This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lithistman (talk | contribs) at 13:13, 8 October 2014 (→Don't remove my talk page contribution.: rm trolling). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 13:13, 8 October 2014 by Lithistman (talk | contribs) (→Don't remove my talk page contribution.: rm trolling)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | The problem of admin overreach needs to be dealt with. And ANI is a (very large) part of the problem, and will never be part of any real solution. It's a drama-filled hivemind, where admins relish flexing their WikiMuscles and admin-wannabes offer attaboys, attempting to burnish their credentials for RFA. It's nothing more than another forum for at which to shop when attempting to get people blocked. For a fine example of this overreach, see my recent block for "edit warring", which only happened because an admin who was himself edit-warring against talkpage consensus forum-shopped (first at ANI, and when that didn't work, at RFPP) and got me blocked for enforcing talkpage consensus. |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
St. Croix
You can have it. St Croix, has/had one hospital which recently was decertified as a medicare/medicaid facility. This will dramatically effect the budget of this hospital and thus the local economy. It will also effect the level of medical care available to locals and tourists....which is a reflection of the economy....and will negatively impact it as well. The AED devices that are in place around the island are potential life saving devices which are necessary in the absence more medical facilities. Not to mention the fact that the lady who has been installing these devices has been doing so with her own money and donations from interested parties. The blog which I referenced is the only blog discussing the implications and providing a link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdubs8 (talk • contribs) 13:13, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
- The information above is interesting, and I'm thankful that there's someone doing it. However, Misplaced Pages is not the place to distribute such information, unless it has been covered in reliable secondary sources. LHM 17:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Barnstar for you
|
The Anti-Flame Barnstar | |
| For keeping calm in spite of all the nasty words you may have faced at WP:BLPN, keep up the good work! Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC) |
- Thanks! Particularly interesting to me was being accused of lying, dishonest editing, and some other nefariousness which escapes me as I type this. LHM 05:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
|
The Guidance Barnstar | |
| Thank you, Lithistman, for taking me under your wing... and for showing me (with patience and kindness) how to improve. DimeBoxFrank (talk) 14:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC) |
- You're very welcome, Frank! If you run into any further questions you don't know how to answer, feel free to drop by my talkpage. If I don't know the answer, lots of times I'll know people who do. It's been a pleasure helping you thus far! LHM 15:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
User:Lithistman/Evidence
Sorry LHM, but I've gone ahead and deleted this evidence page as an Attack page. While you can keep such a list in preparation for an imminent or ongoing arbcom filing or similar proceeding, it's not an open ended thing. I did e-mail you a copy of the text of the page, wikicode and all, as it was at the time of the deletion, so you can keep it for your records. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 14:33, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- I did the same at User:Lithistman/WCM diffs. Again, I e-mailed you a copy of the text, though I imagine that proceeding is much less pressing or timely than the first one. Best, UltraExactZZ ~ Did 14:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- Sigh. Thanks for the note, and for going to the extra effort of emailing me the contents. I had already saved that info as a Word doc, anticipating that NE Ent's efforts to have them deleted would succeed based on how such things go on WP in most cases. What concerns me is how s/he even found out they existed, given that I don't recall ever having interacted with NE Ent in the past. If such matters are being coordinated off-wiki, that is a serious concern, in my opinion. (Note: I'm not saying you were notified off-wiki, just that I'm suspicious that was how how NE Ent may have found out they existed.) LHM 15:09, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- And, for the record, they weren't actually "attack pages" or any sort of "enemies list." I nearly requested deletion of the WCM diffs page myself, as it was rather stale. But the other page was simply a record of the interactions I had with one specific admin, leading up to him forum-shopping in an attempt to get me blocked. It wasn't an attack page, just an evidence page. LHM 15:11, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- You're not wrong - and note that I didn't in any way suggest (nor would I support) any sort of sanction for posting either page in the first place. As far as the "Attack" bit, neither page attacked as such. But the G10 criteria is the one that covers pages evidence pages not being used for imminent or ongoing matters, such as these - and the G10 criteria is the same one as Attack Pages, so that's what got used. (There may be a more precise criteria, and I can redelete or note the record if I should have used that instead.) Sorry for the confusion. As to the other question, it would not surprise me to find that there was an editor going through your edit history, perhaps to find a recent comment of yours on some matter of dispute. They saw the page labeled "Evidence", clicked over, and reacted. In and of itself, it doesn't scream off-wiki shenanigans. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 19:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- It just seemed sort of "odd", given that I'd just seen NE Ent's name pop up having a conversation at the talkpage of the editor whose diffs were contained in the "Evidence" subpage. I'm probably just being overly-conspiratorial. LHM 20:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- There was a good reason I added the template to the evidence page. If you don't have that template, then any admin can delete your collection as an attack page. When you removed the template, it was only a matter of time before it was targeted for deletion. Next time use the template and fill out the necessary parameters. Viriditas (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- I put it on there, I just moved it to the bottom of the page. LHM 22:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- There was a good reason I added the template to the evidence page. If you don't have that template, then any admin can delete your collection as an attack page. When you removed the template, it was only a matter of time before it was targeted for deletion. Next time use the template and fill out the necessary parameters. Viriditas (talk) 21:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- It just seemed sort of "odd", given that I'd just seen NE Ent's name pop up having a conversation at the talkpage of the editor whose diffs were contained in the "Evidence" subpage. I'm probably just being overly-conspiratorial. LHM 20:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- You're not wrong - and note that I didn't in any way suggest (nor would I support) any sort of sanction for posting either page in the first place. As far as the "Attack" bit, neither page attacked as such. But the G10 criteria is the one that covers pages evidence pages not being used for imminent or ongoing matters, such as these - and the G10 criteria is the same one as Attack Pages, so that's what got used. (There may be a more precise criteria, and I can redelete or note the record if I should have used that instead.) Sorry for the confusion. As to the other question, it would not surprise me to find that there was an editor going through your edit history, perhaps to find a recent comment of yours on some matter of dispute. They saw the page labeled "Evidence", clicked over, and reacted. In and of itself, it doesn't scream off-wiki shenanigans. UltraExactZZ ~ Did 19:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
List of deprogrammers
Hello! Please note that I have restructured the layout of the RfC at List of deprogrammers. Please review and make certain your comments are in the intended section(s). Thank you, Tgeairn (talk) 21:00, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Looks good, and thanks for restructuring it. I am likely to end up in the "oppose" section, but I'm still thinking on it a bit. LHM 21:34, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for solisiting help for me
Hi Lithistman. Thanks so much for soliciting help for me. Cas Liber has come on board. I'm going to further expand Andrew R. Heinze just a tad and also get Luther Adler's citations in order, and then I'll ask Cas Liber to check them out. DimeBoxFrank (talk) 14:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
- Glad to help! There's lots of good editors on this project, if you know where to look, and most of them know a lot more than me about the inner workings of GA/FA and all that. I'll keep an eye on the articles you're working on, and pitch in where I can as well, but Cas is very good, so I'll probably just leave him to it. LHM 15:35, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
- I can see already how good Cas is. And now (mentally) I'm "into" getting my articles up to snuff. Onward and upward. EastDimeBoxFrank (talk) 03:45, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys get done! LHM 04:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hi LHM. Did you see that Cas promoted the Andrew R. Heinze article to C class? I only saw it a little while ago (by accident). I'm pretty excited about it. Thanks again for asking him to help me. Also... I hope things are going well for you. EastDimeBoxFrank (talk) 09:39, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- I'm looking forward to seeing what you guys get done! LHM 04:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- I can see already how good Cas is. And now (mentally) I'm "into" getting my articles up to snuff. Onward and upward. EastDimeBoxFrank (talk) 03:45, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Don't remove my talk page contribution.
Don't remove my talk page contribution. 24.21.151.167 (talk) 05:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- When you place rumors on the talkpage of a BLP article, your comments will be removed. Please refrain from doing that. LHM 05:15, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Don't remove my comments 24.21.151.167 (talk) 05:32, 8 October 2014 (UTC)