If you send me email, be sure to tell me on this page, I don't check it very often!
ARCHIVES - Archive 2006-1010 - Archive 2011 - Archive 2012
BEFORE YOU POST - Discussions about the content of articles belong on the talk page for that article. This includes discussions about text, images, tags, or other physical things on the page. This way everyone can participate. If you like, you can post a note here pointing me to it. If you want to discuss general policy, ask for help on a page you haven't seen me on, or other topics that aren't related to the actual article, post it here. I archive frequently, check there if a discussion has "disappeared". Thanks -Dennis
Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 01:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
Thank you, all of you
I want to thank everyone that took the time to participate in my RfA. I've said it before but it is worth repeating: I'm humbled by the tremendous amount of support I received during this entire process. It was unexpected, as was the amount of overall interest. More importantly, the vast majority of those who !voted to oppose, did so in good faith, offering constructive criticism and even some compliments. There was a little drama but it isn't in my nature to dwell on these things or hold grudges anyway. What matters is what we all do from here forward.
I want to thank Pedro and Elen for trusting me enough to nominate me, and too many others to list here, including everyone who took the time to fully research and publicly give me the benefit of the doubt. I did gain a lot of clarity during the process, and it changed my perspective on several things. Saying it was stressful is an understatement, more so that I expected. Fortunately, I had good advice along the way, and learned a great deal about myself and others. Several editors whom I respect have offered to help me address my shortcomings at CSD and I will take them up on their offers. Universally, it was made clear that I should tread lightly with deletions. I agree with and trust their assessment and pledge to do exactly that. In the short run, I have a lot to read up on and learn, but I want to keep up with regular editing as well, and allow myself enough time to learn what I'm doing, before I do it.
Now if you will pardon me, I think I'm going to grab a beer and spend the evening with the Mrs. and my two dogs. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 21:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
You are now an administrator
Congratulations, I have just closed your RfA as successful and made you an administrator. Take a look at the administrators' how-to guide and the administrators' reading list if you haven't read those already. Also, the practice exercises at the new admin school may be useful. I suggest bearing in mind the issues raised about CSD tagging during your RfA and taking it easy in this area for a while. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to get in touch on my talk page. WJBscribe (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Good news; despite the unruly misery of two days ago the community gave the right result. Any questions, please ask however as mentioned I'm going to be taking a break for a while. Best wishes. Pedro : Chat 20:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats from me too - the last couple of days perhaps got a bit fraught, but it looks to me like it actually did still remain civil and constructive. Anyway, my Talk page is always open, so pop on over any time if there's anything I can help with - and let me know when you feel up to starting on CSD stuff. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:33, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations, you held up admirably--that couldn't have been an easy week! Mark Arsten (talk) 20:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations. The CSD pile-on was out of proportion and you dealt with it well. Watch when tagging new pages for speedy deletion now... Twinkle's functions have changed slightly with your admin rights and you'll delete them automatically unless you uncheck a box. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 20:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- That's a good point, yes - there's a Twinkle preference somewhere to set it so that CSD still only tags articles by default. I never use Twinkle to delete things - I only use it for tagging, and I use the standard "Delete" for deleting. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Good advice, that. :) I accidentally deleted a time or two when I intended to tag. I've got the hang of it now, but that might have spared me some embarrassment in my day! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Third on that one. Though I'm crap at CSD - I never delete anything, just spend an hour trying to rewrite everything on the list. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:17, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Good advice, that. :) I accidentally deleted a time or two when I intended to tag. I've got the hang of it now, but that might have spared me some embarrassment in my day! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- That's a good point, yes - there's a Twinkle preference somewhere to set it so that CSD still only tags articles by default. I never use Twinkle to delete things - I only use it for tagging, and I use the standard "Delete" for deleting. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations! Mop carefully! Looks like you need an updated box for your userpage... BusterD (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations. Got a little hairy for a moment, but you now have all these nice new buttons, and if you're anything like me, you're probably terrified that you'll either block yourself or delete the mainpage :) Don't panic, take it steady, and if you want some intensive tutoring in CSD, you know where to ask. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Hear hear! Any questions on how to be an effective admin, just ask an unbiased non-admin like me, and after I give you my uninformed opinion (I thought buttons were on clothes), you can block me. Best.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations. :) And if you ever want to learn your way around my world, feel free to drop by. :D Meanwhile, enjoy your relaxation! I remember how stressful RFA is...and mine wasn't quite as dramatic as yours. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats!--v/r - TP 23:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats! Sorry for any extra stress I added to the process. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 00:48, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- No apology required. I have been, and always shall be your friend. ;) Dennis Brown 2¢ © 10:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats! Best of luck with the mop. I'm going to take a leak in the corner later to keep you busy :) MrLittleIrish (talk) © 09:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Belated Congrats - I m little late relatively, but congrats! Just take care while dealing with CSDs. Yasht101 10:52, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Well done, Dennis. —Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 14:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations Dennis. Drmies (talk) 14:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations!..Modernist (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats!! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats on the mop! - The Bushranger One ping only 02:21, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Been meaning to drop a congratulations here for a while but keep on forgetting! So, congratulations. And I second Moonriddengirl's comment about WP:CP - we're desperately short of experienced editors there at the moment - User:Madman is pretty much dealing with WP:SCV by themselves and it's pretty much just me and MRG at WP:CP at the moment - and I will happily admit Moonriddengirl's doing most of it. And if you want a "fun" early task, you could always close Wikipedia talk:Copyrights#RfC: What to do with respect to the copyright of countries with which the US does not have copyright relations? which is in desperate need of a closure. Dpmuk (talk) 03:43, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Holy carp. I'm looking at it, but I've never closed an RfC and this one has a lot of legal considerations. I'm comfortable enough understanding it from a technical point, but couldn't promise I can close it until I read all of it and comb through the policy to better understand the status quo. This would be a trial by fire. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 11:30, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Indeed it would and I wasn't honestly expecting you to take it on - asking was more out of despair of anyone ever closing it. Dpmuk (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- It looks like some good ideas with no consensus, but I only got about half way through before my brain started hurting, so I went and did something that looked much easier, defusing a situation of someone calling another a racist at ANI. (God, I wish I was joking but I'm not, that is easier than the RfC). Dennis Brown 2¢ © 16:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations for maintaining a cool head during a grueling RFA. Drop me a line or email anytime if you want a second opinion on any admin issues (jog me if there is email because I do not check it that frequently). RFA can be a case of someone finding one's worst edit or action and presenting it as the basis for an oppose. No one is perfect, and .001 percent of the edits can be blown up and draw the focus of too much drama and anguish. Take that shiny new mop and get going. Edison (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Slightly belated congratulations. I am sure you will do a good job, for several reasons, including the fact that I know you are willing to ask others if in doubt, and that you will take other people's opinions into consideration. (Alas, there are admins who don't.) I see that so far you have made very few admin actions, and those in one restricted area. That is the best way to start: rushing into using the tools is a mistake. However, you will get to use them. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Felt uncomfortable taking part in the RfA after advising you in the "Contemplating RfA" discussion; but sincerest conga rats! --Orange Mike | Talk 00:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not a problem, many didn't and I didn't expect it. Pedro did quote you in the nomination, so you were there in spirit. I'm still shocked at the total turn out. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 00:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Better look out; apparently my name is now a hissing and a byword in some circles, for biteyness to noobs, and heartless cruelty to advertising and marketing people who are editing in "good faith". --Orange Mike | Talk 00:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not worried. And we all have our ways of doing things, and reevaluating them from time to time can be a good thing, if done outside of a witch hunt. The real question is, have you rehabilitated yourself? ;) Dennis Brown 2¢ © 01:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I'm "moral" enough to join the Army after committing my special crime, Sarge.--Orange Mike | Talk 01:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not worried. And we all have our ways of doing things, and reevaluating them from time to time can be a good thing, if done outside of a witch hunt. The real question is, have you rehabilitated yourself? ;) Dennis Brown 2¢ © 01:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Better look out; apparently my name is now a hissing and a byword in some circles, for biteyness to noobs, and heartless cruelty to advertising and marketing people who are editing in "good faith". --Orange Mike | Talk 00:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not a problem, many didn't and I didn't expect it. Pedro did quote you in the nomination, so you were there in spirit. I'm still shocked at the total turn out. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 00:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Congrats on keeping a cool head and pulling through the arcane Rfa process. The way you handled it confirms you have the right stuff. Thanks for your willingness to wield the mop, and best wishes in the days and months ahead! Jusdafax 13:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Let me add my congratulations - I am sure you'll make a wonderful administrator. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 16:06, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Trouted
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
You have been trouted for: Putting a trout on your user page.
- Are you just practicing for when I start using the new tools? Dennis Brown 2¢ © 16:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
MMA Notability
I split your Idea and your commentary into separate sections as I really think the idea is the gold pressed way to move forward with the article space. If you want to re-join the idea and commendary, just move the section header below your signature. Hasteur (talk) 23:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- You did good, I should have thought of that. I was busy trying to just get the idea clear and didn't think about the format. Thanks. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 23:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Done it all.
What am I meant to do. Wikipedia is quite hard at finding references, Maybe someone can change the rules a bit better then we wouldnt have these big arguements that last 2 months. Some of my edits were quite bad, I wouldnt mind if people give me a hand on the Threads or even edit it to make it better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by King Genovese (talk • contribs) 17:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
You should come to King Genovese and discuss this. If you will, I can point you in the right direction to make it easier, and explain some things, but not here. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 17:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) King, I posed a question at User talk:Don Cuneo that was never answered. Are you the same person? Your editing habit made me wonder if you were. Calabe1992 19:33, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for that. You got a cool head. FYI FleetCommand is still autoblocked. That needs to be lifted also before he/she can return to editing. I made the same mistake. --RA (talk) 23:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I won't work for me for some dang reason, please feel free to do it, since it is obvious that it is agreed to. I've never blocked or unblocked before, need to read the manual I guess ;) Dennis Brown 2¢ © 23:03, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've done it. Again, no comment on the block/unblock. - Kingpin13 (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm doing something wrong obviously, it kept saying that the autoblock didn't exist for that username.... :/ Again, its a two day old mop, I have more reading to do. Thanks! Dennis Brown 2¢ © 23:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- The unblock link from the autoblockfinder on toolserver doesn't work, you need to copy the id it finds, and then plug it into Special:Unblock manually. - Kingpin13 (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, that explains it. I spend more time to prevent people from getting blocked, so I need to definitely read up. I hesitated even getting involved in this one, but glad I did. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 23:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- The unblock link from the autoblockfinder on toolserver doesn't work, you need to copy the id it finds, and then plug it into Special:Unblock manually. - Kingpin13 (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm doing something wrong obviously, it kept saying that the autoblock didn't exist for that username.... :/ Again, its a two day old mop, I have more reading to do. Thanks! Dennis Brown 2¢ © 23:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've done it. Again, no comment on the block/unblock. - Kingpin13 (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Re: Your are unblock
Hello, Dennis Brown.
Congratulations on your becoming an admin. I was notified of your RfA but unfortunately I was so busy I could not participate.
Yes, you are right. It think I overstayed my welcome in Wikipedia.
Still, there is something I wish you to know. I have received four blocks, two of which are reviewed and reverted. But their brand of shame still sears and burns like the sun. People nowadays do not hesitate to use the seven dirty words against me. (I am sorry, but at the moment, I have no stronger example other than Talk:Microsoft Security Essentials § Edits by James (User:M.O.X) which is a poor.) I have never felt that anyone sticks to WP:BITE. From the moment that I started editing Wikipedia (2009), the policy that was employed against me was Wikipedia:**** the newcomer! I tried my best to be polite, only to learn that in such cases, administrators accuse polite users of "being condescending/patronizing/faux-polite". And now, I am expected to behave myself? Please, I beg of you, define "behave" for me!
Moreover, two of the admins that have imposed blocks on me at one point or another broke the BRD cycle and turned into BRR and then abused me. Even in my only GA article, an admin performed an edit which was not approved by GAN. When reverted and notified him, he just reverted AGAIN! If it is wrong for me, why is not wrong for them? How can I correct my misdemeanor when I do not know what I did wrong? How can I act in good faith when I am convinced that administrators are not acting in good faith?
I have never felt that my blocks were just; quite to the contrary even my first block that is the most rightfully enforced one (I admit I deserved it) caused me to shout "unfair"! When I came to Wikipedia I had faith in it and I was polite. Now, I have lost my faith and have social problems. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Fleet Command (talk) 04:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- The reason I got involved was because the block looked unusual. The public spanking was part of the plea bargain at ANI. I meant what I said, but I'm not blind to other issues. Rather than rehash all the mistakes that everyone made, I just focused on the results. Blocks should only be used to prevent disruption, not to be punitive, and I felt that unblocking you was the proper thing to do, as any perceived threat of disruption was gone. I don't think you have overstayed any welcome, but you may be under a lot of scrutiny. I hope you stay, and that you can feel comfortable doing so. If you find yourself in a situation where objective administrative oversight would be helpful, or just have concerns about anything, feel free to leave me a note. Dennis Brown 2¢ © 11:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Ditto. I'm someone whose blood can rise too. Simply learn to keep a cool head and accept that, no matter how right you may think you are, together we make better articles. I hope that you can stay as well - but I hope too that you can take on board what I wrote about your interaction with *.68. If you can, you and the encyclopedia will be better for it. Regards, --RA (talk) 11:30, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, my! I did unwatch my talk page but I forgot to disable those infernal email notifications. And what I find? Two polite admins! Two actually polite admins. Well, it would have been a treasured find when I was in Wikipedia. But now that I am retired, well, it is like shedding tears for the dead. (Reminds me of Mafia in films; they are famous for their funerals, especially services for those that they themselves killed.) No! I am not going to stay in a place where admins are allowed to edit war, sabotage Good Article Nominations, issue blocks whenever they want and do exactly what others are not allowed to do on pain of being blocked. I am already feeling ... free!
- Although, I will stay if you take this case of admin abuse to Arbitration Committee. No, don't answer that; I know you will never do! Ha ha! Fleet Command (talk) 05:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Well, I have done what I thought was right, which is what I try to always do. I'm assuming good faith here for all parties. I left a message on Todd's page noting that I might have considered other options or refrained because of the time gap, and FC, I meant what I said on your talk page as well, that a little restraint might serve you well. I didn't take sides and I'm not the judge, I just tried to find the most equitable solution that both parties can agree on for the given circumstances. I don't know either of you well enough to make a character judgement, and since the block is lifted, it wouldn't serve any purpose for me to do so. Like I told him at ANI, a little fresh air between you two is likely a good thing. I hope you do come back and continue editing, even if you want a little self imposed break. And if our paths cross again, I hope you can trust that I will be fair to everyone concerned. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 19:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
User:Dinarvand n
Thanks for your message on my talk page. I have replied there. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Comment
I liked your comment in this RFA so look here. PumpkinSky talk 16:47, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Another case closed
Hello to you Dennis. Thanks to Checkuser, the identity of Helplesscross was discovered; as we all suspected, he wasn't as new as his account suggested. See here[1], regards. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 17:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
hey ..
Hi Dennis,
As the black-sheep of the Pedro cabal I wanted to stop by and congratulate you on your RfA. Certainly not an easy one. I'm always so glad to support and welcome one of Pedro's noms to adminship. It is indeed a lofty achievement (Floq, 28bytes, Kim, Peter, etc.). I had to log in to address something (ADMINACT and all), and wanted to stop by to offer my thoughts. I have to say that I am truly impressed with all your efforts, but then again, it doesn't surprise me considering the company that's kept. One thing I'll mention: The day will come where you screw up big time. It happens to everyone. When it does happen to you - step away from the keyboard for a bit, take a deep breath, and come back with the same exact posture you've always shown. While not everyone will always agree with you, your integrity, honesty, and dedication will support you well. Congratulations, and all my best. Ched. — Ched : ? 19:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Ched. I've developed a taste for crow over the years, hopefully I won't have to be eating too often. I'm taking it rather slow, doing lots of reading, trying to focus on what I'm most comfortable with first, and avoiding the weaknesses pointed out by everyone at the RfA until I'm ready to address them. I truly appreciate the amount of support that everyone has given me. I'm used to blending in with the woodwork here, so it is a bit overwhelming. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 19:14, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
"original packaging"
Dennis, your approach at ANI is to be soundly applauded and is a refreshing change. You talk an awful lot of sense! Sincerely. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. I hope you can mange to keep the bubble wrap on your button for a good long while. I also applaud your use of direct messages in lieu of warning templates. Quinn ✹SUNSHINE 00:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Respectively posting here, because I feel that it's relevant to your remark:
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Calabe1992 00:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not expecting to Oppose, and I really like you Calabe, but the initial shock of seeing that left me no choice but to withdraw, if only for now. I've seen so many BLP battles over the years including the damage it causes to the project, I honestly have a knee jerk reaction to that kind of stuff, humor or otherwise. Enough so that I avoid BLP violations on the whole as it is very difficult for me to maintain the level of calm and objectivity that others expect here. I will review the situation after my blood pressure returns to normal and try to be as objective as I can in reviewing the situation. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I appreciate your thoughts, good or bad, regardless. Thanks. Calabe1992 00:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- In the interest of giving you a fair chance to better help us understand this situation, I have commented at the ANI asking everyone to reserve judgement until you have. I suggest you do not rush, but instead choose your words well. I'm not an influential admin here, and my voice is no louder than anyone elses, but I hope it was convincing enough to persuade others to at least be open minded until you have had a chance to state your case. If anything, the fact that I had previously withdrawn support should tell them I'm not trying to be your fan, and trying to instead do what is fair in this situation. We will see. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've also essentially repeated it at the top, since my name was invoked. Sorry to butt in in the middle of your question and answer, but I'm hoping you will forgive the intrusion. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:20, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong done for me to forgive you for. I've issued some further comments below that. Calabe1992 03:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- After sleeping on it and looking at everything, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and reinstate support. The situation does add to the claims that an admin needs some experience in editing articles in order to fight vandalism, and that you have a great weakness in this area. I feel like I'm going out a limb a bit here, but willing to give the benefit of the doubt and hope you will take the time to learn more about editing. Not sure my one vote will make any difference anyway, but at least the overnight wasn't flooded with people using the Cain incident as a reason to oppose, so perhaps you are being given a fair chance. There are still other valid concerns expressed by those who oppose, after all. You have managed to make my RfA look a bit more tame in comparison. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 10:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong done for me to forgive you for. I've issued some further comments below that. Calabe1992 03:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Re: Review requested.
I'm not much of an image person being more into text copyright but I have had some exposure to images and I'd agree that the textual logo is not copyright. The other logo that's there twice is probably copyrightable but also almost certainly De minimis. I think it could be argued that the textual image is also De minimis but as it's not copyrightable anyway that's a moot point. More interesting in the point brought up at the commons deletion request that the arrangement of lights, the platform etc could be copyrighted and here I'm really feeling out of my depth. There is another possible complication here in that I believe a lot of events only allow photography for personal use as a condition of entry. Obviously this is not really a copyright issue, and not being a lawyer I'm not sure how they relate to each other, but if they've agreed to only take photos for personal use it's debatable whether we should be using it. All in all this is a little complicated and I certainly wouldn't hold it against any editor for not understanding it all. I doubt there's a single editor here that could be confident answering all the questions that have popped up with the image of the top of their head. Dpmuk (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Oh and feel free to quote any of that at the RfA if you want. I posted it here rather than there as I haven't had a chance to review the RfA for a while - a job for tomorrow hopefully. Dpmuk (talk) 06:37, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Monty845 has raised some other issues here [2] and submitted it for deletion. I'm not familiar enough with the admins at commons to venture a guess as to how they will view it. I don't think it passes the threshold, but he does have a point that in certain circumstances, the stage presentation as a whole might be considered copyrightable. I'm not sure enough to debate it at commons, and will let the system just work, but you might also want to follow it. At the least, a learning experience as far as thresholds go, because this one is in the grey area. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 09:45, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
UFC 2012 page
What do you think of the 10 PPVs per page suggestion, and having the events with their own page? I think that way the page will not be too short, nor too long and cluttered. It's works alot like the Bellator seasons page. Because trying to divide the UFC into years will just lead to disaster. MMA is the fastest growing sport in the world. So much happens and changes in 1 year that it's hard to keep up with just one page. Glock17gen4 (talk) 07:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- We usually break articles down by logical unit, years, months, seasons, but we do break other things up by groups of numbers, top 100s for example. I would need to look at the [{WP:MOS]] and find the proper section that covers this before offering a final opinion. It is in interesting idea, and appreciate you bringing it up. It's 5:40am here, so I might wait until I'm fully caffeinated before looking. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 09:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- The plan was to have the UFC on <insert name of TV station> split off as needed. Mtking (edits) 09:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- My opinion on that hasn't changed Mt, but I will still check out MOS. How many per tv station per year? The size of these articles is a big concern. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 09:48, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've been poking around, but don't see MOS guideline that recommends breaking it down by 10s, still looking, give me a day or two. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:35, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- The plan was to have the UFC on <insert name of TV station> split off as needed. Mtking (edits) 09:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
ANI
Apology accepted, Dennis. I felt that your criticisms should have been directed at your fellow admins, if anyone, and not to me, who am in the position of reporting smoke and flames at a house down the block: a four-alarm fire, or just a backyard barbecue? I should tell you this is not the first time I have brought a problem - which does not involve me personally in any way - to a group in Wikipedia who should know best how to handle it, and instead of thanks and appreciation gotten a sneer and a put-down for my conscientious effort, which I did not have to make. Which is largely why I have no interest in being part of the running of this outfit; I come to Wikipedia simply to pass the time pleasantly and make such good, worthwhile edits as I can. When it becomes unpleasant, I don't want to be here. So you guys handle the situation with kid gloves or grenades, or whatever you think most appropriate; I was just bringing it to your collective attention, trying to spare somebody a much bigger mess to clean up down the road - and now my role in the situation is done. Textorus (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm used to just jumping in and trying to resolve issues as an editor, not an admin. I'm new to the mop, and I sometimes forget that the same comments might be taken more seriously because of the admin bit. It shouldn't be, since everyone has the same voice, but as you point out, that isn't the way it always works here. So I need to be a little more careful with the humor. Sometimes contacting a friendly admin is more effective than going to ANI in simple cases like this. I have done that with User:JamesBWatson and others for a long time. You can do that here as well, if you choose. I try to use the least aggressive method to deal with problem that will get results. And as to my fellow admins, I wouldn't expect you to know, but I have been publicly critical more than a few times, even before becoming an admin. I don't think admins should be treated any differently than non-admins in this way. As to my gentle handling of petty offenders, my fear is that we take potentially good editors and turn them away, or we take someone "pranking", and turn them into a long time vandal because they get a rise out of it. Kind of like "don't feed the trolls". ANI puts a lot of eyes on a problem, and not all of those eyes have a gentle approach, so I'm quick to jump in where a gentle approach is likely to work for that reason. Anyway, if you run across a problem editor that you think I can assist with, feel free to drop me a line here. And thanks for understanding. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 14:18, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your offer, Dennis, which I accept; you will be my go-to admin in future. This is the first time in over five years of editing that any admin has reached out to me in this way, and I much appreciate that. My skills and abilities are better spent in other ways than in trying to keep track of the endless convolutions of WP structure and policy. I understand and appreciate also your desire not to turn away a potential new editor; but there's something to be said for retaining seasoned old editors, too. So I'll holler at you first in future instead of going straight to ANI. Textorus (talk) 14:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Forumshopping
Hi, I was trying to reply at ANi but got edit conflicted to death so just gave up in the end as the conclusion was to close the thread. One of the points I was trying to make (after Chris's comment) was that for me the WQA thing was about OhioStandard's interaction with myself, and SL93 just piled in over there to pour oil on the flames and magnify what was a minor misunderstanding, which Ohio happily contributed to by taking the completely unrelated comments from the AfD and highlighting them in yellow, very subtle. Sorry, but I don't appreciate users like SL93 who, after attacking me at the AfD, post at my talk page and involve themselves in issues which they have nothing to do with and start creating "deeurhaama" left, right and centre. I certainly was not forum shopping, for me, I was dealing with the unrelated insistent reversion of the RPA tag, and I believe I was being pretty reasonable as I did not expect an apology, just tried to AGF that "jerk" comment as a heat of the moment thing. Anyway, I've been called worse, and am now writing this supping a long, cool Portuguese beer, and will then proceed to do some cooking. Just for info. Cheers. CaptainScreebo Parley! 18:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Even if it isn't intentional, you have to be very careful when you are starting an ANI when you are at another forum, and some of the participants are the same. At the very least, you disclose this in your report, so your faith never has to be questioned. Note that WP:RPA says there is no policy on when to remove text or not. This was in the grey area, and I had not made up my mind and was instead hoping you two would agree to one or the other. I didn't care which, as long as you were both happy about it. You two would never agree on the problem, but you MIGHT have agreed to the solution, which is all we should worry about at ANI. Chris raised the issue about the Wikiquette case, and because there was no action that I had to take at ANI, I didn't have a choice but to drop it and let Wikiquette deal with the larger issues. His attack WAS improper, no doubt, but SL93 had apologized in that ANI thread, and had previously struck his comments, the only issue was strike vs. revert, which I covered above. Since nothing warranted immediate action (the purpose of ANI), ANI should defer to the previous forum. It isn't a statement on the merits of your claims, but when he more or less backed down and apologized, it made them moot when compared to the larger case that was ongoing. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 18:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Fine by me, yes the apology came begrudgingly and a bit late, imo, but I think everybody should just drop the stick, I object to being ganged up on for one or two comments that were slightly uncivil, but hardly personal attacks. Well, thanks for your ponderings. CaptainScreebo Parley! 19:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
some background on JTBX
I'm not sure why you weighed in at No Country for Old Men. You may be unaware that JTBX filed an unwarranted complaint against me that was heard by EdJohnston. In his opinion, he mentioned that the only matter that he considered acting on were JTBX's personal attacks on me. He asked the two of us to work through another editor (Gareth Griffith-Jones) on [The Godfather]. That decision was 25 April. JT violated that decision of EdJohnston's by editing that page without agreement from the rest of us.
Only after that decision did JTBX start editing on NCFOM. Then on JTBX's talk page, there is this:
- As an observation, I was appalled yesterday, when I was aware of your weighing into No Country for Old Men, and drew it to Ring's attention, as you have noticed. Not sensible, and really very obvious!
- -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
So I don't think JT is as pure as the driven snow. Of course you have to decide for yourself. Thanks for your thoughts. --Ring Cinema (talk) 20:22, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I got involved because it didn't belong at ANI. WP:ANI is the not the proper venue for content disputes, WP:DRN is, which I pointed you to, yet no one has reported there. On the talk page of the article, you were already talking about the article, a good start and is required to go to DRN anyway. It is set up and formatted for content disputes, ANI is not. ANI is the venue for incidents (the I) that require immediate admin action. If someone is threatening, making several personal attacks, or doing something that requires quick action, then yes, ANI is the place to go, but that didn't apply here. If the problem is simple incivility, Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance is the place to go because it setup and clerked by people who are good at dealing with that. That said, when I can help solve a problem that should be somewhere else, I will, but sometimes ANI isn't the answer, such as your case. I was under no illusion that either of you are "pure as the driven snow" and did not render an opinion nor take sides, my language was obviously neutral. So if you want a solution to the problems on the article, again, go to WP:DRN. If you are as right as you say you are, then surely your view will prevail. I didn't send you there to be rude, I sent you there because that is the place you will get the fastest results, backed by a documented consensus. As an example, if it went to DRN and it was decided by consensus that "fact=true", then someone kept reverting and adding "fact=false", then I have a grounds to block or otherwise sanction that editor. But it starts in dispute resolution. If he gets ABUSIVE, then let me know, that is different. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:50, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Dennis I appreciate your help, but this isn't just a content dispute. I've had a lot of "content disputes" (see Talk:Predators (film)), this is more of a case of someone who thinks they own articles continually reverting. As Captian Screebo did on the ANI, check this user's talk page. You will find things find much worse than this nugget
- As an observation, I was appalled yesterday, when I was aware of your weighing into No Country for Old Men, and drew it to Ring's attention, as you have noticed. Not sensible, and really very obvious!
That he keeps stringing along to all his postings now. It is clear this editor has repeatedly conflicted with users and admins since 2008 if you look at his history, I appreciate you linking the DRN, which I will try and begin soon. But I am also thinking of opening a Rfc on this user (see User talk:El duderino). I do not wish to dispute and spill over arguments on other editors', especially admins' pages. But since this wolf in sheep's clothing wises to soil my clean record I must respond. Thank you --JTBX (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- I was just looking at the history and did notice an extraordinary number of reverts, but wasn't ready to draw a conclusion. This would be one of the issues to bring up at DRN. I'm not taking sides because this is beyond my expertise, and beyond the scope of ANI at this stage. Even if you are correct, WP:OWN by itself isn't likely an ANI issue. ANI tends to deal with more obvious stuff. This is not so obvious and requires the more reflective viewpoints in dispute resolution. Rest assured, DRN admin have the same tools that ANI admins have to deal with other problems, but they have the experience to look at histories and these types of matter much better. ANI is a hammer, and not every problem is a nail. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your precious time in this issue. Although it was not me who began the ANI warning, I merely responded to the clone reports he is pasting to other admins. Does DRN deal with user conduct? --JTBX (talk) 23:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- The content should be the central issue. Conduct is considered, but shouldn't be a major part, or necessarily any part of, the initial report. Both parties have to agree to go there. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- It's a little unfair to criticize me for keeping an eye on a couple articles so the vandals don't mar them. I'm very open to improvements and I work with anyone who comes along. JT, unfortunately, didn't appreciate me only accepting some of his changes and recommending we discuss the rest.
- Furthermore, I would mention that, EdJohnston advised both me and JTBX to "ask the opinion of User:Gareth Griffith-Jones on any further changes they want to make" in his dispute resolution decision. Since that time, JTBX has made at least two edits on the page in question without consulting Gareth. I suggested that the three of us proceed on the basis of unanimity for the time being and there was no objection to that proposal (Gareth agreed to it explicitly). However, here and here, JTBX has made changes to the article without consulting and without consensus. So I know how he operates and it's not particularly attractive. --Ring Cinema (talk) 23:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
If you two have agreed to not edit without the 3rd party, then whoever did should have enough honor to revert back if they want to be able to demonstrate they have acted in good faith. That was a strong hint in case it wasn't obvious. And my point stands, that I simply noticed a lot of reverts, but as I said, wasn't drawing a conclusion. There are a lot of good reasons to have a lot of reverts. I have a lot of reverts on articles I watch for vandalism, like Ham, ironically. There are also bad reasons. I haven't seen enough to have an opinion, just to note the fact. Again, my goal is to get people to work together, not point fingers. I still reserve the right to point to facts along the way, however. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 23:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
- My response taken from EJ's page: I originally thought of engaging Gareth but as you can see on his messages to Ring-Cinema he has other plans, trying to court me along falsely so that they can continue editing the article as if they own it. Besides it was a suggestion to contact Gareth and not written in stone, especially if he is clearly no longer acting as a neutral memeber. I have been busy but will open a RFc as that was the original plan. Ring's so called violations of mine are a joke. Look at the history, a user called Chaheel edited an improvement to the plot, cutting out two unnecessary words which I already had cut out in my plot draft I had put forward. But if I had put those improvements forward, I would have been reverted, (which actually heppened by Gareth), the acting neutral editor but in reality colluding with Ring to violate WP:PLOT and policy. Meat-puppetry?
- If that isn't enough, Ring took the issue to the Adminstrators noticeboard wrongly, but admin Captain Screebo noticed he was a known edit warrior by looking through his history. We have already discussed it at Dennis's page, who noticed the same thing. Despite all of this, I still wanted to remain friendly with Gareth and reached out to him on his talk page, after editing The Godfather Part II, the second film, which had a plot of over 2,000 words. I cut it down after a lot of effort to about 1,200, but Gareth reverted my changes as unacceptable. Okay, I thought. But then I saw this User Talk: Ring Cinema, he immediately notified Ring and didn't even leave me a message, even though Part II has nothing to do with the conflict.
- Lastly, if personal attacks mean anything, look at how Ring responded on Gareth's page to me. Thanks JTBX (talk) 00:08, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not going to rehash every event here, or issue any decree or point fingers. I simply (and strongly) suggested that everyone involved act in the best of faith. I'm not the one who has to answer for anything later, you two are. I've already pointed you both to the proper venue, where there is a chance (but not a guarantee) that I may offer my experiences with this whole dispute. If I do, it won't be as a clerk, just as an observer. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:21, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- I don't suggest you revert again, because you would be setting yourself up for a 3RR block at the edit warring dept. Read WP:BRD for starters. I'm not impressed by the two reverts, but I'm also have concerns about the talk page at Ring Cinema.Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:27, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Again I appreciate your input. DRN then? Well, Ring already reverted me 3 times in less than an hour for No Country for Old Men yesterday. Should I report this? I felt bad about possibly having Ring blocked and wanted give him yet another chance, I wanted us to talk it out on the discussion page and another editor is already helping. However he responded by calling me a nuisance and creating a new talk section angrily stating he doesn't agree with my edits instead of contributing to the discussion. Again he feels he "owns" the article.--JTBX (talk) 00:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Well, no, that's extremely inaccurate. I'm no edit warrior. I watch some pages that get a lot of vandals, which I'm sure is a positive. On the Captain Screebo thing, CS made a mistake, actually, and he was corrected immediately by an admin. (I'm not sure Captain Screebo is an admin.) The simple fact is, I'm editing in good faith, JT is ignoring EdJohnston's decision on editing at The Godfather. EJ suggested we both edit in concert with Gareth, and I have done so. JT only has observed that when Gareth agrees with him; that is not really what EJ was asking us to do. So this is how JT is disrupting. Instead of seeking a consensus, he tries to sully the reputation of anyone who disagrees with him. Ask Gareth about it. As you can see above, he was and is appalled by it. --Ring Cinema (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I have left Ring and Gareth a message on the Godfather talk page. I am reporting them and no longer engaging with them directly. As you have noted, it is clear what they are trying to do (providing Gareth is not a sockpuppet) from their talk pages, and the fact that I am not being notifed enough to begin with. I appreciate your help. I have already gone down the consensus route but it is clear this user has no history of making compromise and simply using the same tactics with me, as is happening right now, we are getting nowhere. The Chaheel case is a perfect example. I placed the same edit he did, pushing for it in my draft for time, but when he came and edited it in, it was accepted by Gareth immediately. Actually it reminds me of that song. Screebo, as You and I, have seen this user's history. The beauty of Wikipedia is there is no hiding it. JTBX (talk) 12:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Everyone needs to back up and assume good faith here. If Ed has recommended you work with Gareth, then that is likely your best option. I don't know Gareth, but I trust Ed's judgement and until you have a better reason to not, I recommend that you do. Throwing the word "sock" around is not helpful in the least and isn't endearing yourself to me or anyone else. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 13:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I tried to work with him. Thats the point. But I am no longer engaging with them. Also, a lot of what is happening now, appears to relate to this Wikipedia:Gaming the system. I will try a EAR first, then move onto DRN. JTBX (talk) 13:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
User talk:81.178.38.169
Hello. I'm having to post on a proxy because my IP is totally blocked. I'm the blocked user Rinpoche, now banned I see (but what was the point since I was already blocked on the assumption I was banned?)
I was blocked after getting into an acrimonious debate over the speedy deletion of an article I had created on sexual abuse in Western Buddhist orders. I had created the account expressly to contribute that article. Previously I had edited extensively, especially in Mathematics, on IP.
I subsequently had a rather unpleasant tiff with an administrator called John over an entirely gratuitious intrusion into my private life, during which time he blocked my IP page for two weeks. Generally speaking I have scarcely edited Wikipedia in the past two years or so since, though I was involved recently with users Skirtopodes and RobvanderWaal's efforts to roll back Wikipedia's iconisation of Vincent van Gogh's painting At Eternity's Gate as a representation of mental anguish (an assertion as riculous as saying the Mona Lisa is a portrait of a flirtatious courtesan). These users were ultimately blocked as socks of mine, but in fact neither are.
Some days ago my IP Talk page started receiving the attentions of a group of vandal fighters. I have no idea why, although I suspect the involvement of a plainly juvenile and agressive user named Basalisk posing as a physician that RobvanderWaal had ridiculed (I see Basalisk contributed to the ANI). One of these, a user going under names such as Soviet King and Abhijay (and belonging to the same circle of juvenile editors as Basalisk) was expecially agressive and I sent an email to his school advising he be counselled.
I'm slightly perturbed by the legalistic looking template that has been placed at the top of my user page identifying my ISP etc. I hardly see the point since the information is easily found on a Google search. However it contains an accusation of vandalism that I vigorously deny.
This will be my only response to these issues and I am archiving it. Of course you will redact it, but nevertheless it will remain there for inspection by your fellow administrators (one of which at least, Tom Morris, has a habit of examining and publishing in his blogs)
Needless to say I have no intention of involving myself in a dispute with a group of semi-literate adolescents (in the case of Soviet King a school child aged 12 when he began editing) and the administrators mentoring them. In general I have retired from editing Wikipedia, a hopelessly flawed project with no future. A passing madness. 46.19.141.226 (talk) 13:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Response
I did not call Leaf Green Warrior a racist. He or she is calling everyone else a racist. I called him or her a foolish troll. B-Machine (talk) 16:40, 30 April 2012 (UTC)