Misplaced Pages

This is a Misplaced Pages user discussion page. This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KillerChihuahua.

Talk to the Puppy To leave a message on this page, click here. If you email me, be aware that even if I am actively editing, I cannot always access my email and it may be a day or two before you receive a reply. If you message me on this page, I will probably reply on this page. If I messaged you on your page, please reply there. *Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. *Comment about the content of a specific article on the Talk: page of that article, and not here. *Sign your post using four tildes ( ~~~~ )

24 - 23 - 22 - 21 - 20 -19 - 18 -17 - 16 -15 - 14 -13 -12 -11 - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 -4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Archives

• Two years ago this January

And I still see people ranking their personal interpretation of WP:CIVIL above everything else. Above NPOV. Above V. Above NOR.

Oh wait, those are the Simplified Ruleset, aren't they? The basis for all of Misplaced Pages?

Silly me. Here I thought we were here to write an encyclopedia, and that while a civil environment furthers that aim, the Civility Police are generally counter-indicated by the chilling effect and escalation to which their actions usually lead.

ANI Notice

Hello, KillerChihuahua. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collectonian (talk • contribs) 22:33, 20 September 2009

Disruption by Ed Poor at his conflict of interest

You had previously given Ed Poor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) this warning: Ed, I'm not going to play your games. You've been warned; watch your step on Moon and Unification related articles. I will not hesitate to block if you continue to disrupt. Puppy has spoken; puppy is done.

Ed Poor has continued to engage in disruption at articles directly in his conflict of interest; namely attempting to remove info linking related organizations and front groups to the Unification Church and Sun Myung Moon, removing sourced information, and making disruptive page moves against consensus. Please see and for two recent examples. Enough warnings have been given at this point. Thoughts? Cirt (talk) 02:38, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Updates

1. Edit-warring to remove info from the lede, that, per WP:LEAD, was verbatim sourced later in article .
2. Sourcing info to another non-static wiki website?
3. Unsourced change to POV term "opponents"
4. Unsourced addition pertaining to a BLP individual
5. Edit-warring to restore POV and unsourced page move
6. Seemingly professing ignorance of violations of WP:BLP and WP:BURDEN

Cirt (talk) 18:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Ayers

Hi, I essentially restored to my previous edit of Ayers, but added a citation. AFAIK there has been no discussion on the talk page regarding this since my last post, and I missed that someone removed my edit. I think my version should stand as factually accurate, cited, and npov, but I posted at talk in any case. Best, Kaisershatner (talk) 19:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks, and hopefully this will be easily resolved. :-) KillerChihuahuaAdvice 19:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

WMC

I willingly dropped the issue officially here: old ver , diff: .

Only message after this was to Alexh19740110 to tell him I didn't share his views about AGW until Connolley marginalised the third party interventions (following diff) and then re-opened the conversation without further prompting from me . Look at the succeeding edits and diffs to see who was driving the conversation. Dduff442 (talk) 20:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

why are you here? What do you want from me? KillerChihuahuaAdvice 20:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I just don't understand how actions carried out at WMC's prompting could constitute harassment. Dduff442 (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

He did not come to your talk page and ask you questions. He was attempting to respond to your highly confusing posts on his page. Kudos to him. Why are you here? Are you unclear on how you were harassing him? KillerChihuahuaAdvice 20:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't share your opinion regarding his motivations in re-opening the debate or regarding the confusing posts. It's quite out of character of him to indulge enquiries he considers trivial. The entry was entitled 'an offer' and there was only one offer in the message... I think anyone with average intelligence could work that out. I'm unclear how it's *possible* to harass someone at their own volition, so yes. I'm here to answer your questions. Dduff442 (talk) 20:39, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not asking any. I had one, "why are you here" and your answer is "to answer your questions" - this is circular. Looks like we have nothing to discuss. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 21:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Well you threatened me with a block for harassment. Now you agree no harassment occurred are you not embarrassed at all? Dduff442 (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Please excuse my intrusion, but in the spirit of the holiday season, I would like to offer to any party who wants one, a deluxe apology — this includes my eating dirt followed by washing my mouth out with soap. If this would in any way help any situation (which I am intruding into), please let me know. I will go wash some dirt and peel some soap. :-) In any case, happy holidays. Proofreader77 (talk) 22:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm being defensive. But I've been getting threats from all angles for days inspite of trying my very hardest to act with fairness, directness, honesty and integrity. Consciously or unconsciously, there's a buddy system in operation. This encourages cynicism and gaming of the system and damages editors' faith in the admins. By extension, faith in the editorial system itself is eroded.

I just came up with a good analogy on BozMo's page, so I'm going to repeat myself without shame: Misplaced Pages is like a giant steamer with no captain and no rudder. If it goes off course who'll set it straight, and how?

I did get a smile out of your post.Dduff442 (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) As someone in a stranger doghouse than you can imagine (not KC's beautiful floating one), I certainly understand how the waves of Misplaced Pages may crash upon our heads ... often simultaneously and from directions one cannot imagine waves coming from. :-) Again, please excuse my light intrusion into the matter which I know is frustrating — there are so many barfights going on lately, I feel compelled to do anything (even eat dirt) to, um, lighten the mood.

Not my place here to offer anything but apology with dirt/soap option. :-) Let me know (I think some are taking bets:-) Proofreader77 (talk) 22:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Proofreader, you are amazing. No soap no dirt just thanks for being who you be. :-) KillerChihuahuaAdvice 22:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

(Accidentally very happy ... must write down recipe .... dirt, soap ... :-) Bless you, dear puppy. Proofreader77 (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Note: I have now proudly and beautifully displayed wonderful surprise on my user page ... with slight text color adjustment to coordinate with purple pigment pile beneath ... for enhanced beautification effects. :-) Again, bless you. Proofreader77 (talk) 03:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sarah's open...

Your protection expired, and the vandals have already started in on it. I'm involved; can you reprotect it for a longer spell? Horologium (talk) 01:35, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I semi'd, lets see what happens. Its like babysitting a shark feeding, I swear. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 17:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Matt Crypto

Please keep an eye on Matt Crypto (talk · contribs) edits to Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident. He's repeatedly deleting references to the material being stolen, for obvious POV reasons. I've warned him already but I suspect he may need a firmer reminder if he persists. -- ChrisO (talk) 17:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

He's not only changing the content from what the sources say to what the sources do not say, he's reverted three times already. I'm guessing you have the 3RR report all ready to file? KillerChihuahuaAdvice 17:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

He's a bit upset . I'll try to reason with him. Wish me luck! -- ChrisO (talk) 17:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!

Misplaced Pages:Meetup/Miami 3 is coming up in the near future, you are invited to participate. Thanks Secret 17:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Maybe I will actually make one of these shindigs. :-) KillerChihuahuaAdvice 17:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Whack-a-mole

And it's back... Guettarda (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Query

Could you take a look at the history of List of Unificationists (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ? There was a bit of reverting going on, and if asked I will gladly self revert something if need be - but I thought that per WP:BLP, any unsourced, controversial information about BLPs should be removed forthwith. In any event, post the conflict, I moved all unsourced info on WP:BLPs to the article's talk page. Look good, for now? Cirt (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look, but yes, you're absolutely right. If its BLP and its not sourced, out it goes. If its controversial it goes out on speed rails. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 20:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks, just wanted someone else to look it over. Cirt (talk) 20:08, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hrm, looks like some of these are sourced in their main articles. I'm looking at Bo Hi Pak right now. IMO you might want to make a list of the names you removed and go through them, slowly, verifying the sourcing on the main articles and re-adding to the List if indicated - including the source on the list, if you wish. I'm not sure where the rules are on that these days. I realize its a lot of work, but I think its worth doing. KillerChihuahuaAdvice 20:12, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

That is exactly why I moved it to the talk page. I plan to go through them one by one, but only add back with sources on this page itself. :) Sound okay? Cirt (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh I missed that, sorry! Yes, perfect. :-) KillerChihuahuaAdvice 20:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries, Cirt (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Making reports on AN/I

Would you consider refactoring your comments on AN/I — or at least toning it down a bit in future reports? A lot of them seem to be in rather poor taste. Calling another editor a 'bigot' is quite beyond the pale, unless you're prepared to back that up with some really damning diffs. As well, referring to Ed Poor's four-year-previous ArbCom run seems to be a way to attack and embarrass Ed, rather than to address any problems he might have in his (current) editing. Moreover, it's a weak argument, first because several of the supporting votes (which you chose not to copy into the thread) endorsed Ed as a strong supporter of NPOV, and also because as at least four of the opposing voters have sinced been banned outright for their socking and trolling.

From your signature, I gather that you brook little interest in being civil, polite, and courteous for their own sakes', but please try to bear in mind that you'll be a much more effective advocate for your arguments if you present your requests a tad more dispassionately. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)