| Revision as of 20:17, 3 November 2010 editDangerousPanda (talk | contribs)38,827 edits blocked indef, arbcom only← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 16:47, 5 October 2024 edit undoZ1720 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators30,223 edits Burney Relief listed for good article reassessment (GAR-helper) | ||
| (208 intermediate revisions by 44 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{archives |auto=long |search=yes |bot=MiszaBot I |age=365|index=/Archive index}} | |||
| {{retired}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 100K | |||
| |counter = 7 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 0 | |||
| |algo = old(365d) | |||
| |archive = User talk:DarknessShines2/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | |||
| |target=/Archive index | |||
| |mask=/Archive <#> | |||
| |leading_zeros=0 | |||
| |indexhere=yes}} | |||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| I am waiting one week, if by then the crap linking my name to porn websites and criminal gangs is not scrubbed i will seek advice on how to have that achieved. I will have no part of a site which allows a user to be smeared in this manner. Please perma block this account so i can`t return. I must also insist the allegations of racism now being posted also be scrubbed, and petri had better fucking stop smearing me right fucking now ] (]) 13:23, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| :Hi Mark, just wanted to let you know that I at least find it unfortunate that your name has to be at the top of the SPI (aside, I think the section you want blanked has already been scrubbed). There's clearly an abusive use of proxies going on and it would be nice to determine the master of the proxies and some method of shutting him or her down. Given the difficulty in finding the proxy master, it probably would have been better to have the whole thing over at ]. As it stands, Petri Krohn and TFD seem far too enthusiastic about connecting you to the whole mess, which is adding unhelpful noise to trying to sort things out. ] (] <small>•</small> ] <small>•</small> ]) 12:30, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| * - Morning Mark, please stay calm just a little bit longer .. take the high road, there are committee members and experienced editors looking at the details and it should be cleared up soon. ] (]) 13:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :: MN - First, please be careful of the ] policy. You're dangerously close to it. You can make your point without using the magic words. I would suggest requesting to FloNight that ] in the SPI. Second, I posted a comment on the SPI page. I don't think you're socking - frankly, I would be fairly shocked if you were. I think you're seen more than enough evidence that editors familiar with an editors style can spot them fairly quickly and have no problem taking action, and I think you're smart enough to realize that. Even with the anonymous networks, it's still fairly easy to spot a sock. It doesn't help that you went from one contentious area to another. But even if you are, much of the evidence could have been e-mailed privately. The manner it was done smacks of a deliberate attempt to vilify you, far beyond even the attacks on blogs towards various editors in the CC area. I saw FloNight's post to you - at this point, you're best bet is to be as helpful as you can and keep a low profile for a while. Best of luck. <b><font color="darkred">]</font></b> <font color="black">(])</font> 15:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
| == ANI == | |||
| Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> ] (]) 21:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
| You may wish to respond to this posting at ANI. ] (]) 18:12, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Go fuck yourself you sick twisted sack of shite ] (]) 20:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
| ...and thanks to the above violation of ], I have extended the block to indef, and removed talkpage access. Unblock requests can be directed to ArbCom directly from this point on. (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 20:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 16:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 16:47, 5 October 2024
 Archives | ||||||||
Index
|
||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Nomination of Gore Effect for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gore Effect is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Gore Effect (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. jps (talk) 21:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Burney Relief
Burney Relief has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)