| Revision as of 07:47, 24 November 2007 view sourceTreasuryTag (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users46,645 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:33, 24 November 2007 view source MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 6 thread(s) (older than 1d) to User talk:Porcupine/Archives/2007/Nov.Next edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| == Just to fix the formatting... == | == Just to fix the formatting... == | ||
| <center>{{POTD}}</center> | <center>{{POTD}}</center> | ||
| {{-}} | {{-}} | ||
| ⚫ | == The second ] == | ||
| == Null edits == | |||
| Making null edits to ANI with summaries like "**ADMIN ATTENTION NEEDED**" and "***IMPORTANT*** - can an admin actually deal with this, please?" doesn't help at all, first because we have no idea on what "this" is, and secondly because ANI moves fast... You made the thread (whatever that thread is), dozens of users will read it regardless of your edits. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 12:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :With respect, a) it's been ignored for three days, and b) ''this'' is made clear by viewing the diff, as it is the paragraph in question that is shown in the rather attractive green-shaded box.--] (] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 12:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::The diff I have on Twinkle only shows your signature and the thread below, hence the remark :). I agree that moving the thread at the bottom is more likely to draw attention. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 13:48, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Moves == | |||
| To the bottom of the ] page, where it belongs, and now resides. --''']''' (] - ]) 13:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletion of ''U R MR GAY'' == | |||
| There was this meme involving stars on the Super Mario Galaxy box art which spelled out "U R MR GAY", and it WAS covered on Joystiq. Just thought I'd take people to the right place since it DID involve that game ] 13:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Notice == | |||
| After all the incivility, baiting and biting you did wrt user Sambure (not blameless either, but as a newbie less familiar with our methods and rules), you just coulndt' stop when asked to by different editors. Ths removal of an edit by Rlevse may have been an error, but this edit (apologizing on behalf of the user you are in dispute with?) is so over the top that you should take the time to seriously rethink your behaviour around here. When you come back after this 1 month block, please try to reamin civil and not to bite the new<bies. ] (]) 16:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ] '''You have been ] from editing''' for violating Misplaced Pages policy{{#if:{{{1|}}}|, by {{{1}}}}}. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by replying here on your ''']''' by adding the text <nowiki>{{</nowiki>unblock|''your reason here''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from ] instead, or mail unblock-en-l@mail.wikimedia.org. <!-- Template:block --> | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=Please actually read this charitably! Firstly, the removal of the comment was a mistake due to 3+ edit conflicts, if memory serves me right; the edit I made was trying to fix collateral damage. Now, I was insulted in varoius languages by the disruptive newbie in question, who also removed an AfD tag 3 times and ] the AfD's talkpage with a large template box that should simply have been linked to. This user made some childish edits, and persisted in creating their own ] beneath mine with an inflammatory title. They did this even after instructed not to by an admin. The second diff you show was admittedly a little sarcastic of me, but I was attempting to convey to Mr East that I had not in fact fought on the page, or come to the page intending to fight. I discovered harassment and defamation against me there, and asked about the reasons for its presence. Please note that , a suggested sockpuppet of mine, is not one. I edit from a static IP <s>which begins 84 - I'll have to log out to find it for you guys</s> which is . is some evidence; I know it's not conclusive but here's something that is, slightly: has anyone here '''ever''' known me to do vandalism? I pride myself on not doing simple, childish, sweary vandalism no matter how much I might want to. I would also like to note on the record that is nothing to do with me.|decline=You were edit-warring and playing ] all across an article, an AfD, AN/I, AN3, Sambure's talk page, and Luna Santin's talk page. I don't think so. ]}} | |||
| AN3? I don't think I've ''ever'' edited it...--] (] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 17:17, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==AfD nomination of ]== | |||
| ], an article you created, has been nominated for ]. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that ] satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "]" and the ]). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDWarning --> <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 23:41, 22 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| Thanks for blocking this user, she has a nasty temperament and a history of personal attacks. No doubt she'll be back at once the block is over, but what can you do? ;) ] (]) 04:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ==The second ]== | ||
| I've received your email in which you state that a different person created the "second" ] on Oct 13, 2007. Note this user only made one edit, on that same day and there was a whole month prior to the indef block. I contacted a checkuser, ], who confirmed this second Rambutan is indeed not you. However, he also stated that a separate reason prevents this second Rambutan from being unblocked, that it will likely never be unblocked, and that he can not reveal the reason. The second Rambutan is still under investigation. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 14:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | I've received your email in which you state that a different person created the "second" ] on Oct 13, 2007. Note this user only made one edit, on that same day and there was a whole month prior to the indef block. I contacted a checkuser, ], who confirmed this second Rambutan is indeed not you. However, he also stated that a separate reason prevents this second Rambutan from being unblocked, that it will likely never be unblocked, and that he can not reveal the reason. The second Rambutan is still under investigation. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 14:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :OK, fine, as long as I'm not under blame for anything! Please reply so I can be sure that I'm not!--] (] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 14:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | :OK, fine, as long as I'm not under blame for anything! Please reply so I can be sure that I'm not!--] (] '''·''' ] '''·''' ]) 14:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 80: | Line 51: | ||
| ::Coren's message was plenty civil. I also don't see the point in explaining to you that which you have already been told, and that is not uncivil either. ] 19:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ::Coren's message was plenty civil. I also don't see the point in explaining to you that which you have already been told, and that is not uncivil either. ] 19:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ==A little primer== | == A little primer == | ||
| Here's a protip: Stop being sarcastic and condescending to newbies and don't AfD articles that were created only a couple of minutes ago. That's about as rude as it gets. Most especially, do not falsely mark your reverts of other people's edits as vandalism. | Here's a protip: Stop being sarcastic and condescending to newbies and don't AfD articles that were created only a couple of minutes ago. That's about as rude as it gets. Most especially, do not falsely mark your reverts of other people's edits as vandalism. | ||
Revision as of 13:33, 24 November 2007
Template:Personalissuesunspecified
User talk:Porcupine/Talkheader
User talk:Porcupine/Archivebox
Error: Image is invalid or non-existent.
Just to fix the formatting...
Tocopilla railway
Photograph credit: David Gubler
The second User:Rambutan
I've received your email in which you state that a different person created the "second" User:Rambutan on Oct 13, 2007. Note this user only made one edit, on that same day and there was a whole month prior to the indef block. I contacted a checkuser, User:Deskana, who confirmed this second Rambutan is indeed not you. However, he also stated that a separate reason prevents this second Rambutan from being unblocked, that it will likely never be unblocked, and that he can not reveal the reason. The second Rambutan is still under investigation. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:10, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- OK, fine, as long as I'm not under blame for anything! Please reply so I can be sure that I'm not!--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 14:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- I've confirmed the second Rambutan isn't you. The investigation is something else related to that account, but not to you. This does not affect your chances of an unblock, however. --Deskana (talk) 14:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Of course not. But this investigation is - effectively - irrelevant, is it?--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 14:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- The investigation has absolutely nothing to do with you, as stated above. --Deskana (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- There's no need to snap; I just wanted to check. I thought it odd that you'd mention a confidential investigation to me when it has nothing to do with me, that's all.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 14:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not snapping at you, Porcupine. You've misinterpreted what I've said as hostility. You could do with relaxing a notch or two. --Deskana (talk) 14:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- I apologise - your use of the phrase, "...as stated above" suggested impatience: I mean, it was certainly un-necessary, you could just as well have not said it. You sounded irritated at me for asking an obvious question to which you'd already supplied the answer. But my social antennae are a little run down this decade :-) Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 14:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- There's no need to snap; I just wanted to check. I thought it odd that you'd mention a confidential investigation to me when it has nothing to do with me, that's all.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 14:19, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- The investigation has absolutely nothing to do with you, as stated above. --Deskana (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Block review
Hello.
After your request by email, I have reviewed the situation leading to your block. I am sorry, but I will not overturn it, nor suggest to the blocking admin that it be overturned. — Coren 19:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Jolly good of you - thanks for your illuminating explanation of how I can do better in future :-) Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 19:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think that sarcasm right there is part of the problem. You have been warned, repeatedly, about your general tone and incivility; and it's not the first time you have been blocked for that reason. I could have gone on with diffs, and added further admonitions about how disruptive you are being. I saw no reason to pile on what others have already told you and add insult to injury.
It should be clear to you by now that aggressive and incivil behavior is not tolerated; and unless you mend your ways we will have no choice but to protect the encyclopedia. Had you come to me with an admission that you have messed up and a promise to try to not repeat your previous behavior, I probably would have considered offering to negotiate a reduction of your block length. As things are, you are unable or refuse to see how your behavior is inappropriate, and do not appear to be willing to change it. — Coren 19:34, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think that sarcasm right there is part of the problem. You have been warned, repeatedly, about your general tone and incivility; and it's not the first time you have been blocked for that reason. I could have gone on with diffs, and added further admonitions about how disruptive you are being. I saw no reason to pile on what others have already told you and add insult to injury.
- I don't see what's wrong with that bit of harmless sarcasm. It would have been civil of you to give a proper explanation of where the logic in my unblock request went wrong - and how the project is served by banning me - rather than just saying "no".--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 19:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Coren's message was plenty civil. I also don't see the point in explaining to you that which you have already been told, and that is not uncivil either. 1 != 2 19:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
A little primer
Here's a protip: Stop being sarcastic and condescending to newbies and don't AfD articles that were created only a couple of minutes ago. That's about as rude as it gets. Most especially, do not falsely mark your reverts of other people's edits as vandalism.
If you cannot follow WP:CIVIL, please stop posting things. I took a look at that AfD and you ought to be ashamed of yourself. Jtrainor (talk) 23:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm... do you think that Sambure/Boney-sockpuppet ought to be ashamed of him/herself?--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 07:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)