Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:50, 9 March 2006

Please both of you cool off. The edit history is too crazy to say who is at fault but it looks like you're both as bad as each other. Take a break from Misplaced Pages, have a nice cold shower, and come back and try and work together to improve an article on an interesting band! --kingboyk 07:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC) (admin)

Mucky Pup

Having dropped in to see what was going on with this recently AfD'd article, I took a look at the article history, and I'd like to suggest that you take a break from editing this article for a couple of days. Let it be, find something else to work on, let the Wikistress levels die down. I know that you want to make Misplaced Pages a better encyclopedia, and I am certain that you will continue to do so.

I've left a similar suggestion to MikeWazowski, because I think it's a good idea for him to take a brief break, too. Not being much of a music fan, or Bloom County fan, I am just sort of looking at this from a distance, and I believe that a few days of benign neglect might improve perspectives all round.

-ikkyu2 (talk) 07:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

• That's an understandable solution. My problem is the fact that he feels the need to be 100% right or not at all. While I haven't agreed with every deletion he's made, I've accepted most of them and moved on. In fact, I'm not even deleting his line, which I agree was a good point. I'm simply moving it to the appropriate section. Before the incident, he removed one my opening sentences, claiming redundancy. After thinking it over, I agreed with his deletion but realized the previous line was also redundant. This is the line that he's throwing a hissyfit over. As far as putting the line in, in order to make it interesting to people, if they're visiting the entry, they already had an interest, or found it interesting enough to follow a link from another entry. All a introduction, for a band, needs, is a lineup (original or current works), a formation year and the location a band came from. Unless there are some extraordinary events, that the band were resposible for or part of, there's no need for some minor accomplishment, like winning a writing contest for a cartoon strip.

He then removes a factual line about the first bass player, not being an official member, because there's no specific reference listed. Not every band entry is going to have a reference regarding the official status of each member that passes through. Most of the information, that I've supplied in the entry, comes from a mixture of information off of the band's site and my own personal knowledge resulting from my friendship with the members.

Lastly, the fact that a person may have suggested an entry, that I submitted, be undeleted, does not mean I'm going to just accept the person poor changes.

I just wanted to state my case and make my point. Thanks. User:JohnBWatt 02:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

First, I am requesting to be unblocked (IP address 172.131.153.132), as the situation was resolved. However, since the resolution was resolved, MikeWazowski continues to rant about the situation, and has now tried to bring details of my personal life, which I choose not to share on this site, to the attention of Misplaced Pages readers. He identified me as a porno ACTOR, after misreading details of my life, at Kingboyk. Even if I had been such a thing, how does my personal life reflect my writing an unrelated article? After reading the guidelines concerning Personal attacks, I am considering this instance, as one. Since I cannont currently contact either user, I'm requesting that all comments and links to my personal information, be remove. As far as knowing the bands that I've written entries for, it's irrelevant. None of the articles make any claims, other than factual events. The argument was NEVER about removing information. It was about its placement in the article. This was never a personal issue, on any level, until MikeWazowski chose to make it such. JohnBWatt

Apologies, just received (and replied to) your email. As I apparently typo'd your uName, I couldn't find you, so my reply email surely made no sense to you. Signing now so I can (hopefully) head off confusion, then will post more. KillerChihuahua 23:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, issues resolved is one thing, but then you post that issues are not resolved. I'm going to follow up on your assertions about MikeWazowski, and try to make sense of this situation. KillerChihuahua 23:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

• • Thanks. My point about issues being resolved, concerned the original issue about the entry. I THOUGHT it was resolved, at least, until I found the write up at Kingboyk, talking about my personal life. In my eyes, it was resolved, but apparantly he wanted to keep talking about it.

JohnBWatt

and I am back, not much more enlightened than before. I will unblock, please be nice, avoid revert warring, and if you have a problem with another user there are many venues, such as Rfc, mediation, or just asking someone to come in as a third party. The situation on Kingboyk's page has, to the best of my knowledge, been taken care of by Kingboyk, so let it drop. Please be civil, regardless of what the "other guy" does. thanks - KillerChihuahua 23:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I deleted that comment from my talk page. I suggest you both stay away from the Mucky Pup article for a while. Make your next edit on that subject be to Talk:Mucky Pup where you'll discuss the problems with the article, and the good points of the article as you see it, and work out how you are going to go forward. You can always ask for outside help such as mediation. I'll be keeping an eye on both of you tonight, any repeats of edit warring or incivility from either of you will result in a ban (and it will be longer than 24 hours). See you around and happy editing! --kingboyk 23:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

You are now unblocked, go forth and edit. Please note: I will block again if hostilities and revert wars commence again. KillerChihuahua 23:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate the help from both of you. As I said, I considered it over. What I didn't appreciate is having personal, and inaccurate, information posted about me. I'm actually pretty easy to get along with. --JohnBWatt

I don't doubt that, which is why I recommended that your block be lifted. Now I'm going to post a question to Talk:Mucky Pup which you can maybe answer for me? --kingboyk 23:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Good enough. Least said, soonest mended. KillerChihuahua 23:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd be happy to answer that question for you, kingboyk, but I'm still showing as blocked.--JohnBWatt

Bother. You're only my second UNblock, let me try again. KillerChihuahua 23:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

lol! Say no more! --kingboyk 23:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Very funny, Kingboyk. John, you show as not blocked. What message did you get when you tried to edit? thanks - KillerChihuahua 23:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

This is the message I'm getting... This is the message I'm still getting.... Reason given: Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "JohnBWatt". The reason given for JohnBWatt's block is: "3RR on Mucky Pup". JohnBWatt

You still getting that error message John? --kingboyk 00:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, yeah. JohnBWatt

I'll leave a note for the Puppy and try to fix it. Sorry about this. --kingboyk 00:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

No big deal. The answer to your question, by the way, is yes, that is the same Mucky Pup. In fact, your mention of Carter USM, previously, is what reminded me to add that fact into the article. --JohnBWatt

Thanks for the answer. I hadn't noticed that you'd added a Carter reference in. --kingboyk 00:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the unblock worked (nice to know I didn't mess that up) but you're being caught by the autoblocker. give me a few minutes - KillerChihuahua 00:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I tried something. How about now? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 00:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

And if not, what is the IP address given in the message?

and thank you Bunch for helping out! KillerChihuahua 00:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

17:53, 8 March 2006, KillerChihuahua (Talk) blocked #114191 (expires 11:22, 9 March 2006) (Unblock) (Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "JohnBWatt". The reason given for JohnBWatt's block is: "3RR on Mucky Pup".)

I reversed. Fixed it? (Maybe User:Bunchofgrapes did the same thing at the same time? :)) --kingboyk 00:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

All seems good now. Thanks to all involved! --JohnBWatt

Now if I have to come back to block you after all that hassle, you know it's gonna be a big one don't ya? :P --kingboyk 00:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Rofl, I was thinking how nice and patient he's been through all this, but you're right - if John responds by edit warring and conflict, no WAY I'm going to unblock whatever you receive! And thanks again to Bunch and Kingboyk. My unblock experience is seriously lacking, but I learned a good bit today. The good news is that this is the first block I've ever done that was reversed. KillerChihuahua 00:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey now! I'm generally very patient and nice to people. The two incidents, on here, happen to be rare happenings. My responses, in the two incidents, were based on, what I felt, were improper procedures or lack thereof. I don't feel the need to prove anything to anyone, but you'll see, in talking to me, that I'm pretty easy to talk to and get along with. =) --JohnBWatt

Hi John. I'm in full agreement with what you posted on my talk page. Are you OK with the thread remaining on view, or do you want certain parts blanked? --kingboyk 04:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Your Halloween 9 edit is fine by me, by the way. --kingboyk 04:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't delete my warning OK? When your page is full you can archive it. Until then, removing warnings from admins is considered vandalism. That said, I'm happy with your edits and you seem like a nice guy to me. I'll remove your page from my watch list now, so if you need to contact me you know where to find me. Cheers and happy editing! --kingboyk 04:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't mind the thread being visible, save for the fact that it serves as instructions for people to find me through Google and Myspace, which I'd prefer not happen. I have no problem with my past, but I like to choose where aspects of it are posted. If there's a good way to edit the posts, saving the meaning but leaving out details of how to find me, then that would be cool. If not, then I guess just delete the whole thing, if that's not a problem. I'll leave it in your hands and trust in whatever you decide. Thanks again! --JohnBWatt

Well, the link has gone, so I'll leave it as is and soon enough it will be archived (my talk page gets a lot of traffic!). If there is anything you object to still visible just drop me a line, okay? See you mate. --kingboyk 04:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

This is the type of line that gives people ideas, "Even though he deleted the specific blog entry I linked to, his own MySpace page still states that he's been in a couple of porn movies, which is easily verifiable by a simple Google search." That's the kind of stuff, I don't need. --JohnBWatt