| Revision as of 00:35, 4 December 2008 view sourceOttava Rima (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,327 edits →Really?← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:24, 9 July 2012 view source DangerousPanda (talk | contribs)38,827 editsm Protected User talk:Roux: RTV being invoked - editor wishes no further contact ( (indefinite) (indefinite)) | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{retired}} | |||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=User talk:Roux/Archives/|format=Y/F|age=168|index=no}} | |||
| <div id="title-override" class="topicon" style="float:left; position:absolute; left:0; top:0; width:97%; display:none"><div style="background:#F8FCFF; position:relative; left:1em; top:0em;"><span style="font-family:Trebuchet MS"> | |||
| {{User:Roux/Nav|name=roux|caption=<small>archiving performed by ] every five days // {{User:Roux/Status}}</small>}}</span></div></div> | |||
| <div id="title-override" class="topicon" style="float:left; position:absolute; left:0; top:0px; width:99%; display:none"><div style="background:none; position:relative; left:0.8em; top:3.35em;"> | |||
| <span id="siteSub"></span></div></div><br> | |||
| {| align=center width=100% style="-moz-border-radius-topright:20px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:20px; font-family:Trebuchet MS, sans-serif; border: 2px solid #{{User:Roux/Colours}}; padding: 6px; background: none;" | |||
| | | |||
| {| class="messagebox" style="-moz-border-radius-topright:20px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:20px; padding: 6px; background: none;text-align: left;margin:auto;border:2px solid #{{User:Roux/Colours}};color:#{{User:Roux/Colours}};font-family:Calibri, Myriad, Trebuchet MS, sans serif;width=35%" | |||
| |- | |||
| |<big>'''This user is currently under the following self-imposed editing restrictions, per the ] thread located ].</big> | |||
| * The restrictions are to last for 2 months, ending on 2 Jan 2009, enforced by escalating blocks which will also reset the six month limit. | |||
| * 1RR on any and all articles related to Commonwealth monarchies and the Royal Family thereof (clear vandalism excepted), to be broadly construed. | |||
| * Required to stick solely to guidelines and gain consensus for any unique interpretations of existing guidelines and/or implementation of new ones, again to be broadly construed. | |||
| * Required to follow Strict civility restrictions on any and all talk pages and in edit summaries; the severity of and required action due to incivility, personal attacks, and/or assumptions of bad faith, to be judged by any uninvolved administrator. | |||
| * On article talk pages is required to stick solely to content. | |||
| |- | |||
| |<big>If you feel I have violated any of these, please let me know so I can correct myself. If you feel the situation is beyond that, please contact ].</big> | |||
| |} | |||
| Password has been scrambled. → ] ]<small> 02:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)</small> | |||
| {| align="center" padding ="6" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="4" style="background: white; width: auto" | |||
| | align="left" style="background: #white; border:2px solid #{{User:Roux/Colours}}; font-size: 100%; -moz-border-radius-topright:20px;-moz-border-radius-bottomleft:20px;"| | |||
| <div style="height: 150px; width: auto; overflow: auto; padding: 6px;text-align: left; border:none;"> | |||
| __TOC__ | |||
| </div> | |||
| |} | |||
| == Welcome Back!!!!!!! == | |||
| Welcome back! We all missed you! I hope that guy got banned. *hugs you* (>'_')><span style="background:#0F4D92;color:white;padding:1px 4px;">]{{•}}]</span> 02:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :The guy-in-question is currently on a 3-week block (it expires December 4). ] (]) 17:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::Just wanted to say hi. Glad you couldn't stay away :-) ] (]) 16:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Scroll and Key "notables" == | |||
| The box is an eyesore. Could you soon do better? ] (]) 16:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)SLY111 | |||
| :An anon IP did that; I didn't want to just revert him/her again. But yeah, it's been a couple weeks since they did anything, and never bothered to respond on the talkpage, so I'll fix it. //] ] <small>16:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| Great job. SLY111] (]) 14:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == lolz == | |||
| hay watchu doing XP ]''']''' 10:17, 27 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :OHAI im in ur wiki, fixing ur references. //] ] <small>10:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| ==copyvio tag== | |||
| An undoubted copyvio is where the material was added at one time by one person from a known source that you can specify. If you have not found the source, use the "copypaste" tag. ] , for all you know, might be copied from a PD source. ''']''' (]) 15:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::turns out the situation is just a little different than I had guessed -- see my talk p., and my note to the author. ''']''' (]) 19:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Hai! == | |||
| Hai <3 --<strong>]<sup>]</sup></strong> 23:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == BLACK FRIDAY! ZOMG! == | |||
| Don't go shopping, it'll kill you. | |||
| ...And HAI! *hugs* I've never edited your talk page, so here it is. <span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;">]√]</span> 19:46, 28 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Jclemens RfA == | |||
| {{ #ifeq: Jclemens' RfA Thankspam | end | </div></div> | | |||
| <div class="NavFrame" style="width:100%"><div class="NavHead" | |||
| style="color: #ffc000; background-color: #1010d0;">Jclemens' RfA Thankspam</div><div class="NavContent" | |||
| style="display:{{#ifeq:yes|yes|show|none}}; text-align:left;"> | |||
| }} | |||
| {| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #ffd000;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ] | |||
| |rowspan="2" | | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em; color: #1010d0;" | '''JClemens' RfA Thanks''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | '''Thank you for participating in ], which passed with 77 supporting and 2 opposing. Regardless of your position, I thank you for the time you took to examine my record and formulate your response. ] (]) 02:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC)''' | |||
| |} | |||
| {{ #ifeq: end | end | </div></div> | | |||
| <div class="NavFrame" style="width:100%"><div class="NavHead" | |||
| style="background:00 FF FF;">end</div><div class="NavContent" | |||
| style="display:{{#ifeq:{{{show}}}|yes|show|none}}; text-align:left;"> | |||
| }} | |||
| ==Why did you delete my page?== | |||
| why did you delete my page? ] was notable. <sup><small>]</small></sup><sub><small> ]</small></sub> 12:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==Re: Tyler on AN/I (Your comment)== | |||
| I appreciate what you said on the AN/I I posted about Tyler, however, this appeared to be a case of a user's actions putting another user's work on Wiki in jeopardy, by posting an offensive messsage on their userpage and sending it to them by email. This was, imho, a serious case involving an onwiki action (at least until I found out Tyler'd been taking the ****). I won't do it anymore, simply cause I don't want stuff like this to happen anymore. ] (]) 15:41, 29 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Silly permissions == | |||
| ''Further, Falcadore you may not be aware of this, but the creator of a page is not permitted to remove CSD tags from that page.'' I would like to know just how I might have been aware of it, and bear in mind there are a lot of WP documents, policies and guidelines, making it intimidating large amount of material for any new editor to read and be familiar with. I don't mind the verdict, but I do mind how it was done. | |||
| I guess what I'm trying to say is, what the author is or is not entitled to do is not stated sufficiently clearly. The annotation for CSD should more clearly indicate this. --] (]) 05:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I guess then, I'm an idiot. --] (]) 11:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==Technical Problem== | |||
| Hey there, I would like to divert your attention to one article "]", this article is not showing some of the sections which are present in the editing tab but not shown in the normal preview of the article. Plz have a look at this article and help correct it if you can. Regards.] (] • ]) 08:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :{{done}} //] ] <small>]<small>08:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| ::Thanks] (] • ]) 08:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Request for input == | |||
| Hello Roux. You had initially brought up the idea of a on {{user|Shutterbug}} and related accounts, in a ] thread that was later moved to ]. As a result of ], all Scientology-related articles are under ], so technically according to ] any administrator may carry out the topic ban. However ] is clear this should be decided by uninvolved administrator(s): '']''. You are not an admin, but you were the original uninvolved editor to bring up the idea of an indef topic ban. Would appreciate your further input in this matter. Thank you, ''']''' (]) 21:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your ] on Cool Hand Luke== | |||
| Dear Roux, I noticed your vote statement on Cool Hand Luke, and I just wanted to encourage you not to blanket-oppose somebody just because they have a Misplaced Pages Review account. While I myself do not have one, I know many pillars of our community do-- New York Brad comes to mind as a shining example of someone who, I think, has used that forum from time to time for meta-discussions. | |||
| I've never spoken to Luke before the elections, I don't know him that well, I'm not writing you here on his behalf. I just notice that some very "battleground"-esque people have targeted Luke and are making some very intense accusations against him. Before his name was dragged through the mud, Luke was almost unopposed, a veritable shoo-in for election. Now, he's not. | |||
| Roux--if you think the accusations are true, if you've investigated them and are convinced Cool Hand Luke has acted improperly, then obviously, you have to oppose. | |||
| But please, don't oppose just because of innuendo, bold accusations, or generic labels of "drama" or "bad associations". Don't make the decision based upon a question like ]. Don't let a tiny minority of users, through grandiose statements of mudslinging, sink an otherwise untarnished candidate. I don't think that's the kind of project we want. | |||
| Anyway, thanks for listening to this ranting. :) --] (]) 22:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| : I figured. I want to be clear, I wasn't saying you ''were'' voting that way, I just wanted to be sure. Truth be told, you've probably know the candidates and their stories better than I do, so no worries. :) Cheers! --] (]) | |||
| == Thank you for participating in my RfA == | |||
| I just wanted to take a moment to say "thank you" for taking the time and effort to participate in my recent RfA. As you may know, the discussion closed 66/0/1 and I'm now a holder of the mop. I will keep working to improve the encyclopedia and appreciate the trust which you have placed in me. - ] (]) 00:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Quick question... == | |||
| I know that ] can be used on a Talk page of an article or user, but is it acceptable to do so on a WP:AE? I'd like to get some uninvolved opinions for the Scientology-related thread for which you suggested a topic ban. ]<font color="green">]</font>] 05:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| I fail to see why you think this needs to be posted to ANI at this point. ANI is too busy as it is. Your concern would be put to better use if you tried to help solving the issue right there. --] <small>]</small> 18:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Background Information Page == | |||
| The Background Information Box on my artist's page] (]) 22:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Yes, the box on right side of the Marlee Scott page...am I in the right place now?] (]) 22:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| yes...the box on the right side of the Marlee Scott page] (]) 22:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == removing self-categorization == | |||
| I greatly appreciate your help in removing self-categorization from categories. I wonder if you'd be interested in taking your efforts a step further and supplying one or more parent categories in cases where the self-cat was the only parent. Best wishes, -- ] (]) 00:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :I thought I had been.. what did I miss?//] ] <small>] 11:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| == Cookies == | |||
| {{cookies|For your auto-archiving help.}}'''<font face="Segoe Print" size="2">~]''' ]</font></font> 03:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == Really? == | |||
| "I thought about it and feel that opposing other candidates just isn't right." | |||
| Really? So, when there are over 30 people running, you honestly think that a candidate doesn't have the right to promote which 7 he thinks should be there and that his opinion doesn't matter? Wow. I really hope that you don't ever run for any other position, because I will definitely have to point this out in order to show that you don't believe that people have the right to express their opinions, especially if you ever go and do the same thing. ] (]) 16:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :Beg your pardon? I think it's fine to ''support'' other candidates. Voting ''against'' other candidates is what I find distasteful, because it looks like you're trying to lessen their chances while improving your own. And I am '''not''' saying it was the intention, but people on ArbCom need as much as possible to avoid the ''appearance'' of impropriety. Supporting other candidates shows "I think this person would also be good"; it's an act against self-interest and is therefore commendable. At no point did I say his opinion didn't matter, so don't put words in my mouth. I also don't much appreciate being badgered for my vote, thanks. //] ] <small>] 16:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| ::So, only you get to vote against opponents, and its perfectly okay if you vote against them for voting against others? Isn't that the very definition of hypocrisy? You created a standard that you do not live up to. At least attempt to create a legitimate basis instead of opposing a standard that you, yourself, refuse. Voting oppose is not improper. However, opposing because you don't want them to have the ability to freely speak their mind probably should be improper. ] (]) 17:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::You seem to have me mistaken for someone else. I'm not running, which means I'm not voting against any opponents. Please re-read what I wrote above, as it seems as though you didn't. //] ] <small>] 17:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| ::::I'm sorry, but you have mistaken people for someone completely else. Everyone running is a wikipedian. You are a wikipedian. It is disrespectful to claim that ''you'' have the right to oppose but other wikipedians don't. That is really rude and really unfair, and possibly even incivil. ] (]) 21:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::OKay, you know what? Who the hell do you think you are to come to my talkpage and badger me regarding my vote? I made my opinion crystal clear. Oh BOO HOO your favourite candidate had ONE vote against him for doing something that I found distasteful. Did I say he wasn't entitled to his opinion? NO. Did I say he wasn't allowed to show his opinion? NO. Did I say that he should be prevented from giving his opinion? NO. On the other hand, did you show up at my talk page and fucking accuse me of a bunch of shit I never did? YES. The next time you post here, unless you are posting an apology, you will be reported and blocked for harassment. //] ] <small>] 22:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)</small> | |||
| :::::::Your current incivility is indicative of your constant incivility, which connected to the incivility in your hypocritical stance against a person for opposing others. Who are you, going off your own standards, to oppose another because they opposed someone? What gives you the right that you can then deny the others the same right? Hmm? This is not Rouxapedia. This is Misplaced Pages. You have no right to dominate others, to abuse them, and to claim that they don't deserve a say. Thats really unfair, highly incivil, and not up to the Misplaced Pages standards and policies. You can't bully your way like that, and that is extremely inappropriate. Go ahead, ask for me to be blocked, but your incivility here and there is extremely inappropriate. The only one who should be apologizing is you for your abuse. ] (]) 00:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| :::::roux is entitled to oppose standing candidates for any reason, or no reason at all. It's not unreasonable for him to have concerns about candidates who oppose other candidates (certainly I've thought about the implications of it.) His oppose are certainly not uncivil or rude - I can't speak to unfair. Feel free to question roux's vote(s), but don't come to his talk page to sling about accusations and hassle him in such a manner, that truly is uncivil. ]<font color="FF8800">]</font> 22:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| == I still need help editing my background info box... == | |||
| I'm new to the talk pages, so I hope I'm doing this properly. I just need to edit Marlee Scott's record label info, as she has signed to a new one...I'm with her management team.] (]) 18:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks for the response, I will do what you suggested] (]) 19:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:24, 9 July 2012
Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.Password has been scrambled. → ROUX ₪ 02:15, 8 July 2012 (UTC)