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.
:::::::*grin* You are pathetic. Now go away from my talkpage. Let me spent time on useful things then your crying! ] ] 22:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::::*grin* You are pathetic. Now go away from my talkpage. Let me spent time on useful things then your crying! ] ] 22:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
::::::I take it as provocations to draw my into an editwar or worse, an attemp to deliver me a topic ban too. My AGF with him is completely gone, sorry. ] ] 22:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
::::::I take it as provocations to draw my into an editwar or worse, an attemp to deliver me a topic ban too. My AGF with him is completely gone, sorry. ] ] 22:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
{{od}} Don't like me? Fine. Then stay away from pages I have built and to which you have added zero text, only ever deleted text in an attempt to create a battleground. ] (]) 22:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Revision as of 22:56, 27 July 2011
Ik probeer naar beste eer en geweten bij te dragen aan het kleine rode blokje van de afbeelding
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The House (restaurant) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Oonissie (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
This is an automated friendly notification to inform you that you have been reported for Violation of the Edit warring policy at the Administrators' noticeboard.
If you feel that this report has been made in error, please reply as soon as possible on the noticeboard. However, before contesting an Edit warring report, please review the respective policies to ensure you are not in violation of them.
~ NekoBot (MeowTalk) 20:50, 7 July 2011 (UTC) (False positive? Report it!)
What vandalism is
I don't know what you think you're doing at Talk:Jack_Kevorkian but you need to take a second and review WP:VAND to learn what vandalism is. More specifically, calling an edit "vandalism" when it is not (repeatedly) can be considered a personal attack, and your actions in general today seem to be borderline hounding. Take a step back and remember that you are supposed to be contributing to an encyclopedia, not finding places to pick fights. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I hope you make a chat to Claudio too. Unfortunately, I consider editing in someone elses contributions one of the most sneaky and treacherous forms of vandalisme... Night of the Big Wind (talk) 21:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I tend to agree with NotBW. One does not edit in messages that are not written by yourself.
If you would do that in mine, I would report you as well. No one appreciates that, it irritates people, and above all, it is a lack of respect. So my advise is, that when someone reverts your edit, then show respect, but better still, stop editing other peoples messages.--Kind regards, Ro de Jong(Talk to me!)08:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Illegitimately deleting or editing other users' comments. However, it is acceptable to blank comments constituting vandalism, internal spam, or harassment or a personal attack. It is also acceptable to identify an unsigned comment. Users are also permitted to remove comments from their own user talk pages. A policy of prohibiting users from removing warnings from their own talk pages was considered and rejected on the grounds that it would create more issues than it would solve.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Misplaced Pages better — thanks for helping!
Zojuist heb ik me aangemeld. Omdat ik niet op mezelf ga stemmen wil ik graag mijn stem aan jou geven. Je kunt tegen-, neutraal of voorstemmen, inclusief een toelichting. Ik zal jouw tekst en stem een van de komende dagen naar de aanmeldpagina kopieren.
Aha, het kostte wat zoeken maar je hebt je dus aangemeld als moderator. Helaas, ik kan niets voor jou betekenen. Ten eerste ben ik geblokkeerd, ten tweede heb ik daarop nl-wp verlaten. Als een arbitragecommissie zich gaat gedragen als een rechtbank en besluit over zaken zonder te vertellen welk bewijsmateriaal er in gebracht heeft, hoeft het van mij niet meer. Dat heeft niets met jouw lidmaatschap te maken, maar wel met de totaal verkeerde rol die de AC zich heeft aangemeten. En al er dan ook nog dubbele standaarden worden gehanteerd door moderatoren en AC, bedank ik voor de eer. Ik wil verder niets meer met nl-wp te maken hebben. Night of the Big Wind (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Beste The Banner,
Wat betreft jouw blokkade heb je gelijk, een geblokkeerde gebruiker kan niet stemmen. De discussie met Marrakech op de aanmeldpagina heeft me doen inzien dat het doneren van mijn stem aan jou als een vorm van blokontduiking gezien kan worden. Ik trek daarom mijn aanbod in.
De discussie op de aanmeldpagina maakt alleen duidelijk dat er een hoop verzuurde mensen op nl-wp zitten. Mensen die blijkbaar ook deze pagina volgen omdat ik tot hun vijanden behoor. Het is doodjammer dat zij wel kijken naar het aanbod, maar niet naar mijn reactie erop. Maar goed, als er iemand zwart gemaakt moet worden, ga je niet naar woord en tegenwoord luisteren.
Ongelukkigerwijs heeft het feit wat wij ondanks alle meningsverschillen toch "on speaking terms" zijn gebleven, nu een negatieve impact op jouw kandidatuur. Gelukkig lijkt het geen al te zware effecten te hebben. Night of the Big Windtalk22:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello! Do you have any idea why this edit with Misplaced Pages Cleaner version 1.09 broke a link? (The software removed a bracket at the end of the link.) HeyMid (contribs) 07:24, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
It was not the software that broke the link. After fixing the link to a disambiguation-page, I had a tekst ] I removed a bracket too much by fixing this. As you can see I did that more (Maribor and the second time Gislaved). WikiCleaner signals the problem, but does not fix it! Night of the Big Windtalk11:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
J
I know you're currently working on reverting that one IP's edits on the J article, but I would argue that this edit is not actually vandalism, even though you marked it as so. The point of that part of the article is to discuss the letter in different languages, it appears as though he is adding information on the letter in Korean. --Fbifriday (talk) 15:33, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I see that you tagged three redirects for speedy deletion under G8. G8 is usually used to request deletion of redirects to pages that have been, or are going to be, deleted. That doesn't appear to be the case here.
I have tagged them because they created a loop. Kate Young was a redirect to Catherine Young, a dab-page. I was linking on the dab-page to a person, but the redirect brought me straight back. Night of the Big Windtalk08:56, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Re your message: Sorry, but the non-deletion was correct. The target of the redirect exists, therefore G8 would not apply. I see what you are trying to do with Template:Texas Pageant Winners and Miss Texas USA. The fix would be to either create an article for Katie Young, unlinking the names on the dabpage that link back to the dabpage as 88.109.60.234 did, or changing the links on the dabpage to a specific redlinked name and then changing the links on other articles to that redlinked article. For example, with Kate Young, the Australian swimmer, you would change the dabpage link to Kate Young (swimmer) and then change 2000 Oceania Swimming Championships and 2000 Oceania Swimming Championships links to Kate Young (swimmer). Having a link on an article/template go to a dabpage is not unreasonable if there is no article at this time on that person. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Placing of the terrorism infobox at List of organisations known as the Irish Republican Army article
My view that the only thing more injudicious in placing the terrorism infobox at List of organisations known as the Irish Republican Army was edit warring to revert its removal. If you make that edit, or similar, again without a clear and current consensus to do so I will block you indefinitely - for as long as it takes you to recognise the requirement to consider the effect of your actions before taking them. I am of the opinion that if you were not aware of the likely consequences to the editing atmosphere by your contribution, you are not sufficiently versed in the issues to be of benefit - and if you were then you are not fit to remain an editor. This is an official warning, and the only one you will receive regarding this issue. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:33, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Excuse me? If you try to get your point across in such a rude way, you are totally wrong. First thing you should do is give me arguments why my action was wrong by giving me links to prior discussions. If not, you can expect a complaint about incivility! Night of the Big Windtalk22:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
I have reviewed my comments - and I fail to see where I was rude; you may not like what I had to say, but that is a different thing entirely. I shall ask at my talkpage whether other editors feel my language was inappropriate, however, and be guided by their comments. You are always able to bring a complaint about my actions at Misplaced Pages:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents at any point. I do not need to find the discussion(s) where consensus was decided, as that is your task should you wish to challenge it. You are on notice that there is an existing consensus, and that you should not make edits contrary to it in the meantime. I am sure that the editors habitually editing the article will be able to provide you with links, should you ask. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
You were unnecessary rude, threatening to block me straight away (I had only reverted twice). But still I do not have any link to a discussion. Not from you, not from anybody else, nor at the template, nor at the article. Without that, I consider the consensus as non-existant and organized by shouting and roaring. Night of the Big Windtalk12:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
The Article List of organisations known as the Irish Republican Armyfalls under WP:1RR per the notice at the top of the Article Talk page. All editors on Troubles-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions. All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24 hour period). When in doubt, assume it is related.
There is a clear guideline on Misplaced Pages about the use of the word Terrorism. Please read it before editing.
Blocked 24 hrs for edit warring / 3RR on Kevorkian article
Actually - both of you were clearly edit warring and over the 3RR limit on the Kevorkian article. Both accounts are blocked for 24 hrs for violating 3RR, and I have full-protected the article for 3 days.
If you need any help with that, just ask. The disruptive editor involved has a long history on these topics, and this can be shown clearly (for instance, go back a way on the talk history of Action T4 and just be astounded by the disruption. Jabbsworth (talk) 01:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Please rethink the deletion. There are historical details there, which will be lost. No suicide bags are for sale anywhere in the world at the moment, as far as I know, so this is not promotional material. People have a right to know who used to sell the bags, etc. Jabbsworth (talk) 13:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
But do you not agree that the details deleted actually are part of the history of the suicide bag, and that deleting them in fact makes the article less information-rich? Jabbsworth (talk) 06:27, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Exit international
You are suggesting that any mention of this entity is promotional. I disagree, that's nonsense. You seem to have a dislike of the organisation, or Nitschke. I suggest you take this to ANI perhaps, because it looks like we are going to clash big time over this. Jabbsworth (talk) 18:16, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Then fight it out with Claudio. In fact, you are as much POV-pushing as he his doing. Be aware of the possible consequences. You don't have exactly a clean sheet. Night of the Big Windtalk18:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
I was not editing any more that article, and I will not let me engage again in a edit war with this guy. Do you suggest me to report him to the ANI-3RR as he now achieved 5RR? Also he against the collective efforts of numerous users and without any consensus, now he has removed a lot of information from euthanasia article, information that was hardly worked and referenced not only by me but by Bilby. As usually he just deleted those parts against his POV por euthanasia. And you can testify my efforts to discuss the thing in the talk page instead of edit and revert the article. -- ClaudioSantos¿?18:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
You describe yourself as "I have sometimes the nasty habit of being a stormy type of guy". I suggest you look at my complete edit history and decide if interacting with me this way will work or not. I do not simply give up and walk away because someone is behaving badly. I'll listen to you if you have a good argument, but when you do childish things and oppose things just for the sake of opposing, like a little boy having a tantrum, it won't work with me. Jabbsworth (talk) 00:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with you editwarring and making PA's, but don't complain about the consequences! You are warned by now that I don't accept any PA's from you. Try to be civil and friendly. Night of the Big Windtalk01:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
You'll find I can be very civil and friendly if you edit co-operatively. In fact, I believe we used to have a very good relationship in the past, but you seem to have recently developed an obsession about Nitschke and his group. Why? Do you run an opposing group? Just asking.... Jabbsworth (talk) 01:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, most POV-pusher are friendly when you edit along your lines. But I want the arcticles neutral. I don't buy Claudio's ant-POV, nor your pro-POV.
And your constant accusations of me being an edit-warrer and POV-pusher are not PAs? Of course they are! You can't take what you dish out. And you have a rich history of edit warring yourself, so this line of attack is hypocritical. And you need to explain how inserting relevant info about a non-profit onto a non-profit's page is POV-pushing? Plus explain why your odd desire to delete this info is not POV pushing? And also tell me how a question about whether you have a COI is "another PA"? Pfffft! Jabbsworth (talk) 01:27, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject Food And Drink!
Hello Night of the Big Wind! Welcome to WikiProject Food and Drink! We are a group of editors who work together to better organize information in articles related to food and drink.
The goals of WikiProject Food and Drink:
Consensus about the organization of food and drink related articles.
Coordination of editing on food, drink, and restaurant related articles.
Categorization of food, drink, and restaurant articles.
Creation, expansion, and maintenance of food, drink, and restaurant articles.
Hi there. Although I'm sure you didn't mean it maliciously, one of your posts at WP:ANI inadvertently revealed personal information about a fellow editor - hence why it was removed, twice. Per WP:OUTING, "Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information." Regards, GiantSnowman23:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, as I already remarked at then ANI, it is proverbial how Jabbsworth trigger complaints and punishments for other's actions but actions that he hismself commit. Look at this:, just publishing my country. As Jabbswroth expressively claimed that revealing his country is a harrasment or stalking, then why should I do not assume that he is stalking me?. -- ClaudioSantos¿?00:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
That is the way he works. Always the innocent victim of the nasty guys. But more and more I get the idea that he is involved with or working for Exit International. Night of the Big Windtalk00:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
As I replied on my talk page, CS edited from IPs for years. He has never had a privacy concern, clearly. And he has never been stalked (that I know of). I was trying to be friendly to him, clearly a mistake. Jabbsworth (talk) 00:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Also mentioned in the article is Canada, Atlanta Georgia, El Cajon California, and South Carolina. You were asked and told not to do this, and you were also told I have no COI. Yet you are persisting to in wp:OUTING and COI making COI accusations. Jabbsworth (talk) 22:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict) You mention "one editor" - especially with regards to CoI - and then casually mention Australia as being part of the CoI. You can only AGF so far... Also Jabbsworth, no need to outdent every few comments... GiantSnowman22:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
In fact, Snowman, is the way Jabbsworth plays this protest plain provocative. He could have asked me to change the text before starting to complain elsewhere and leave me in the dark about a possible problem. Where to we have a talkpage for? As far as I know to talk to each other. Complaining behind someones back is no funny and (censored).Night of the Big Windtalk22:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Should have he come to you first? Course. But that's a moot point, as it doesn't change the fact that an editor feels you have tried to out him, whether or not that was your intention. You two should leave each other alone. GiantSnowman22:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
For disruptive editing, we need look no further than your risible attempts to exclude the number of staff and key people's names from the infobox at Exit International. That was the most pathetic and pointless thing I have ever seen on my time at wikipedia. Jabbsworth (talk) 22:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Don't like me? Fine. Then stay away from pages I have built and to which you have added zero text, only ever deleted text in an attempt to create a battleground. Jabbsworth (talk) 22:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
