| Revision as of 01:17, 3 March 2017 editHijiri88 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,391 edits →WP:BITE← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:49, 3 March 2017 edit undo184.145.42.19 (talk) ←Replaced content with 'You can all eat dick.'Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| You can all eat ]. | |||
| This is the place where people trash me. Add your trash below! | |||
| == ] == | |||
| BITE is for newbies, and you ain't no newbie. ] (]) 04:47, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :Oh, so it's OK to treat people like shit after they've made a certain number of edits? Or is it a time period? Please, point me to the page that tells me when newbieness expires. If you can't, admit that you're fishing for a confrontation, presumably so I can be blocked indefinitely. OK? OK.] (]) 06:22, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::Generally, when you've got two NPA blocks on your record from over a month ago, you are no longer enough of a newbie that pointing out that you are being uncivil is covered under BITE. Let alone that I didn't even say you were uncivil; I advised you to read ]. ] (<small>]]</small>) 11:54, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::The root of the issue was ] accusing me of "disruptive editing" because I erased poorly-sourced nonsense (or as they characterized it, "blanking"). Many of those saying '''Keep''' on the AfD agreed refs were trash, yet Barek never apologized nor did anyone say they should. As I said on that page, you need not worry. I'm entirely done contributing to "Clique-a-pedia". Further, that you now deign now to comment on my talk page after threatening me with a block on the basis of a single comment on ''your'' talk page speaks to a level of hypocrisy that's both disgusting and patently obvious to any disinterested party. Of course, disinterested parties on WP are about as common as unicorns. I mean, can I have you blocked now for saying nonsense on my page? Would any admin take that seriously? My ANI request certainly blows that theory out of the water! You are intellectually dishonest, and have no business commenting on something you really didn't look into. Of course, that hasn't stopped you thus far. Take a hike.] (]) 21:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I didn't threaten you with a block for posting "a single comment" on my talk page. I threatened you with a block if you posted multiple aggressive, harassing messages on my talk page after you had already done so once. I went back on it once I realized you had done the same to multiple users. And your insinuation that I am a part of some clique is somewhat amusing -- I don't recall ever interacting with any of the users who were disputong with you before (except Drmies), and the user who posted the first message above would probably laugh at the insinuation that he and I are in some kind of clique together. I just saw your behaviour on the AFD you linked to on ANI (a page with more than 7,000 watchers) and offered you some friendly advice. You took my advice the wrong way. ] (<small>]]</small>) 22:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::P.S. The second of my blocks was total bullshit. Anyone with the guts to dig into it would see that, but again, unicorns...] (]) 21:48, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Well, people don't have to ] (]) 22:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| Just so anyone else doesn't waste their time, and looking like I just did at what caused the second block. User:184.145.42.19 was initially blocked for for 31 hours on January 18th. The block expired at 17:00 GMT on January 19th. After a couple of innocuous edits, between 22:30 and 23:19 there were 11 more edits with the edit summaries as: | |||
| * ''"Carolina Reaper" is not a recognized cultivar, and a marketing book from a brewery doesn't prove otherwise. Revert at your peril, motherfucker.'' | |||
| * ''Yemeni-American implies al-Awlaki was born in Yemen. He wasn't. Please remember that the entire rest of the world doesn't speak like goddamn Yanks.'' | |||
| * ''This article clearly deserves an advert tag. It is wall-to-wall marketingspeak. Garchy is a dishonest editor. See his list of edits.'' | |||
| * ''Does Garchy just go around reverting advert tags? Jesus Christ. This article deserves it; clearly "polished" by Bratton-friendly editors.'' | |||
| * (blank) | |||
| * ''Manual reversion of edit by User:Garchy; these are all high-profile cases that garnered media coverage, and thus relevant. Also, I made some edits to original text to remove non-NPOV content by author.'' (wow, that one was civil!). | |||
| * ''January 2017'' (another civil one!) | |||
| * ''In 1942, it was not called Saint Petersburg. Anyone can click on linked text to see current name of the city. Jesus Christ.'' | |||
| * ''Anyone can click link to see what the then-Leningrad is called today. It's also mentioned IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE ARTICLE.'' | |||
| * ''Garchy reverted to a version full of non-NPOV fluff which tends to advertise for a gardening museum. This is trash.'' and | |||
| * ''Garchy reverted to version full of advertising, including business hours for "Lotusland". Garchy reverted EVERY SINGLE EDIT I MADE ON 18 JAN (]).'' | |||
| Not suprisingly, 10 minutes later you got your second block - surprisingly for only 60 hours. How you can possibly claim it was total bullshit I don't know - the only bullshit I can see, is that it wasn't longer. Your response to this block was which has more expletives than anything else - not sure how that 3-way would work. After that was deleted, you rudely asked for the block to be lifted. When that was denied you followed up with the insult . Shortly after you were blocked from editing on your own talk page. So how was this block total bullshit - the edit summaries alone deserved a longer block in my mind? ] (]) 23:22, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| *I defy any of you...er, people, to give a good reason why you're on my talk page now, besides eliciting something you can use to get me blocked again. Go.] (]) 01:58, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| *I was here, because I assumed good faith, and thought I should check into that second block you said was BS. Having been subjected to trumped up charged and blocked myself in the past, I like to make sure that others don't get the same treatment. However, I was wasting my time. Give me one good reason why you claimed the second block was BS? ] (]) 02:00, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::*You would not have seen the claim about the second block '''until''' you came to this page, so your "explanation" rings hollow. Further, as with every other editor getting their digs in above, you are not neutral in any way. If this nonsense were posted on any of your talk pages by me, I'd surely be blocked right now. Ask Hijiri, who threatened me with same the other day! Seriously, you're not helping, only fishing. I suggest you take your rod and shove...off to a different lake.] (]) 02:26, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :*Oh, I'm keeping an eye on your edits, I'll admit that. Shouldn't be a surprise given that the ANI case is still open, and I participated, and then you made some rather unkind comments referring to me. But I don't have any ulterior motives, beyond hoping that you'd become a valuable contributor to Misplaced Pages. | |||
| ::Don't take things too seriously. You had two short blocks, for relatively common and minor offences. Mine is worse . Accusations of lying (well, they were, and despite documenting it in detail, I still got a block). And the other was for ... wait for it ... sexual harassment. (and while the Admin eventually admitted they'd been overly harsh and changed the block to only 2 days, they wouldn't back down on the sexual harassment claim ... so I've been stuck with that label for 9 years. I tell you, if it was really sexual harassment, would I have only got 2 days?) | |||
| ::It was an on-topic joke about spanking ... and I meant it as someone did something minor that was wrong ... I still don't know what nerve I hit that got construed as sexual harassment ... or even sexual. I'm still bothered by that, 9 years later. But life goes on, and one can still contribute here, even if one doesn't necessarily have the best start. ] (]) 03:10, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::You're a liar and a hypocrite. Where was all this helpfulness during the AfD??? The only thing you've done here that's useful is to clue me into an ANI that nobody told me existed. Classy lot, you all are.] (]) 04:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Lying about what? I started out helpfully at the AFD. Initially I became involved because I noticed the case at ANI; When I saw the talk about an AFD I immediately left what I thought was a helpful message to you on your talk page, to let you know about the previous case, and the unanimous keep. I also left a similar message in the ANI.. After you noted in the ANI that the previous AFD had been closed by a known sock puppet (which is true) I tried to help by pointing out that anyone would have made the same close decision.. Then I tried to calm down the discussion on your talk page with - though I erred by mentioning ] - I was starting to get testy. After that, I got overly testy - sorry about that. It was only then the AFD started - my first comment was quite neutral. You then made a valid point about one of the two references I said met ] and I agreed with you, and pointed to another reference and at the same time was surprised there were so many other articles, and innocently said 'Good Grief' in surprise - which inadvertently offended you.. Then I made a third polite comment, and tried to point out I thought you were being rude. You were a bit sarcastic, and I made a 4th polite comment, but then you started to get under my skin and stopped being diplomatic. It was downhill from there. | |||
| ::::My point though, is that I came in to help. I tried to help. I wasn't aware you didn't know the ANI had been re-opened - or else I'd have put a notification template on your page. And I'm still willing to help. Am I a hypocrit - sometimes ... we are who we are ... but I don't think that has much bearing on this. ] (]) 05:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I need your help like I need another hole in my fuckin' head. The last "editor" who claimed to "help" was the one who initiated the AfD instead of assisting me with doing that myself (which is what I asked for help with). Stop posting here. You're not welcome.] (]) 05:31, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Sorry you feel that way; yes, I can understand your frustration about that AFD - though I don't think the outcome would have been any different no matter who started it. Goodbye then. ] (]) 05:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I just wanted to point out that the reason I'm on "your talk page" is because you posted on mine after the relevant ANI thread had already been closed, as well as to mention that {{tq|he last "editor" who claimed to "help"}} couldn't possibly have been {{tq|the one who initiated the AfD}} since I claimed to help. I offered you friendly advice by linking you to the ] essay which, if you read it and took it to heart, I think would really help you in convincing other users to come over to your side in disputes like the AFD you referred to. Posting strings of replies beneath every !vote one disagrees with is almost never a good idea. ] (<small>]]</small>) 01:17, 3 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:49, 3 March 2017
You can all eat dick.