→Umm?: silly vandalism |
MarkThomas (talk | contribs) Activities of User Sarah777 |
||
Line 506: | Line 506: | ||
::::@Ali: I don't reckon I'd go that far unless he actually blocked me. But in the "genocide" debate he managed to threaten to block three editors in a short period of time. Two for arguable incivility (very arguable) and one completely inappropriate threat to me based on an intellectual disagreement. All the best! |
::::@Ali: I don't reckon I'd go that far unless he actually blocked me. But in the "genocide" debate he managed to threaten to block three editors in a short period of time. Two for arguable incivility (very arguable) and one completely inappropriate threat to me based on an intellectual disagreement. All the best! |
||
::::@Unknown - me? rash?!!! Nope; I'm a slow learner admittedly, but I have realised that to survive here you best learn the rules and the politics. I wasn't giving that aspect due care and attention till now! ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 23:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)) |
::::@Unknown - me? rash?!!! Nope; I'm a slow learner admittedly, but I have realised that to survive here you best learn the rules and the politics. I wasn't giving that aspect due care and attention till now! ([[User:Sarah777|Sarah777]] 23:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)) |
||
Hi Alison, first of all, in response to Lamunknown's points about Tyrenius above, I wasn't offended by Tyrenius asking me and Gold to desist and I think he was actually trying to calm things down and do a good job on the article. |
|||
I have just checked and can't find the place Sarah777 refers to where she was threatened with a block. What does seem to be happening on the talk page of Great Irish Famine is that Tyrenius asked Sarah777 and Domer48 to come up with factual references to support their use of the phrase "genocide". Instead of doing so, Sarah777 came here to remonstrate against Tyrenius and (apparently) attempt to gain your support as an admin in a content dispute. |
|||
In addition, Tyrenius has correctly pointed out that it is original research by synthesis to use the method of "genocide claim" that Sarah777 does want to use, which is perhaps her problem? |
|||
I propose Alison if you have time that you take a careful look at the activities of user Sarah777. She has already caused editors to raise an extensive and well-supported [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Sarah777|RfC about her conduct]]. |
|||
thanks |
|||
Mark |
|||
[[User:MarkThomas|MarkThomas]] 07:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::: ''me? rash?!!!'' - :P --[[User talk:Iamunknown|Iamunknown]] 23:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC) |
::::: ''me? rash?!!!'' - :P --[[User talk:Iamunknown|Iamunknown]] 23:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:23, 25 June 2007
Please sign (~~~~) before you save. Beware HagermanBot!
![]() Archives |
---|
|
My best wishes
I'm sorry to hear that you've been ill. Get well soon! Wishing you all the best, DrKiernan 11:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Allie, thanks a million, the black has almost gone, the tape is good, although everyone is different, so I wouldn't recommend. I was grand until two weeks ago. I'm getting the clarity to get PT, so some years of waste might be ameliorated. Thanks for the help! 00:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Keep yer chin up, hope you get well soon and it's nowt serious. Khukri 08:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
5000 edits
Do you remember me? I just made my 5000th edit today. NHRHS2010 Talk 02:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
3rr
Hello, a new user User:Illegal editor has broken the 3rr rule on the Collectivist anarchism article and the Benjamin Tucker article. He also shows many similarities and tendencies with other blocked sockpuppets of banned user Billy Ego. Can you check him out please? Full Shunyata 02:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Deco Da Man again
Hey Alison, in hopes you're feeling better now -- I see you did poke your head up yesterday, anyway. If you are feeling better...
...well, this case is unresolved again. The admin who blocked Deco Da Man (talk · contribs) the first time Ryulong (talk · contribs) has blocked him a second time, this time on the basis (of maybe 30 edits) that Deco Da Man hasn't made any edits outside his user space & is supposedly using Wikipedia as a social networking site. I think it's rather that Ryulong has taken a person dislike to this kid, or something -- there's no other explanation I can summon up for a second incidence of the harshest sanction being made on the basis of few edits, no warnings, & an apparent forgetting of standard WP behaviors like WP:Assume good faith & WP:BITE. I've also asked MaxSem (talk · contribs) to take a look -- he's the admin who unblocked him the first time.
I think this is a matter not just of needing to make sure Deco Da Man keeps his nose clean, but also perhaps of reining in an admin who's throwing the book a little bit too hard. If you can take a look, thanks. If not... I understand you're still unwell. --Yksin 17:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Alison. Please see Deco Da Man's talk page; would my proposal work for you, assuming that he accepts it, and Ryulong as well? (Deco Da Man's in Australia, so time zone issues might mean some time before he will respond). Thanks. --Yksin 22:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Damned powerful soup
Whoop! Hugs. welcome back. Lsi john 19:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's so nice to see you back. :) Just saw your major archiving. Acalamari 19:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Just wanted to add to the other well-wishers. . .Glad you're back and feeling better. R. Baley 19:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Welcome back!
Hi Alison, welcome back! I hope you're feeling better. While you're here, you might want to leave a kind word with Sharon, who won't be active for now due to family concerns (I'd rather you hear it from her than from me). Thanks. --Kyoko 19:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh no! I'll email her straight away ... thanks, Kyoko - Alison ☺ 19:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to see you back! Hope you are feeling better! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Wow its good to see you back,I bet you are feeling a lot better now:).Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 20:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Likewise - glad to see you around and about! Take care! -- User:RyanFreisling @ 23:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Wow its good to see you back,I bet you are feeling a lot better now:).Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 20:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to see you back! Hope you are feeling better! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
71.107.145.200
71.107.145.200 keeps reverting his ip's talk page. oysterguitarist~Talk 23:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- *sigh* - I gave them every last chance. Reverted and protected to prevent further timewasting and abuse. Let's see what the LA Times have to say ... - Alison ☺ 23:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
RFPP
Alison, would you please go to RFPP and say that my request there has been fulfilled? The administrator who semi-protected the page I listed there didn't put the "semi-protected confirmed" template in to show it had been semi-protected. Acalamari 23:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Done - congrats on making the top-editor's list, BTW :) - Alison ☺ 23:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks; I was working with the MartinBot for half an hour or so reverting vandalism on that page (I've never worked with a bot before!). I have no idea why an extinct volcano is notable enough to vandalize, but I guess that's the way it is. What do you mean by the "top-editor's list"? Acalamari 23:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Never mind; you meant Wikipedia: List of Wikipedians by number of edits. You're on that as well; higher than Ryan and I. Acalamari 23:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- (ec) It's probably a class of schoolkids who got the volcano to study for homework! Top-editors by edit count! We all have editcountitis :) - Alison ☺ 23:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, heh; it seemed that way from the vandalism. As for your edits, just checked: in the 16,600s you are, while I looked at mine yesterday and I'm approaching 13,000 (how sad, I must be, when I look at our edits). Acalamari 23:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks; I was working with the MartinBot for half an hour or so reverting vandalism on that page (I've never worked with a bot before!). I have no idea why an extinct volcano is notable enough to vandalize, but I guess that's the way it is. What do you mean by the "top-editor's list"? Acalamari 23:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
heh
OTRS really aren't "agents" of the foundation in the traditional sense: they're volunteers. I'm sort of an exception, as I'm interning at the foundation simultaneously (though in reality that still makes me a volunteer), and people like Bastique obviously are actual "agents" of the foundation on OTRS, but yeah, generally OTRS are volunteers. Appreciate the message though, and if you don't mind please keep an eye on the page in case any admins accidently unprotect or revert over the protect? ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 23:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yep - will do. And yeah, I applied to the OTRS as a volunteer myself, so we'll see what happens! Hope your internship is going well - Alison ☺ 23:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's going great! As for OTRS, just give it time, it takes a LONG time sometimes for it to go through. If you go a month without hearing anything, ask Bastique. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 13:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Unblocking
True, but the second block was a little harsh. He'll be closely watched for a while, and I'll be first in line to block him for good if he doesn't do something worthwhile. I must be having an generous day! Hope yours is going well. --Steve (Stephen) talk 05:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok :) No problem. We'll see how he gets on, so ... User:Yksin has staked her reputation on this guy (again!) and has agreed to mentor him - Alison ☺ 05:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, even though he made no agreement prior to unblocking, I'm sure Deco Da Man will need to pay attention to the concerns this whole biz brought up or he'll just be blocked again. As it is, he still hasn't replied further to any of it. I just hope he hasn't given up -- as you know, I agree with Stephen that the second block was pretty harsh. Thanks again for your help. Hope you're still feeling a whole lot better. --Yksin 16:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Semi-p
Thanks for the semi-protect, though I have a sneaky suspicion that the vandal will create an account. Oops..better not say too much or WP:BEAN... Cheers :) Dark Falls talk 08:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Heh - take my word for it. They'll just go hit your talk page instead :-) - Alison ☺ 09:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- (Scratch, scratch) A flaw in my logic... Good thing I'm not #1 on the hitlist... --Dark Falls talk 09:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Just saw it, but they apparently moved on... Anetode is taking care of it though... --Dark Falls talk 09:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- (Scratch, scratch) A flaw in my logic... Good thing I'm not #1 on the hitlist... --Dark Falls talk 09:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Fop
Based on events since your message, it seems like you're one of the more patient, tolerant admins! One Night In Hackney303 09:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Certainly more patient that User:Ryulong - hurrah! ;) Pic's gone, too - Alison ☺ 09:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not quite. One Night In Hackney303 09:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Meh! It's on Commons, too :-b Talk about blatant narcissism - Alison ☺ 09:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm - User:Zscout370 deleted it from Commons for licensing issues. Yayy! - Alison ☺ 09:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- "licensing issues" - or in plain English "get that vanity picture that serves no useful purpose off the servers". One Night In Hackney303 09:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- His vanity campaign is that bad he somehow ended up in the original version of the Matthew Bellamy article on the Lithuanian (??) Wikipedia, which I fixed as well naturally. One Night In Hackney303 10:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- "licensing issues" - or in plain English "get that vanity picture that serves no useful purpose off the servers". One Night In Hackney303 09:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not quite. One Night In Hackney303 09:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Protecting userpage
Thanks for that - I can't imagine why they picked me!--Rambutan (talk) 10:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- No problem :) Your reputation as a vandal / POV fighter obviously precedes you. If you want to have that protection applied indefinitely, just let me know. Nobody should have to put up with that kind of nonsense - Alison ☺ 10:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I suppose there's no reason to have it taken off, on the other hand, other users have occasionally updated templates and so on. Maybe try semi-protection after a few days, or is that against WP:SEMI? Thanks,--Rambutan (talk) 10:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- There is someone in the 69.0.0.0 IP range going around blanking user and user talk pages from (mainly) admins for a few days already. After block, they just switch their IP. Semi-protection seems the best solution (mine is semi-protected). Fram 10:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, Fram, one just did my talkpage (the only unprotected bit of me!). I think someone said they're all AT&T IPs, but I couldn't swear to it. UPDATE: Here is the AT&T comment.--Rambutan (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with that message, I also don't warn anymore but give straight blocks. It doesn't stop him, but it sure makes it a bit harder. Fram 10:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, Fram, one just did my talkpage (the only unprotected bit of me!). I think someone said they're all AT&T IPs, but I couldn't swear to it. UPDATE: Here is the AT&T comment.--Rambutan (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Rambutan, I extended your userpage prot to indefinite, esp given that you're going on wikibreak soon - Alison ☺ 08:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Committed Identity question
Alison, quick question about the "Committed Identity" thing. If I should, because of the unstableness of my mental situation, happen to be committed, will I have to create a special committed identity? (Yes, this is supposed to bring a smile to a sick Dub...)
Seriously though, is the hash thing for committed identity recommended for everyone, or just admins and above? I've been on Wikipedia for a few months, and I'm starting to really get into it! I also have a digital ID certificate. Should that be mentioned, or because it uses real-life identity, probably not? Just wondering! Thanks - NDCompuGeek 10:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Baccara
About our discussion with User:Dreamer.se... Well, we're not against changes and improvements to any article. But do you consider more than 20 changes in one single day healthy to the article? At first, we didn't revert his changes because they were, indeed, good ideas. But when he added an "extended version" of the single "Sleepy-Time-Toy", we did revert it because that "extended version" does not even exist. When reverting, we did give him a good reason, but he just didn't care and kept on modifying the article with something that is not true. At the article's history page we told him: <<There's no such thing as an "extended version" of "Sleepy-Time-Toy". The difference between 7" and 12" was the sound quality.>> Don't you think this was a good reason to revert this modification? And next, he added a table with some chart positions (copied from the German Wikipedia) that is not verifiable. As we understand, Wikipedia's articles must contain facts, not gossip. Once again, we thank any positive contribution... But don't you think any major changes should be first discussed in the article's appropriate page? User:Oaobregon
Question
I noticed right beneath the Mark Kim comment you banned a user not for his incivility but because he saw nothing wrong with it. That is the exact problem with Mark Kim. Not only has been repeatedly uncivil over the last 2 years, nor does he see anything wrong with it, he thinks its the right thing to do over and over to "protect" articles or get his way in them. I intend to open an RfC on the user (but expect it will be dismissed by him like everything else) but I would appreciate some additional feedback here. From my point of view this looks like an issue which has just gone on too long and needs to be addressed.--Crossmr 20:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I've actually created an RFC to get some formal input on this. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Mark_Kim If you'd like to give any input.--Crossmr 04:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for blocking this vandal. :) Abbott75 07:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC) (PS, I love your sig, *yoink!*.)
- No problem. And *yoink!* away, by all means. My sig, BTW, was crafted by the very talented User:Nikosilver - Alison ☺ 08:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Slow-motion edit wars?
I'm not sufficiently familiar with the :en rules for things, but you declined my request for semi-protection of Mike Bickle with the explanation that there was not enough recent activity to justify semi-protection. My impression is that I check in here every few days or weeks, and each time I do, an IP has deleted the reference to funding and the Joseph Company. Then I add it back. Other than IPs and me, no one much seems to be watching the page. Since I probably live in a different time zone than the IPs, we don't end up in a "heated" edit war, since it stays in my/their version for several hours or even days until one side or the other checks back. We trade a few edit commentaries with each other, but these do not always address the points the other side is making. Can you suggest another way of settling this dispute? Using talk pages of changing IPs to directly enter dialog does not seem like a feasible solution--my hope was that by semi-protecting the article, the IPs would be motivated to register and be more easily engaged in a discussion. Is there a minimum frequency of edits required to justify semi-protection?--Bhuck 07:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Unfair delting
Before you delete an article you should alway inform the last editor. Otherwise you are being rude and breaking wiki rules. I may have to have you blocked if you continue. Now please provide a good reason why you delted the PS-wiibox article as it said nothing but truth, meets the rules for notabilty. The only thing you had any right to do was mark it as a stub. If you continue like this I will make sure you are blocked from wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RabisaE (talk • contribs) 08:53, 21 June 2007.
- Well, here's the reason; your article, Ps-wiibox, is not encyclopedic. It's wild speculation at best or patent nonsense at worst. See WP:CRYSTAL to understand why. Note that you were already speedy-warned for creating that article, it was deleted by another admin, yet you immediately went ahead and created it again. Whereupon I deleted it again as indeed, I may per WP:CSD#G1, "where administrators may delete Wikipedia pages or media on sight without further debate". If you wish to contest this, you can bring the matter through the deletion review process. You can also report me to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents so I can be blocked. Thanks - Alison ☺ 08:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- How rouge! One Night In Hackney303 08:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for all you have done, and giving me a chance. I would like to say that the reasons I am interested in wikipedia are:
- The project itself is a
goodgreat idea and I would like to contribute. - I would like to share my ideas, I am still not sure if this is the right place to do it but I am trying to do it without doing to wrong thing.
- MediaWiki has interested me for a while, I discovered it when I was looking around wikipedia. I am trying to make a broswer and WYSIWYG editor for it. Is this okay? or should I be doing this at the MediaWiki site? Please see User:Deco_Da_Man.
Thank you once again :D
Thank you,
Deco Da Man {talk} 08:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC).
- EDIT: And thanks for restoring my user page.
- No problems at all, Deco. User:Yksin has gone above and beyond the call to help you on this one. Don't let her down! - Alison ☺ 23:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Ali :)
WTF??
Huh? Bad guys win? And how am I supposed to bid him farewell now? NikoSilver 12:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, Niko. I know ... Unfortunately, I saw (and reverted) what happened yesterday & believe me, full-protection is warranted :( If you paste a message here, I'll move it to his talk page for you. - Alison ☺ 16:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC) (sickened by all of this)
- Thanks Allie. Everything has already been told there. I liked the way I interacted with him, even when that was negative, and I'll miss him. I'm more pissed because of the way he left, and I am in the position to understand why I imagine he did the right thing. Some things are not worth the one-in-a-billion risk. I sympathize... NikoSilver 23:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Niko, to be honest, I still feel like leaving the project - at least temporarily - over the whole mess. I really feel sorry for the guy & the reasons why people need to remain private here have never been clearer now. And the response from Those Above has been less than stellar - Alison ☺ 23:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Allie. Everything has already been told there. I liked the way I interacted with him, even when that was negative, and I'll miss him. I'm more pissed because of the way he left, and I am in the position to understand why I imagine he did the right thing. Some things are not worth the one-in-a-billion risk. I sympathize... NikoSilver 23:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you kindly, Alison, for taking care of vandalism when I didn't know where to turn. Jim.henderson 18:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- No problem at all. It's not so much the vandalism, but that it contains serious allegations and personal attacks against certain members of the community there. That can lead into defamation and legal issues for WP. Thank you for being diligent and reporting it - Alison ☺ 18:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome
Much appreciated, that info looks really helpful for a newbie.
Couldn't reply on my own talk page- is this the right place to do it anyway? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriotic Gael (talk • contribs)
- Of course :) And welcome back, too. Happy editing & if you need any help, just let me know ... - Alison ☺ 18:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh come on...
He's perm-blocked. He's a non-issue. It's not like he's going to be able to do anything; RBI doesn't really apply.
Anyway...I'm bored. Now I'm bored again. I blame you for this, of course.
So there.
(God, I need a hobby...) HalfShadow 19:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Bored, is it? Here's a few hints to keep ya busy :-) Let me know if you need more ;) - Alison ☺ 20:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
locking a page
I am unexperienced at wikipedia and I was wondering: is it possible to lock a page like a video game page on the count that a big gaming conference (E3) is coming up?Sasst82 19:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, you can request an administrator to either fully protect or semi-protect a page by requesting it at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. It's a good idea to read the protection policy first, and note that we don't generally pre-emptively protect pages - Alison ☺ 20:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Also if one person is denied does that mean another, trying to lock the same article, person cannot try? Sasst82 20:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it can be requested more than once, by more than one person. However, asking repeatedly won't get it protected unless the article has deteriorated in the meantime. Page protection is kinda really a last resort as we (or at least, I) don't like locking out any editors from participating, be they anonymous or registered editors. - Alison ☺ 20:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- thanks. Sasst82 20:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it can be requested more than once, by more than one person. However, asking repeatedly won't get it protected unless the article has deteriorated in the meantime. Page protection is kinda really a last resort as we (or at least, I) don't like locking out any editors from participating, be they anonymous or registered editors. - Alison ☺ 20:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Also if one person is denied does that mean another, trying to lock the same article, person cannot try? Sasst82 20:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey there
Hi there Alison! I dropped your name here and here. I hope it's OK, and I figured as much, but if not, would you be so kind as to refer her to another Wikipedian who is a bit more active than I, but a bit less busy than you? I've been on holiday, so apologies for the brevity and the "business-like" post, hehe. My time's a bit limited at the moment, but I'm sure we'll catch up at some point! Cheers mate gaillimhConas tá tú? 20:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Gan fadhb ar bith, a bhuachaill! Just ask her to give me a shout here if there are any issues at all & I'll see what I can do. Hey - I'll be over yonder in less than two weeks now. Can't wait :) - Alison ☺ 20:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
You semi-protected some articles a couple days ago
It's started up again. Here's the history. Arrow740 20:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. - sigh - same editor, different IP address - Alison ☺ 20:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Arrow740 20:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't that get protected too? - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 20:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Of course. Thanks :) I semi-protected it this morning but that seems to have been circumvented now by various sleeper socks. *sigh* - thanks for the reverts over there, BTW. I've left a detailed message on the talk page and have to say, I detest fully protecting a talk page like that ... but what else to do? - Alison ☺ 20:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank You for protecting the Talk:Gerritsen_Beach,_Brooklyn--Guyver8400 20:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. As stated above, I really don't like doing that & will try to remove the prot at first opportunity. Libellous comments and personal vendettas are not pleasant - Alison ☺ 21:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Maybe a little longer
I recently reported User:=CJK= because of his actions. If you look at my report, he's been doing this all day long, after 2 warnings by 2 different editors for the Hannibal Lecter article, and then again for the article reverts that you blocked him for. I think "a short time" might not be enough for this editor. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi there. We'll have to see where this goes. He's been given what I'd consider a standard 24-hour block for 3RR violation (not to mention the rampant incivility and refusal to work with others, warning blanking, etc, etc). He's got a clean block record to-date. There's the possibility that, having been blocked, he may reform but if it's business as usual when he returns, he'll just get quickly blocked for longer until the inevitable occurs - Alison ☺ 22:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok. It only said "editing for a short time", instead of giving a time. I didn't know if that meant like for an hour or what. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, right. The boilerplate block message doesn't really make that clear. If you click on his contributions, then 'block log', you'll see the duration ... - Alison ☺ 23:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I also wonder if his name can't technically be considered a violation, considering the difficultly with linking to his edit history, though I suppose he wouldn't be here anymore if that were the case... HalfShadow 23:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the username meets the username policy, far as I can see. It's just a little funny and the "=" gets escaped in URLs. - Alison ☺ 23:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Gotcha. I always forget about that, probably because it's just a small link at the top. I'll have to remember that for the future. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I also wonder if his name can't technically be considered a violation, considering the difficultly with linking to his edit history, though I suppose he wouldn't be here anymore if that were the case... HalfShadow 23:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, right. The boilerplate block message doesn't really make that clear. If you click on his contributions, then 'block log', you'll see the duration ... - Alison ☺ 23:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok. It only said "editing for a short time", instead of giving a time. I didn't know if that meant like for an hour or what. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
When I put that 3RR report in, just before you blocked him, the area where you put the users name (that lists his history, contribs, etc) would show up "Example user" because of the "=" signs around his name. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Whereabouts is that? I've seen something similar in the past and I know there's a workaround for it. Maybe mention it on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names but it's starting to look like you're out to get him (whether you are or not!) - Alison ☺ 23:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not trying to get him blocked for his name. I don't think he did it intentionally knowing it would screw up the coding. I was merely trying to explain what HalfShadow was referring to. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Apparently, doing this {{userlinks|1==CJK=}} fixes it: =CJK= (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) HalfShadow 23:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not trying to get him blocked for his name. I don't think he did it intentionally knowing it would screw up the coding. I was merely trying to explain what HalfShadow was referring to. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I put in a request for comment about it because I wasn't aware there was a template to correct it. Should I remove that or let others discuss the issue. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- That should be fine. See what the community has to say ... - Alison ☺ 23:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ok. I used that template that HalfShadow brought here, because if I used the one they want to use on the request for comments page, his name turns everything into one giant header, and he still shows up as "Example". lol. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Your monobook
I copied off your monobook because I'm not too bright about this sight :) Hope it's okay with you, Alison. Cheers!--SusannaBanana (talk · contribs)23:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. No problem, although a lot of it is useful to administrators only - Alison ☺ 23:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Also, the 'welcome' tab has been customised to use my own personal welcome templates, which you probably don't want to use. You should change that - Alison ☺ 00:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll remove that (I need to find it in the text). Is there anything else that is slef-made/personal to remove? Cheers!--Susanna Banana @ 00:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Maxwell Joyner
I'm Thankful that you deleted Maxwell Joyner as rapidly as you did. It was so prompt that I didn't even have time to add it to WP:AfD! Thank you once again, and best wishes. NSR77 TC 02:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Alison
Regarding Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pam55 I have E-mail exchanges and chats with Behmod, other Iranina users and VoA. I have reasons to believe that Behmod and Pam55 are different students of the same department of the same University (I can provide additional info by E-mail if needed). In the worst case they are only guilty in mild meatpuppeting. I decided to unblock both of them and have given them warnings about meatpuppeting. Alex Bakharev 04:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, Alex. As the blocking admin, I don't mind which way you go on this one. I was just following through per request, and per checkuser. I've left some more detail on the checkuser page above.
User:Bonklet
Why did you block Bonklet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for only 24 hours? All the account's contributions are vandalism, including vandalism to sprotected pages, so the account should be blocked indefinitely unless there's been a policy change I'm not aware of. szyslak 05:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Where's the policy which points out where an editor should be indefblocked with one warning on their talk page? Call me naïve, by all means, but I'd rather not indefblock for silly vandalism like that without giving them some chance of reform. It has happened in the past. There's an editor on this page who's been indef'd twice now and is a reformed contributor. I generally only indef if they're blatant-blatant, or a returning troll or a banned editor like RMS or JB196 ... - Alison ☺ 05:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- From WP:BLOCK: "While the duration of a block should vary with the circumstances, there are some broad standards: (...) accounts used primarily for disruption are blocked indefinitely". Indefblocking vandal-only accounts has been common practice for years. When such a user wants to make useful contributions, they can create another account. Additionally, Bonklet is clearly a "sleeper account", which was used for the express purpose of vandalizing semi-protected pages like Feces and Sex. szyslak 06:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Right. Now define "primarily", because that's the sticking point. Indefblocking vandal-only accounts certainly has been practise, providing they're defined as "vandal-only". I'm not playing silly semantics here; if they're vandal-only, they get indef'd. Remember also from WP:BLOCK; "Administrators are never obliged to place a block and are free to investigate the situation themselves", "A rule of thumb is when in doubt, do not block" and note that blocking is only to prevent disruption and is not a punitive measure. - Alison ☺ 06:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC) (hope you like your userpage. I accepted your open invite and tidied a bit!)
- From WP:BLOCK: "While the duration of a block should vary with the circumstances, there are some broad standards: (...) accounts used primarily for disruption are blocked indefinitely". Indefblocking vandal-only accounts has been common practice for years. When such a user wants to make useful contributions, they can create another account. Additionally, Bonklet is clearly a "sleeper account", which was used for the express purpose of vandalizing semi-protected pages like Feces and Sex. szyslak 06:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note also that indefblocking is a serious matter; you are permanently revoking an editor's privileges to edit Wikipedia. That's not something to do lightly. BTW, here's my block log. You'll find quite a few indefinites in there. It's not something I take pleasure in doing but, unfortunately, it is necessary betimes and I do it anyway - Alison ☺ 06:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- BTW, now this is a classic example of a vandalism-only account that will (and did! - thanks, Riana) immediately get indefinitely blocked - Alison ☺ 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Mmm. Idiot... Riana (talk) 08:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Bonklet's vandalism was relatively minor for an account with no non-vandalous contributions. On retrospect, it's perfectly safe to just watch what the user does if s/he returns. I strongly agree that blocks are not a punitive measure, by the way. szyslak 12:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- BTW, now this is a classic example of a vandalism-only account that will (and did! - thanks, Riana) immediately get indefinitely blocked - Alison ☺ 08:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Phewwfff...
File:Watchlist-clear.JPG
- A bit of a relief, don't you think? --Dark Falls talk 11:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
My userpage
Aww, thanks! It looks so much better! I've removed the blurb that says "this userpage is UGLY", being that it no longer is. (The redlinked cat was intentional, but it can definitely go!) szyslak 12:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Shoot me an email when you can
Bit of a situation here. SirFozzie 17:28, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey Alison,
Sorry for the quick email. I am emailing you, regarding the case of Behmod/Pam55. Right now I am in the vacation in Toronto and I hardly have access to Internet and it is difficult for me to follow up the situation. I understand that I am suspected to be User:Behmod. I am strongly request to review this case again. Should not you be convinced, I am ready to provide you my Phone number and Student ID. Also, I would appreciate it if you could unblock me again or at least tell me: how I can unblocked myself?
I am doing this communication since Behmod contact me several times. I will be back home on Sunday evening. Should you need to emergently contact me before Sunday, you can do it via Behmod.
Thanks,
Pam
Coding question
Allie, a silly little coding question, but I'd like to know for future ref, and am working on something at the moment. Which is WP's preferred coding for the reference section, is it (1).<div class="references-small"><references /></div>
, or is (2).{{reflist}}
the preferred option? To make things easier, just refer to 1 or 2. Thanks/i/a;- Gold♥ 19:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Goldheart! Nice to see you back on. To answer, I always use {{Reflist}} instead of references-small, for a number of reasons. 1) it's tidier, 2) It's clearer to newbie editors that follow along that "this is where the references end up" 3) you can make it 2-columns later with a simple
|2
option. Also, as its not transcluded, we can make global changes to how small reference lists work with one file change. It's all good :). Furthermore, {{sourcesstart}} and {{sourcesend}} complement it perfectly when adding footnotes and cites that are not embedded references. Check them out! - Alison ☺ 22:02, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks Allie, that's interesting as I'm half-baked in a couple of languages. I like the global use. Always wondered about that;- Gold♥ 22:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Allie, by way of adjunct. If you get talking to ON, say to keep up the good work, and big support here. I have witnessed past editing and it is indeed of an excellent caliber. WP is going to be a lesser place if that happens, in the mean-time, the quiet life;) Gold♥ 12:34, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Who is this ColScott character anyway?
Reading about this ColScott character, I'd like to know a little more about him in case he starts socking. I'm also wondering--should he be listed on WP:LOBU anyway? Nobody will ever unblock him after this. Blueboy96 21:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- User:ColScott has a long history here. He's actually Don Murphy and his blocking case is highly controversial and has been for some time. Long story .... - Alison ☺ 22:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Eternal RfC
Alison, this RfC I'm going through is well into it's second week now. How long more? Does it end? How? By whom? Some editors appear to have been given carte blanche to say just about anything they like about me, day after day; and any even remotely assertive response by me gets cited as "more evidence". I am close to losing the cool completely here, which I realise is probably the plan. The views of he RfC are splitting down the middle along fairly predictable lines. Time to call a halt; or at least enforce some civility on my attackers (the irony). Regards (Sarah777 22:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC))
- Lemme take a look. I'm kinda busy here right now but promise to take a look sometime today. Day-job is killing me :) - Alison ☺ 22:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- That's fine Alison. I really want this to end. I made an offer to be "guided" by an Admin, Swatjester (whom I didn't consult!) - but it is drawing no reaction at all. Regards (Sarah777 22:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC))
Wymond college article
Please could you remove the "This article does not cite any references or sources" strap from the top of the article, i have added the reference that was needed.
Thanks
24
Thanks for denying the block, though I think it should be longer: I suspect he wrote most of the attack article on me on Encylcopedia Dramatica, so imo he should get a longer block, but that's just me. Will (talk) 13:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikibreak
Starting tomorrow, I will take a Wikibreak and will come back on July 13. See my userpage for more details. NHRHS2010 Talk 16:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Turkish language
Hi, Turkish language is on the Today's Featured Article, it doesn't appear to have vandalism any more intense than any other Main Page TFA. Can it be unprotected? --Iamunknown 22:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Gahh!! I should have checked that. Unprotected now (Please don't tell DrKiernan !! :) ) - Alison ☺ 23:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks :) --Iamunknown 23:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Unblock
Well, I can't say I blame you. However, did you actually look at my arguments as I was "edit warring"? Did you look at what I was editing? No: You didn't. And therefore, anybody can do whatever they want which leads to crazy people like me getting frustrated. --=CJK= 02:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, yes I did - however, that doesn't detract from the fact that you were edit-warring and being abusive. Either way, it's over now. Back to editing - Alison ☺ 02:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh come now. I was deleting what was basically pornography from the Kim Possible (character) page, and the next thing I knew I couldn't edit anymore. The people who know the rules and how to contact you people always win I guess. Can I get blocked at random now if someone is pissed at me? --=CJK= 02:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- You were edit-warring on a number of articles. How and ever; no, you can't get blocked at random if someone is pissed at you. Same rules apply as before and your previous block is already history. At this point, it is probably the best thing to go study the rules so you know them too :) - Alison ☺ 02:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I already admmitted that I made a mistake on the Hannibal Lecter article. You didn't answer my question, though, which indicates to me that you really didn't check to see (A) what was being edited or (B) what my arguments were. One minute I was deleting porn, the next minute I couldn't edit. --=CJK= 02:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I did look. Second time answered. And no, you were not deleting porn. BTW, read WP:CENSOR. Are we done now? - Alison ☺ 02:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm. "are we done now"? I thought you might calm my fears but I guess you're just a jerk with lots of power. --=CJK= 02:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I left you a polite welcome note on your talk page (since deleted) and you come right back over here and start arguing again. "You didn't answer my question, though" - Alison ☺ 02:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Look: I was trying to delete some distasteful garbage and then, without warning from you, I was blocked. Then, a day later I come to talk to you about it and you say "are we done now" as though you have some important wikipedia business to attend to. Try to be sociable, Alison. --=CJK= 02:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- You were plenty warned. Your page was strewn with warnings, in fact, from various editors. You were then reported & that was where I came in. You really should read up on policies here. BTW, I have tons of stuff to do. I just had some teenage girl's phone number permanently removed from an article's history & now I'm making some changes to articles on nuclear incidents. What are you doing? - Alison ☺ 02:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
It's cool, make up whatever excuses you want. --=CJK= 03:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
How amusement
lol :) Riana (talk) 02:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Could you go ahead and come up with some Idea for some nav bars, please?-- Hornetman16 04:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- What do you think of the one I have above? I can change the icon set for you to any you like, really. Some folks use the Crystal icon set. I chose the ones above because they're small and intricate. Mind if I snag a copy of your userpage, sandbox it and play around with it? I'll give you a shout when it's done & you can tell me what you think? I did [[User:Szyslak|this guy's the other day in about 15 minutes. It did look like this. What do you think? - Alison ☺ 04:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Great job on the navbar Alison -- I just might need to acquire it for my page, should I ever really decide to make it look nice. :) Have a blessed weekend. Tiggerjay 05:54, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Awww, thanks, Tiggerjay. Feel free to steal it if you like it. Have a great weekend! :) - Alison ☺ 06:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- If you do, you'll need User:Hornetman16/Bar and User:Hornetman16/Imagelink to get you running - Alison ☺ 06:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Great job on the navbar Alison -- I just might need to acquire it for my page, should I ever really decide to make it look nice. :) Have a blessed weekend. Tiggerjay 05:54, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Emigration
So, what's Valspeak for "begorrah"? I'm guessing it's the ubiquitous "OMG". :) Baseball Bugs 09:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Heh - as it happens, "begorrah" isn't really heard outside of Hollywood, thank goodness :) - Alison ☺ 09:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Aye, another stereotype bites the dust, fer shure. :) Baseball Bugs 10:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Ireland's economy is very strong. Do you know how I know that? :) Baseball Bugs 10:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Something to do with the Euro exchange rate, I suspect, and the fact that the GDP is through the roof right now - Alison ☺ 10:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC) (remind me why I left for Sili Valley again?)
- That's a good practical answer. Another answer is: "Because the capital has been Dublin every year." :) :) :) Baseball Bugs 10:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
That's the sort of joke I would block people for using (just kidding).--Anthony.bradbury"talk" 14:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- No noose is good news! So, what's the Gaelic equivalent to "Oy, gevalt!" Baseball Bugs 14:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for protecting my userpage from that Ip switching vandal. Francisco Tevez 10:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Least I could do. It's a week, but if you want it indefinite, just ask. Thanks for being on vandal patrol tonight! - Alison ☺ 10:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- So boring! lol... apparently my mother might die a painful tear filled death. Riana (talk) 10:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- You're also a "worthless c**t", apparently. Tsk, tsk. How original ... - Alison ☺ 10:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC) (tell me to get to bed!)
- I also engage in sexual intercourse with dark-skinned people. Oh, and go to bed! :) Riana (talk) 10:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh you race traitor. Was it at least good? (Disclaimer: stupid people, this is what we call a joke)⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 13:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Race traitor? Not at all! :p Riana (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Bedtime. Finally. G'night!! :) - Alison ☺ 10:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh you race traitor. Was it at least good? (Disclaimer: stupid people, this is what we call a joke)⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 13:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I also engage in sexual intercourse with dark-skinned people. Oh, and go to bed! :) Riana (talk) 10:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- You're also a "worthless c**t", apparently. Tsk, tsk. How original ... - Alison ☺ 10:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC) (tell me to get to bed!)
- So boring! lol... apparently my mother might die a painful tear filled death. Riana (talk) 10:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Argghhhhh he's back again as 69.225.31.249 Francisco Tevez 10:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
About the BTW SIG
![](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/fb/Yes_check.svg/20px-Yes_check.svg.png)
So I go out of my way to revert vandalism and spam from wikipedia and to contribute to so many other things and this is the thanks I get. No I am not being uncivil and I think it is quite petty that you would pick on this espacially when I don't get paid to work on wikipedia. I find this very off-putting. I like to have a new signiture every fortnight or so because this allows me to have some variety without starting a new account or being accused as a sock puppet. So from now on fix your own vandalism and remove your own spam. The one and only (Wonder-Contributor)(<S>)
- May I also ask what BTW is, could that be something uncivil (Wonder-Contributor)(<S>) is the man
center tag
Yeah it was a mistake, but I kinda like it. I'm not sure I'm going to play around with the non-center version a bit to see which looks better to me. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 13:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
User Block
Hi, I would like to request a user to be blocked: 85.167.46.20 because they are continuously making un-constructive edits to FIFA 08. Either that, or could you semi-protect the page, your pal ¢нαzα93 13:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Please reply to my talk page, thanks ¢нαzα93 13:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi there; You have mail. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 14:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Advice please
Hello Alison, you have been very helpful in the past, and I was hoping your could lend some advice and suggestions of a page I’m working on [1]. (that title probably sent a shiver down the spine) An editor is being disruptive and has a serious POV issue, (that is just my opinion). I was hoping you could have a look. Regards --Domer48 19:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
[2]Started her [3] This is were its at.
- Alison, I'm curious about your role here as an admin. Clearly the above is incivil and insulting, especially the accusation that I am "disruptive" and have a "serious POV issue". Many admins would issue warnings for this. In addition, Domer48 has in edit comment lines on that article accused me of "bad faith edits". In response I have been patient and repeatedly asked for factual support for his arguments, something that has been rejected. Is this something you are not going to challenge - I note you are also requesting of Tyrenius that he justify his warnings to me and Gold. What is your position on this? Thanks. MarkThomas 20:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Mark, calm down please and assume some good faith on my part here. Tyrenius issued a final warn to Goldheart without any previous warns being evident. I've been requested to look into this and am only starting here. I haven't even begun to check into what Domer48 is referring to above. - Alison ☺ 21:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note also that Domer48 stating that you are "being disruptive" and have a "serious POV issue" in their opinion can't really be construed as a personal attack; just their (as yet unsubstantiated) opinion - Alison ☺ 21:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Check your inbox, I sent you an email concerning, you know. Karrmann 20:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, no need, checkuser confirmed and shes been blocked. Karrmann 20:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Quick Question (I hope)
Sorry to bother you, I asked another admin (diff here), but the example I used from ANI might be removed soon, and I really want to know if it's ok to post in more than one place when I strongly suspect a sock account of being used to avoid a block. R. Baley 21:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ummm. It's kinda good to keep the discussion in one place all right. However, you might also want to check out WP:SSP if you strongly feel that sockery is involved. That way, other neutral members of the community can evaluate and comment - Alison ☺ 22:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think from what I've read at various places is, that it's probably ok to report in more than one place, but that once an admin has noticed, or a discussion starts, report that at the other noticeboard (or SSP) so that everybody knows what is going on (and nobody is caught off guard). Thanks again, R. Baley 23:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The great Genocide and all that
Alison, Need you to take a peek here; I have been striving to remain civil all around but have encountered what I consider OTT behaviour from User:Tyrenius. He threatened a block (on me) stating that the word "genocide" cannot be used in a discussion debating claims that he famine was genocide! Could you please have a word with him?
Block threat: Please see WP:TPG: Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views. (emphasis as in the original) If you contravene this, you will be blocked. If there is any matter to be included, then it must be because it is the view of a verifiable secondary source, not because it is your view. Tyrenius 20:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Reply: Tyrenius, the debate is over whether the word "genocide" has any place in an article about the Famine. (At least that is one of the interlocking debates going on here). You said "The word 'genocide' shouldn't even be mentioned, unless a secondary source has specifically used it in the context of this famine." I disagree; and I strongly object to you apparent assertion that it can't be even mentioned in the talkpage without threat of blocking. Secondary sources have been provided. I politely ask to withdraw you block threat and apologise for having issued it. Regards(Sarah777 22:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC))
(Sarah777 22:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC))
- Sarah, I'm really sorry but I'm going to have to be excused from this one, I think. I've already edited the article and the talk page so I've a distinct conflict of interests there. Furthermore, myself and Tyrenius had a ... ummm .... discussion over the Hackney blocking incident only this week. Also, I have my own bias over the 'genocide' issue and recall commenting to you two weeks back about the "gorta mór" translation. Note above that User:MarkThomas has questioned my role in all this as an admin. Can I possibly ask any of the other neutral admins watching here to possibly step in and take a look here? - Alison ☺ 22:49, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) :( This just happened earlier today, see up Alison's talk page. And it happened earlier this week, see the history of User talk:One Night In Hackney. What is going on here? I am concerned that good editors (you, Gold_heart, MarkThomas, ONiH) are being run off by Tyrenius... --Iamunknown 22:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I honestly don't know. I'm concerned at the handing out of final block warns to a number of people without a whole lot of evidence nor prior warns. I'm guessing Tyrenius is trying to defuse an escalating situation on Talk:Great Irish Famine. We'll have to see what his response is - Alison ☺ 23:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I won't be running anywhere! But if there are concerns about Tyrenius; where do we take them? I'm still totally unclear about what happened to ONiH; I had my own troubles at the time and next he was gone! Zap! User: Iamunknown; if you have the history of what happened, could you post it on my talkpage? Regards (Sarah777 23:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC))
- If you have serious concerns about actions of an administrator (and that includes me), you can file a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents but note that you really need to have your homework done first & be able to provide diffs, etc, to support your rationale - Alison ☺ 23:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Sarah, I'll post something later tonight. In the meantime, don't do anything rash, plz? :) --Iamunknown 23:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I won't be running anywhere! But if there are concerns about Tyrenius; where do we take them? I'm still totally unclear about what happened to ONiH; I had my own troubles at the time and next he was gone! Zap! User: Iamunknown; if you have the history of what happened, could you post it on my talkpage? Regards (Sarah777 23:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC))
- @Ali: I don't reckon I'd go that far unless he actually blocked me. But in the "genocide" debate he managed to threaten to block three editors in a short period of time. Two for arguable incivility (very arguable) and one completely inappropriate threat to me based on an intellectual disagreement. All the best!
- @Unknown - me? rash?!!! Nope; I'm a slow learner admittedly, but I have realised that to survive here you best learn the rules and the politics. I wasn't giving that aspect due care and attention till now! (Sarah777 23:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC))
Hi Alison, first of all, in response to Lamunknown's points about Tyrenius above, I wasn't offended by Tyrenius asking me and Gold to desist and I think he was actually trying to calm things down and do a good job on the article.
I have just checked and can't find the place Sarah777 refers to where she was threatened with a block. What does seem to be happening on the talk page of Great Irish Famine is that Tyrenius asked Sarah777 and Domer48 to come up with factual references to support their use of the phrase "genocide". Instead of doing so, Sarah777 came here to remonstrate against Tyrenius and (apparently) attempt to gain your support as an admin in a content dispute.
In addition, Tyrenius has correctly pointed out that it is original research by synthesis to use the method of "genocide claim" that Sarah777 does want to use, which is perhaps her problem?
I propose Alison if you have time that you take a careful look at the activities of user Sarah777. She has already caused editors to raise an extensive and well-supported RfC about her conduct.
thanks Mark MarkThomas 07:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- me? rash?!!! - :P --Iamunknown 23:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Can you check Nasibi article
User:Woneders_land keeps reversing edits in Nasibi article without discussing my points in the disscusion page Dy yol 00:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- There has been a lot of sock-puppetry on that article already. Can you possibly bring the matter to his talk page first & see if s/he responds? If not, then maybe get back to me here - Alison ☺ 00:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Umm?
Is this something to worry about, or just plain old vandalism? ~ Wikihermit 04:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)