| Revision as of 18:27, 16 April 2015 editCyphoidbomb (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users166,474 edits →Further vandalism: R← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:44, 16 April 2015 edit undoWilliam Sommer (talk | contribs)593 edits addNext edit → | ||
| (12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | You seem to have fcommunicate with me and I do not feel competent to do what you ask so can only do what it is that I can to identify such mistakes.[[User:William Sommer|William Sommermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | ||
| ''''if for whatever reason you decide to send a ,message about someone's I.P. address being used as a User Name, REFRAIN!'''' You are not welcomed here.```` | |||
| :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] ([[User administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Welcome! == | |||
| ⚫ | ittle self-reflection. You have accused almost everyone here of one type of bias or another, but what about your use of the term "WP'dians"? The use of that term could be consider derogatory towards ]. --] (]) 19:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
| Hello, William Sommer, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for ]. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: | |||
| * ] and ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] and ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| You may also want to take the ], an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Misplaced Pages. | |||
| Please remember to ] your messages on ]s by typing four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on my talk page, or <span class="plainlinks">{{input link |label=click here |page=Special:Mytalk |preload=Help:Contents/helpmepreload |preloadtitle=Help me! |type=newsection}}</span> to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome -->--] (]) 05:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Welcome to Misplaced Pages: check out the Teahouse! == | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Teahouse/Invitation|sign=<font face="Papyrus" size="4" color="#800080">]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">] ]</font></sup> 13:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)}} | |||
| == IP address == | |||
| Hi there - now that you are please can you stop as well? ]] 15:42, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Editing from both a named account and an anonymous/IP account (i.e. logged out of your named account) could be construed as ]. Please be careful. ] (]) 16:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| I have nothing to be afraid of so please refrain from unjustified acts on behalf of WP authority. I do not expect you or any one else to appreciate my stance and certainly I have better things to do than sock puppetry; another term so loosely used by WP'dians in the know. Interesting that characterization assassinations are so non-repulsed on complain boards let alone purported statements of fact based on prejudices. I have held the opinion and will continue to hold the opinion that whatever is needed by WP to protect it's interests will be metered out by its hierarchy.] (]) 16:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ::: You're kidding, right?— ] <sup>(])</sup> 20:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | ::: You're kidding, right?— ] <sup>(])</sup> 20:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
| Line 34: | Line 12: | ||
| == April 2015 == | == April 2015 == | ||
| ] Welcome to Misplaced Pages, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a ] that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in ], disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the ] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-mos1 --> ] (])(]) 16:48, 7 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Don't copy and paste whole conversations to other pages -- just link them. Copying and pasting them, as with your overly long and pointless rants, is just plain disruptive and incompetent. ] (]) 01:55, 8 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Do not post == | |||
| Do not post on my talk page again. | Do not post on my talk page again. | ||
| ] (]) 05:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC) | ] (]) 05:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
| ] You may be '''] without further warning''' the next time you make ] |
] You may be '''] without further warning''' the next time you make [[Misplaced Pages:No personal attacksmeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | ||
| ⚫ | :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritativmeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | |||
| {| style="width:95%px; background:#D0D4FF; border:0px solid #000; font-size:normal;" cellpadding="5px" | |||
| :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| |--- | |||
| |] | |||
| |'''You have been {{#ifeq: 48 hours|ind|indefinitely|temporarily}} blocked from editing ]{{#switch: | |||
| |b= for ] | |||
| |v = for ] | |||
| |vp = for ] to the page ] | |||
| |pa = for ] | |||
| |s = for continuing to add ] links | |||
| |3= for violating the ] on ] | |||
| |o = for {{{o}}} | |||
| |sock = for violating Misplaced Pages's policy on ]}}.''' {{#switch: | |||
| |vp | |||
| |v = Page blanking, addition of random text or spam, repeated tripping of the edit filter, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and repeated and blatant violation of ] are considered vandalism. | |||
| |sock = Using or creating new accounts to avoid violating the ], to edit war, or avoid a ] or ] are considered violations of policies regarding sockpuppets. If you wish to contest a block, do not create new accounts to do so, please e-mail the blocking administrator instead. }}{{#ifeq: 48 hours|ind|| Your block will expire in '''48 hours'''.}} {{#ifeq: 48 hours|ind||If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires.}} ] (]) 19:36, 8 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| |}<!-- inserted with Template:Block-reason --> | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Further vandalism == | |||
| e administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| |personal attacks]] on other people, as you did at ]. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.<!-- Template:uw-npa4 --> ] (]) 08:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| , or it will be added to a case that you should be indefinitely blocked. ] (]) 17:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | No, what has happened does not work that way and you above all should know that regardless what wants to be changed. You cannot say that the Romans wish that they never crucified Jesus as an entendre to bringitalk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
| Welcome back to Misplaced Pages. | |||
| Please do not add misdated "clarification needed" tags to typos, but either: | |||
| a) ignore the typo | |||
| b) correct the typo and (if you really feel the need for clarification of a word such as "othe") date your tags with appropriate markup (ie. date=2015 rather than "dated=April 2015" (sic)). | |||
| Many thanks, ] (]) 18:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more meant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | |||
| ⚫ | You seem to have |
||
| :If there is something wrong hermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | |||
| :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| : . That's clearly a typo of the word "other". Maybe you could just go and fix that? And yeah, you need to use "date=" rather than "dated=". — ] <sup>(])</sup> 20:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| e, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative ng him back to life. To say more is just to support your previous assessment that anything I said was a rant.] (]) 17:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| : — ] <sup>(])</sup> 20:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ClaireWalzer--you should have opened a new section instead of changing what is the record.] (]) 17:40, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :That Claire changed the title shows that she is trying to assume good faith from you. That you changed it back shows that you are not assuming good faith (part of the reason you were blocked before). Also ]. I highly recommend changing it back, or it will be added to a case that you should be indefinitely blocked. ] (]) 17:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | No, what has happened does not work that way and you above all should know that regardless what wants to be changed. You cannot say that the Romans wish that they never crucified Jesus as an entendre to |
||
| :Order of events: | :Order of events: | ||
| :1) . | :1) . | ||
| :2) , as is her right according to ], in an attempt to show good-faith. | :2) , as is her right according to ], in an attempt to show good-faith. | ||
| :3) , which is forbidden by ], in a petty attempt to assume bad faith (unless you meant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | :3) [https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:William_Sommermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | ||
| :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | ||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If |
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If smeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | ||
| :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Your concerns about preserving the record are ] since that's what the is for. The only reason to alter Claire's words would be to parade around the initial statement and deny the redaction. | |||
| ⚫ | : |
||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a chatalk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more meant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | |||
| :If there is something wrong hermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism). | |||
| :If there is something wrong here, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :You don't get to decide what another user meant or intended by restoring selected portions of their edits. Period. If you want to address and complain about the person's edit, you can point to the edit by using , but you do not get to materially misrepresent their comments by selectively restoring the problem edits as though the editor left them that way. You can disagree all you want, but you are wrong, and what you did is a violation of talk page guidelines. ] (]) 18:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| e, you need to present ]s or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. ] (]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative nge then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Notice == | |||
| he wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice--> Thank you. ] (])(]) 21:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC) | |||
| &diff=prev&oldid=656710819 You changed what she wrote], which is forbidden by ], in a petty attempt to assume bad faith (unless you | |||
Revision as of 18:44, 16 April 2015
You seem to have fcommunicate with me and I do not feel competent to do what you ask so can only do what it is that I can to identify such mistakes.[[User:William Sommer|William Sommermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson ([[User administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC)
2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) ittle self-reflection. You have accused almost everyone here of one type of bias or another, but what about your use of the term "WP'dians"? The use of that term could be consider derogatory towards Native Americans. --I am One of Many (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- You're kidding, right?— Jeraphine Gryphon 20:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- My very sentiments. It is just part of the barrage that comes with the environment right now with the board discussion. I just add it up to being the flavor of the week.William Sommer (talk) 22:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Why not apply it to all 'dians since the example was clearly for WP. It never said or implied as you would like for it to be characterized as such. Why not have one of the Native American group comment on your behalf.William Sommer (talk) 19:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
April 2015
Do not post on my talk page again. ClaireWalzer (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make [[Misplaced Pages:No personal attacksmeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritativmeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) e administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) |personal attacks]] on other people, as you did at User talk:ClaireWalzer. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Jim1138 (talk) 08:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC) , or it will be added to a case that you should be indefinitely blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
No, what has happened does not work that way and you above all should know that regardless what wants to be changed. You cannot say that the Romans wish that they never crucified Jesus as an entendre to bringitalk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more meant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong hermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) e, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative ng him back to life. To say more is just to support your previous assessment that anything I said was a rant.William Sommer (talk) 17:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Order of events:
- 1) Claire used the original heading.
- 2) Claire almost immediately changed the heading she added, as is her right according to WP:REDACT, in an attempt to show good-faith.
- 3) [https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:William_Sommermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If smeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a chatalk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more meant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong hermeant to imply that your edits were vandalism).
- If there is something wrong here, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative administrators seem to relish. This is what has happened and that is restored with my move. If she wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) e, you need to present WP:DIFFs or cite policies, instead of trying to compare yourself to Jesus. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
There is much that she could redact and didn't and to be selective is just taking a technicality to make something disappear. This is not a game of technicalities as you and other more authoritative nge then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) he wants to attempt a change then do it with a new section. You have decided what you want to do long ago and the talk page discussions show this so go ahead and use thisorgotten your previous abrogation to as a confrontation personality. It just supports my finding that WP administrators that find contributors not to their liking 2015 (UTC) &diff=prev&oldid=656710819 You changed what she wrote], which is forbidden by WP:TPO, in a petty attempt to assume bad faith (unless you