Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:42, 13 August 2006

Hello, I am Cowman. Welcome to the void that is my user page. Please add comments to the bottom of the page and sign comments with ~~~~, or click here, or more preferably e-mail me as I am only sporadically active. Thanks! Cowman109

Archives
November 2005 – April 2006 May 2006 – June 2006 July 2006 – August 2006 September 2006 – November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 – February 2007 March 2007 - November 2007 December 2007 - December 2009 January 2010 - September 2010 October 2010 - October 2011 November 2011 - April 2012 May 2012 - April 2013 April 2013 - April 2014

(no subject)

Spin back by IRC when you get a chance, i've got an idea for you. CQJ 23:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I've contacted our good friend at the committee in regards to what were discussing about our other friend at the other place, nudge nudge, wink wink. Find me on IRC when you have a chance tomorrow. CQJ 04:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 24th

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. --Michael Snow 04:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Research Survey Request

Hello, I am a member of a research group at Palo Alto Research Center (formerly known as Xerox PARC) studying how conflicts occur and resolve on Misplaced Pages. Due to your experience in conflict resolution on Misplaced Pages (e.g., as a member of the Mediation Cabal) we’re extremely interested in your insights on this topic. We have a survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=400792384029 which we are inviting a few selected Wikipedians to participate in, and we would be extremely appreciative if you would take the time to complete it. As a token of our gratitude, we would like to present you with a PARC research star upon completion. Thank you for your time.

Parc wiki researcher 23:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
PARC User Interface Research Group

my RfA

The Cabal

I have decided to join the cabal (if there is one... hehehe). I was wondering if there is anything special I need to do before doing anything Cabalish. Viva La Vie Boheme 03:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, assuming you've gone through the painstaking initiation involving being alone in the wilderness for a week and being fed alive to the mosquitos, no, there is nothing special :). Just feel free to volunteer to help someone out in a new case if you feel you can help. Oh yes, and you can always bring cookies. Cowman109 18:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks ;) Just mediated my first case! Viva La Vie Boheme

Signpost updated for July 31st

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Schizophrenia

How do I close the Schizophrenia case? As per the discussion in the article's talk page, I don't think that the case can be mediated. It is my belief that Mihai is not seriously participating in the mediation, and that my attempts to understand and meet her objections to the data being included into the article have failed. I believe the case should be close, and probably moved up to a higher level of resolution. - MSTCrow 23:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I have closed the case for you (all it took was changing the open cases to a closed cases category at the bottom). It does seem that policy is the answer to this problem and that the other disputant wants the information removed as they perhaps question its validity or find it misleading, despite its citations. I will leave a comment on the talk page. Cowman109 23:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit Count Fixed

I had copied it directly from Goldom's RfA. I forgot to fix the transclusion to my userspace. I'm really sorry about that, it was pretty stupid on my part. Regards, alphaChimp 21:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Ahah, that explains it :D. Thanks. Cowman109 21:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

My First Article

Hey Cowman, well u said it would be fun to write an article, so I thought I would. Take a look at DECv :) --Deon555|talk|e|Review Me! :D 06:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

My Choosiest Choice of All

Cowman 109, I'm afraid that I did not create My Choosiest Choice of All. I did edit it, but I cannot remember what I added since I have not put details (I will remember to do so in future). But the summary for that page does not seem to be plagarised from ScrubsTV or TV.com. I did, however, create the His Story II Scrubs episode article, if that is what you meant. I did not plagarise the summary for that. ~~EJB341

Alright, thanks. I will remove the My Choosiest Choice of All summary just in case it is copy-vio just to be safe. Also, in the future, you can leave your signature on talk page messages by typing ~~~~ at the end of your messages. Thanks again. Cowman109 20:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it appears I read through that too hastily :). Sorry for mixing you up. I must have confused the histories of the pages (I went through a lot, heh). I'll speak with User:The JPS, since he's the one who created it after all. Thanks. Cowman109 20:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Well, I belive that in GF that it's original. There's only so many ways things can be said about something that isn't complex, and there will obviously be similarities between summaries, but it certainly isn't a cut and paste. This summary is shorter at tv.com, and I didn't actually know about the episode guide on scrubs-tv.com -- but I've just checked and that's much longer. So, to answer you're question, the article was as original, and is sufficiently different from the two sources you mention. I didn't realise the rest (which I had no hand in crating, but I probably made some frmt tweaks) were copyvios. Shame :( The JPS 10:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure!

Sure why not! just kick over links ot the info to my talk page. Æon 21:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Roger that I will be more than willing to listen. I will post at there talk pages in a sec. Æon 21:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Joseph a Bank

If you go to _anyone_ of the pages, you'll see the Wikiproject Biography Template, down the bottom right, click Show, theres a link to "requested biographies for over 1 year", and a link to Joseph A. Bank, and now your talk page is in the What Links Here :P Take care! --Deon555|talk|e|Review Me! :D 06:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ahah! That explains it. I can sleep peacefully now :P Cowman109 06:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

your rfA

Ah dont sleep too peacfully yet --Deon555|talk|e|Review Me! :D 07:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 7th

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks and good luck

Cowman, thanks for volunteering to mediate at Template:The Batman. I don't want to say too much for fear of looking like I'm trying to prejudice the mediator, but I wanted to thank you for making an effort to straighten this mess out. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding that dispute, you've (understandably) inticated on the Template talk:The Batman that you are unclear on the points in contention so I'll give a rather more pointed comment than I tend to if it will help. The central point of this dispute is based on comments made by User:ThuranX that led me to believe he intended to continuously revert any changes to the template (examples: , and more particularly where he states he will revert edits he describes as "attacks" on any comics-related navbox, not just the Batman template). All of that being said, I'm aware all of those statements were made during a period of anger based on his statements that edits to the template he created were vandalism, and it is of course entirely possible that he has since cooled down. But one of the reasons I requested mediation was for an impartial person to speak with this user to ensure that work on this template (and others) will be allowed to go forward.

Basically the case was created more as a user behavior issue than any other reason, but as I am one of the individuals involved in such arguments obviously my slant and opinion on culpability is biased. If you are interested, my personal dispute with User:ThuranX is described on my talk page but you may understandably not wish to bias yourself by reading only one person's side, particularly before you have had a chance to engage ThuranX

I hope this comment was beneficial and not too weighted or pointed, and again thank you for picking up this case. -Markeer 15:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

RE:Question about your RFA opinion

Please read my RfA standards. -- Миборовский 23:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Please delete my redirect

I made a redirect from my old account to my new one that I didn't mean to. Please delete the redirect, thanks. Demonblade 06:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

from user talk:zhanster to user talk:demonblade

It seems someone else already got to it :) Cowman109 15:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

RfA Dogpile

Meh. Another administrator through which my bidding will be completed.

Congrats. CQJ 16:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Congrats too! -- Grafikm 17:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Closed MedCabal case

It was this one here: Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-09 User kmccoy. It was opened, I think, 2 months ago. With nothing added. SynergeticMaggot 17:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, congrats on your RfA. SynergeticMaggot 17:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks. :D Cowman109 17:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Palffy and 3RR tag

When I first put that tag, the situation was the following:

• Original version of the article

Reverts by Palffy

1. 17:42, 8 August 2006
2. 21:42, 9 August 2006
3. 18:03, 10 August 2006
4. 18:09, 10 August 2006

with three reverts in 24h. So the warning was lawful, and he did remove it.

Now we have also

1. 17:27, 11 August 2006
2. 19:30, 11 August 2006

with the last revert just in time to avoid a 3RR break, and just before the protection he asked for a page he was edit warring.--Kwame Nkrumah 18:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I was scolded by an Admin for removing the same tag from my talkpage, and he is allowed to remove the tag?

He said I broke the 3RR using a side account, and when he breaks the rule I am harassing him?

In the end he get the page protected on his version and the tag removed: Tell me the truth, is Palffy the son of someone important here on Misplaced Pages, that the rules do not apply to him?--Kwame Nkrumah 18:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I honestly have no idea who the two of you are - it is simply unnecessary to repeatedly add the warning when he has already received it. On a side note, you may want to consider requesting that your account is renamed as it is the name of the first president of Ghana. If you don't want to retain your contributions you could also simply create a new account to fit account name guidelines. Thanks. Cowman109 18:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

_I do not get the part about the renaming. I know who Kwame Nkrumah was, but I do not think anyone would be tricked in thinking I am the real Kwame Nkrumah (he died long time before I was born)--Kwame Nkrumah 19:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I am not scolding one of you in particular - I am simply asking that you both just leave eachother alone as it is not productive to fight over something as simple as a three revert rule tag. Cowman109 18:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Hm, true. I was looking over Misplaced Pages:Username and it only says such usernames would be innapropriate if the person died recently, but 1972 isn't that recent. The name simply stood out to me as I recall doing a school report about him a few years back. So, you were right about that. I still must insist that you simply leave Palffy alone for now as the disputed page is now protected anyway, preventing further such 3rr violations. Cowman109 19:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

That I leave him alone??? He reverts my edits without dicussion, he denounces me for 3rr, he says I am spitful, he says I am lousy, he says I am using two accounts, he accuses me of stalking, and I should leave him alone?

I understand you do not want to get involved in a fight between two users, but if you want to push your solution on the matter, at least try to understand who-is-doing-what-to-whom. Thanks.--Kwame Nkrumah 19:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, his edits were very innapropriate and I will make sure he realizes that, but provoking people (your talk page comes to mind) is not the way to settle matters. Note that I also asked him to leave you alone. Cowman109 19:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems your request was rejected: , , . --Kwame Nkrumah 19:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Semi-Protection

Are you sure I still can't get semi-protection for my Talk page? =))) --Palffy 18:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Only after you'll restore the 3RR warning I put.--Kwame Nkrumah 18:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Do I have to beg for protection for my Talk page =///..? You can't stop this guy, he's gotta have the last word... --Palffy 20:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I will ask him to stop harassing you once more. Protection is not generally used when there is only an issue with one or two users, instead blocks are more appropriate should this continue. Cowman109 20:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know. One of his "friends" just "harassed me": Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kwame Nkrumah.

I am out of this. Thank you for all you have done.--Kwame Nkrumah 20:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

That does not appear to be harassment - it is a simple procedural request to determine whether users are using a sockpuppet. Cowman109 20:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry to be bothering you about something nonsensical all day, but don't you think this requires a resolution of more than a warning? The user is intent on stalking my posts, changing articles in which he has no expertise in, talking back to admins and fellow users..I know that this is your first day as an admin and don't want to do something out of the ordinary, but I think this subject matter requires consultation with someone else. I really hope you or someone else can find some fairness in this.. --Palffy 21:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that is what the WP:ANI report is for. :) I am currently speaking with other administrators about it off Wiki as well. Cowman109 21:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

And what about his new personal attack? --Kwame Nkrumah 22:27, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Requests left on that page can often take a ridiculous amount of time to be reviewed (as I'm sure you're aware). It's nice to see an extra pair of hands there. -- Steel 20:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Well someone needs to do it. :D Cowman109 20:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Congrats on the RfA

Well done, I am sure you will make a fabtastic editor. Viridae 02:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

W000000000T! well done Cowman! i knew you'd do it ;) *turns over "better luck next time" paper to reveal "CONGRAT'S"* :P --Deon555|talk|e|Review Me! :D 08:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Way to Nail tCv

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar For blocking the tCv sockpuppet I Aeon award you this star. Æon 06:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

FC Chornomorets Odessa

Wasn't the page protected? Why did you move it? Once more, you stepped out of your adminship and actually "choose" to backup one version. And the fact that you did this when I was blocked is another thing against you.--Kwame Nkrumah 11:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I unprotected it from moves as there was a discussion going on and temporarily moved it to the official name that was at the top of the page - but yes, I should not have moved it, and for that I apologise. You were only blocked for three hours, however, and I thought your block was over by that time. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, though, it won't happen again :) Cowman109 15:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

2006 UN Resoultion between Israel and Hezbollah

Please stop deleting that page. Fact is the beginning is not a violation of any copyrights. The Second part is the actual text of the Resoultion. This shouldn't really be a problem, 1. It gives more information to the reader, and 2. I have cited the source from where i got it from. So I would appreciate it if you would stop it. --Zonerocks 14:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm I only deleted it once - another administrator deleted it the other time. If someone tags it for speedy deletion again you can put the {{hangon}} tag on the page and then leave your reasoning for keeping it on the talk page - but another source of confusion is that you're mispelling resolution. If you name it resolution instead of resoultion, then that might clear things up a bit, too :) Cowman109 15:50, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it seems that an article about this subject has already been created at United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1701, so it doesn't look like that another creation of the page will be necessary. Cowman109 16:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Emma Watson

If I may, I'm not so convinced this article needed protecting: it was hit 5 times by someone (who was then blocked) in Anchorage, AK, USA; once by someone in London, England; and twice by someone in Edinburgh, Scotland. The style of vandalism (over nine hours, btw) was completely different as well. Perhaps this can be lifted in a few hours? RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I figured that the IPs were related in some way (it seemed strange for there to be a burst of vandalism in one day). But yes, pages shouldn't be protected long, anyway. Feel free to unblock early if you'd like - I'm trying to help Voice of All with some over-blocked pages at WP:PP as well :) Cowman109 19:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 19:19, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Mediation cabal

May I volunteer to mediate cases, or is there an approval process? -- Cri du canard 23:32, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

There is currently no approval process as the Mediation Cabal is an informal initiative intended to be autonomously run by its members. All I would ask is that you look at Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Suggestions for mediators before volunteering to help out in a case. :) Cowman109 23:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for taking time to comment neutrally on my RfA. To answer your concerns over my involement in janitorial processes, I actually have 280 edits in deletion discussions (I just went and counted them), which is actually larger than the number of edits I have done in FAC. Yesterday, in fact, I started several AfDs. My edit history is open for you to verify this information (link showing only Misplaced Pages namespace edits) I hope you take this information into account. Andrew Levine 00:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, alright. Thanks for clarifying. Unfortunately I still feel that you have not had much community involvement in terms of communicating directly with users. I will support your next RFA, though, given more direct communication with users (perhaps getting involved in dispute resolution processes could be a good step). Thanks for responding to my neutral comments, though - usually candidates are too timid to reply when they should :) Cowman109 00:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand that ou don't have the time to review every past discussion I have been involved with. If you would like, I can show you (with links) several examples of discussions I have been in which were deeply involved and/or came close to becoming heated, to show you how I handle myself in user interactions. If you want me to stop bugging you, that is also alright. :) Andrew Levine 00:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hm, could you indeed please bring up an example of a heated discussion? I feel that users need some sort of experience with editing disputes before they could be potentially stopping them with administrative tools, of course :) Cowman109 00:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

There's the grammar discussion Talk:Krazy Kat#Grammar and referencing fixes reverted which got pretty heated between two other users, I helped sort things out. Another example is at Talk:Black Canadian#Micha.C3.ABlle_Jean where another user and I could not agree, and I ended up offering a compromise. Andrew Levine 00:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support and trust. Andrew Levine 01:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

RE Mnemonic

Mnemonic

Hi, there. Concerning the external link you are trying to add to Mnemonic, there are concerns that your placement of that constitutes external link spamming. As you are the owner of the site, it may be best to let neutral parties who aren't affiliated with your site to determine whether the link should be put on Mneumonic, also in part due to concerns at WP:AUTO. Does that sound alright? Thanks. Cowman109Talk 18:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Isn't it sounds ridicules? I am not the owner of the site and what is the different anyway? Take a look at pages that are left in External Links. Most of them are pretty much useless for your visitors. You can find full explanation of all modern mnemonic techniques on the http://www.pmemory.com. If it's all about commercial site - we don't try to sell anything on Wiki, our link was directed to the free eBook and free information.

http://www.worldmemorychampionships.com/ is a pure commercial site created to sell O’Brien’s stuff; visitors of WIKI won't be able to learn anything about memorization techniques there. What's up with that?

Please advice

Ah, I thought you were the owner by this diff link. Anyway, yes, that other link you brought up does seem innapropriate so I will remove it. I will see if I can get another opinion concerning pmemory.com, however, to see if there can be some sort of consensus on removing it or not as another editor feels it is innapropriate. Cowman109 01:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, also you can sign your comments by typing ~~~~ at the end of your messages :). Cowman109 01:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Cowman! Pmemory 02:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)Pmemory

Sir?

Upon my announcing my resignation, you responded "have fun in the outside world". I'm not sure if you meant it this way, but it sounded to me like an insult.--The Count of Monte Cristo 04:43, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I acutally didn't mean it that way at all. I'm wishing you luck in your endeavors outside of Misplaced Pages, and have fun with school and such. Sorry for the confusion. :) Cowman109 04:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.--The Count of Monte Cristo 04:48, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Belated Congrats

Congrats, and I'm glad to see that you're active so far. =D Yanksox 05:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Um...

I saw your help with this guy and need some help of my own. I am 69.145.123.171 (on AOL) and he's claiming I'm trolling, while I'm not. He hates anons, and thus, he hates me. The comments he is making are very hurtful, and he is constanly removing my comments from his page. I'm not in any way, shape, or form trolling, and I have a good reputation. If you check the history of my page, you will see he edited it without my permission, claiming I now 'have to register'. I'm stuck with very limited internet right now-can you please help me sort this out? --172.191.52.232 06:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Could you please provide a diff link that shows you are being harassed? Also, leaving edit summaries calling him a 'jerk' generally do not go to well. Cowman109 06:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I've just had a lot of problems with him. Normally I'd leave diffs, but it's hard with dial-up. Hang on, I'll get them... --172.191.52.232 06:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, he

• edited my page in a rude way without my permission
• Called me a vandal under his IP here
• Told me he wanted me blocked on AOL (again, under his IP)
• Reverted many of my comments on his talk page
• He told you to block me! My good IP address! I have over 2,500 constructive edits on that!
• Called me a troll

That's all I can find at this point, as I'm so mad I want to scream. I'm not trolling. He hates anons. So he hates me.--172.191.52.232 06:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I must tell you that honestly from my point of view, repeatedly leaving messages on his talk page with edit summaries such as "Jerk" and "burned", I believed myself that you were trolling and harassing him on his talk page. He clearly has not had a good experience with you, so it would be best to simply avoid him from now on. I will ask him to avoid you from now on as well, so we can get back to building an encyclopedia. Thanks. Cowman109 06:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm not ready to leave it at that. I've had much experiance with the Wiki, and this feud goes farther than it would seem. This page is where the problem stems from. He took it much too far. In fact, I believe he used several sockpuppets on it to inflate the 'prohibit' tally.

I know how this must look from your point of view, but it's a complex matter and will take a moment to explain. Can you give me the time to sort the story out? --172.191.52.232 06:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm off to bed as it's 3am here, but I asked him to leave you alone as well. I will be able to continue discussing this tomorrow. Cowman109 06:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I just saw the comment you left on his talk page... Thank you. I didn't mean to sound as mad as I did, but he really rubs me the wrong way... It's a long story. In fact, I think I'm going to start typing it up right away. Given, I did say some things to him I shouldn't have, but I've taken his abuse far too long. Thanks for listening to my speil. --172.191.52.232 06:55, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, here's the whole thing. It's on the AN, but I figured you'd like to hear the whole story. Be warned, it's long and confusing.

(Just to clarify, this is me)

Okay, this is going to be very long and complicated; not only that, but I am typing this without the internet and will have to copy and paste add links and such later. So please forgive and fragmentation you might see and bear with me: The problem is with this page. The page is, simply put, a vote that will show the general thoughts on letting anons edit. I, as an anons advocate, hover around the page and try and keep it fair. I do not own the page, but the person who made it has not been editing often, and I haven’t been able to ask permission of them to keep the peace. My opinion is that Misplaced Pages would not exist were it not for the anons. User:Hildanknight’s opinion is that you should be required to register. He follows the page even more than I, which is saying something. He has gone to the point of commenting on almost every single vote to allow anon editing, sometimes adding ‘no comment’ when he can’t think of anything to say. Needless to say, I was upset. So I tried to handle it nicely. I left a comment on his talk page that simply said anons are Wikipedians to. It was at this point he decided to retire, then un-retire. For months I kept going back to that page, checking to see if he’d reply, but he did not. It was only after my internet connection had been cut and restored that I discoverd he had replied, needlessly harsh, I might add. I added my reply , then waited. I was surprised to find that instead of reply on his talk page, as he normally does, he edited my userpage, stating that it was time to register, and I would soon know why he hated anons. I then added a new message on his talk page , saying that I would stand for anons no matter what the cause. I then came up with an idea, inspired by his comment-I would keep track of the IP’s I had to use on AOL. Growing excited with the thought, I told him of it. Yes, it was mean. I was angry. He reverted it. , calling me an 'annonomous vandal'.Now, the reason he doesn’t like IPs is that Singapore, as a whole, has one single IP address. I can see the problem, but that’s no reason to abuse me. After my idea popped up on his talk page, my userpage suddenly was vandalized by the Singapore IP. Coincidence? I don’t think so.The edit was reverted by Mr. Lefty. I thanked him, and moments later discovered that my talk page had been vandalized-again, by the Singapore IP. I knew it was him. There is no question about it. Angry, I left him a message. . Yes, I used a bad edit summary, but I was (and am) really peeved. He, of course, reverted me. , calling me a troll. As if that wasn't enough, he contacted an admin, and had him block me! And then decided he wanted his talk page protected to I couldn't protest! He told the admin that blocked me he deserved a barnstar, and requested my good IP be blocked! I have 2,500 constructive edits on that IP! Oh, was I mad. Before his page got protected, I blew up. . The admin who was considering semi-protected promptly reverted and protected the page. . So he thanked the admin and again requested my good IP be blocked. . And to top it all off, one of his pals came along and told him I'm a moron and he should ignore me.

That was confusing, was it not? Now, am I in the right in assuming that his page should not be protected and he should recieve a warning for his behavior? I'm not saying what I did was great, heck, I insulted him. But he got off free. I got blocked. Can somebody help here?

One more thing: I think you were in the right with the way you reacted to the situation, I just think Hildanknight mislead you, and my timing was really really bad. --172.191.63.212 07:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I don't have anything personal against you, just against anonymous editing in general. So I think I should clear things up a little by offering my side of the story.

Firstly, I think I should explain why I hate anons.

Firstly, as you mentioned, my IP is shared by almost all Singaporeans. This means there are many users of this IP who vandalize anonymously, and the IP is constantly blocked. I remember once spending a full hour on an article, hitting submit, and losing everything because I was blocked. I posted on several pages trying to get help on this issue. The Village Pump, the SGpedians' notice board...but it seemed everyone was ignoring me, and no one helped me. I decided to bear with it, but I eventually couldn't take it anymore. I blew up just like you did. NSLE (a fellow SGpedian who was later desysopped over sockpuppet abuse) blocked me indefinitely for disrupting Misplaced Pages to prove a point. The block was later lifted.

I joined Misplaced Pages to contribute information to articles on computers/websites and Singapore TV shows/movies. I wrote two articles - Google Groups and Homerun (film). I occasionally reverted vandalism to pages on my watchlist. As the number of pages in my watchlist grew, I was reverting more and more vandalism daily, mostly anonymous vandalism. That, together with the constant blocks, started to drain me, and the amount of information I was contributing to articles declined.

One of my favourite pages was RuneScape. The article is a frequent target of anonymous vandals and I've reverted several vandal edits to that article. Still, plenty of subtle vandalism goes unspotted, thus degrading the quality of the article. When the article is semi-protected, peace reigns, and there is no vandalism. However, eventually an admin will lift the semi-protection and the anonymous vandals will have a field day.

My campaign against anons was a general attempt to try and solve these issues that were causing me considerable stress. However, I failed. Gradually, I became more disillusioned with Misplaced Pages, and Terence Ong, the only Wikipedian I could consider a Wikifriend then, was leaving. I decided that enough was enough, and posted that I was leaving Misplaced Pages as well. Finally, with much encouragement, particularly from Richardshusr, I decided to stay.

You posted the message on my talk page several days before I posted my decision to leave. And a couple of days before I decided not to leave, someone else replied to your message, and I decided to reply as well. I'm sorry if I sounded harsh, but you won't know how much stress anons have caused me - and I was asking you to imagine it.

Now for my side of the story. Today, you posted a reply on my talk page. I then clicked on the link to your user page and read your announcement about your Internet connection. So I clicked "edit this page" and typed a reply. (I sometimes forget the distinction between user and user talk pages - not forgetting some users have a single page for both.) What I meant with my post was that since you were on AOL, you would soon suffer constant blocks for no reason, so you would "see what I put up with every day". So I suggested you register.

In retaliation, you posted on my talk page. You reverted your user page, I reverted your talk page. In my edit summary, by "anonymous vandals", I was referring to those on RuneScape and other pages; I'd wasted enough time on them, and I don't want to waste time on you.

After my third revert, I was concerned about violating 3RR. Therefore I posted on the Village Pump asking whether either of us was in danger of violating 3RR. I did not ask Cowman109 to block you - after reading the question I posted, he blocked you of his own accord and then left a message on my talk page. He mentioned "Should he continue from other IP addresses, I will gladly semi-protect your talk page temporarily if you request it." As I remembered you were on AOL and had multiple IPs, I requested my talk page be semi-protected and your good IP be blocked, because I guessed you would come back with another IP and harrass me further. You proved my guess right. So Cowman109 reverted your edit and semi-protected my user page.

As mentioned, I don't have anything personal against you. In fact, if you register, we could even become Wikifriends! For starters, what's your ASL? I'm 14, male and from Singapore. You may think that I'll rejoice after reading your user page and seeing that you left, but I'm not exactly happy over this.

This has caused both of us a great deal of stress, and I hope we can clear this up and contribute to Misplaced Pages.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, then, so we seem to have gotten all that through. Yes, 69.145 made some hurtful edit summaries as he felt threatened himself by Hildan's aggressive approach towards anonymous IPs. However, you should realize that now there are new blocking mechanisms in place that allow administrators to block only IP addresses without blocking accounts attached to them in order to prevent collateral damage. Also, it is just about 99.9% unlikely that all anons will ever be forced to register, as they are indeed an integral part of Misplaced Pages. Besides, Jimbo himself would likely override any such 'vote' that occured that would say otherwise (but don't quote me on that). Anyway, another extremely important part of Misplaced Pages is to assume good faith of editors. Someone using an IP does not automatically make them a bad person - there are plenty of registered user account vandals as well (Willy on wheels anyone?). So, in conclusion, this matter does seem to be resolved. I trust that you two will no longer get into fights with each other over such things. Cowman109 15:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Re : User:69.145.123.171 et. ali

I'm not sure in how to go around saying this (or handle this), but you may interested in the following pages : Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#Please.2C_please.2C_please_help..., User:69.145.123.171, . - Mailer Diablo 13:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from posting truly disturbing, not to mention ill-written, messages to my talk page.

You stated in your message, "If you feel that the other user is being incivil to you in some way, simply ignore him and remember to focus on content, not on the contributor." Should I therefore similarly say to my critics who "feel that I have been uncivil to them," "hey, ignore my uncivil conduct, do not, under any circumstances respond in kind, focus on content...."?

Your outrageous double-standard is indicative of explosive bigotry. And I will be asking for your removal from any/all Mediation/Arbitration. Your dictate to me that, in effect, I have no recourse but to abide uncivil behavior as I see it, or else be subject to reprimands clearly not in order against my uncivil critics is as brazen a violation of the very urstuff of Misplaced Pages neutrality as is possible.AOluwatoyin 21:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)AOluwatoyin