reply |
→I have really tried: reply |
||
Line 148: | Line 148: | ||
I've gone to great efforts to comply with the arbitration ruling, exceeding that which was expected of me. I contacted several people, including yourself for mentorship, and notified arbcom before the deadline that I could not find a mentor. Through your help I learned to how independently cite sources up to the current standards. As requested in arbitration by those who had issues with my behaviour, I went to great lengths to list where I thought there was bias and undue weight in the article, and posted this all on the talk pages. These threads were marked so that the other editors could clearly see what needed to be done. I've made every attempt to seek mediation and consensus at every turn since arbitration...and still, this action was taken. [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Request_to_amend_prior_case:_ADHD]] I am dismayed that they are allowed to do this once again with false accusations and character assassination. I am FORCED again to defend myself against several accusers. This time it for a bogus reason, and that is, giving my opinion upon request. This is especially demoralizing when one considers the behaviour of all the parties since arbitration. Any words of advice would be appreciated.--[[User:Scuro|scuro]] ([[User talk:Scuro|talk]]) 05:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC) |
I've gone to great efforts to comply with the arbitration ruling, exceeding that which was expected of me. I contacted several people, including yourself for mentorship, and notified arbcom before the deadline that I could not find a mentor. Through your help I learned to how independently cite sources up to the current standards. As requested in arbitration by those who had issues with my behaviour, I went to great lengths to list where I thought there was bias and undue weight in the article, and posted this all on the talk pages. These threads were marked so that the other editors could clearly see what needed to be done. I've made every attempt to seek mediation and consensus at every turn since arbitration...and still, this action was taken. [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Request_to_amend_prior_case:_ADHD]] I am dismayed that they are allowed to do this once again with false accusations and character assassination. I am FORCED again to defend myself against several accusers. This time it for a bogus reason, and that is, giving my opinion upon request. This is especially demoralizing when one considers the behaviour of all the parties since arbitration. Any words of advice would be appreciated.--[[User:Scuro|scuro]] ([[User talk:Scuro|talk]]) 05:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Well it seems the admin over at the case (Carcharoth) is awaiting your input on the matter, thus I'd give it them. I think it'd be important to stress what you have done above to me, in that you have tried to find a mentor and that you shouldn't be punished for not succeeding, nor should you be punished for Arb's failure to appoint. Further I can confirm that you have in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nja247&diff=307571281&oldid=307570770 my opinion] tried, and I have personally been [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nja247&diff=307571281&oldid=307570770 unimpressed] with LG's recent behaviour. [[User:Nja247|<em style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;color:#6600CC">'''''Nja'''''</em>]]<sup>[[User talk:Nja247|<em style="font-family:Trebuchet MS;color:#63D1F4">'''''247'''''</em>]]</sup> 09:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Chelsea Korka == |
== Chelsea Korka == |
Revision as of 09:41, 20 September 2009
Welcome to NJA's talk page! Please click to leave me a new message. |
---|
Movie studio/anime vandal is back... again.
The anime/movie vandal from the 118.137.x.x range has returned once again. This time, the guy used 219.83.106.171 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) yesterday and vandalized some of the same articles using the same misinformation MO. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 07:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
- The guy has returned, this time around as 202.70.61.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Last edit was over an hour ago as of this edit. He did his vandalism for a least three hours, but when I discovered them, it was already too late, even for a report on WP:AIV. BTW, I now understand why it took some time for a reply to any of my messages or any action whatsover. May you have a speedy recovery. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 16:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- I warned the 1st one reported on the day and have monitored it since. The latest has been blocked temporarily for vandalism. Cheers and thanks. Nja247 19:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- He's back again, this time as 202.70.61.133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). While this IP is now blocked for 31 hours, looks like another rangeblock is in order because of this... - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 10:32, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- I warned the 1st one reported on the day and have monitored it since. The latest has been blocked temporarily for vandalism. Cheers and thanks. Nja247 19:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- We'll see what IP he jumps on next and figure out a range to attack. Quite annoying and I'm still looking for something longer term and more effective. Nja247 18:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well, here's another one, last edit over an hour ago (as of this edit): 202.70.61.148 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). All of his edits happened while I was out and right behind our backs. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- P. S.: I've also reported everything about this vandal's activities for this week on WP:AN/I so other admins can give their input. Just to let you know, BTW. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 16:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- Not an issue, seems to have been 'handled' for now. I know it's a matter of time for it to re-occur, and I don't mind you telling me when these pop up. Cheers. Nja247 19:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be sure that when that vandal shows up beyond the range currently blocked or in any IP, you'll be the first to know. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 01:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Not an issue, seems to have been 'handled' for now. I know it's a matter of time for it to re-occur, and I don't mind you telling me when these pop up. Cheers. Nja247 19:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: Query on tool
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Viriditas (talk) 10:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Grant.Alpaugh may be back
So I started a discussion on a revert I did and the user I'm talking with is brand new and knows a lot about how things were done last year by our friend Grant. I notified him of my concerns here and his response seems to indicate an even deeper knowledge of Grant's history. Is this enough evidence to be concerned about? Am I overreacting? Thanks for your help. --SkotyWATalk|Contribs 05:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Two more links to share regarding this when you're online again: I've been accused on WP:WQA based on my request for advice from you above, and User:Grsz11 has started another sockpuppet investigation. --SkotyWATalk|Contribs 16:24, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry all, I've had some leg surgery today and therefore have been unavailable. Things were more challenging than I though with it. Anyhow, Skoty, if there's an SPA I suppose we'll see how it turns out. Too bad actually for Grant if true, as if he'd put in a valid unblock request and admitted to his mistakes it's possible it would have been granted (I would have been inclined to at least consider it this time around). Nja247 19:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Robbieejoness
Robbieejoness (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) repeated a copyright violation as his only edit since your block against him for serial copyright violation expired. Where has he been, you ask? Obviously editing as 90.203.235.38 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). To get the copyright violating image installed, Robbieejoness uploaded it, and the anon added it to the article. The edits are within 3 minutes of each other, so it isn't a coincidence.—Kww(talk) 18:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hey mate, sorry for the delay (see above for why). Unfortunately today hasn't been the best of days and therefore I'll have to defer you to an appropriate noticeboard, such as WP:Copyright_problems should you require assistance (or consider WP:ANI if it's serious). Good luck and sorry to be useless at the moment. Nja247 19:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Validbanks 34
Validbanks 34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Has repeatably undid revisions to Mac OS X. I have asked him to stop the edit warring & has turned edit remarks to personal attacks. 『 ɠu¹ɖяy 』 ¤ • ¢ 18:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hiya, see above for my reason for the delay. I'd make a report to WP:AN3 to be honest, or WP:RFPP. Sorry I can't be of any more assistance tonight, but I've had a much more difficult day than I thought it'd be and I'm going straight to bed! Good luck mate. Nja247 19:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
You blocked this user a few months ago due to repeated uploading of non-free files with non-existent or fake licensing information. Well, he's back and at it again. Do you want to have a more forceful word, or should I log this elsewhere? Thedarxide (talk) 20:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, the user is already under discussion at Wikipedia:ANI#Robbieejoness. Maybe make a comment there, cheers. Nja247 20:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Cheeky! I can hobble :) Nja247 20:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Barnstar of Recovery | ||
Here's to a hasty recovery from the op. Since you can't walk anywhere, I expect 2 GAs by the weekend. Terrillja talk 20:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC) |
Hello Nja247, it Airplaneman again. I saw your edit where you undid the reword for the MacBook Pro description. I agree with that, and after reading your edit summary, I decided to reword it. It's a very teensy detail, but I think it's better, how about you? Thanks, Airplaneman talk 20:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Blocked
Done Unblocked.
(moved) Help! Hackbinary here and you have blocked me. Although we where on opposite sides of the Arquila Insite thing, and BTW there are loads of un-notable bands and such, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_Accusations, anyway, you wikipedia folks have made your decision and I'll respect it (even if I think it is wrong.) It is quite another to accuse me of this sock-pupetry, and lock me out from doing anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.41.5.36 (talk) 13:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Other stuff existing doesn't validate the notability of any given article. Articles are held to our standards independent of what's around them.
- Circumventing a block to post a message about your block is still circumventing a block.
- {{unblock}}. --King Öomie 13:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- AS you know, it is very difficult to write anything once blocked. This whole article writing experience has been very frustrating. I know at least 2 or 3 other people have written on the Article, one in London, and 1 or 2 in Glasgow. I'm in Edinburgh, and have written from home, my g/f flat, and my workplace. In every instance, I have endeavoured to login, so that my comments are reflected against my user name, but the long comment that I made a couple of days ago, I think I forgot to login for.
- Who and how do I address this whole blockage thing? Hackbinary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.41.5.36 (talk) 13:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Looking through your contributions, you're not aware of our policy regarding subject notability. There's no vendetta against small businesses, it's just that most of them don't really qualify for articles, and the people writing them tend to very ornery about it.
- Add
{{unblock|*your reason here*}}
to your user talk page (on the main account), explaining the multiple computer situation, it'll be handled by an administrator. (Obviously replace '*your reason here*' with an actual reason) --King Öomie 13:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
He's now requesting unblock, admitting to some of the IPs but not all. Would you take a look? Daniel Case (talk) 14:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Please help me understand this
Why were the four diffs I provided in this report not all reverts? Does a revert need to take place within a specified period? Because each of the examples I provided (both the first four and the bulleted next four) showed Lulu removing something that another editor had put in (at most within the past four days) or restoring something an editor had taken out. I'm not being argumentative here, just trying to understand. Also, is there some hard-and-fast rule about this or is it a matter of some kind of interpretation?
Also, this is an editor constantly making changes without discussion other than (often abusive) comments in the edit summaries. So I don't understand how this is not edit warring, whether or not the technical 3RR boundary was breached, especially with the volume of this editor's changes.
I'm hesitant to put this on the edit warring noticeboard page because I assume leaving the discussion there would just keep that report cluttering up the page, and what I really want is a better understanding for myself, but if you find it more convenient to reply there, feel free to move this comment there as well.
Thanks for taking the time to look into this. -- Noroton (talk) 13:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- The edit warring continued, so I filed a second report on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring page. -- Noroton (talk) 16:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- No issues on the second report. I will leave it for another admin to consider for a second opinion. For 3RR to apply, there needs to be more than three reverts (ie 4 or more) in a 24 hour period. Edit warring is another possibility, but that's trickier to identify. Personally I think that there's a content dispute in this case, meaning people need some warnings and encouragement to work together. Though I'll leave the new report to be considered by another admin who may wish to take more direct action. Cheers, Nja247 19:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. But I did list four diffs (and then four more in that report). I assume one or more of them wasn't really a revert, but I've looked over them again and I don't see how. Could you tell me which one or ones weren't and tell me why? This would help, because you're one of four people who have told me I'm misunderstanding reverts, but I still don't know why. (And I've read through WP:3RR). Thanks. -- Noroton (talk) 21:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
User:PiCo edit warring again
The other day, you banned User:PiCo for edit warring ([1]). The moment the 31 hour block you imposed ended, PiCo repeated the same exact reversion that he'd done four times before, which earned him the block in the first place ([2]).
Technically, he isn't in violation of WP:3RR, I guess, but only because he had a 31 hour "time out" imposed on him. What are our options here? PiCo doesn't seem to have been deterred at all by the block. I don't want to just revert his reversion, because then I'd be edit warring as well. And I don't want to ask for page protection, because the last time I tried that (a year or two ago), the page wound up being "protected" in the state the edit warrior chose, which sort of defeated the purpose.
I appreciate any help you can provide. Thanks. -Lisa (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- I've reverted his edit. I'm hoping that he'll leave well enough alone until this can be ironed out in talk. -Lisa (talk) 22:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
TECFORLIFE FP7 Project page removed
The TECFORLIFE FP7 Project has been deleted due to copyright problems, but this is not the case. I'm sure that project coordinator agree on publishing the page content and also the project logo Tecforlife_eu_project_logo.png in the wikipedia.
In order to restore the page, I receive below instructions BUT talk page does not exist. Should I ask the project coordinator to send an email with the copyright permission?
If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:TECFORLIFE FP7 Project and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
Currently I'm trying to contribute to wikipedia in the Assistive Technology area and this is my first page.
- Yes, you should follow the instructions to correctly allow use of any copyright. Cheers, Nja247 14:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Validbanks 34 is edit warring again
Validbanks 34 has come off their block about an hour again & has already removed the OS Family text twice. 「ɠu¹ɖяy」¤ • ¢ 00:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Appears to have been handeled by a short block again, though if it were to continue I think something longer or some other process to handle further disruption will be inevitable. Nja247 14:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Validbanks socking...
Kjfdgkjbn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) looks to be validbanks socking. They also appear to have an axe to grind with you, they have undone edits back to your last edit on all of the pages you last edited. Perhaps a hardblock is in order?--Terrillja talk 22:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Good eyes. Cheers, Nja247 22:36, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Now two socks... One of them was created after you blocked with ACB enabled. I knew that mass rollback script would come in handy one day--Terrillja talk 22:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
What's the other?And yes, that's a deadly, but useful script in situations such as that! Nja247 22:44, 19 September 2009 (UTC)- Sorry, another emerged after I left that message, there are 3, not 2. The other 2 are Newshence 93 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Jgnsdf 43 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), both have been blocked.--Terrillja talk 22:47, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- For sure it's easy to get in trouble with if you aren't careful, but I have had a few times I have had to hit it chasing a vandal. Almost makes me want to walk to the shooting gallery that is RfA, but not quite yet.--Terrillja talk 22:51, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oh gawd it's an unduly ridiculous process, but I do think you'd make a welcome addition. Nja247 22:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, perhaps in a few months when I get back to the US I will ask you to go through my contribs and let me know if I need to look at anything. Right now I'm in Europe on a sketchy internet connection, so I don't want to push for anything and have my internet drop out like it does fairly often.--Terrillja talk 23:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oh gawd it's an unduly ridiculous process, but I do think you'd make a welcome addition. Nja247 22:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
- Now two socks... One of them was created after you blocked with ACB enabled. I knew that mass rollback script would come in handy one day--Terrillja talk 22:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I have really tried
I've gone to great efforts to comply with the arbitration ruling, exceeding that which was expected of me. I contacted several people, including yourself for mentorship, and notified arbcom before the deadline that I could not find a mentor. Through your help I learned to how independently cite sources up to the current standards. As requested in arbitration by those who had issues with my behaviour, I went to great lengths to list where I thought there was bias and undue weight in the article, and posted this all on the talk pages. These threads were marked so that the other editors could clearly see what needed to be done. I've made every attempt to seek mediation and consensus at every turn since arbitration...and still, this action was taken. Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Request_to_amend_prior_case:_ADHD I am dismayed that they are allowed to do this once again with false accusations and character assassination. I am FORCED again to defend myself against several accusers. This time it for a bogus reason, and that is, giving my opinion upon request. This is especially demoralizing when one considers the behaviour of all the parties since arbitration. Any words of advice would be appreciated.--scuro (talk) 05:38, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well it seems the admin over at the case (Carcharoth) is awaiting your input on the matter, thus I'd give it them. I think it'd be important to stress what you have done above to me, in that you have tried to find a mentor and that you shouldn't be punished for not succeeding, nor should you be punished for Arb's failure to appoint. Further I can confirm that you have in my opinion tried, and I have personally been unimpressed with LG's recent behaviour. Nja247 09:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Chelsea Korka
Since the Paradiso Girls's page has been recreated as they have become notable due to numerous radio and TV appearances, may I ask that you recreate Korka's page, since I believe it's how the procedure goes? Thank you.--Whadaheck (talk) 01:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- No that's not really how procedure goes. The page may be recreated by someone who's interested in doing so so long as the article will now meet notability and other inclusion guidelines. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_a_page for any help. Nja247 09:10, 20 September 2009 (UTC)