| Revision as of 23:30, 3 May 2008 editとある白い猫 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers55,796 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:45, 7 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,299,654 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite/archive24) (bot | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{not around|3=March 2022}} | |||
| {{vacation3|]|start=], ]|end=], ]}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |algo = old(7d) | |algo = old(7d) | ||
| |archive = User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite/ |
|archive = User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite/archive24 | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{User:Killiondude/scrolling}} | |||
| <div style="font-size:12px">{{TOCright}}</div> | <div style="font-size:12px">{{TOCright}}</div> | ||
| Line 14: | Line 15: | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| |valign=top| | |valign=top| | ||
| * ] |
* ] | ||
| * ] |
* ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| Line 22: | Line 23: | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| Line 30: | Line 31: | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| |} | |} | ||
| == Page protection at WP:WORDS == | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| Should be safe to undo the page protection now; see discussion ]. - Dan ] (])(]) 14:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| <div class="afd-notice"> | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ] is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ''']''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| :I'll give it a few more days, I know you're busy, and if you haven't had a chance to reply, I'll ask another admin to do it. - Dan ] (])(]) 17:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] (]) 20:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Dispute resolution == | |||
| ==Happy First Edit Day!== | |||
| I have ported over the first section of the WG "Dealing with disputes" page, here to the EN wiki, at ]. If you have a chance, could you please take a look before I make it more public? Thanks, --]]] 16:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| <!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## --> | |||
| {{ombox | |||
| | name = First Edit Day | |||
| | image = ] | |||
| | imageright = ] | |||
| | style = border: 2px solid CornflowerBlue; background: linear-gradient(to left, #c6ffdd, #fbd786, LightPink); | |||
| | textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center; | |||
| | plainlinks = yes | |||
| | text = <big>'''Happy First Edit Day!'''</big><br />Hi Ryan Postlethwaite! On behalf of the ], I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made and became a Wikipedian! ] (]) 21:44, 28 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| }} | |||
| == |
== Happy Birthday! == | ||
| <!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## --> | |||
| Hi, Ryan. Just curious if you are back home and editing again. I am ever to desiring to continue formal mediation between IZAK and I. Thanks so much. ] (]) 14:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| {{ombox | |||
| | name = Happy Birthday | |||
| | image = ] | |||
| | imageright = ] | |||
| | style = border: 2px solid SlateBlue; background: linear-gradient(to right, #a1ffce, #faffd1); | |||
| | textstyle = padding: 0.75em; text-align:center; | |||
| | text = <big>'''Happy birthday!'''</big><br />Hi Ryan Postlethwaite! On behalf of the ], I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day! <span style="font family:Lobster;text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px lightskyblue, -4px -4px 20px HotPink">] ]</span> 02:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| }} <span style="font family:Lobster;text-shadow: 4px 4px 20px lightskyblue, -4px -4px 20px HotPink">] ]</span> 02:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ==Happy Birthday!== | |||
| :As you might know WP:TOV is my baby. I created it and am actively involved in it. A few days ago IZAK inserted himself into it, despite being explicitly told that him and i should avoid each other. He has been actively posting on the talk page and has even been accused by another of being uncivil. | |||
| <!-- ##RW UNDERDATE## --> | |||
| :I have completely avoided posting in those sections in which IZAK is, but now he has gone :ahead and even made changes to the project :page. Notice his edit summary- it's just a bit over the top. The crux of this issue is IZAK and I were told to avoid each other. I have done just that over the past few weeks. IZAK agreed to do just that but clearly has not. There are so many project on Misplaced Pages in which his efforts put into. He agreed to work on things other than what I am working on. Yet he has come into WP:TOV, taken a decidedly contrary view point of my own and created a situation in which I do fear to further be involved in this project without major conflict. ] (]) 13:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| {{ombox | |||
| ::I've reverted him, he was quite simply out of line with that edit. I'll keep my eye out, and make it clear that he should stop interacting with you. Should he not stop, he will be blocked. ] 13:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| |type = notice | |||
| :::He's still posting on the talk page and have essentially taken over the conversation. Sigh. ] (]) 20:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| |image = ] | |||
| |style = background:Darkgreen;border: 1px solid #CC9999; | |||
| == ] == | |||
| |text = <span style="font-family:Book Antiqua;color:#FFFF00;">Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the ].</span>--] (]) 03:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| }} | |||
| You denied this at RFP, but I protected before you denied the request. To be honest, all I see is IP vandalism on the history. Sure, its not exactly a torrent, but its almost all there is. -- <strong>]</strong>] 08:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :3 or 4 edits a day is not a reason to block out all IP's from an article - this can easily be dealt with by the RC patrollers. We don't want to alienate possible new users who can't edit the page constructively. I think you should unprotect. ] 08:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::3 or 4 edits a day isn't much. But I re-iterate—one must also the number of *positive* IP contributions to the article and weigh them against the damage the same collection of editors are relentlessly inflicting on the content. In this case, I also think a look at the subject of the article could give fair estimation to the answer of the previous. But, I suppose we could discuss the traditional fire and flames war between the approaches of "IPs contribute a good majority of our content, we should only protect in extremities" and "So many IPs vandalise, RC can't cover everything, we should protect fairly leniently" for hours. I am supposing that I am merely of the latter approach; and you prefer the former. As I noted as RFP, I am not strongly opposing your decision, nor at the same time supporting my own rigorously—if you feel the need to remove the protection, I will not mind in the slightest. -- <strong>]</strong>] 08:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == What ''is'' a lot of vandalism? == | |||
| You turned down my request for semi protection on ] saying "there's not much vandalism considering how high profile the topic is" - that was at 08:33, 30 April 2008, about four hours after the request. The page was being further vandalized ''almost as you typed'' - heres the vandalism just since last night: | |||
| *07:59, 30 April 2008 124.184.9.155 (2 edits) | |||
| *08:44, 30 April 2008 58.107.208.121 | |||
| *08:50, 30 April 2008 121.45.32.199 (5 edits) | |||
| *08:58, 30 April 2008 217.44.99.75 | |||
| *09:02, 30 April 2008 58.179.206.160 (3 edits) | |||
| *14:22, 30 April 2008 64.90.250.244 | |||
| The page history shows hundreds of incidents of vandalism, and almost all of it from anonymous IP's. Semi-protection would have been instant relief for any editors or bots working to remove vandalism on that page. If you will not reconsider I would at least appreciate a better explanation than "there's not much" - which just isn't true, again it was practically being vandalized as you wrote those words. You have to go back three pages just to get to the first of the month. Is that because there's so many wonderful contributions being added? Of course not, the whole list is IP vandalism and reverts, with a few nuggets here and there of real encyclopedic edits. Is there a way for me to request a second opinion? As I believe my requests absolutely fills the bill set by ] and especially ] ] (]) 15:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Regarding the second opinion I have posted a request for one on ], I hope you don't take offense. ] (]) 16:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Do I have your approval? == | |||
| I wouldn't bother you with this, but ] seems to think he has some authority in the project and in order to be properly aprised of it. Do I have your approval to tell him to only crap in the litter-tray? After months of harrassment of people on their Talk-Pages, and a block of him, he's still doing . It's particularily disturbing because this time round since his hatred and accusations are not restricted to but seems aimed at practicing followers of Judaism, and the testimony of victims of a pogrom (the 1929 Hebron massacre). ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 16:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| '''Note:'''<br> | |||
| * PalestineRemembered has just recently started editing again and I've already noticed a few obvious issues and suggested he revert one of them and redefine his forced mentorship. | |||
| * To remind, one of the reasons PR was assigned forced mentorship was improper behavior around me, more specifically, repeatedly accusing me of being a war criminal. There was also an issue of repeatedly (50+ times) making false accusations regarding my (quickly retracted) second block on Misplaced Pages, an event he not only did not participate on and misread into, but clearly didn't care for my explanations either. | |||
| ** Here are "a few" diffs about this 50+ issue: | |||
| *** "Jaakobou has harassed other users and admins on talk and even been blocked for it" - ''''''. (added 18:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)) | |||
| *** "Based on my previous warnings with the user (e.c. ) ... I recommend a short block of the user, as his mentor." (added 20:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)) | |||
| * I believe this is a good point in time to fully clarify to him the results of the last Arbcom and to redefine his forced mentorship. | |||
| With respect, <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| * '''Extra note:''' PalestineRmemebered was repeatedly noted, warned and blocked "01:18, 29 October 2007 GRBerry (requested by mentor)" by mentors and admins for his repetitive (mis)citation of old issues. | |||
| ** Here are "a few" diffs about this 50+ issue: | |||
| *** "Jaakobou has harassed other users and admins on talk and even been blocked for it" - ''''''. (added 18:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)) | |||
| *** "Based on my previous warnings with the user (e.c. ) ... I recommend a short block of the user, as his mentor." (added 20:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)) | |||
| * Going over some of the notes he'd received from past mentors, I noticed he was also told by previous mentor Kendrick that "remove the tags usually frowned upon" but one of his first edits returning to edit was without taking an active part in the discussions. | |||
| So apparently, there's already two issues addressed by previous mentors that he's returned to ignore. <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC) clarify. <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC) added proper linkage. <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 20:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ]: Recent edits == | |||
| Welcome back, Ryan, I hope your vacation went well. | |||
| I was hoping to discuss with you at ]. It appears to me that the discussion was about the meta-issue of ArbCom taking these cases in secret ''at all'', rather than about the specific case we were told should be discussed with ArbCom. Because of that, I don't see the applicability of the reasoning cited in your edit summary. Are there terms under which you feel that discussion could continue? --]'']'' 17:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I was going to inquire about this as well. If precedent is followed, ArbCom is unlikely to respond to inquiries of this nature, and has yet to even once fully publicly discuss blocks related to editing of pedophila-related articles. Furthermore, ] does have a point in saying that the discussion being called for on ] is not one regarding a specific case - this is more of an analysis of the general practice adopted by ArbCom as of late to discuss issues such as this in secret, deal out blocks without much explanation, and not to inform the general public of all the information and deliberation involved in the such cases. Misplaced Pages is supposed to be a transparent entity, and members of the community are supposed to be able to observe how admins function and what reasoning is used to instill blocks. This is why some editors are worried about the way things are going right now and want to engage in open discussion. ~ ] (]) 02:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::These are all interesting points, and I believe there could be some middle ground for the arbitrators to discuss these kinds of blocks without bringing the project into disrepute. As it happens, I think the VPs block was the correct course of action - those userboxes were bad, very bad in fact and if I'd have noticed it, I'd have taken the same action as DMC. It might be an idea to spark up a discussion at ] about how these blocks could be handled (but please don't mention any specifics). A simple post explaining each of these kind of blocks would probably be helpful so other users know what kind of behaviour will be seen as unacceptable by ArbCom. ] 12:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::I would expect that VP's userboxes were meant to dance right up to the line and not cross it. He appears to have a personality that entices him to boundary pushing, especially in areas he's passionate about otherwise. Unfortunately, his stance is unpopular, so the slack someone on the other side of the issue would get isn't available to him. This isn't a bad thing ''per se''. Can one ever be ''too'' anti-pedophile? | |||
| :::I do worry about the effect of such an asymmetrical policy on our neutrality, whether real or perceived. My primary passion is writing a comprehensive encyclopedia from a neutral viewpoint. I've certainly felt driven to more active measures than making userboxes, but I've resisted. You and I very much agree about bringing transparency to this process (see ] to ]). I feel that the topic mentorship page is a good place for the discussion, as this involves no universal policy of ArbCom, but instead a policy that fairly exclusively impacts this topic area and its editors. --]'']'' 14:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Comment on ANI == | |||
| Hi there. Regarding your comment on ANI about my semiprotection of ], please note that I do, in fact, research and consider admin actions before I push the buttons. I don't just go "okay!" and do the admin magic thing when someone makes a request such as this one. In this case, I saw quite a lot of vandalism on what I'm sure is a popular article, and felt that it would be worth at least giving it a break from the need to do the many reverts on it. My apologies for not commenting here beforehand; I'll keep that in mind for future issues like this; I took this as a request for a second opinion, and never actually thought of checking back with you. | |||
| Please do recognize that other admins likely do, in fact, do their due diligence (such as it is here) before making a decision such as this one. Thanks. ] <small>]</small> 05:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Rollback. == | |||
| I don't know if you got my previous message, but I cannot find it in your archives. I was wondering if I could file to get rollback rights again. I know that you revoked them last time and I believe that I am ready for the tool. I know the mistake I made, and I've read the rollback dos and don'ts multiple times since then. Please let me know your decision when you can. Thanks. ] (]) 11:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Hello Undead warrior. Appologies for the late response, I've been away for a few weeks. I've granted you the rollback tool again, I'm sure you've learnt from your mistakes but please only use it for reverting vandalism this time and not in content disputes. Best regards, ] 12:03, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Mentorship == | |||
| I would definitely appreciate a summary of where my use of the tools has caused issues or otherwise raised eyebrows -- or tempers. If I see the pattern you are seeing, I would definitely appreciate better alternative suggestions to how I have handled certain instances. Thanks. - <font face="Verdana">] <sub>]</sub></font> 13:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Many thanks for getting back to me on that Tony. As I said - none of the things are major, just with a little improvement it could make you a better admin. I'll keep a check on your talk page and lend a hand wherever I can. ] 13:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == comment on term == | |||
| Hi Ryan | |||
| Based on the discussion I am having with a user on al-Ghazzali, the user claims that the word "Wahabi" is derogatory and can get a person banned. But I would like to point out that the word is very mainstream in academia: and corresponds to ]. --] (]) 15:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == FYI: Calton is back . . . and back at it == | |||
| See: ] where I gave Calton what amounts to level 4im warning.--]<sup>(] <small>•</small> ])</sup> 21:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I thought Calton would have got the message by now that his tagging was disruptive. Thanks for warning him - I'll certainly block him myself if I see him doing it again, that's if you don't get there first. ] 21:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :: How nice. ] <sup>]</sup> 22:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::Oh dear, I was hoping that Calton would respect this given the warning doug gave him, but his flippancy is just increasing. I fear that a block will be the only thing that will make him see sense. ] 22:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Hi there! == | |||
| Hi Ryan, I hope you had a good vacation. :) It's nice to see you active again here, and I hope you had a good time. I wanted to ask you, what did you think of ]? I had to change the wording halfway through due to a change in the userrights interface. I mentioned this page to you a few weeks ago, but I wasn't sure if you'd seen it or not. If anything, welcome back! :) ] 16:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| You might be interested in ] - ] (]) 02:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Sorry I didn't contact you about this, I was hoping to catch you on IRC. I'll be interested to hear your thoughts and I'm more than happy to discuss your concerns either here or privately. ] 03:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Discuss what exactly? My opinion had been most consistent on this matter for the past three years. You did not even ''bother'' notifying me of this. What am I supposed to make out of this? | |||
| ::Will I be accused of disruption if I file an RFAR against him? Although the conclusion of the last one was rather solid: . Will I be accused of disruption for getting staled by him? He has developed many very cunning ways over the years... | |||
| ::In no way will I make any effort whatsoever to avoid him. In no way will I agree on anything concerning Davenbelle. I will not be inconvenienced the slightest bit for Davenbelle anymore. If there is anyone that will be inconvenienced will be Davenbelle. In addition the entire community will need to baby sit his current account (Jack Merridew) and all possible sockpuppets. Community seeking to unblock him should do so knowing this. Enough is enough. | |||
| ::--<small> ]</small> <sup>]</sup> 23:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 16:45, 7 December 2024
 | This user may have left Misplaced Pages. Ryan Postlethwaite has not edited Misplaced Pages since March 2022. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Archive
Nomination of Pugese for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pugese is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Pugese until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Traumnovelle (talk) 20:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
 | Happy First Edit Day! Hi Ryan Postlethwaite! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 21:44, 28 October 2024 (UTC) |  |
Happy Birthday!
 | Happy birthday! Hi Ryan Postlethwaite! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day! Hemlock :3 leave a message 02:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |
Hemlock :3 leave a message 02:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Happy Birthday!
 | Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee.--DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 03:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |