You are a despicable individual. Comparing people to slavedrivers and saying they are backwardly educated just because they don't agree with you is completely beyond the pale. You disgust me. – [[User:PeeJay2K3|Pee]][[User talk:PeeJay2K3|Jay]] 00:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
You are a despicable individual. Comparing people to slavedrivers and saying they are backwardly educated just because they don't agree with you is completely beyond the pale. You disgust me. – [[User:PeeJay2K3|Pee]][[User talk:PeeJay2K3|Jay]] 00:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
== Personal attacks ==
Please refrain from any more personal attacks. The next time I will report you. This will be the last time I will write in your page and I hope you don't type messages in mine either. You need to mature a bit, no offense. [[User:Digirami|Digirami]] ([[User talk:Digirami|talk]]) 00:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:There is a link available for proof. [[User:Digirami|Digirami]] ([[User talk:Digirami|talk]]) 00:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
==Featured list==
==Featured list==
Hello Jamen. I note [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jamen_Somasu&diff=next&oldid=360362108 this edit], just out of curiosity, which Featured List did you significantly contribute to? I only ask as we have [[Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations|a list of folks]] who make major contributions in this area, and you appear to have been missed out. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 08:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello Jamen. I note [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jamen_Somasu&diff=next&oldid=360362108 this edit], just out of curiosity, which Featured List did you significantly contribute to? I only ask as we have [[Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured list nominations|a list of folks]] who make major contributions in this area, and you appear to have been missed out. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 08:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:You shouldn't really be adding that unless you helped ''get the list to featured status'', not just changed it when it ''was already featured''. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:36, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
=="Vandalism"==
If I were you, I'd start trying to talk to the various people who have left you messages, rather than find more and more ways (e.g. arbcom, sockpuppetry claims) of attempting some form of revenge on them. However, if you're serious about this, you could go to [[WP:AN/I]] so you draw admins' attention to this situation. Oh, and if you could let me know which FL you "significantly contributed to", that would be awesome. Cheers. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:The biggest problem here is that this is 'merely' a format dispute, and one that in almost all cases is conducted by ordinary editors within Wikiprojects, and changes are made by consensus. I understand that you feel in the minority, and I'm afraid to say that your proposed changes don't have a consensus, and until they do, they'll be reverted. That's how this place works. It can be very frustrating, I know. However, you shouldn't resort to dragging Arbitrators into this, nor should you pursue your unfounded sockpuppetry accusation (I suggest you add a G8 speedy deletion template to that page) against editors in long (and good) standing within the project as a whole. My best advice is to start over, speak to the project, say you wish to start with a clean slate, and try to remain calm. Promote your changes for their sake, not because of some "affiliation" with one organisation or another. I guarantee that people will take you more seriously that way. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think anyone would say "really good friends", I'd just say a group of like-minded people, that's how Wikiprojects get started. Try again, do it with respect, stay calm, and if the project don't listen again, then they ''will'' be at fault. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:::I think if you believe in your cause (and I'm sure you do), you'll be prepared to try it one more time, without the threats, and ensure you comment on the content, not the contributors. I believe that my fellow contributors are, on the whole, good people, and are usually prepared to give folks a second chance. Why not try? [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 16:53, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
::::Your choice. A pity because if you truly believe in Wikipedia as a whole, you'll take a step back, re-assess your approach, and try again. It's never easy to overcome an existing consensus, but staying calm and being constructive is 50% of the job. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 17:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:::::But consensus is at the heart of Wikis. You need to achieve a consensus if you wish to change something the community believes to be amongst "our finest work" (ie a featured list). An alternative would have been to take the list to [[WP:FLRC]]. In any case, giving up now will do no-one any good. But as I said, it's your choice. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 17:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
::::::Okay, since you've started [[Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Copa Libertadores winners/archive1|this]], please ensure you notify all main contributors and the WP:FOOTBALL project. Then list it at [[WP:FLRC]]. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 17:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:::::::I've got little idea what you're talking about now. ATBE? No idea. The link? What was that? And as for resorting back to name-calling "vulture", this is pointless. I was trying to help but it seems that I'm wasting my time. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 17:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
No idea what ATBE is, it isn't on the link you sent me at all. And as for calling people vultures? Well it's no better than calling them trolls and so you shouldn't do it per [[WP:NPA]]. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:If you scroll to the bottom of the screen after you've entered a page for history search, you'll see "Average Time Between Edits". [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
== Sockpuppet accusation ==
Are you going to list this bizarre accusation or would you like me to delete it for you? [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:I wasn't kidding when I made that accusation and, contrary to popular belief, I am not doing it just for fun and giggles. I am serious. The timing between the respones on those two accounts are sometimes too incredible. If anyone can prove to me they are not sock-puppets, fine. [[User:Jamen Somasu|Jamen Somasu]] ([[User talk:Jamen Somasu#top|talk]]) 18:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
::Then I suggest you list it correctly or else I'll delete it as disruptive to Wikipedia. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 18:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Last warning. This only thing that is more ridiculous than the dispute yuu are in is getting blocked because of the same dispute. You are very close to that now. My advice is to take on your shoes. Open your door and take a walk. A long one. When you are ready to discuss without calling people names, throwing accusations around that you can not back up and abusing processes such as [[WP:FLRC]] and [[WP:SPI]], you are welcome back to discuss whatever your issue is. Begin on the articles talk page. [[User:Rettetast|Rettetast]] ([[User talk:Rettetast|talk]]) 19:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
==FLRC==
I've removed your premature nomination for the removal of featured status of [[List of Copa Libertadores winners]]. It's clear you have nothing tangible to discuss, but you are seemingly here to make a point. If you believe that risking an indefinite block for the format of a table is worthwhile, then I guess you won't be editing here much more. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 21:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
:You need to be patient. Three or four days at least. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 22:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Revision as of 22:31, 6 May 2010
{{helpme}}
I have a problem. I am currently committed to updating CONMEBOL's club tournaments as many of them don't even have pages. However, there is a vulture that keeps waiting until I make the updates just to change information to his own liking (User:Digirami). A prime, recent example of it was the article 2010 Copa Libertadores. Before I even touched it, no one even bothered with it. Now that I have done some upgrades, he/she starts messing with the work I done.
I have tried having discussions with him/her. I have also tried encouraging him/her to contribute to the other pages that needs updating. On both, I have never received a response. Until this is fixed, I will stop what I am doing. I can't keep working to have vultures come and change things once someone else did 95% of the work.
No one owns articles here; everyone is welcome to make changes to improve another's work; in fact, right by "Save page", there exists a message "If you do not want your writing to be edited and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here". And please do not make personal remarks (i.e., "vulture"). This user was probably simply trying to improve upon your edits, to the best of his/her ability. If private discussion does not work, be aware we have other venues through which to discuss, such as Wikiquette alerts, and Dispute resolution. Intelligentsium 02:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Jamen Somasu, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!
Aboutmovies (talk) 08:28, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Id 23583 mundial-site.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ww2censor (talk) 05:17, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edit war
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2010 Copa Libertadores. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. I have chosen not to block you in favor of directing you to discuss the problem on the article's talk page. Any further edit warring/three revert rule violations will result in a block. Thank you, Malinaccier (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UEFA Europa League
Just because Shakhtar were knocked out of the 2009-10 Europa League doesn't mean they stop being the defending champions. "Defending champions" simply means they won the competition last year. – PeeJay 17:20, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a figure of speech. Shakhtar still hold the trophy in their trophy cabinet. They didn't have to hand it back just because they lost to Fulham! – PeeJay 17:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:CopaLibertadoers.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:CopaLibertadoers.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
The Catalan nation may see FC Barcelona as their representative club side, but it is not appropriate to tag the club with the Catalan flag. FC Barcelona represents Spain in European competitions, not Catalonia. – PeeJay 20:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't ignore my messages. – PeeJay 20:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since Barcelona are in the competition as the Spanish champions, WP:MOSFLAG kicks in, specifically the paragraph about the use of subnational flags. I do not have anything against your Catalan pride, but please stick to the rules. --Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 21:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. I have nothing against Catalan independence - in fact, as a Welshman, I can sympathise. However, since Catalonia does not submit clubs to the Champions League (or any other competition) in its own name, it is completely inappropriate to use the Catalan flag in a football article. – PeeJay 21:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This guy is not a catalan. He is actually a troll , a costa rican troll! He is not argentinian either! Dont belive any of his/her lies! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.205.93.162 (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
April 2010
This is the only warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to 2009–10 UEFA Champions League, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You've had your fun, but enough is enough. One more time: Barcelona are representing the Spanish Primera Division in the tournament, not the Catalan Primera Division or the Andalusian or whatever region in Spain you like to insert here. Please respect the content policy WP:MOSFLAG. If not, you are likely to face a block.Soccer-holicI hear voices in my head... 21:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have reported you for vandalism. – PeeJay 21:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see your edits as vandalism, but you have clearly been engaged in an edit war on that article. As this is something you have been warned about explicitly before, I have blocked you for 24 hours. Future content disputes should be worked out on the article's talk page, no by rapidly reverting other editors. Thanks. Kuru(talk) 22:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Intercontinental Cup and FIFA Club World Cup
The Intercontinental Cup and the FIFA Club World Cup are entirely separate competitions. Their relationship is analogous to the relationship between the Olympic football competitions before 1930 and the FIFA World Cup; i.e. both competitions determine the de facto best side in the world, but they are separate. Therefore, their stats should not be presented as congruous. Following a discussion at WT:FOOTY, I have prodded the new articles you have created and I will also be taking the template you created to WP:TfD. – PeeJay 13:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on List of Recopa Sudamericana winning managers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Riotrocket8676You gotta problem with that? 21:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Copa Libertadores
Please refrain from changing the number of teams in the Copa Libertadores infobox from 38. There is no need to specify how many start in the group stage. Unlike the UEFA CL where the competition proper starts at the group stage and there is a need to specify how many start in the group stage and the total number of teams included from the qualifying round, the competition proper for the Libertadores starts at the first stage and therefore the competition proper has 38 teams. Digirami (talk) 19:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Logo south american recopa2.png
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Logo south american recopa2.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thanks for uploading File:CopaLibertadoers.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thanks for uploading File:Zlogorecopa2.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thanks for uploading File:Logo supercopa.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I can't state my reasons blocked; I am currently trying to send both formats to be voted on. As wikipedians, we should strive to make things simpler and better, thus, the term KISS: "Keep it simple, stupid" (no offense to anyone)
Decline reason:
That does not address the reason why you (and Digirami) were blocked, which was for edit warring. –MuZemike 17:09, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Can you simply put that article on hold? I really don't think that we should be this extreme on one article
Decline reason:
Please do not use this template to continue your edit war. The next such usage will result in your ability to edit this page being removed. Kuru(talk) 17:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Well, can you at least put this on the discussion board to be voted on BY ADMINISTRATORS involved on the football project and co. and not simply friends of his? Thanks.
As wikipedias, we should always strive for simpler and better. Jamen Somasu (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File copyright problem with File:2e5kxfk.PNG
Thank you for uploading File:2e5kxfk.PNG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
Ok, this is now getting so ridiculous that I am forced to call an administrator. The WIKIProject Football is now suffering from severe neutrality issues. Maybe as a consequence of its nature, it is to be expected. In that case, a good kick in the head every now and then might be needed to clear up any favoritisms.
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured here.
Discuss the matter on the project talk page, or article discussion pages. See WP:DISPUTE. Seek other opinions, and form a consensus. Plenty of options in the WP:DISPUTE link. Be bold, see WP:BRD. Chzz ► 13:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Messages
When leaving people messages, please be sure to use the User talk page, not the User page itself. I've moved a couple of your edits to the right place. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:29, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Edit summary
I know you feel like you're having a hard time here right now, but this edit summary is unacceptable, despite your "censorship". Any further behaviour of this nature will result in your account being blocked. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You also need to understand that this kind of contribution won't help your cause. Your call for the arbitrators to get involved with a trivial case of how a table should be formatted before perhaps seeking mediation or going to WP:RFC is indicative that you perhaps aren't familiar with the sequential escalation of dispute mediation we have here. I would suggest withdrawing the motion at Arbcom, and heading for something more technical like RFC. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you mean by "confederation" but the point is that your dispute, in the big scheme of things, is not really an Arbcom issue. I think withdrawing now would be absolutely for the best. The others involved in the dispute would respect your approach. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, further requests like this which are fictional and indicate a high level of ownership over said articles will certainly result in a block. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Arbitration
You are a despicable individual. Comparing people to slavedrivers and saying they are backwardly educated just because they don't agree with you is completely beyond the pale. You disgust me. – PeeJay 00:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Featured list
Hello Jamen. I note this edit, just out of curiosity, which Featured List did you significantly contribute to? I only ask as we have a list of folks who make major contributions in this area, and you appear to have been missed out. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You shouldn't really be adding that unless you helped get the list to featured status, not just changed it when it was already featured. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:36, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Vandalism"
If I were you, I'd start trying to talk to the various people who have left you messages, rather than find more and more ways (e.g. arbcom, sockpuppetry claims) of attempting some form of revenge on them. However, if you're serious about this, you could go to WP:AN/I so you draw admins' attention to this situation. Oh, and if you could let me know which FL you "significantly contributed to", that would be awesome. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest problem here is that this is 'merely' a format dispute, and one that in almost all cases is conducted by ordinary editors within Wikiprojects, and changes are made by consensus. I understand that you feel in the minority, and I'm afraid to say that your proposed changes don't have a consensus, and until they do, they'll be reverted. That's how this place works. It can be very frustrating, I know. However, you shouldn't resort to dragging Arbitrators into this, nor should you pursue your unfounded sockpuppetry accusation (I suggest you add a G8 speedy deletion template to that page) against editors in long (and good) standing within the project as a whole. My best advice is to start over, speak to the project, say you wish to start with a clean slate, and try to remain calm. Promote your changes for their sake, not because of some "affiliation" with one organisation or another. I guarantee that people will take you more seriously that way. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone would say "really good friends", I'd just say a group of like-minded people, that's how Wikiprojects get started. Try again, do it with respect, stay calm, and if the project don't listen again, then they will be at fault. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:40, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think if you believe in your cause (and I'm sure you do), you'll be prepared to try it one more time, without the threats, and ensure you comment on the content, not the contributors. I believe that my fellow contributors are, on the whole, good people, and are usually prepared to give folks a second chance. Why not try? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:53, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your choice. A pity because if you truly believe in Wikipedia as a whole, you'll take a step back, re-assess your approach, and try again. It's never easy to overcome an existing consensus, but staying calm and being constructive is 50% of the job. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But consensus is at the heart of Wikis. You need to achieve a consensus if you wish to change something the community believes to be amongst "our finest work" (ie a featured list). An alternative would have been to take the list to WP:FLRC. In any case, giving up now will do no-one any good. But as I said, it's your choice. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, since you've started this, please ensure you notify all main contributors and the WP:FOOTBALL project. Then list it at WP:FLRC. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've got little idea what you're talking about now. ATBE? No idea. The link? What was that? And as for resorting back to name-calling "vulture", this is pointless. I was trying to help but it seems that I'm wasting my time. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No idea what ATBE is, it isn't on the link you sent me at all. And as for calling people vultures? Well it's no better than calling them trolls and so you shouldn't do it per WP:NPA. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you scroll to the bottom of the screen after you've entered a page for history search, you'll see "Average Time Between Edits". The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppet accusation
Are you going to list this bizarre accusation or would you like me to delete it for you? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't kidding when I made that accusation and, contrary to popular belief, I am not doing it just for fun and giggles. I am serious. The timing between the respones on those two accounts are sometimes too incredible. If anyone can prove to me they are not sock-puppets, fine. Jamen Somasu (talk) 18:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then I suggest you list it correctly or else I'll delete it as disruptive to Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Last warning. This only thing that is more ridiculous than the dispute yuu are in is getting blocked because of the same dispute. You are very close to that now. My advice is to take on your shoes. Open your door and take a walk. A long one. When you are ready to discuss without calling people names, throwing accusations around that you can not back up and abusing processes such as WP:FLRC and WP:SPI, you are welcome back to discuss whatever your issue is. Begin on the articles talk page. Rettetast (talk) 19:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FLRC
I've removed your premature nomination for the removal of featured status of List of Copa Libertadores winners. It's clear you have nothing tangible to discuss, but you are seemingly here to make a point. If you believe that risking an indefinite block for the format of a table is worthwhile, then I guess you won't be editing here much more. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You need to be patient. Three or four days at least. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]