Revision as of 06:10, 19 June 2014 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,087 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) from User talk:Skyring) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:27, 30 June 2014 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,087 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) from User talk:Skyring) (botNext edit → | ||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
] (]) 04:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC) | ] (]) 04:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
:A valid point, though looking at the discussion is a bit more edifying than edit summaries. --] (]) 04:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC) | :A valid point, though looking at the discussion is a bit more edifying than edit summaries. --] (]) 04:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC) | ||
== ] and ] == | |||
You appear to be assuming the worst of {{U|Alans1977}} on ] and admit to following them around. Please refrain from calling people names like "drunk". Based on your talk page archives, I see that interactions with other users has been an issue in the past, so consider this a warning (]). ] (]) 03:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
:I will also note your lack of AFG is in violation of the ] for ] as well as the ] restriction on the page. ] (]) 03:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:27, 30 June 2014
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Skyring. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Australian politics
Pete, I have had to remove your comment in that infobox discussion. HiLo had already commented in that thread, and given the iBan your job is to make sure that this doesn't happen. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- I really don't think it's fair that they can't comment in the same thread as long as they aren't addressing each other... Timeshift (talk) 02:46, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- You may think whatever you like, but there's an interaction ban in place. Drmies (talk) 03:01, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Geez, Drmies, talk about precious. I don't complain when he edits the same articles and discussions after I do. That's the way the WP:IBAN wording reads. No interaction, but both allowed to edit the same things. We've both been active on Australian political articles for years. Is it really going to be a matter of who jumps into a !vote first so as to mark off their territory and exclude the other's opinion from the general debate? --Pete (talk) 05:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Again I agree with Pete. A stopped watch is still right twice a day :D Timeshift (talk) 05:16, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- It was either this or a topic ban, I think this is the better outcome. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Callanecc, you're giving me the impression that you aren't following what's going on. You've done this a few times now. Perhaps it would help if you read the contributions of others? --Pete (talk) 10:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- My comment was referring to closing the AN thread (and subsequent clarification to you) in which I made the IBAN quite a bit more strict, my only other chose was to impose a TBAN. I decided that there wasn't enough of a consensus for the TBAN but based on the comments of other admins at the time that was not their impression so a TBAN might have been the other outcome. My opinion is that this is the better outcome. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Yeees, but how does this relate to the political discussion, precisely? --Pete (talk) 10:57, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- That instead of not being allowed to make any edit (etc) related to Australia and football or interact with HiLo there is just a stricter interpretation of the IBAN. My thinking was that it's better just not to be allowed to interact (etc) than not be able to edit a topic in which you are very active. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- I don't want any interaction. What I find puzzling is that I make a contribution to a discussion without mentioning the other guy or responding in any way and he thinks it's about him. Geez, but I've been editing Australian political articles for nine and a half years now, I'm entitled to an opinion on information in infoboxes. --Pete (talk) 11:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- You're entitled to an opinion, I suppose--I do believe that the UN has written such a clause about infoboxes into the human rights charter. You are not allowed, though, to violate the conditions of your iBan. It's really quite simple and why Callanecc and I have to argue this point is not clear to me. What I was kind of hoping for is a simple "geez sorry it won't happen again thanks for not blocking me". For which, by the way, you're welcome. Drmies (talk) 12:39, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- I don't want any interaction. What I find puzzling is that I make a contribution to a discussion without mentioning the other guy or responding in any way and he thinks it's about him. Geez, but I've been editing Australian political articles for nine and a half years now, I'm entitled to an opinion on information in infoboxes. --Pete (talk) 11:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Am I the only one to get a sense of deja vu from this? Pete, you have been warned before about trying to get around the edges of your iban. It seems that you seem to keep getting caught out like this then you say something like "I didn't think what I did this time was an infringement". Sorry, heard that story too many times before. If HiLo48 has been active on a talk page you would be best advised to stay away. Is it fair? Perhaps not, but you got yourself into this and although I know it takes two to tango, it seems that you're the one that keeps getting into these situations. Maybe that might tell you something, you're not stupid, I'm sure you can work it out. It seems to me that you're damned lucky not to have been blocked this time, make the most of your opportunity to continue to edit Misplaced Pages and stay away from HiLo48. - Nick Thorne 14:08, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Meh. If I were trying to stir up the other guy and "get around the iban", you might be right. The reality is that it never entered my consideration. I added my opinion to a specific question on presentation of information. So I thought it a bit precious of HiLo to make a fuss. It's not about him. --Pete (talk) 18:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- You're right on the last point. Now, let's move on, and let's hope that I don't have to revisit this issue again. Pretty please? Drmies (talk) 22:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- Meh. If I were trying to stir up the other guy and "get around the iban", you might be right. The reality is that it never entered my consideration. I added my opinion to a specific question on presentation of information. So I thought it a bit precious of HiLo to make a fuss. It's not about him. --Pete (talk) 18:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Hey there
Pete, do you think you and HiLo can get along? And do you think that even if, on occasion, you can't get along, that you can limit that not-getting-along to where it won't disrupt threads, discussions, Misplaced Pages, the known universe? I think HiLo is willing to give that a shot. Also, I'm having a beer with some tequila, which I am sure most Australians can appreciate. Cheers, Drmies (talk) 22:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Drmies! I'm addressing that position even as we speak. As for mixing tequila and beer, I look forward to your upcoming edits. :) --Pete (talk) 23:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Angus Taylor (politician)
Your old friend 1955Dewayne is adding a mountain of crap about wind energy to this BLP, and I was wondering if you might use your skills for good... The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Of possible interest to you?
FYI, I've done a dummy spit (or two). Pdfpdf (talk) 12:55, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
Thanks for helping me get the facts right on Meilin Miranda's page, from Dragix (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC) |
Discretionary sanctions notification
Please carefully read this information:The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.Please note Tony Abbott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is now subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:06, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the headsup. You didn't have to do that, and I appreciate the advice. --Pete (talk) 19:48, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
"I'd like to welcome a new editor to the gentle discussion club that is the Australian political area in Misplaced Pages."
LOL Timeshift (talk) 03:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- It's open mike night at the Misplaced Pages comedy club. Thanks for your applause. I got a million of 'em. --Pete (talk) 03:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Remember to leave the 3RR report advice on the user's talkpage. Timeshift (talk) 03:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Twinkle apparently can do all the legwork for reporting, but I couldn't puzzle out how. Fuck, I must be retarded. --Pete (talk) 03:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
LOL! Timeshift (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- A valid point, though looking at the discussion is a bit more edifying than edit summaries. --Pete (talk) 04:11, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
WP:AGF and WP:HOUND
You appear to be assuming the worst of Alans1977 on Talk:Abortion and admit to following them around. Please refrain from calling people names like "drunk". Based on your talk page archives, I see that interactions with other users has been an issue in the past, so consider this a warning (without a template). EvergreenFir (talk) 03:34, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- I will also note your lack of AFG is in violation of the ARBCOM ruling for Abortion as well as the WP:1RR restriction on the page. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)