Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:27, 23 July 2013

GAN

Hello. My name is Hahc21 and I have seen that you have an interest in reviewing good article nominations. I am very very glad that you have decided to go ahead and take some reviews pretty fast, and I appreciate all the help you can give to this part of the encyclopedia. If you ever need something, I don't mind if you bug me on my talk page; actually, I'd be delighted to help you on any questions you may have, related to the GAN assessment process, or in general. Having nothing else to say, welcome to Misplaced Pages, and have a nice day!. — ṘΛΧΣ 02:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Misplaced Pages, Retrolord. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Misplaced Pages:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Misplaced Pages:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! — ṘΛΧΣ 20:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Keep Calm

Well done for knocking this article into shape - it was a delight to read on the train this morning! I've a couple of concerns about some material I feel is missing - two relatively minor gaps in the history section and one larger issue in the rediscovery one - which you might like to take a look at; I've left them on the talk page.

Good luck with the nomination! Andrew Gray (talk) 09:53, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Just wanted to say I was also sorry to see you insulted at WT:GAN and also hope you stick around. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

BTW, you may have already seen it, but I found this essay to be the most helpful thing in sorting through what I should or shouldn't bring up in reviews--I wish I had found it sooner! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello, following a review of your contributions, I have enabled reviewer rights on your account. This gives you the ability to:

• Accept changes on pages undergoing pending changes,
• Have your changes automatically accepted on pending changes level 2 protected pages, and
• Administrate article feedback.

Please remember that this user right:

• Can be removed at any time for misuse, and
• Does not grant you any special status above other editors.

You should probably also read WP:PROTECT, since this user privilege deals largely with page protection. As the requirements for this privilege are still in a state of flux, I would encourage you to keep up to date on the WP:REVIEWER page. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions! Happy editing! Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:39, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Rate

Hi Retro. Do you think I could ask a quick favor? At the top of my user page I'm keeping a score-board of sorts, where I hope to move articles up from C to B and eventually GA class, but I need someone to score my work at RTI International so I can add it to the scoreboard.(note: I have a disclosed COI for the RTI article) Do you think I could get you to give it a C or B class? Any feedback on what it needs for GA is welcome too (I know the lead needs a bit more meat), but not required. Just hoping to post it on my scoreboard for now. CorporateM (Talk) 17:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Re:GA

Thanks so much for the review! If you ever need a reviewer, lemme know :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 23:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, if you like hurricanes and want to review another one, I'd be thrilled! :) --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 06:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Fusō

I finished up my copyediting at Japanese battleship Fusō. Thanks for reviewing! - Dank (push to talk) 18:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I've been working on the article for Fusō's sister ship, and making a few tweaks to Fusō ... done now. I believe we responded to your comments. This Wikicup round ends on Tuesday, so please let me know if there's anything else. - Dank (push to talk) 03:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Copperhead

It's nice when a GA review (and past ones have sometimes been hit and miss in my experience!) really delves into the article :) Thanks again! --Errant 10:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

GA Review of Distinguished Warfare Medal

Thanks for the review of the Distinguished Warfare Medal. I came to the page in hopes of building a GA grade article and in my opinion one was already here, at least in my opinion. I do hope to continue to improve the article. Rather it passes or fails, I look forward to your review.Casprings (talk) 13:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

German Army

I think this is a very inconclusive discussion and the outcome depends on who you ask. I am a big fan of semantically correctness versus best representation in the English language. MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIII, February 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at US Army leadership since World War II

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Hess

The sentence that got my attention was "Hess joined the Thule Society, an antisemitic right-wing Völkisch group, and the Freikorps, a volunteer paramilitary organisation." Thing is, I thought Freikorps was a phenomenon of a bunch of right-wing paramilitaries rather than just one group. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 00:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Alright thanks for that, i'll look into it then. ★★RetroLord★★ 00:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Your comment in 'Requests for Permissions/Reviewer'

I didn't enjoy your comment here. Misplaced Pages does give all editors the right to request if they meet this criteria. I just exercised the right available to me. Its upto the Misplaced Pages:Administrators to accept or reject my request. Please don't make patronising remarks about editors. I think you should read Misplaced Pages:point. Cheers. JK (talk) 08:41, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

And wikipedia gives all editors the eight to comment on such decisions. If you only have 130 mainspace edits I would advise you to hold off a bit on the request. If you get rejected you might have to wait a while before another request gets accepted. I was just excersising the rights available to me. As you say, its up to the admins to decide, but I'm not confident. ★★RetroLord★★ 08:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

No, you should still read Misplaced Pages:point. I only wanted to bring to your attention that you are not the jury. cheers, JK (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

The community IS the jury. Admins make decisions on behalf of the community, they are not some independant arbitrary body that decides things on a whim. Every member has the right to comment on these decisions, and you should not be making such requests if you plan on having an outburst everytime someone disagrees with you. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not an outburst. This is expressing my displeasure at your rather patronising remark. JK (talk) 09:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

If you behave in such a manner for much longer and continue to not assume good faith with your remarks you may have difficulty getting along with other users. This is also a piece of advice, just like my comment on the request page was. You are not above criticism. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

So are you. JK (talk) 09:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have to ask you to stop posting on my talkpage about this issue. If you wish to contribute to the project in a constructive manner please do so. Also please try to follow WP:Goodfaith and be civil in your dealings with other users. Thankyou. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Apologies

Apologies for my impolite/rude comments here and in the RFP page. Thank you. JK (talk) 13:19, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Manta ray GA

Thanks for reviewing. I hope you'll treat it as a potential FAC. LittleJerry (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Have you contacted another user? LittleJerry (talk) 16:16, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm still reviewing the article, but it is likely I will have to get a second opinion on the review. Sorry ★★RetroLord★★ 21:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Retrolord, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison to other tools Information about vandalism on Misplaced Pages Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Misplaced Pages with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 05:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou! ★★RetroLord★★ 05:06, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Keep Calm and Carry On

I would really hate to fail this GA for a minor issue - see the nomination page.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:57, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Manta ray/GA1

Not sure if you've seen my comments here. Could you please expand on the areas you feel are over-technical? J Milburn (talk) 12:32, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Retrolord; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Shoup GA

See: Talk:David M. Shoup/GA1 —Ed! 05:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

See: Talk:David M. Shoup/GA1 again. —Ed! 02:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Made the latest fixes. —Ed! 22:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Take another look here if you could, please. —Ed! 01:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Fusō-class battleship

Hi ... you wanted to know when I had an article to review, and this one is now at FAC ... and half the content overlaps two articles you've already reviewed. It may look like we already have the 3 supports we need to pass ... but there's an understanding at FAC that one review is needed from outside the wikiproject "regulars", and articles often sit at FAC for a month waiting for that 4th support. It's considered perfectly acceptable for a reviewer at FAC to say that they only covered the things they personally feel comfortable with, unlike at GAN. Okay, that's the FAC basics, I hope that helps ... this isn't a request for a support, of course. - Dank (push to talk) 21:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Street Fighter X Tekken Review - Character List cannot be removed.

In your review for Street Fighter X Tekken, you said that the character list has to be removed. This cannot be done because it would be inconsistant with all the other fighting game articles we have here, the majority of which have character lists. 85.210.178.116 (talk) 12:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

GAN

Hello, I've made the alterations you originally suggested to Belgium in World War II - would you be interested in re-reviewing it? ---Brigade Piron (talk) 19:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be able to do it on the weekend. Let me know when your ready for me to start, Thanks ★★RetroLord★★ 08:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for not getting back to you earlier. If you could give a look over again, that'd be great! --Brigade Piron (talk) 13:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, sorry to bother you again. Could you officially close your review? On the list, it appears as though you're still in the course of reviewing it, even though I've changed it several times. Best wishes ---22:02, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Manta ray GA again

All the problems so far have been resolved. LittleJerry (talk) 19:38, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello?

Operation Graffham

Hey, after your ace review of my last deception article for GA, do you fancy taking a look at the next one? :) I'd like to try and get it passed as GA before it makes DYK, just for fun! --Errant 23:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIV, March 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at refugees during the Battle of France Interview: Editors discuss writing articles about the former Yugoslavia Op-ed: Prioryman on German V-weapon sites and the historian's responsibility

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Notification of user conduct discussion

You may wish to comment on a user conduct discussion regarding Niemti, which can be found here. If you comment there you may wish to review the rules for user conduct comments first. You are receiving this notification because you were previously involved in dealing with this user. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Halo 4 Original Soundtrack/GA1

Will you be returning to this review soon? It's been almost two weeks since the nominator posted that all the issues you noted should have been addressed. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 12:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done! ★★RetroLord★★ 23:48, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Just FYI, your most recent article review request was completed. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War Op-ed: ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Gallipoli Campaign

Hello Retrolord. Myself and a few other editors have recently been working on Gallipoli Campaign in the view of getting it to B class and possibly GA (by way of a peer review first). I noticed on the talk page that you had expressed some interest in doing this back in Jan 13. Are you still interested? If you are there is a discussion here of things that still need to be done so pls feel free to stop by. Thanks. Anotherclown (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Dumelow on the French Foreign Legion and Nick-D on New Zealand military history Op-ed: Nick-D on military history tourism

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:53, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Lin Biao

That might be the best option. I am not the primary contributor for this page, so I feel some time to bolster and adduce the article would be most auspicious. Thanks for your review! QatarStarsLeague (talk) 19:44, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Trones Wood

If TW gets a B class, will it automatically drop off the "incomplete" lists?Keith-264 (talk) 16:14, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Not quite sure what lists you are referring to? ★★RetroLord★★ 17:10, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

These: Hidden categories:

   British military history articles needing attention to referencing and citation
   German military history articles needing attention to referencing and citation
   World War I articles needing attention to referencing and citation
   Military history articles needing attention to referencing and citation
   Military history articles needing attention only to referencing and citationKeith-264 (talk) 17:15, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

It might not happen automatically, but if it was B class then it shouldn't be on those lists, so it should be ok with removing it from them. ★★RetroLord★★ 17:30, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Move

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hi, how do I go about moving List of field marshals of the Third Reich to List of field marshals and grand admirals of the Third Reich? Much appreciated, ★★RetroLord★★ 17:24, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• Hello there Retrolord, may I suggest reading up on MOVEing pages which gives a first time page movers guide to doing that? Good luck and if you need any further help, I'll be watching this talk page for a bit, feel free to just ask. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 17:46, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

That was very helpful, thankyou! ★★RetroLord★★ 17:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Your Royal Highness, I present to you a trophy for creating the article/list List of field marshals and grand admirals of the Third Reich, keep up the good work! Prabash.Akmeemana 21:06, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh that is very nice. Thankyou very much! ★★RetroLord★★ 06:55, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Jetstreamer  20:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		Thanks for cleaning a few of my articles of the queue, and for all the work you've been doing on reviewing generally. Much appreciated! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh well that's very nice. Thank you! ★★RetroLord★★ 00:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Knighthood Request

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This shows again that you are unfamiliar with many, many aspects of Misplaced Pages:

1. The placement of the {{under-construction}} template at the top of any article informs any reader that the page in question is undergoinfg major changes. Given that a number of the references it includes are dead, I'm trying to find new sources to replace the link rots. It didn't take too long to anyone to figure this out, it's enough to look at the dead link tags in the "References" section;
2. Should there is inactivity in an any article the template is used at, a bot automatically removes it;
3. I'm not signing anything. The template puts the name of the last editor that modified the article.

Given that you are new here, please become more familiar with the guidelines before attempting to instruct the experienced editors.--Jetstreamer  13:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Well gosh. ★★RetroLord★★ 13:26, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Would you like a knighthood?★★RetroLord★★ 13:31, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

user:Bidgee Now that we are friends again, how 'bout that Knighthood? ★★RetroLord★★ 15:23, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Knighthood

I request permission by thy king to serve the kingdom and the royal highness as knight. I request this with honor, it is solely my duty to protect you and your kingdom. Oh and we need your help at WP:AFC, there's a backlog there that requires your attention! Prabash.Akmeemana 02:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

What sort of Knighthood do you want? ★★RetroLord★★ 03:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The Grand and most Honourable Order of the Royal Knights of Misplaced Pages. Prabash.Akmeemana 03:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Kudpung

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi Retrolord, this is just a quick note to make it clear that if a person asks you to stay of their talk page, you should respect that request, with the possible exception of mandatory notifications. If you post to Kudpung's page again, besides a mandatory notification, you will be blocked for harassment. Please consider this a formal warning. Worm(talk) 08:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Worm. I do try to stay off his talkpage but his actions concerned me so I had to go there. It would seem rather unfair that Kudpung a user can ban someone from a talkpage, then carry on having discussions about them in private, so that they may not respond.

Could you please ask Kudpung, as I did, to agree to notify me should he continue making posts about me on other users talkpages, as it is becoming quite annoying, and would be harrasment, as you mention above. ★★RetroLord★★ 08:59, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

You banned him from this talk page, I don't believe he's posted here since. It's not just "trying to stay away", you must stop posting there all together. The only edit I've seen where Kudpung mentioned you was suggesting another editor move on to more productive things, I don't see any issue with that, nor do I see why you should be notified. It's certainly not harassment to mention you elsewhere. There's no requirement that users are notified of every time they're being discussed, though it is polite. Given your treatment of Kudpung, I am not surprised that he doesn't want to extend you that courtesy. You'll remember that I agreed your initial comments regarding Kudpung were harsh but understandable, your behaviour since that day has not been. Worm(talk) 09:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Two things

1. Can we have an interaction ban? That stops both of us posting on each others talk, as well as mentioning the other at all? 2. User:pantherleapord was banned from my talkpage, then proceeded to post here quite a few more times, given that I am effectively being told violating a talkban will result in a block, does the same logic apply to him aswell? ★★RetroLord★★ 09:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Interaction bans are dolled out by the community when there's no other option. They're a considerable time sink and I don't see a pressing need for it here. I would welcome you both voluntarily refraining from interacting with each other or commenting on the other, certainly. As to panther leopard, yes, the same logic applies, however he hasn't posted here in nearly 2 weeks. If he posts here again, let me know and I will give him the same warning. Worm(talk) 09:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Seeing as an interaction ban is out and I can't post on Kudpung's page, could you please ask him to enter into a 'voluntary' interaction ban. Essentialy meaning, neither of us mention the other, anywhere. This would prevent this current incident from occuring again, and would be a good resolution to it. Could you please do that Worm? ★★RetroLord★★ 09:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC) Actually, screw all that. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I won't post here after this final comment, but it would be remiss of me to not reply. Feel free to revert this comment, or move it within the archive box. You say that complaining is not allowed - you always have the option to complain to an uninvolved administrator, the adminsitrators noticeboard (WP:AN), the community as a whole (WP:RfC/U) or (assuming the others have failed) the arbitration committee. Complaining is allowed, but be prepared that complaints will also bring attention to your own behaviour. What is not allowed is harassing any user by posting to their talk page after they have told you not to. Worm(talk) 09:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Worm, I wouldn't revert you, I'm too nice. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Retro, wouldn't it be easier if you a) re-reviewed the original interaction, b) forgave both kudpung and yourself, c) make a better effort to be nicer to everyone instead of WP:BATTLE mode every time, and d) don't give people reasons to talk about you? (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:44, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok. I'm happy to forgive Kudpung for his role in our previous interactions, and would ask he do the same. I'm even happy to revoke the talk page bans, and it would be nice if Kudpung reciprocated.

Fake professors

Policy? Not that I'm aware of - but it's dictated by both common sense and real-life experience. GiantSnowman 13:05, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Be nice.

Please don't be rude to obviously inexperienced new users, as you were here. — Scott • talk 14:14, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

That was less of a comment at the editor, who was acting in good faith, but more an exclamation of suprise that no one had closed it yet to stop his humiliation. I would have done it myself but I have no idea how. ★★RetroLord★★ 14:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

It certainly came across as a comment at the editor; I was planning on commenting myself. Retro, can I ask if English is your first language? I don't mean that as an insult, but your phrasing of things is very easily read very differently than you claim to mean it - your post at RFA certainly reads as horribly inappropriate. Thus, I'm concerned that your reading of the language has led to some misunderstandings, and the way others read your writing has caused even greater consternation. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

English is my first language, yes. ★★RetroLord★★ 14:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Remember that "He may participate fully in Requests for x(Admin,Crat or comment), provided he does so in a civil manner". I do not think that comment was in a civil manner. Remember that despite your one step forward then two steps back you are still skating on thin ice here! PantherLeapord (talk) 22:44, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

• I don't want to pile on here, but I when I saw that comment, I did wince a bit. It was a bit harsh even if you didn't mean for it to be. One way to reduce the scrutiny you are under is to dial back the sarcasm. You have to remember, everything sounds more rude when it is typed than it does when it is spoken, so is always good comment slightly more polite than you think is required. I don't think hammering Retro is needed, as I'm hopeful he will just take the advice at face value and just be more careful in the future. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 14:24, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Formal note

Retrolord, I wanted to provide you a formal note about WP:NOTFACEBOOK. Although you have wide leeway, the guidelines for userpages says things pertaining to "entertainment" rather than "writing an encyclopedia"...are generally frowned upon by the community. The granting of false titles has typically been held to meet the "not writing an encyclopedia". This only has become problematic when you actually went to someone's talkpage to ask them if they wanted a title.

Misplaced Pages has a "titles" system in place. Declaring yourself "the King of Misplaced Pages" when we already have a GodKing obviously fails the "humour" aspect as well. Granting barnstars to editors, spreading wikilove, and giving yourself Established Service Awards are held to be valid, and you're welcome do so as earned.

I would therefore highly suggest you re-think your self-granted title, and your "granting" of other unsupported titles (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Bwilkins, lets be honest. There are far more serious problems on wikipedia than my 200 word userpage with a picture on it. I am well aware this isn't facebook, and my "socialize/non-socialize" ratio isn't in the danger zone I would imagine. I don't really see the problem with my granting of Knighthoods, is there any difference between that and a custom barnstar, which is supported? My last I even gave it as a custom wikilove message, whats wrong with them? ★★RetroLord★★ 17:12, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

• • I don't think the self title is so big a deal, but promoting titles is unusual. Not sure it is against policy, but it is....different. Michael Jackson declared himself the king of pop, but it never convinced me either. How is the article review work coming along? Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 22:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

• Rlevse gave people their own days of the year. Hundreds of them, I think. He was an administrator when he did it though, so maybe that's OK. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:40, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The biggest difference (although there are others) is that Retro's already under the microscope ... focusing on encyclopedia creation is more important to them right now that childish "lordships". This is not a game, and it's offensive to see it treated like one (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmm... so if someone manages to claw their way into positions of authority before anyone manages (or bothers) to put their encyclopedia contributions under the microscope (Rlevse's certainly needed it), or indeed before people start hanging around their talk page baiting them, then it's not so much a problem? Certainly an interesting take on it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The closed Anna Frodesiak RfA

Hello Retrolord. I noticed you undid an edit by JamesBWatson to the now-closed Anna Frodesiak RfA. James' edit was perfectly acceptable, as he restored the hat to the title it was at originally before you changed it to your preferred version. This is what's called refactoring others' comments, and it is not acceptable on Misplaced Pages. Whether or not you think it is a personal attack is irrelevant; if other editors thought it was, they'd have called him out for it, and you wouldn't have been warned for anything regarding this. Please don't do it again. Furthermore, I see no consensus that the discussion above should have been hatted (but I'll admit I didn't read most of the page). Regards, TCN7JM 00:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC).

Does it count as refactoring others edits if it's your own edits being hatted? ★★RetroLord★★ 01:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

May it please your Lordship, I would suggest that you let this one go. Returning to discussions that closed several days ago, which no one is likely to go back and read, is a distraction from the content editing that should be our central focus on the site. Newyorkbrad (talk) 01:36, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I have to agree with Newyorkbrad here. Also: remember that you refactored another editor's comments and that they were simply undoing your initial refactoring. If you keep up stuff like today then do not be surprised if your topic ban is extended to not allow any participation in RfX whatsoever as your behavour there since the ban was put in place has been borderline disruptive. Remember that we only have so much patience. PantherLeapord (talk) 02:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank god we have people like User:PantherLeapord in the world, sometimes I forget my place here. Thanks for the advice, friend. ★★RetroLord★★ 03:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

NewFranco

Why did said to NewFranco "This RfA is downright ridiculous. Shouldn't someone put it out of its misery." 174.95.44.225 (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) See 3 sections above under the header Be nice (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Retrolord is Mattisse

I can't believe no one else has noticed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.249.180 (talk) 22:27, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here. Someone care to do a checkuser on this IP address? ★★RetroLord★★ 00:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I am conducting my own sockpuppet investigation into this user. So far I have found the following facts:

• Shared IP of a retail store across the street from a school
• Likes to edit airport/airline articles
• Likes to edit Indonesia related articles
• More recently a few things to do with 9/11
• I suspect the IP is being used by a company/user called WestJet/WestJet Airlines, perhaps a different person than this sock due to retail store IP

★★RetroLord★★ 07:14, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you mind saying how you found that it's a shared IP of a retail store across the street from a school? Of course, you don't have to answer, if you would prefer not to make your information fully public, but I would be very interested to know. My searches on this IP address have failed to establish even what state it's in, with some IP checking sites saying Kansas and others Texas, so I would certainly be interested in how you have pinned it down to one shop. Maybe you live near the shop, and have access to it, or something. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Theopolisme&diff=prev&oldid=518418964 is the relevant diff. Hope that helps. ★★RetroLord★★ 09:55, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah! So simple. I checked several "Whois" type sites and so on, but I didn't think to just look at the IP's editing history. Thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:17, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

IRC office hours for wiki-mentors and Snuggle users

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-office on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail, Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 03:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC). This message was delivered to you by: Prabash.Akmeemana 03:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

HELP!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

,

Hi, do sanctions on en-wiki apply to other wikimedia sites, such as metawiki or testwiki for example? Thanks, ★★RetroLord★★ 07:03, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

They do not. Very often, users blocked on en.Wiki are recommended to get some experience on other Foundation sites in order to demonstrate their maturity before sanctions are lifted. Behaviour on other Foundation projects, if known, may eventually be taken into consideration when applying for editing restrictions on en.Wiki to be lifted. This can also include behaviour on IRC channels (see current Arbcom cases). Just as an example, behaviour on non Wikimedia websites has been known to fail RfAs. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:23, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Exactly what Kudpung said. I wish I had more time to help at http://simple.wikipedia.org, for example, as I think that is a worthwhile project. There is lots of material here that can easily be ported over and simplified by someone with good communications skills and the ability to parse it into simpler English. Drama is also non-existent there, from what I can tell. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 10:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Josephine 96 GAN

Hey there! I believe I answered your questions about Josephine 96. Lemme know if anything else needs to get done. --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :D --♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:37, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

HELP!

{{admin help}}

Hi! How do I find out if an IP has had their talkpage access revoked. I know the IP in question has been blocked, but is there a way to check the block log to see if it still has talkpage access? Thanks, ★★RetroLord★★ 10:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Non-admin view: The block log will typically show that in the block entry. PantherLeapord (talk) 11:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

For example: . PantherLeapord (talk) 11:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, look at the IP's contributions page. At the top there is a link to "Block log". There you can see whether there is a current block that includes "cannot edit own talk page." JohnCD (talk) 11:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Elimination drive

Yeah, I'll knock something up in the coming few days- we could perhaps run it through August, though I am moving house at the end of August and so may not actually be able to do much at the very end of the competition. I suppose having a couple of coordinators/judges would be helpful... J Milburn (talk) 10:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. Let me know if you need any help with it then, ★★RetroLord★★ 10:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

"Encyclopedic value is negligible"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You're talking absolute crap. The Misplaced Pages page on the shooting is over 20,000 words long, and the article on the trial is well over 15,000. You're also pretty ignorant if you think it's only been reported in the US, it's been getting coverage on the BBC daily. I'd love to know how you tell a "media hype up" from a 'real' story, but I'm guessing you've never thought that long about it at all, as often happens when people just open their mouths and let any old crap fall out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boomer Patrol (talk • contribs) 13:08, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Word count is not a measure of encyclopedic value. You aren't a sockpuppet are you? ★★RetroLord★★ 13:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For His Excellency's most right and proper good humor. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! ★★RetroLord★★ 13:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

IRC CLOAK REQUEST

I hereby request an IRC cloak! ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 07:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Belgian Government in Exile

Absolutely! I look forward to it! --Brigade Piron (talk) 07:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Neutral title

Hi, as you can see here , you took my reviewer permission away after I requested it. Seeing as I requested its removal "cloud-free", could you restore it? Many thanks, ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 10:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

So to summarize, my reviewer permission was removed after I requested so (no cloud), so can I have it back, just like admins resign/get it back as long as there is no cloud? I assume the same rules apply with all userrights? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 10:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I have reviewed your recent edit and behaviour history and am not willing to restore your reviewer privilege for the following reasons:

• Two recent blocks and an admin-related topic ban
• Limited content contributions as against user talk and project namespace

I am going to leave this request open in case another admin feels differently and will not object if one does. Alternatively you may lodge the request in the normal way. Stifle (talk) 10:17, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

The rights should be given back just like admins get their rights back when resigning them. As there was no cloud over my activities when I resigned, they should be given back. Had I not resigned them, I would still have them. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 10:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

That is perhaps true, although assumed the administrators who blocked you recently would not also have revoked your reviewer right. Perhaps the next admin to review this will be swayed if you can indicate what you plan to do with the reviewer permission. Stifle (talk) 10:22, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I intend to return to what I used to do with the rights, review pending changes. At the time I applied for these rights I understood all relevant policies and associated guidelines, and still do. There is often a backlog, sometimes big, sometimes small, at pending changes that I used to, and would like to continue, help with. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 10:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

 Not done per Stifle. To be entirely honest, your highness, I don't trust your judgement. Salvio 10:32, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I cannot fathom why you're posting HELP requests here, rather a) approach the admin who removed the rights; or b) returning to Requests for Permissions - it shows that you simply do not understand the machinations of the project as much as you claim. Cloud does not apply here, and just because you voluntarily relinquished them, does not mean that behaviour since their removal cannot be taken into account (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Add - I posted the above before Salvio's decline. Now you have actually shut the door for their reinstatement at this time, and all future requests will need to link back to this one (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

So how am I meant to get my rights back? Would one of you be kind enough to explain that to me? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 10:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

What PantherLeapord said. Alternatively, you can ask me on my talk page in six months or more. Salvio 10:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Exactly as Panther says. Before the above, you SHOULD have gone to the removing admin first OR Requests for Permissions. You didn't, and the decision has been made. What you need to do is spend a couple of months re-proving yourself, then go back to either the removing admin or RFPERM, linking back to this entire discussion and making your request. Any request anywhere else between now and at least 2 months will be considered major forum shopping, which will cause you even longer delays (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Forum shopping now? Ask a simple question, get a mob of admins piling on. Much appreciated, all of you. Sorry for trying to do something. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 10:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

And you wonder why I don't trust your judgement... Salvio 11:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

For an arbitrator your very mature. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 11:18, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• Final warning: remove the personal attacks in the title of the section or you will be blocked, and I will remove it for you plus lock your access to this page. You're not helping yourself with this ridiculous behaviour Retro (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:08, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• : Did you read the title before making that comment? I changed it to something more suitable. Your always welcome to remove personal attacks at my talkpage Bwilkins, always. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 12:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Changing "Lynch mob" to "Yugoslav Supreme Court" (based on the history of that institution) is a clearly worse attempt to disparage the admin and arb who came by to answer your question. WP:UTRS is open to you (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:36, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to highlight that this user also appears to be having troubles with consensus and userboxes over at Misplaced Pages:Australian Wikipedians' notice board#Userbox Ideas, is verging on incivility in comments like this, and is quite dismissive of explaining policy to a troublesome user here. I thought I'd bring it up here as there are admins watching, rather than go to ANI - for the time being. Liamdavies (talk) 12:20, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Use of the emergency email system

I am responding on your talk page to your email as per your request. You received a response to your initial contact to the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency email address explaining that the email address is used for threats against life and property. Your continued use of it to request an unblock is not only inappropriate, but pointless. As you were told, the Wikimedia Foundation cannot assist you with this request. Please do not continue to misuse the emergency email system, but follow the on-Misplaced Pages processes for addressing those who are actually in position to give you any available assistance. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 12:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

What? Is this some kind of sick joke? Had you investigated this case at all, you would see my talk page access was revoked. As a WMF employee, you should be very well aware that with no talk page access, avenues of appeal to a 24 hour block are reduced to nil. As the WMF fails to provide sufficient avenues to pursue appeals against malicious or capricious administrative actions, I was forced to use the emergency email. It would be appreciated if you could alert me to a system of appealing talk page revocation within 24 hours, keeping in mind the UTRS system takes far longer than that. Maggie Dennis (WMF) User:Mdennis (WMF), ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 12:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

You are not "forced" to use the emergency email address, and as you have discovered doing so had absolutely no benefit for you. We do not investigate block complaints and cannot help you. The system is solely for escalating issues of imminent threat to relevant law officials, and we do absolutely nothing else with issues received through it. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 12:29, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I also emailed through the regular address. No response of course. Would you please explain what avenues the WMF provides to users whose talkpage access is revoked to appeal? User:Mdennis (WMF)?, ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 12:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I do not know what you refer to as "the regular address", but unless the Wikimedia Foundation is the blocking entity (such blocks are done by Foundation staff and marked as official actions), in which case you can email answerswikimedia.org and receive a response generally within 24-48 hours, it does not handle unblock requests at all. The Misplaced Pages communities are self-governing. The best you will get from the Wikimedia Foundation if you write regarding a community block is a referral to community processes like the Arbitration Committee or the OTRS volunteer response team. You may not receive a response from either within 24 hours. If you want a chance to speak to an administrator immediately, your best bet may be to use the IRC channel. While you would not be able to access the administrator channel, there are several dedicated to Misplaced Pages where you might find administrators online at any given time. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 12:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

So is it the WMF's position that a user must use off-wiki means, other than contacting the foundation, to contest blocks? Suggesting users utilise a third party insecure form of communication in the face of such grievous administrative misconduct seems misguided to me. What are your thoughts User:Mdennis (WMF)?. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 13:16, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

That the self-governing Misplaced Pages communities have processes for issues such as dealing with potential administrative misconduct. The Wikimedia Foundation hosts the English language Misplaced Pages, along with hundreds of other sites, but the bulk of community processes are created by the consensus of its users. It does not appoint or oversee the activities of volunteer administrators; their appointment and review of their behavior is instead at the discretion of the volunteer communities who work with them and who also create the policies governing their behavior and appointment. See Misplaced Pages:Policy for how policies are created and modified. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I am more than well aware of "consensus" and "policy". The WMF runs this site and delegates 99% of its responsibility. However, the WMF should take responsibility for the actions of its delegates, and be prepared to answer user queries regarding these actions. How would you recommend I make enquiries regarding wrongful actions, directly to the WMF, while those actions still affect me? User:Mdennis (WMF), ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 13:32, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Answers is the email address for general inquiries. Correspondents generally receive a response within 24 to 48 hours. We cannot intervene in community processes. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Shall I take that as an official policy position from the WMF, that they cannot (Do not have any physical or legal ability to) intervene in community affairs User:Mdennis (WMF)? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 13:39, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

The official policy is wmf:Terms of Use; see section 10. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

That is a summary, not a legal document, and therefore I assume not the official policy. Would you please link me the real policy? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 14:00, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Please read the first words (which are bolded) below the language bar. If you have difficulty scrolling down, you need only click on the colored text in the sentence to read the official policy, which is on the same page. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 14:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

There is absolutely zero need for such vile and uncivil comments. Do not allude to some physical disability or other lack of bodily function that would prevent me from scrolling down. You are the community liason, liase. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 14:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

It seems a reasonable assumption that you are experiencing technical difficulty in scrolling down, since if you were seeing the scroll bar you would surely have realized that the summary is not the only content on the page. I believe I have given you all the information that I have to offer on this subject. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 14:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

AN/I Workshop

The following is a workshop for preparation of an AN/I post against {{User:Bwilkins)). You are welcome to make statements below. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 12:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Recently I received a malicious block by involved admin with a long history of harassing me (questioning my english language skills, questioning my userpage), who has announced time and time again he hates my user page. This admin has already been questioned on this board over his uncivil and questionable conduct in his capacity as an administrator.

Also with Bwilkins, AGF is the exception, not the norm, despite his essay "assume ignorance", Bwilkins does everything but.

Make statements below this line

Bwilkins

So that User:Bwilkins cannot later claim that he did not read that statement as he did in his edit summary, I repost it here, notifying him of its important contents. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 13:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Sincere and important advice

May it please Your Lordship,

1. It is crucially important that you follow the guidance that Maggie Dennis has provided regarding your not using the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency e-mail address again. Do not send any more e-mail to that address under any circumstances. As she states, this e-mail notification address is reserved for emergency matters having extremely serious, potentially life-or-death ramifications. While being blocked from editing Misplaced Pages or posting to your talkpage can be demoralizing, it obviously does not fall into the "emergency" category. If you misuse the emergency contact e-mail address again, you are likely to be indefinitely blocked from editing with e-mail access disabled, and I am sure you do not want to take that risk.

2. Although of a lesser order of importance than paragraph 1, I strongly recommend that you drop your plan to start an ANI thread on Bwilkins. I believe that a community discussion concerning the interactions between the two of you would be unlikely to result in a condemnation of Bwilkins. It is more likely that you would be the subject of criticism, and potentially of sanctions exceeding the 24-hour block that was already imposed. No one can stop you from making this post to ANI if you wish, since it is about an incident in which you were personally involved, but I have been following discussions on ANI and similar venues for seven years and I think I have a pretty good idea of how this one might be likely to turn out for you.

3. Overall, I am concerned by your interactions with other users in the past few days. Your level of enthusiasm for Misplaced Pages is obvious and I thought you had agreed to channel that enthusiasm to a greater extent into the actual work of developing the encyclopedic content, or content-related forums such as GA reviews. In the past few days, you've been posting again to the noticeboards (on issues not directly involving you) and getting into quarrels with other editors. I don't think doing these things is the best use of your wiki-time and suggest, once again, that you focus more on content-related participation.

4. If it is relevant to you (you do not need to respond by stating whether it is or it isn't) and if you haven't seen it before, I recommend that you read and take to heart some of the advice given in the essay Misplaced Pages:Guidance for younger editors. You do not need to focus so much right now on the section about security and safety, because you've been following good practice in that area, but some of the other advice seems directly relevant to you. I've seen a lot of editors come and go in my seven years of editing, and some of them have fallen into the same situation that I am concerned may be happening to you. That is, an enthusiastic editor comes to Misplaced Pages and is very excited to be able to participate in all aspects of this massive, sprawling project. He gets just a little bit too excited, and starts to participate enthusiastically in all parts of the project, including both ones he is good at and ones he is not quite yet so good at yet. When criticized about the aspects he isn't quite so good at yet, he loses his temper and gets into quarrels. Over time, the situation spirals downhill and eventually the editor either loses his enthusiasm for Misplaced Pages and doesn't want to be part of it any more, or even worse, other editors lose their enthusiasm for the editor's participation. I've seen too many of these situations end unhappily, and I hope yours won't be one of them, but only Your Excellency can control how you behave on Misplaced Pages, and in turn, how other editors will perceive you and your participation.

Perhaps this advice will be helpful. None of it is meant to come off as uncivil or as a personal attack and I hope you will not take it as such. If you have any questions please feel free to let me know. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

NWB is giving some good advice here. I know it's frustrating to receive what we feel an unfair block. I've had a few of those myself but on this I don't think you'll get anywhere. If you look at ANI, about admin power abuse by Sandstein. I don't know what the beef is with BWilkins but I can honestly say he is one of the more rationale admin out there. Just my opinion andd it's often wrong so take it or leave it. I would suggest considering a small wikibreak and disengage for a while, this site isn't that important and a break can help you put things into perspective. I did that for a while after getting tangled up into Arb case nonsense. I came back with a new perspective and much more importantly much much less stressed. Either way just my opinion so it may just be my own rambling. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Speedy keep the above advice. You've got potential Retro - and you'll be a great editor. Dusti 01:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I've taken the above advice onboard, so thank you NYB, Hell in a bucket and Dusti. But as a final act of kindness, could one of you please explain the blocking policy to me? Specifically, my issue is that my talkpage access was revoked. The blocking policy reads as follows:

"Prevent this user from editing their own talk page while blocked, if checked, will prevent blocked users from editing their own talk page, including requesting unblock. This option is not checked by default, and typically should not be checked; editing of the user's talk page should be disabled only in the case of continued abuse of the talk page. The protection policy has further details."

It is my understanding of the above that a user should only lose talk page access if they are disruptive after being blocked. Does the blocking policy allow for removal of talk page access for 2 "disruptive" edits to a users talk page? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 02:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Further to all that, the blocking policy also states:

"Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators. Administrators should also be aware of potential conflicts of interest involving pages or subject areas with which they are involved. It is acceptable for an administrator to block someone who has been engaging in clear-cut vandalism in that administrator's userspace."

As my so called "personal attacks" were directed at the whole group of pile-ons on my talkpage, would Bwilkins have been involved when blocking me? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 02:36, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

This is going to go nowhere fast Retro - I'd suggest dropping the stick. Further, I believe talk page access was revoked as warned - as you were using the talk page to make personal attacks. The block was preventative, and revoking the talk page access prevented you from digging yourself into a deeper hole. Dusti 02:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Just because the disruption happens on a talk page isn't reason to revoke access to it. The blocking policy is quite clear about when it is to be used is it not? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 02:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Misplaced Pages:Australian Wikipedians' notice board, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. PantherLeapord (talk) 02:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

PantherLeapord: Please don't template the regulars. Also, that's not really refactoring. That was a post at the very end of the thread, so there was nothing after it that might be misconstrued due to the missing post. Oh, and it was a personal attack, so I removed it again. Please don't restore it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Must be 1mm inside the personal attack side... but alright... PantherLeapord (talk) 03:03, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Apology to His Excellency The Right Honourable Admiral of the Fleet, His Majesty THE KING Lord Baron SIR RETROLORD

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I would like to apologize for my mistake in undoing your removal of the borderline personal attack. PantherLeapord (talk) 03:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Atleast apologise for making the fucking personal attack in the first place. I'll have a chat with you mentor about your behaviour. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 03:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Enough already, shrill all-cap demands aren't going to do anything but decrease already-short patience with your behavior. Acroterion (talk) 03:45, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Remark

It is suggested that His Excellency read this essay. PantherLeapord (talk) 03:46, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

So after me complaining you are wikihounding me, you come here AGAIN? How many more times does this user need to make smart ass comments to me before some admin finally does something? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 03:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Aaand warned by myself and others for poking you with a stick. Please break the tit-for-tat cycle, OK? Acroterion (talk) 03:58, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Stepping back

I've just left a message for PantherLeapord, so it's only fair that I leave the same one for you, and you can take this as an official admin request. If I were you or PantherLeapord, I would seriously consider giving each other - and contentious areas - a very wide berth. Misplaced Pages isn't a playground for bored students during school vacations, and it's pages don't need policing by absolutely everyone. Ultimately, you'll both just end up being IBANned or in the worst case scenario, blocked. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I saw your last post, and yes, I understand. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 04:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Answer

So had the block included an automatic talkpage access revocation you would be right it would have been improper. Consider the edit you did here ] to this edit of mine ]. It's similar behavior and according to precedent it could've been extended. I do have to say though looking back at the entire situation and how I handled it I regret it now. I could've expressed myself in so many more appropriate ways without going to the extreme. Really a 24 hour block is nothing, there is no real harm to you or the project just hurt pride. The project isn't going anywhere there will be things to do later, sometimes blocks gets us away from the irritation and when we come back we have a different perspective. BTW it took me years to understand this philosophy and when I look at the block log now I kinda cringe realizing how easy I could've done things different and how much it can be used (ineffectually most times) against an editor to discount an opinion. Just my rambling but hopefully it helps give you perspective. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

GA Nominations

Hi. I notice you appear to be trying to review more than 15 articles on the Good Article Nominations list at once. I admire your enthusiasm in clearing the backlog, but in my experience, GA reviews take at least a day, and only then for an article that impeccably meets the criteria without any issues, and a more realistic figure (indeed, the standard time for a review to be "on hold") is around a week. I'm afraid I'm somewhat skeptical that you'll be able to clear those reviews in the timeframe we normally expect, so could I politely suggest you dial back a bit and concentrate on one GA review at a time? Then when you've completed that, move onto the next. Ritchie333 11:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Whaaaaaaaaa? Fifteeeeen?. I thought I had 5 or so. Hang on i'll check. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 11:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

User:Ritchie333, I did just start a few. As I am currently in possession of copious amounts of free time, I assure you they will all be done within the next day or so. No need to worry. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 11:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

You have a new message!

Mediran (t • c) 12:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality Request

Hi there Retrolord, I kindly ask permission from you to help turn the content on your user and talk page notices that seem a tad bit immature, I know it's fun and games to have phrases like "exile for life" or the kingdom fantasy, but such words can appear immature and, will only put a negative impression on you, the last thing I want to see is a user getting picked on because of the content on your userpage and talk page, your contributions to wikipedia content are really good, but when I see your userpage with the exile and King stuff makes me think differently on how you actually work here. People will start to respect you and like you more as a Wikipedian, all the editors that don't like you will see your true capabilities and will start to like you again, but again its your userpage and talkpage, so the choice is up to you my dear friend. --Prabash.Akmeemana 00:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern Prabash. I do have a few things in mind, that I will roll out in the next day or so. I'll tone down most of the content, let me know what you think? ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 02:22, 23 July 2013 (UTC)