m Signing comment by 66.21.1.44 - "→vandalism: " |
Tcaudilllg (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
Your opinion, sir. [[User:Tcaudilllg|Tcaudilllg]] ([[User talk:Tcaudilllg|talk]]) 17:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC) |
Your opinion, sir. [[User:Tcaudilllg|Tcaudilllg]] ([[User talk:Tcaudilllg|talk]]) 17:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Alright, fine. I will be monitoring the socionics page and if I see any insinuation that socionics is esoteric I will notify you. If you do not take immediate action at that time, Wikimedia may face a lawsuit. [[User:Tcaudilllg|Tcaudilllg]] ([[User talk:Tcaudilllg|talk]]) 17:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Wikipedia reconciliation == |
== Wikipedia reconciliation == |
Revision as of 17:30, 30 November 2009
(Manual archive list) |
Your user page
(en-0) Why don't you protect your user page? There are a lot of vandalism. --79.26.164.143 (talk) 20:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Lot of people watch this page and Jimbo is wayyy too trusting.. :) - 4twenty42o (talk) 20:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
1,940 reasons why. Darrenhusted (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- You mean this vandal? 78.55.51.15 (talk) 22:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Jimbo doesn't protect his user page because he actually believes in the wiki process, encourages others to edit his user page, and genuinely hopes and expects others will make positive contributions to his user page. He also recognizes that vandalism is easily reverted. —Finell 09:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- Also, Jimbo has one essential role for the duration of his association with Wikipedia - one that no-one else can ever fulfill; he is a lightning conductor for vandalism, trolls and SPA's. They get drawn to this page, and vandalise it in the certainty that it will be seen by a large audience... Of course, being typical vandalising troll SPA's they don't realise that the large audience means the edits will be very quickly reverted and get them warned/blocked. Bless them, and copper sheathed Jimbo. LessHeard vanU (talk) 09:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
(Additional) Jimbo also uses his own user page as a scanner for vandals and trolls. If you notice it has been vandalised a lot of times; and thanks to the number of people that put this article on their watchlist these trolls are kept away from Wikipedia. It is just like a big scanner for vandals and trolls. Kangxi emperor6868 (talk) 07:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- It doesn't get nearly the amount of exposure of, say, the main page which will always (well, never say never) be fully protected. Jimbo's page is stalked by many so damage control is relatively quick. It's also not an ivory tower. Jimbo is relatively accessible and the suggestion box is transparent. Valley2city‽ 04:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Your urgent attention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Socionics/Workshop
Your opinion, sir. Tcaudilllg (talk) 17:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, fine. I will be monitoring the socionics page and if I see any insinuation that socionics is esoteric I will notify you. If you do not take immediate action at that time, Wikimedia may face a lawsuit. Tcaudilllg (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia reconciliation
Hi! I've been recently looking at Wikipedia reconciliation and having seen many of these projects, am interested in creating a similiar "India-Pakistan" cooperation board. I believe that such a project would be one of the most interesting reconc. projects and would like to have your comments/thoughts on this. Rana A.R (talk) 10:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
W/regard enhanced project neutrality
Wikipedia:WikiProject community rehabilitation/Idea/We are all Switzerland↜ (‘Just M E ’here , now) 16:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I think this deserves a lot of attention, and I think the core value put forward here is exactly right. One way I used to say it: for a really good Wikipedian, you ought to be unable to accurately guess at political affiliation or opinion. I think we should all leave our personal politics (and the polemics that go with them) politely at the door.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 03:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
vandalism
First of all I am not user:PIO neither my logged nicknames or IPs but in every case action of user:AlasdairGreen27 in article pallone is vandalism because version before suspected socks is this but not this disaster or stub! removing valid contribution of PIO who was banned by an Italian admin after these edits but for other reasons not pertinent this article regarding some Italian famous sports. I can develop this article because I have books and sources but I request your action against vandalism of AlasdairGreen27 who is notorious in Italwiki for his battle in meatpuppetry with user:DIREKTOR against all Italian and Serb editors in several articles of European history and this point I will report to you in future. Actions of admins user:Spellcast and user:MuZemike against my logged nicknames are nonsense. If you want, I can develop a lot of articles but I request unblock at least of account user:Vastaso. You can leave your answer here under. Regards, 29 November —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.95.253.173 (talk) 18:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- Note that I have not taken any administrative actions regarding PIO (i.e. I have not blocked any of the accounts myself), only in the handling of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PIO/Archive, which amounts endorsing for CheckUser attention and making sure the already-blocked socks were properly tagged. MuZemike 20:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
- Again we read complaints against user DIREKTOR. He does what he want in our wiki, even write in croatian in his talkpage (see: november 29 [1]) and no admin pinpoints that only in plain english he should have a discussion there. He does what he want with articles promoting Tito and communist Yugoslavia (gone with the wind the "impartiality" of wikipedia?) Unbelievable. When all this will stop? Pi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.21.1.44 (talk) 16:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)