect your freedom to be wrong.
Sentience: Sentience refers to utilization of sensory organs, the ability to feel or perceive subjectively, not necessarily including the faculty of self-awareness.
Sapience: Sapience, usually defined as wisdom since it is the ability of an organism or entity to act with judgment.
I will act no further. Judge for yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.139.96.127 (talk) 02:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
- Man, I love it when newbies give me odd jobs. Civility, please. I've replied to your talk page. Snowfire51 (talk) 03:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Re:Writers Strike
Oh no, I wasn't offended at all! Thank you for your kind comments. ^_^ I'm sure my work needs improvement, anyway. I like feedback and constructive criticism; they help me improve as an editor. —Mirlen 07:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Practical advice
It's probably not worth it to edit war with an IP on its own talk page. See WP:DENY. - Jehochman Talk 03:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I've given 75.32.190.138 (talk · contribs) a 24 hour break to cool down. Since this is a different IP than was persistent about this particular subject before, he (It appears to be Alex Constantine) may come back with yet another IP. If he comes back, give me a holler since I'm a little familiar with the situation or, if I'm not around, post about it to Admin noticeboard/Incidents or Admin intervention against vandalism. Also Administrators' noticeboard/3RR is a good one for this kind of behaviour. Cheers, Pigman☿ 06:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Bigotry against IP-only users
Please refrain from making unwarranted edits to this IP user's talk page with incorrect spellings of "sarcastic". It is neither necessary nor proper for you to be judge nor jury here, is it? Fortunately, we can wholly agree that the facts are what is ultimately important.. and in this case, the IP user got the __facts__ right and made the point very clear to the supposedly "seasoned" editor.. that is, DO NOT ASSUME, CHECK YOUR FACTS BEFOREHAND.
In good fun, I Thank you for your incredibly constructive reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.34.98.154 (talk) 10:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I tried. Snowfire51 (talk) 10:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Snowfire, I deeply appreciate your involvement in this topic of discussion, and the article as a whole. True, I tend to be a bit speculative of non-registered users' edits, only due to the fact that, more than not, it's the IP users (not ALL of them, I get that, but a lot!) that tend to come in and commit the vandalism. So yes, IP edits get scruitinized more, but rightly so.
- Once again, thank you. Edit Centric (talk) 03:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
No problem, good working with you. Whether it's officially recognized or not, there is a natural bias against IP editors. I feel comfortable saying that, since probably 90% of the vandalism I correct is from anonymous editors.
When there's a problem with an IP editor, especially one that has been disruptive in the past and refuses to cooperate or be civil, there's a natural tendency to assume the worst. There's no logical reason not to have a wikipedia ID for anyone who's going to be here for longer than a few rounds of vandalism, so there is and should be a higher level of scrutiny there.
Anyway, don't worry about it for now. Anything else I can do to help, just drop me a line. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 04:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Suicide Methods article
I'm not used to debating things on Wikipedia. However, I'm somewhat baffled by your reaction to the suicide thing. I always thought that making self-destruction sound like the hideous, painful mess it really is was a good thing. I'm contactable at billy_britain@hotmail.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FergusM1970 (talk • contribs) 06:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Replying to your comment, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. I understand you'd like your thoughts on suicide known on the page, but your opinions are original research, which is not allowed. Entries should be properly referenced and clinical, not emotional.
- Also, Wikipedia pages should be discussed on their talk pages, not through email. If you have a concern, make it known on the talk page of an article and see if other people agree with you. Wikipedia works through gaining a general consensus on disputed topics. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 06:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
There is a whole load of hearsay, myth and vagueness in that entry. There is also enough ambiguity that some people might see it as a "how-to" article. All I'm trying to do is mention the possible outcomes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FergusM1970 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm trying to clean up the unreferenced statements, simply pointing to someone else's hearsay doesn't give an editor the right to insert his own. I agree the article isn't a very good one, but if it's going to be on WP, it needs to be taken care of in the proper manner. If you want to list probable outcomes or mishaps, those need to be properly referenced. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 07:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll look up some references.
I note, though, that while you have cleaned up much of what I wrote on that entry, I inserted three specific (and effective) methods of self-removal. You removed all reference to the consequences of these actions, but left the instructions themselves untouched.
My feeling is that BOTH should be there; if someone is actually searching the web for suicide methods there's a fair chance that they're looking for a simple and painless one to try out. I fully take your point that everything on WP should be properly backed up; however, if it's OK for the details of medieval Japanese suicide rituals to be in there without any references at all, why is it so bad if the effects of a non-fatal gunshot aren't referenced?
Just a thought, but maybe one that could save a life or two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FergusM1970 (talk • contribs) 07:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I deleted the consequences of what you had added because it was not properly referenced, it was all speculation. It falls under WP:OR because based on what is written, it can't be proved, and thus it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.
- I can sympathize with you wanting to add things that you think might "save a life or two", but wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a suicide hotline. If you'd like to discuss this matter, I encourage you to take it up on the talk page of the article, I'm sure they've been through this before. Thanks! Snowfire51 (talk) 07:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Just wanted to say thanks for your support on my talk page. I appreciated that :) Equazcion •✗/C • 01:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Randy Moss
Why did you revert my addition for Randy Moss having the record? Thanks --Phbasketball6 (talk) 03:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Never mind I thought Jerry Rice's record was 21 touchdown instead of 22. Thanks for correcting it. --Phbasketball6 (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
IdioT rant
Sorry, my entry there was a big mistake because I can't read properly. There are TWO sections on the Favrre discussion about how to pronounce his name. I fixed myself now.i4 (talk) 08:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
On Being Bold
Thanks... figured it was about time :) Replysixty (talk) 00:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
McGill
Yes, and my only concern is that you may have been in violation of 3RR, too. I'm not up on this stuff. I don't know how to go about reporting an anon IP whose address keeps changing but I'm sure there's a way. I'm afraid this is going to go on and on. I wasn't even all that concerned about his edit until a) I read your discussion about how the lead should be a more fixed and stable element and b) his disregard for your good faith efforts to engage him in a dialogue. Anyway, let's get some sleep! Shawn in Montreal (talk) 06:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I think the only thing you could really do is request page protection, which would force the IP to get an account, which would make it a lot easier to stop the bad edits. I dont know how far you would get at WP:RFPP but if you happen to be on the good side of an admin, that may be your best bet. Other than that just keep on reverting (dont break 3RR though). I really dont see anything else that could logically be done, except for maybe tagging the anon with {{uw-npov1}} until you get enough violations to report to WP:AIV, you could also report a 3RR violation, or maybe your best bet would be to bring it up at WP:AN/I where some knowledgeable admins could help you out. Hope you guys get this figured out.
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 06:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
It is continuing today and I have already reached my 2 revert limit. I have requested a page protect, here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- It has been protected, but as the admin says, it may well crop up again in a week's time. The admin suggests dispute resolution (see his/her comment bly clicking on the above link_. So please continue to do what you can to get the vandal to engage in a dialogue.Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)