Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:52, 21 July 2008 editCanadian Paul (talk | contribs)Administrators101,593 edits Excuse me?← Previous edit Revision as of 19:12, 21 July 2008 edit undoPalestineRemembered (talk | contribs)5,038 edits Revert this vandalism?: new sectionNext edit →
Line 115: Line 115:


::Also, I left a message at ] that you might be interested in. Cheers, ] 18:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC) ::Also, I left a message at ] that you might be interested in. Cheers, ] 18:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

== Revert this vandalism? ==

This looks like vandalism to me. The quote may or may not be true, but it's presumably verifiable and attacks on the credibility of the author look as if they fall flat on their face (as well as coming from a racist and dubious source). The revert certainly bears no relation to anything in talk, to which no contribution has been made by the editor in question (I can't see any contribution to Talk from him in the last 6,000 words). Shall I simply go ahead and re-revert for vandalism, over-riding usual I-P restrictions? ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 19:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:12, 21 July 2008

User:Cream/scrolling

Archive

Dates:


The revert

Thank you. :) Acalamari 17:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

What is your source of information? Too soon to be a coincidence.

Hello, Ryan. I see that you blocked User:Pascal Tesson sucks. What is the source of your information? I notified Pascal of the name and you blocked it very soon afterwards. Did Pascal Tesson contact you? Chergles (talk) 19:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hawayo Takata

Since you have a mop and keys, feel like addressing Aaxxll's repeated removal of all citations, references, and footnotes from the Hawayo Takata article? - House of Scandal (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Time management

In the time it took you to leave me that offensively condescending post on my talk page, you could easily have found that the user in question is being completely disruptive and needs a preventative, not punative block. Hope this helps --Badger Drink (talk) 02:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Please take it to WP:AN if you disagree with the result from AIV. AIV isn't the place to contest block lengths. Ryan Postlethwaite 02:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm not even contesting a block length! Jesus mother and Mary! There was no block, hence there was no block length to dispute. --Badger Drink (talk) 02:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Upon third thought, it really does seem you're out to lunch on this one. The edits I reverted, with the exception of the AIV edit, were reverting of the clear-and-simple vandalism edits of a user who's left messages such as this on my talk page and the talk page of others. The AIV page was blank when I reverted, so there was no actual lost "progress". Cheers and cider, --Badger Drink (talk) 02:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Yay! No more silly stuff!

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for reverting trolling on my talk page :) Shapiros10 My work 15:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Giano & the AN

Hello Ryan, things over at the administrators noticeboard now seem to be getting out of hand and people are starting to fall out. (Same usual story of civilised debates on Misplaced Pages). :S I was just wondering why we are having all this talk of policy changing just to suit one, uncivil, disruptive Wikipedian? Me and Xenocidic and a few others are asking the simple question...look at his immense list of blocks...why is he still being allowed to edit? We don't have to resort to changing a whole policy to suit one person, surely? Lradrama 16:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The problem is, there's a big divide about how to handle Giano. Some believe he should be held to the same standards as everyone else, and if he was, he'd have been banned a long time ago. He's got a lot of friends here, which means that they support him in situations when he's completely out of order. As I said in the AN thread, anyone else would have been blocked for that comment, but we still have people arguing that we're baiting him and he's done nothing wrong. I understand until's comments - we shouldn't be kidding outselves that we have a policy on civility that is equally enforced on everyone when one user is above and beyond that policy - it's a little wrong imo. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, that is wrong, as you have said, and as many others have said too. This should not be happening. I bet Giano is loving all this squabbling he has caused. If we have to treat Giano differently than everyone else, treat him much more leniently than everyone else, then I think it is a dire state of affairs. And many others agree. Whatever next... :'-( Lradrama 16:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

User Damiens.rf

Ryan, I support the removal of Damiens.rf's twinkle; there is a pattern with him and a few other editors of running rampant through articles that contain images and attempting to remove the images and intimidate regular editors of those pages. They really have no solid ground to stand on right now with a practically non-existent and highly disputed NFCC policy. Cbsite (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)




Thank you!

Thanks a lot for the Barnstar, Ryan, and the kind words! Those mean a lot! :) Thank you! Acalamari 15:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Betacommand

But it is ok for me to be called a vandal, a troll and a dick - and that's just in the last 24 hours? Yes, I'm going to take someone else's advice and chill out but so should Betacommand. Citizensmith (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

BAHAHAHAHA

You made someone delete the main page? lol --Carbonrodney (talk) 07:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Turkish issue - a possible Izmir lee sockpuppet

Hello Ryan Postlethwaite. Do you remember all those issues with User:Izmir lee, whom you ended up by blocking indefinitely? I may be wrong but it looks to me that he has created a new account the following day after the block, under the name User:Aegean Boy. They have the same contributions profile, defend the same positions, etc. Could you check it out? Thanks! The Ogre (talk) 14:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

And he has already done 4 reverts. The Ogre (talk) 14:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Pretty sure it's him. He has exactly the same interests and the account was created the day after he was indef blocked. He even argues in the same way. Too many coincidences if you ask me. --Tsourkpk (talk) 03:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I've opened a sockpuppetry against him here . Please feel free to weigh in when you're back. --Tsourkpk (talk) 20:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Working Group Wiki Final Report

Hey, as a reminder, the Working Group is approaching our 6-month deadline for producing our final report. The draft is being built at . Could you please stop in, and see if there is anything you'd like to add? Or if not, just signoff at the talkpage that you are okay on how things are going? Thanks, Nishkid (talk) 19:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Done for now; I need sleep!

There's the template I showed you yesterday. You can start writing some of the entries from the beginning like we talked about. I've been using a fairly straightforward "form letter" approach to the articles, and you can see different versions by going through the years. I have now written the article for 1970, and the articles from 1982 to 1993. WBOSITG wrote the 2003 article. Have fun! Read over my articles and let me know what you think. Mike H. Fierce! 11:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me?

Are you accusing me of abusing the tools? Because that would be a very serious accusation if it were, so I want it clearly stated. I didn't block him for just that comment, but for the combined effect of all of the incivility and personal attacks that I listed in my addendum. I recused myself already from any blocks regarding his talk page edits, but mass incivility is unacceptable. Cheers, CP 18:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

The other 24 hours was for talk page edits, and did not come from me. How about I reduce the block to 3 days? Cheers, CP 18:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, I left a message at User talk:Jauerback that you might be interested in. Cheers, CP 18:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Revert this vandalism?

This revert looks like vandalism to me. The quote may or may not be true, but it's presumably verifiable and attacks on the credibility of the author look as if they fall flat on their face (as well as coming from a racist and dubious source). The revert certainly bears no relation to anything in talk, to which no contribution has been made by the editor in question (I can't see any contribution to Talk from him in the last 6,000 words). Shall I simply go ahead and re-revert for vandalism, over-riding usual I-P restrictions? PR 19:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)