→Re: Simplified sig: Hehe |
→Redirection: reply to Magnus |
||
Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
::As I read it, the gulf between guideline and policy is merely one of degree, not one of enforceability. Both are "rules", and, as all rules, both have their exceptions, guidelines more so than policies. But both are rules nevertheless. <span style="font-family: monospace">[[User:Jouster|Jouster]]</span> (<span style="font-size: smaller; background: black;">[[User Talk:Jouster|<span style="color:white">whisper</span>]]</span>) 17:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC) |
::As I read it, the gulf between guideline and policy is merely one of degree, not one of enforceability. Both are "rules", and, as all rules, both have their exceptions, guidelines more so than policies. But both are rules nevertheless. <span style="font-family: monospace">[[User:Jouster|Jouster]]</span> (<span style="font-size: smaller; background: black;">[[User Talk:Jouster|<span style="color:white">whisper</span>]]</span>) 17:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC) |
||
:::You are making a very large [[WP:POINT]] violation, keep that in mind. Another thing, userpages can be protected however the user sees fit if he or she requests it — it may not be in policy, but it is piggybacked onto ''common sense''. <small>—</small>'''[[User:Animum Delivery Bot|<font color="Green">«</font>]] [[User:Magnus animum|<font color="green">A<small>NIMUM</small></font>]] [[User talk:Magnus animum|<font color="Green">»</font>]]''' 02:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC) |
:::You are making a very large [[WP:POINT]] violation, keep that in mind. Another thing, userpages can be protected however the user sees fit if he or she requests it — it may not be in policy, but it is piggybacked onto ''common sense''. <small>—</small>'''[[User:Animum Delivery Bot|<font color="Green">«</font>]] [[User:Magnus animum|<font color="green">A<small>NIMUM</small></font>]] [[User talk:Magnus animum|<font color="Green">»</font>]]''' 02:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC) |
||
::::[[WP:POINT]] would be making a sock puppet specifically to illustrate the dangers of allowing unrestricted [[WP:OWN]] and [[WP:MYSPACE]] on userpages. My concerns, as expressed here, do not in any way negatively affect the encyclopaedia; your ''actions'', on the other hand, have a direct, detrimental effect on the servers, and serve only to excoriate an old wound for a gain of a measure of vanity. Regardless, if you feel that I'm truly committing a [[WP:POINT]] violation here, then feel free to [[WP:SHUN|take appropriate measures]]. |
|||
::::Do you intend to stop making edits of this type—indeed, have you been ''making'' edits of this type? As I mentioned, I haven't been watching—and do you feel remorse for overstepping this guideline earlier and then arguing that the guideline was incorrect, instead of modifying your behavior? <span style="font-family: monospace">[[User:Jouster|Jouster]]</span> (<span style="font-size: smaller; background: black;">[[User Talk:Jouster|<span style="color:white">whisper</span>]]</span>) 23:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Link == |
== Link == |
Revision as of 23:28, 15 July 2007
User:Magnus animum/Userspace Header
Small craft advisory. (Low to moderate level of vandalism) 2.47 RPM according to EnterpriseyBot11:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC) |
Hey
Hey Magnus animum. I haven't said hi in awhile and thought I would drop over and say hello. Hope that has brightened up your day. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 19:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- I broke the 4000 edit mark. Reverted lots of vandalism, met new wikipedians, etc. :) --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 19:55, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, I inherited you old coach Husond. The duck is right now in Iberia. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 19:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- To be more specific he is taking a vacation in the North-East part of Portugal which is in Iberia. :) --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 21:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Happy Editing my dear friend. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 22:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Category:Wikipedian_administrators_open_to_recall double membership?
Hi... you appear in this category twice, perhaps due to inclusion of a menu or whatever. It throws the stats of how many admins are in the category off, would you mind trying to correct it? I would be happy to help if you want me to but it's best to manipulate your membership in this category yourself. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 12:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
On RFPP, you put the template as semi-protected, even though you fully-protected the page. Did you mean to put the "fully-protected" template in instead? I changed it, but reverted myself. Just asking. Acalamari 18:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome. :) Acalamari 19:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Hey Magnus, would you mind deleteing the two following pages. User:The Random Editor/Main Page/Source & User:The Random Editor/Userpage Source. Thanks. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 19:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Gracias amigo. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 19:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Redirection
With regards to this, please see this. The issue of you bypassing this guideline has come up before, and was a source of a number of opposes on your AfD, including mine. What is your motivation here—is this an indication that you have forgotten that rule, chosen not to obey it, or do not take it seriously? I'm trying to understand why you'd do this. Jouster (whisper) 07:14, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- Jouster, this single edit to follow up on this Magnus animum's username change is of trivial importance. The purpose of the guideline (not "rule") you cite, to the effect that it is unnecessary to edit links to change the target page following a redirect where the link still works, is patently to prevent wholesale unnecessary series of edits. This concern is scarcely, if at all, implicated by this isolated edit making a couple of changes to the editor's own userspace.
- Earlier this week, you assured me that your creation of a page devoted in large part to your concern about "obfuscation" in userspace, in which you acknowledged that Magnus animum was your most frequent "victim," was borne of serious philosophical issues and had nothing to do with a feud between the two of you. At the time, I was prepared to accept that, although I personally considered the practical effect of the types of editing that you were complaining about on the transparency of the project to be slight. With this opening of a new thread raising another marginally important question about the same user's editing of links within his own userpage, in a way that does not affect any other editor in any cognizable way, my concern is renewed. The definite impression is created that you are stalking this user's edits and picking arguments simply for the sake of doing so. Please desist. Newyorkbrad 07:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- NYB, violation of that guideline on a large scale (using an AWB rule), to the point where he even accidentally broke some pages via his actions, was the number-one concern I had during Magnus' RfA. Thus, when his User page—which I have on my watch list because I want to monitor it for further obfuscation and out-of-any-process-that-an-administrator-will-bother-to-explain-to-me full-protection of the transcluded templates (despite precisely zero vandalism in the edit history, and, to quote WP:USER, "Protected pages in user space should be unprotected as soon as practical")—gets edited in precisely the same way that trigged at least three of the opposes in the last RfA, I get concerned. Magnus never apologized for the unnecessary and guideline-breaking edits, nor for the ones that actually broke things (typically, template transclusions, IIRC), and, indeed, defended his actions as "making the encyclopedia more reputable" or somesuch. Then, randomly, one of his friends shows up and apologizes on his behalf, I guess? Magnus never "officially" backed down from his stance of, "I will violate this guideline because I think it makes Wikipedia 'more professional'." If he feels this guideline doesn't apply to him—and, despite your assertion to the contrary, I do not stalk his contributions, so short of someone putting a message on his Talk page with an eye-catching headline that I'd see on my Watchlist, or him editing an article I Watch, I wouldn't know—then, together with others who were concerned over his willing violation and lack of regard for this rule, it might be time to pursue the nuclear option. I came here and asked Magnus' intent to discover whether that level of drama could be avoided—i.e., whether he still feels that willful disregard of this policy in article space is justified by the goal of having a more "professional" encyclopedia.
- Lastly, on the difference between guidelines and policies, forgive me for being pedantic, but I quote, with emphasis, from WP:PG:
- A guideline is any page that is: (1) actionable (i.e. it recommends, or recommends against, an action to be taken by editors) and (2) authorized by consensus. Guidelines are not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception.
- A policy is similar to a guideline, only more official and less likely to have exceptions.
- As I read it, the gulf between guideline and policy is merely one of degree, not one of enforceability. Both are "rules", and, as all rules, both have their exceptions, guidelines more so than policies. But both are rules nevertheless. Jouster (whisper) 17:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- You are making a very large WP:POINT violation, keep that in mind. Another thing, userpages can be protected however the user sees fit if he or she requests it — it may not be in policy, but it is piggybacked onto common sense. —« ANIMUM » 02:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- WP:POINT would be making a sock puppet specifically to illustrate the dangers of allowing unrestricted WP:OWN and WP:MYSPACE on userpages. My concerns, as expressed here, do not in any way negatively affect the encyclopaedia; your actions, on the other hand, have a direct, detrimental effect on the servers, and serve only to excoriate an old wound for a gain of a measure of vanity. Regardless, if you feel that I'm truly committing a WP:POINT violation here, then feel free to take appropriate measures.
- Do you intend to stop making edits of this type—indeed, have you been making edits of this type? As I mentioned, I haven't been watching—and do you feel remorse for overstepping this guideline earlier and then arguing that the guideline was incorrect, instead of modifying your behavior? Jouster (whisper) 23:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
- You are making a very large WP:POINT violation, keep that in mind. Another thing, userpages can be protected however the user sees fit if he or she requests it — it may not be in policy, but it is piggybacked onto common sense. —« ANIMUM » 02:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Link
Hi Animum, just thought I'd let you know the hyperlink to your editcount on your talk page needs repairing. I'm not sure exactly what is wrong. Maybe its just me. Thanks, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 15:16, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- Ahh. I meant the userpage. But if you say it works, it must just be me. No worries :) -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 15:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- Ok then. Problem solved then. I guess we were both kinda right. Cheers, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 15:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Can you please tell me what you mean? ZapBoy (contribs) (sign here) 16:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: Simplified sig
Do I have to use <font>? :-P ^demon[omg plz] 04:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
RFPP templates
Don't worry, I know I'm typing them in manually; I just prefer doing it that way. See this discussion on my talk page for more information. Thanks! Acalamari 15:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)