Revision as of 11:47, 9 July 2007 editGiovanni Giove (talk | contribs)3,770 edits →Giovanni Giove← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:23, 9 July 2007 edit undoZenanarh (talk | contribs)3,015 edits →Giovanni GioveNext edit → | ||
Line 120: | Line 120: | ||
::Can someone take a care of Giove, please? He already got a rich dossier and it's increasing every day with new vandalisms. Regards ] 09:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | ::Can someone take a care of Giove, please? He already got a rich dossier and it's increasing every day with new vandalisms. Regards ] 09:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::Cool! If I am a vandal, why you was never able to revert my edits?:-) Lacj of argumets?... take care....--] 11:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | :::Cool! If I am a vandal, why you was never able to revert my edits?:-) Lacj of argumets?... take care....--] 11:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
::::Edit warring with you doesn't interest me. You are not the subject of my interests. Article is. My arguments are on the talk page. Yours are... remind me please... Britannica? Like this ? This text is full of POV and sourced by Italian writers. And it's not Britannica. I can dispute almost every sentence taken from that source. Through RFC of course. But not yet. At present we are discussing about the name of the city used in the article. Reverting doesn't interest me. By the way I reverted the page to the moment when I put the tags and you deleted it again . The article needs protection. ] 12:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:23, 9 July 2007
Click here to leave a new messageNo current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |
- Refining the administrator elections process
- Blocks for promotional activity outside of mainspace
- Voluntary RfAs after resignation
- Proposed rewrite of WP:BITE
- LLM/chatbot comments in discussions
Archives |
---|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 |
Human Height and Unfreeride
Thanks for protecting the human height page from Unfreeride, though he is so persistent I fear that he'll be straight back at it.
He is working from a POV that Northern Chinese are the superior race, and has made many such statements to that effect, and bought arguements about race and intelligence into the human height article.
Also, he has made many ad hom attacks - accusing me of "dementia" being a "white supremacist" and a "troll", and "idiot", a "liar" and having 2 sock puppets.
His tactic in editing an article is to push his POV (in this case that Asians would be the tallest if not for X Y Z)and then heavily references his statement with irrelevent articles, that people either won't bother to read, can't read because they are in chinese, or find hard to delete because of how conviluted his edits become.
He violates just about every rule that wikipedia has, and I don't like the edit wars he is sure to begin on return. Check his contribs on other pages and you'll see human heiht is just the tip of the iceberg, he uses similar tactics on many pages with a similar agenda and even references his own statements to support subsequent POV pushing.
Rwlinda
Rwlinda whom you unblocked has immediately returned to spamming his/her own website again. IrishGuy 16:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- How disappointing. Note left on user talk, I'll reblock myself if it comes to that. – Steel 16:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but the site I link to used to have a link up there for I believe over a year and was removed because I thought it was ok to add additional links to films that star Robin Williams. I do not intend to add any other links, I only re-added this one, because it used to be there and I know it's being appreciated by a lot of people. Please advice (since the talk page doesn't seem to be very active)~. I also added some additional information to my talk page. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks. --Rwlinda 18:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Your block to Giovanni Giove
There seems to be another user who did exactly the same revert to the Marko Marulić article here. Can this be his clone or are they ganged up together? Please check this out. --No.13 17:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
A small update. From the moment you blocked Giovanni Giove for edit warring and 3RR another user has appeared and he continues exactly the same edit wars and makes exactly the same reverts. He now completely replaced Giove in his edit wars on Giovanni Lucio, Marko Marulić and Giacomo Micaglia. Honestly I don't really consider this a coincedance, the possibility for something like that to happen is just huge. They are definately connected somehow. --No.13 14:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- (See my recent comments on yesterday's ANI thread) My recommendation is to gather evidence of them reverting to each other's version (particularly where one turns up in a dispute when the other gets blocked) and go to WP:RFCU. – Steel 14:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree. GiorgioOrsini all of sudden appeared when I wrote to Giovanni Giove that he's been warned for the third time (although, he had been in many other ways warned not to do edit wars, but discuss on talkpages and give arguments... about 70 (yes, seventy) times. See messages and links on the talkpage of Giovanni Giove, , ).
Now, after that, Giorgio Orsini appeared out of nowhere and "pushed" in again Giove's POV versions (I dare to say that, because Giove persistently avoided any discussion, even if he was explicitly being asked to give answers). Maybe for the reason that Giove can avoid the accusation of "breaking the rule of being warned for the 3rd time/and still continuing"?
See this change from 3rd July and even worse one (on 3rd July) with comment, that blatantly ignored the talkpage; 5th July - . He continued to editwar same day with , without giving any argument on the talkpage.
These changes ignored all arguments (the hill of arguments and sources) given on the talkpage. The case is heavier, because the size of the talkpage shows how long this dispute is goin on.
In fact, he played dumb and even dared to object on the warning ("for the third time") told to Giovanni Giove. He said "The 'proof' above is simply a nonsense. The above use of a particular and a generic term does not prove anything. Also, you are obliged to be civil and not to 'support' your text by your anger". Sent on 5th July .
And even more. Same day, 5th July, on the same talkpage, he send an ...inflammatory message, that is in fact his personal point of view... or a personal wish . "former Yugoslavia's republics... must comply to a single linguistic standard i.e. to the same language" (?????????!) "Balkanization of this language..."(??!!!). Same political views as Giove. To deny any possibility of Croatian language mentioned as independent (described in talkpage of Jakov Mikalja article).
Further, he continued to insult with word ("political propaganda in Croatia"), without any argument given for that. ...If opposer doesn't agree with him, than he "throws mud" on the opposer.
Now to other problem. In this message from 3rdJuly to Giovanni Giove, Giorgio Orsini encouraged him to ignore warnings and (continue vandalizing) . To be correct, this is the change where he stated that .
It would be nice to see if we have a sockpuppet case. Is he the same user as Giovanni Giove? Greetings, Kubura 14:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- There's not much more that I can do, other than agree entirely. Requests for checkuser is the place to go. – Steel 14:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Happy Steel's Day!
Steel359 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Love, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
- Wow, congratulations. Qst 16:52, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hurray! Happy day, Steel! :D --Iamunknown 18:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- No need to thank me, dear Steel (and I'm so sorry for not making your day earlier! ;) because you've earned it with your hard work, your positive and kind attitude and your friendship. I hope you had a wonderful, beautiful day, friend! :) Love, Phaedriel - 22:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hurray! Happy day, Steel! :D --Iamunknown 18:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Nancy Cartwright
I know that you unprotected the article per request but the vandalism to this article continues and I am requesting that it be protected again, the problem looks like it will just continue unless the IP adresses are blocked from editing. Here are some of the vandal edits since you unprotected the article,diff diff 2diff 3diff 4, Thanks --Joebengo 15:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, in the last seven days it's been vandalised twice. I've just blocked an IP for two weeks if that helps (the one that hit the page on the 4th after being blocked on the 28th. – Steel 20:17, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Why have you blocked me?
1) Why have you blocked me? I have not broken the 3RR on Mako Marulic/Marco Marulo article. I've done some edits, and they were referencied (for wikilinks, sources or self evidence). For two time user:Zmaj reverted them.
Then I did some further edits (still referencied), this time User:No.13 did 2 rv, giving no reason (just accusing me of 'vandalism'). I did other 2 rvv to defend a NEW version of the article, so I havent broke the rule (as far I can know). All my edits are referencied, and I am open to discussion. What should I do? I'm alone against several Crotian user that don't like what I write. They conducts edit wars against me, and I am alone here...
2) User n°13 break the rule for sure, starting from here. He should be blocked (law is the same for everybody).
3) Why a so long block? accutaly I break the rule for one time only. THe second and the third time, admins themself recognized the error.
Tx for your attention. best regards--Giovanni Giove 20:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Your block was for a clear 3RR violation: . Each reverted the preceeding edit, it doesn't have to be the same text reverted three times. No.13 does appear to have broken the 3RR too; I hadn't noticed that. Regardless, that was three days ago and no block for that now would be justified. If you feel people are ganging up on you, try finding an impartial mediator at WP:MEDCOM or WP:MEDCAB to help resolve the dispute. You'd been blocked three times previously; none of which were overturned. Without checking myself, I'm going to assume that they were valid, since 3RR blocks are usually swiftly overturned if it turns out there was in fact no violation. – Steel 20:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I have not broke the 3RR rule, there is a clause where it doesn't apply if someone is reverting vandalism and this is clear vandalism by Giovanni Giove. This is not a content dispute, this man has absolutly no sources or arguments for his cause. Marko Marulić is a Croatian poet who wrote in Croatian and in Latin. He never wrote one thing in Italian. Also all international sources know him as a Croat including Encylopedia Britannica and Italian sources. I have looked into Giovanni's edits and he constnatly edit wars and his contribution to Misplaced Pages was no less than constant disruption. His actions immediately after his block expired say more than enough - he immediately went to continue his edit wars. --No.13 20:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I forgot: even Zmaj broke the rule, just have a look. I have restored my version, and I am ready to discuss it. On my talk page you can read that admins recognized their errors about the 3RR. See and . Best regards.--Giovanni Giove 20:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Zmaj reverted three times. As for your previous blocks, you appear to be right. – Steel 20:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Giovanni Giove
He continues to edit war just as his 3RR block expires. See here --No.13 20:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- It takes two to edit war. – Steel 20:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- In case of Giovanni it takes only one. --No.13 20:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- ... for your incivilty yes. I give proper references to my edits. If you don't like my edits on Marulo/Marulic, if you are so sure about yourself, why you can not perform a civil discussion?mmmh?!.. why?!!!! Do not forget that I 'won' nearly all my edits on Dalmatia's history. And I am alon against 20 Croatian users. You shold wonder why I won....--Giovanni Giove 21:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Where is your reference for Marko Marulić? I have yet to see one. You edited the article without any source or research to version that suits you, without asking or consulting with anyone and you are accusing others for incivility?! You have some nerve. And I have seen some of your edits, your only constant on Misplaced Pages is edit warring. --No.13 21:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- ... for your incivilty yes. I give proper references to my edits. If you don't like my edits on Marulo/Marulic, if you are so sure about yourself, why you can not perform a civil discussion?mmmh?!.. why?!!!! Do not forget that I 'won' nearly all my edits on Dalmatia's history. And I am alon against 20 Croatian users. You shold wonder why I won....--Giovanni Giove 21:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- In case of Giovanni it takes only one. --No.13 20:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I suggested a few days ago that you go to WP:RFCU. What happened when you went there? – Steel 21:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I would if I knew how. Since I am newly registered I don't know how to make a complaint there. --No.13 21:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Scroll down just past the contents (see the box "To request a check") and follow the instructions. It's mainly a case of telling them what you told me the other day. – Steel 21:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I would if I knew how. Since I am newly registered I don't know how to make a complaint there. --No.13 21:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Steel. I've noticed something interesting, but I don't know...will that be enough for RfCU.
I've noticed an identical method of "threatning" to opposers by user Giovanni Giove and NovaNova.
They both use the picture of "stop hand" and with accusation "You're a vandal", followed by a threat "You'll be reported to admins, moderators...".
Maybe too little for RfCU, but... that's too specific, I haven't seen any other users that do so. See this by NovaNova, and by an IP (anti-Croat attitude, pro-"Serbocroat"), and by Giovanni Giove.
Similar method of "threat, warning" I had on it.wiki, though, by another user (is Giove someone's "prolonged hand" or a sockpuppet, I don't know. Giove appeared in a next message sent to me.), however, other wiki is out of "hand of en.wiki-law" :) .
Possibly other users (that disagreed with Giove and company) had same experiences, I haven't managed to see them all. Kubura 12:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- I managed to get ahold of a checkuser yesterday evening and it turns out that NovaNova and GiorgioOrsini are socks of some user banned long ago, and so I've blocked them both. Giovanni Giove is apparently a different person on a different continent. – Steel 15:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm but how do you explain the fact they make identical reverts to the articles? For example on Marko Marulić article when Giove was blocked for 3RR Orsini came in and did exactly the same revert, identical 100%. I've consulted with Kubura who follows this user for some time and I have found out that this was not the only time he did something like that. Also I came upon the fact Giove/Orsini issue was subject of RfCU couple of times. If the IP shows they are on different continent I don't find that reassuring, they must be somehow connected. It is obvious I think. --No.13 15:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose the simplest answer is that Orsini is simply a troublemaker. If reverting to Giove's versions will annoy the editors who are reverting him on other articles, he'll do that. *Shrug* – Steel 15:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- There were cases when it was also the other way around, Giove reverting to Orsini's version. What about that? --No.13 15:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm not a mind-reader. Is this conversation going anywhere? – Steel 15:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- There were cases when it was also the other way around, Giove reverting to Orsini's version. What about that? --No.13 15:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose the simplest answer is that Orsini is simply a troublemaker. If reverting to Giove's versions will annoy the editors who are reverting him on other articles, he'll do that. *Shrug* – Steel 15:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm but how do you explain the fact they make identical reverts to the articles? For example on Marko Marulić article when Giove was blocked for 3RR Orsini came in and did exactly the same revert, identical 100%. I've consulted with Kubura who follows this user for some time and I have found out that this was not the only time he did something like that. Also I came upon the fact Giove/Orsini issue was subject of RfCU couple of times. If the IP shows they are on different continent I don't find that reassuring, they must be somehow connected. It is obvious I think. --No.13 15:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Steel, No.13 is new here. Please, don't be angry at him.
No.13, you're pushing Steel too hard. Steel is only a human, and he has no software-tools that read minds :) .
On the other, we always have to have in our minds, that we sometimes deal with the pairs of vandals/trolls (like Giove and GiorgioOrsini). It doesn't have to be the same person, although we can suspect.
So, as Steel said, "shrug".
Don't be afraid, No.13. Giove is so getting progressively egoistic and vandalistic in his behaviour (with expressed obsessive behaviour, see changes from 7th and 8th July 2007, that someone else'll is going to loose nerves because of him, and give him hard wiki-punishment, before we start any procedure for something like that. Kubura 23:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
- It is funny to read that Kubura calls 'troll' another person. On the contrary of you, Kubura, I give the reason of my edits. Never forget it.--Giovanni Giove 07:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- I have a lot of problems with Giove on another article Zadar. After edit warring with him (he didn't participate on the talk page), a RFC was started, he continued with edits and changes despite the discussion, I added tags to the article with explanation in the talk page . Giove deleted the tags without explanation and made 9 edits after that. He doesn’t worry about RFC which started 30.06.2007. After this date he has 26 edits of any kind (changes, reverts, deletions) . And that is just a little part of his vandalized contribution to the article, his contribution to the talk page is nearly zero.
- Can someone take a care of Giove, please? He already got a rich dossier and it's increasing every day with new vandalisms. Regards Zenanarh 09:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Cool! If I am a vandal, why you was never able to revert my edits?:-) Lacj of argumets?... take care....--Giovanni Giove 11:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Edit warring with you doesn't interest me. You are not the subject of my interests. Article is. My arguments are on the talk page. Yours are... remind me please... Britannica? Like this ? This text is full of POV and sourced by Italian writers. And it's not Britannica. I can dispute almost every sentence taken from that source. Through RFC of course. But not yet. At present we are discussing about the name of the city used in the article. Reverting doesn't interest me. By the way I reverted the page to the moment when I put the tags and you deleted it again . The article needs protection. Zenanarh 12:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Cool! If I am a vandal, why you was never able to revert my edits?:-) Lacj of argumets?... take care....--Giovanni Giove 11:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)