|
|||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Thanks!
for your cooperation and willingess to listen. Dougweller (talk) 20:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
ARBCOM Notice
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Anonimu and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, Codrin.B (talk) 02:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Leon Jordan AfD
Leon Jordan was a member of the Missouri General Assembly when he was assassinated in 1970, and meets WP:POLITICIAN on that basis alone. In addition, he was considered the most powerful politician in Missouri, his murder is unsolved, and the case has been discussed in reliable sources for decades. Did you read the references? Please reconsider. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your prompt response and I appreciate your withdrawal. I did a minor expansion last night and will do more work on it tonight. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:39, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
You've made some really significant improvements to the article, especially on the prose. Concerning POV, I will try and sort out the issues myself. I think it is difficult for you to see the points where you are writing from your POV and not a neutral one. I personally agree with your POV (the Pakistanis attracted atrociously) but we need to leave such judgements to the reader. The topic is interesting, and I think it would be great if we could collaborate to get the article to GA status. Thanks. --He to Hecuba (talk) 23:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Wonderful, I look forward to working with you. Darkness Shines (talk) 23:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, give me some time to review the source material and I'll start writing. Also, I tend to make BIG BOLD CHANGES EVERYWHERE in article space, so don't be afraid of reverting anything I do, because content hammered out after discussion tends to be better than the first thing which comes into my head. Great =). --He to Hecuba (talk) 23:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hello Darkness Shines and He to Hecuba. I've put the GOCE request for this article on hold to give you time to deal with the content issues. It isn't removed, and not put back in the ques, just on hold. Please would you put a note at WP:GOCE/REQ#Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War when you've done with content issues, and I'll remove the hold and (if still wanted) do a copy edit. Best, --Stfg (talk) 12:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, give me some time to review the source material and I'll start writing. Also, I tend to make BIG BOLD CHANGES EVERYWHERE in article space, so don't be afraid of reverting anything I do, because content hammered out after discussion tends to be better than the first thing which comes into my head. Great =). --He to Hecuba (talk) 23:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Occupy Wall street
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Occupy Wall street. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
El Talismán
A registered editor restored deleted content. I'd revert it, but I don't want to get involved in a edit warring dispute again. Platinum Star (talk) 20:33, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Judas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Arora
Re: the Risley ref that you have just added - Herbert Hope Risley is not a reliable source for racial stuff. He was, indeed, a scientific racist and his theories have been blown out of the water. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Had not noticed it was that fellow, have self reverted. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- That's ok. It is a common event. The man was a nutjob, although highly thought of until, oh, about 24 hours after he died. - Sitush (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, I meant to thank you earlier for your help with the Haven Herefords thing. There is probably enough there now to ensure that the article is not deleted, although there remain big swathes of uncited content. - Sitush (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Not a problem, as I said, once upon a time I was a farmer and that particular herd is quite famous. I have written to some relatives to see if they still have copies of the old farmers journals. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, I meant to thank you earlier for your help with the Haven Herefords thing. There is probably enough there now to ensure that the article is not deleted, although there remain big swathes of uncited content. - Sitush (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- That's ok. It is a common event. The man was a nutjob, although highly thought of until, oh, about 24 hours after he died. - Sitush (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Proposing site ban for Darkness Shines. Thank you. Hasteur (talk) 18:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for letting me know, I think I shall pass on the drama. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I have started another subsection regarding an interaction ban between you and Top Gun where, if approved, can result in blocks if any interaction is initiated between you two. Top Gun is supporting this proposal. You can find this directly underneath the section stated above.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 518,375,168) 01:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Never mind. Forgot you already answered there.—cyberpower (Chat)(WP Edits: 518,375,409) 01:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
RFC at talk:Pakistan
Don't want to clutter up the RFC header and don't want to get too much involved into the subject. Therefore I leave a response to your comment here. If it is about the notability of the source the RFC should've been drafted somehow like this:
Is the Failed States Index by Fund for Peace published by Foreign Policy notable enough to be included in this article or not?
Just my thought as it seems to be just about that and the current RFC title can be confusing for editors not already familiar with the past discussions. Thanks for your clarification tho. TMCk (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 02:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Calabe1992 02:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Talkback 2
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
JCAla (talk) 19:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
During the copy edit ...
Hi Darkness Shines. Thanks for noticing my comments and responding to them. The way I like to work is to put the {{GOCEinuse}} box at the top of the article while I'm editing, and to replace it with {{under construction}} overnight or if I'm taking a significant break. While the inuse box is there, please could you avoid editing, so that we can avoid edit conflicts? Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 21:28, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Of course, sorry about that. Further issues you post I will respond solely on the talk page. Thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- No worries, thanks. While the {{under construction}} box is there, it's fine to edit. I just want us to avoid edit conflicts. Best, --Stfg (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:European Union
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:European Union. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Template:Infobox Human Rights Abuses has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. mabdul 09:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Interaction ban
Hello Darkness Shines, with this edit, in enacting a consensus of the community reached at the Administrator's Noticeboard, I hereby inform you that you are banned from
- interacting with TopGun
- undoing his edits
- making reference to or commenting on him or his actions
- replying to him in any discussion
- editing his user talk space
- filing WP:ANI reports about him except to clarify or abolish this interaction ban or to report violations of the interaction ban.
The discussion leading to the ban may be viewed here. Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 18:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
State Sponsored terrorism
I was going through the article and subsection on India and added a line acc to the source "without evidence" later came to the talk page to see a lot of discussion on that. Feel free to update my edit. --ÐℬigXЯaɣ 11:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
for continuous fight against vandals and POV pushers, and helping Wiki retain its neutral face. Keep up the good work ÐℬigXЯaɣ 11:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you, regarding the article you mentioned above, it needs a lot of work doing to it. I will look it over when time allows. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Blog refs
Hi there, I was just wondering on what basis you've been removing all blog references from the Ghulam Azam page - there is no blanket prohibition on using such references on Wikipedia, as far as I'm aware? In particular, the Eric Avebury statement is available on his own blog here: http://ericavebury.blogspot.com/2011/07/bangladesh.html. Let me know.
Abbasfirnas887 (talk) 13:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your reply (I'm never sure whether I should respond on your talk page or mine)! The BLP policy says:
Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.
and
Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject (see below).
This seems to me clear on the point that material from blogs *on the living person* himself/herself is not allowed - but those references weren't on the person, as far as I'm aware. They were concerned with the ICT as an institution.
Abbasfirnas887 (talk) 14:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- The article is a BLP so extra caution has to be taken. The ICT is also about living people as are those being tried, blogs will not cut it as sources. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Carmel School Giridih
DS Thanks for providing the sources. Please note that the Correct and official name of the school is Carmel School, Giridih since it is a convent school often in media and newspapers it is named as Carmel Convent School , regards --ÐℬigXЯaɣ 17:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- i have given sources specific to Carmel School Giridih as there are many Carmel SChools in the World check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmel_School_(disambiguation) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmel_(disambiguation) --ÐℬigXЯaɣ 18:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, were I am from all convent schools are names as s"school name" convent school. I had assumed all catholic schools worldwide would follow the same naming patterns. Feel free to move it back. 19:43, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:7 World Trade Center
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:7 World Trade Center. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Your interaction ban with TopGun at AN/I again
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Pseudofusulina (talk) 02:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Periyar (river).
Hi, Please let me know why was the Periyar (river) article change reverted?Pearll's SunTALK 15:45, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Thought that was obvious from the edit summary, you appear to have ownership issues. All your edits appear to be reverts back to yourself. It is also obvious that the river source is Kerala and not as you seem to think Sundaramala, I will post on the talk page presently. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, I have added Sundaramala as the source after verifying and adding multiple references on the article and its talk page. Please show me a reference where it says that the exact location of its source is in Kerala?Pearll's SunTALK 16:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- I already did, on the article talk page were this discussion belongs. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, I have added Sundaramala as the source after verifying and adding multiple references on the article and its talk page. Please show me a reference where it says that the exact location of its source is in Kerala?Pearll's SunTALK 16:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- There was not a source to say that the river originates from kerala, And please edit the article after providing the suitable reference for the same. Pearll's SunTALK 16:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- I will edit the article any time I bloody well want to. I already gave a source. Discuss this on the talk page of the article and stop wasting my time. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:International recognition of South Sudan
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International recognition of South Sudan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- Quick note, there was no need to mark that for speedy deletion. New editor was clearly trying to create an article on a notable topic, he ended up getting blocked temporarily due to trying to battle CSD tag. Cheers.--Milowent • hasspoken 18:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
ISI RfC
Hi DarknessShines. I reverted your reversion of DeltaQuad's closure. The matter has been discussed in the previous RfC so I suggest you either wait a bit before trying again or use some other means of dispute resolution. Also, you might want to use an arm's length approach to your interaction with TopGun for the time being. Just a suggestion. --regentspark (comment) 13:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
GA articles
Cheers DS, I have had an article on the GA nomination list for some time now. What about you review my article and I review yours. At the GA, they say it is explicitly allowed to say "you review mine, I review yours". What do you say? JCAla (talk) 14:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me, which article is your one? Also look on the talk page for the guild of copy editors comments. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, will do. Mine is Amrullah Saleh. I will have to temporarily replace some images if you review the article, as they were nominated by Rawalpindi for deletion on commons, if you know what I mean. ;) BTW, I already adjusted the article to a prior peer review and let a copy-editor check for language. JCAla (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Looking over it now, will post issues as I find them on the talk page. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, Darkness Shines and JCAla. Just a word to let you know that I agree with the deletion of File:Amrullah Saleh.png; it doesn't look like it is public domain. It might be a good idea to remove the questionable image from the article and not put it back until the deletion discussion has closed. Regards, -- Dianna (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Diannaa, kindly look at the preceding discussion on commons. Moby Group (owning Tolonews) itself states that it is "100% Afghan owned and operated". Mohseni is an Afghan citizen. Also look at what Liliana had to say here. JCAla (talk) 07:19, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Looking over it now, will post issues as I find them on the talk page. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, will do. Mine is Amrullah Saleh. I will have to temporarily replace some images if you review the article, as they were nominated by Rawalpindi for deletion on commons, if you know what I mean. ;) BTW, I already adjusted the article to a prior peer review and let a copy-editor check for language. JCAla (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
A beer for you!
For Providing sources and help in saving Carmel School Giridih from AFD, cheers ! ! ! ÐℬigXЯaɣ 22:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC) |
- Thank you, obviously you know I like a Beer Darkness Shines (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Taliban, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Armitage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:World Without Nazism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:World Without Nazism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Using a reference more than once.
Hi Darkness Shines. I've noticed a mistake you keep making, which I've been having to correct in my copy edits. When you make a reference like this:
- <ref name=Fred>details, details, details</ref>
then when you use the same reference a second time, you've been repeating the definition with all the details. This is wrong. What you should do the second time is just this:
- <ref name=Fred/>
Take a look at this diff for an example.
While I'm here, "the abuses were only stopped by the intervention of the Indian armed forces" is not obvious and did need citation. I understand why you did that edit summary, but it was wrong and quite rude. Historical facts may be well known or poorly known, depending on the readership, but they are never "obvious". In fact, this bit of history is poorly remembered in the west, even by those old enough to have been able to read newspapers when it happened. To the younger generation of westerners, it's all but unknown. Requests for citations need to be met.
Keep well and take care. --Stfg (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Doing the references as you have means the correct page numbers will not show. Or am I missing something? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:35, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- The page numbers are still there. Different page numbers need different refs, like your ref name=Totten2 and ref name=Totten3, but for each page, you only define the ref once, and then you use the slash notation for later occurrences. Take a look for yourself at how I've corrected refs Totten2 (page 248) and Totten3 (page 250) and see how the page numbers are still there. --Stfg (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- OK will do as you suggest in future, assuming I bother anymore of course, I am pissed off with constantly being blocked for nothing. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:24, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- The page numbers are still there. Different page numbers need different refs, like your ref name=Totten2 and ref name=Totten3, but for each page, you only define the ref once, and then you use the slash notation for later occurrences. Take a look for yourself at how I've corrected refs Totten2 (page 248) and Totten3 (page 250) and see how the page numbers are still there. --Stfg (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
March 2012
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)- Block increased to a week due to this personal attack. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- (ec)I self reverted and you still put it up to a week? Darkness Shines (talk) 12:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I increased your block before you self-reverted. I am willing to reduce it back to three days, however, if you apologise. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Of course I am sorry, I would not have reverted it otherwise. Time stamps show you increased the block at the same time as I reverted. I will also be appealing the block as it was not the second violation of an IBAN nor was it an infarction at all. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have re-imposed the original block. I think you were most definitely violating your interaction ban: you were blatantly trying to game your restriction. But, of course, you're welcome to appeal my block. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- No I was not, I was raising a legitimate concern, but thanks for assuming good faith. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- In fact this was gaming the system[1] Copying and pasting content I had written to user space and then getting a gullible admin to restore a deleted article with my content change is gaming the system, as I can now no longer edit that article. Pure genius you lot. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have re-imposed the original block. I think you were most definitely violating your interaction ban: you were blatantly trying to game your restriction. But, of course, you're welcome to appeal my block. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:34, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Of course I am sorry, I would not have reverted it otherwise. Time stamps show you increased the block at the same time as I reverted. I will also be appealing the block as it was not the second violation of an IBAN nor was it an infarction at all. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I increased your block before you self-reverted. I am willing to reduce it back to three days, however, if you apologise. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Unblock
Darkness Shines (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have not violated the interaction ban. Sal seems to think I have done so twice, I have not. Sending an article to AFD is not an WP:IBAN violation. Nor is this[2] an IBAN violation. I did not name him, I did not refer to his edits and as can be seen here[3] I was trying to avoid mentions of he who must not be named at all costs. I see no other way I could have asked that question on the BLP board. And if asking about a BLP violation is an interaction violation then how am I meant to raise such query's in the future? I have not violated the IBAN as laid down under the policy, and I request this block be lifted. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Do you seriously think that referring to a user by an evasive term like "He who must not be named" instead of by username somehow doesn't count as referring to him? The interaction ban says "making reference to or commenting on him or his actions", not "making reference to or commenting on him or his actions by name". You certainly did make reference to, and commented on, him and his actions. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:06, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
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.
Merger?
If you return to my talk page and look at the thread just above yours, you will see the answer. Nyttend (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- That is not an answer, you restored an article which had under gone AFD to mainspace, you merged it with another article and it is full of OR, most of it fails verification, and it is not possible now for me to edit the article to correct your hideous mistake. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- You asked why I did it, and what I said is a sufficient reason to understand why I did it. Kindly avoid dragging me into your dispute; I acted because I'm neutral in your dispute, and you'll notice that the only content edit I made was removing some templates that are inappropriate out of userspace. Nyttend (talk) 13:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Haha, that's a funny story. What do you call it if an AFD leads to a deletion of an article based on the OR of the content, you then restore it in your sandbox and let an admin move it back into an article. Very funny. But I still do not get the reason why it was done. JCAla (talk) 13:30, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- That's know as gaming the system, do not expect an admin to admit he fucked up, none of them ever do. My block log is proof of that. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have checked the article's logs and it appears it was never deleted. Could you please provide a link to the AfD which ended in deletion, please? Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- You are looking at the wrong article, [4] This one was deleted. It was saved in user space and has now been merged into Pro-Pakistan sentiment which I created in good faith, not as a preemptive strike as has been alluded to. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have left a note on Nyttend's talk page; however, Captain Screebo (talk · contribs) has been pruning the article since you posted that thread on BLPN. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- So what? He will just get reverted down the road, and still I am unable to edit an article I created. It still has OR both the Music and Displays of sentiment have no place in an article, it is just made up crap. The entire lede is unsourced apart from two neologisms which fail verification, usage of a word is not a definition, and those terms are being defined now by Wikipedia. Pure horseshit is what it is. I had begun the article, used academic sources and would have expanded it correctly, now it is and will remain a mess. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Well, for one thing, even if the article is that bad, you are not the only one who can make it better. Captain Screebo can improve it and even nominate it for deletion again, if the article cannot be bettered. Furthermore, Nyttend can also be convinced to undo his history merge – flies, honey, vinegar and all that, you know. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- So what? He will just get reverted down the road, and still I am unable to edit an article I created. It still has OR both the Music and Displays of sentiment have no place in an article, it is just made up crap. The entire lede is unsourced apart from two neologisms which fail verification, usage of a word is not a definition, and those terms are being defined now by Wikipedia. Pure horseshit is what it is. I had begun the article, used academic sources and would have expanded it correctly, now it is and will remain a mess. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have left a note on Nyttend's talk page; however, Captain Screebo (talk · contribs) has been pruning the article since you posted that thread on BLPN. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- You are looking at the wrong article, [4] This one was deleted. It was saved in user space and has now been merged into Pro-Pakistan sentiment which I created in good faith, not as a preemptive strike as has been alluded to. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I think TopGun did game the system and DS went for the wrong measure. If he promises to you to ask at ANI the next time about what he should do in such cases, would you unblock him? Others should then check whether the sources back the claims etc. JCAla (talk) 14:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- (ec)If I had not asked on the BLP board about it (you know the question you have blocked me for) Then who exactly would have fixed it? I have been following the discussion on the other talk pages, first and foremost please correct my spelling error which has propagated all over the place.I refer to the section headers[5] ;o) Also explain to the quite confused Nyttend as to why I am now unable to edit an article I created, any edit I make to that article will be a revert of what was merged, hence a violation of the IBAN. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yes. As a note, "Pakophilia" is a neologism for "Pro-Pakistan sentiment". JCAla (talk) 13:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Even more amusing I saw you removed "Dal Khor" well done as it is not supported by the references at all, a point I had made in the AFD for the same term, dunno why I bother truth be told, some editors are allowed to do as they wish while those who work to improve articles using the best sources available keep getting bitch slapped. I am coming to the conclusion that editing Wikipedia is a terrible waste of time and energy. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have checked the article's logs and it appears it was never deleted. Could you please provide a link to the AfD which ended in deletion, please? Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- That's know as gaming the system, do not expect an admin to admit he fucked up, none of them ever do. My block log is proof of that. Darkness Shines (talk) 13:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Unblock II
Darkness Shines (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
No I do not think "He who must not be named" is referring to him, it is in fact the opposite. I did not comment on his actions, as I pointed out in the diff[6] I edited my post to try and not refer to him. If this has been a deliberate violation on my part I would accept this block, it was not. I have written "He who must not be named" at ANI and nobody said it was a violation FFS. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Unfortunately "he who is currently blocked" continues to refer to the other editor in an WP:IBAN. This block should be longer, however, the terms are clear: you cannot refer to them by nicknames or whatever (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
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.
- (ec)Are you taking the piss? JamesBWatson said that was the reason for declining my request? How the hell am I to clarify that without writing it again? As usual admins close ranks against the plebs and refuse to admit they are wrong. I am done. I will log out and edit in future from an IP. All having an account gets you is shite from nationalist POV pushers who play games. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Hey, I think only Salvio could possibly unblock you (if he wants to), if you make a productive suggestion on future behavior to him. :) But don't know if he actually will. It's, however, worth a try. JCAla (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- There were fuck all wrong with my behavior, I did not violate the IBAN, I did not game the fucking system, and every time I have been blocked on this excuse for a fucking encyclopedia is because one person, just one, has done his utmost to have me blocked. His fan club are now calling for a topic ban as well. Like I wrote above, from now on I will edit from an IP. Darkness Shines (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ha, was searching for where they propose the topic ban for you and came to this. Man, this guy got nerves. Sorry, you are not allowed to comment on this, forgot. :/ JCAla (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Really don't see why not, after all I am quite certain I was being referred to on Talk:Pro-Pakistan sentiment. No doubt that will further anger our overlords who will now extend the block. Heaven forbid one ever admits he was wrong. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Ha, was searching for where they propose the topic ban for you and came to this. Man, this guy got nerves. Sorry, you are not allowed to comment on this, forgot. :/ JCAla (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Unblock III
Darkness Shines (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have not intentionally violated the IBAN, I posted "what I am not allowed to say" at ANI and nobody there said this was a violation. Now that I know it is I will refrain from saying it again. A three day block for a mistake is obscene. Please unblock me. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:22, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Accept reason:
I want to believe you and, therefore, I am about to unblock you. But, please, please, please in future avoid referring to TopGun's actions at all costs, either by mentioning him directly or by using periphrases. You are supposed to ignore him, no matter what he does. If he violates Wikipedia's policies, there are many other editors who can called him out. You just ignore him. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Holy crap, I did not expect this Sal you just restored my faith in the admin class, thank you. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:03, 1 March 2012 (UTC)