User talk:Roux/Archives/2009/March

WikiCup Newsletter

21:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 21:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Nikki Finke

In case you didn't know Nikki Finke's blog is commonly cited by the New York Times [1]. It's not a traditional blog but more of an online version of her newspaper column.

Her journalist credentials: "Finke was an Associated Press foreign correspondent in Moscow and London. She later worked for The Dallas Morning News. She joined the staff of Newsweek (as a correspondent in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles), then at the Los Angeles Times as a staff writer covering entertainment and features. She became West Coast Editor for the New York Observer and then New York Magazine where she penned Hollywood business columns. Finke has also written for: The New York Times, Vanity Fair, Esquire, Harper's Bazaar, Elle, The Washington Post, Salon.com, Premiere, and Los Angeles magazine."

In 2007, Finke won the Los Angeles Press Club's Southern California Journalism Award for "Entertainment Journalist of the Year". --Lilwayne fo sho (talk) 03:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

show all subcategories

I remember that there is a command to force the category page to show all its subcategories on the first page (if there are more than 200 members and so more than 1 page in that category). Do you know what it is?

But I don't mean Special:CategoryTree, because that just adds the cattree in addition to the subcategories. Debresser (talk) 23:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

No clue, I'm afraid. //roux   23:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Nor has anyone else...

I have another question for you. I programmed a template to add a page to a category only in userpage namespace (using <includeonly>{{#ifeq:{{ns:2}}|{{NAMESPACE}}|[[Category:whatever|{{PAGENAME}}]]|}}</includeonly>). But that means that e.g. the page User:Debresser/Userboxes also gets tagged with that category, because as far as the system is concerned that is a userpage (the system does not recognise subpages as such). Is there any way to keep templates from tagging subpages you know of? Debresser (talk) 19:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Checkuser completed

I've done it for you.Klemm2 (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed. 129.111.56.199 (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

This is from my laboratory office.

To the University of Texas IT department, there have been scientific edits used but I personally do not use UT computers for WP except this time and a few times. 129.111.56.199 (talk) 22:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Political party strength in Alabama

To reply to what you said on my talk page. I tried fixing it but didn't know how. If I did, I would have. Atlantic Gateways (talk) 14:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Municipal Corporation blah blah

I think it's valuable, interesting and useful to the encyclopedia to have something that says what consistutes a city versus a town versus a borough versus a hamlet versus an unincorporated place versus an etc.

I'd also like to make a featured article.

Is there a way I can combine the two? Atlantic Gateways (talk) 02:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

18:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 18:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

A good idea to stop. Mea culpa

I apologise, Roux. A good idea is a good idea though, see my user (not talk) page for the details. Edit Centric (talk) 09:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Apology

I apologize for failing to intervene in some way during the MedCab disaster Caspian blue engineered last year. --Tenmei (talk) 21:50, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh psh, it's hardly your fault. Honestly, I really don't give a damn about him--he seems to think I have some sort of long-term antagonism towards him, which is an interesting piece of egomania but so far from the truth as to be laughable. This latest... outburst is just more proof. Ah well. //roux   21:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, Roux, I assumed Tenmei apologized for this, "I am offended by the heedless harassment of roux", but you're quite generous on this attack unlike your outburst against my criticism and even condone the personal attack series. Good to know about you more.--Caspian blue 22:19, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Caspian, enough is enough. Stop now. //roux   22:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Caspian blue -- Stop beating a dead horse! If you don't understand this English idiom, click on the link. --Tenmei (talk) 03:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Banned from talk page

I posted the following on my talk page. Perhaps this strategy may help mitigate a continuing parade of harm? --Tenmei (talk) 22:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Blocked from talk page

No: User:Caspian blue ≠ WP:C

Naaa, I can't be bothered. If he chooses to continue acting in this way, it's his choice. I have given enough warnings. //roux   22:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

ANI thread

Hey. Sorry if you think I'm coming across as unhelpful on that thread, but I'm fairly passionate about the subject of verbal abuse and how certain terms are inappropriate here. I think that that user needs to learn the importance of not accusing until ensuring they are correct first. Even so, I've stuck that part of the comment as I realise I'm a little edgy this evening. I'll take a step back for a while... —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 23:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

No no, I totally understood where you were coming from. It's just--same as my reply over there--that because these issues can be so incredibly divisive we really need to solely focus on the content as much as possible. Cheers! //roux   23:30, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, I'm not sure if anything will be done about the topic at hand anyway. One thing I've found on Wikipedia is that it's really hard to get consensus on dealing with occasional vandalism NPOV violations from otherwise good editors, such as ParaGreen13. I suspect any further of the same attitude from him will get him blocked, though, so that might be incentive enough to stop. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 23:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Aye, Wikipedia in general has a pachyderm visualisation deficiency when it comes to a wide variety of things. //roux   23:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Your message

I received your message, but I will not become involved in that particular hornets nest. Just wanted to let you know I received it. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:27, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thx. re (Top) explanation.

Hello, Roux. You have new messages at Trafford09's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Trafford09 (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Constructive suggestions

Please reconsider the following comment made by Tznkai:

"... the fact is, no one is willing to step back and shut up instead of argue." --Tznkai (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

If I may, I would like to suggest two plausible ways to "step back," as requested: 1. using the collapse templates to minimize everything that you've posted on Tznkai's talk page

{{collapse top}}

.... whatever you wrote fits in here ....

{{collapse bottom}}

2. using the strike feature to indicate your compliance with the clear request that you abandon the talk page venue

<strike> .... whatever you wrote fits in here .... </strike>

In this instance, your best guesses about how to approach a persistent problem were unavailing. Why not simply "step back" for now? Then when you feel like it, why not mull over what you might have done differently, if anything? This review exercise might suggest more effective defensive strategies ...?

For example, you find useful defensive tools in an unexplored location like Category:English idioms -- as in the phrase "Beating a dead horse"? When Caspian blue or anyone else refuses to take you at your word when you say "stop," it can't hurt for you to suggest something like:

"Stop beating a dead horse -- and if you don't understand this English idiom, click on the link."

I would imagine that this defensive "tool" will be construed as non-confrontational, terse, and unequivocal. This may not prove to be good enough; but there you have it.

Hoping for better days ahead. --Tenmei (talk) 03:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Parappa664

After he twice vandalized my talk page, I turned him in to WP:AIV. That's still pending, but one curiosity is the bot's assertion that he's in the list of IP users for an educational institution. How can a registered user be on that list? Unless he vandalized that too! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Probably in the cat due to copying the IP talkpage onto his own, I'd guess. //roux   07:05, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to the team for fixing. This was one of the weirder users I've run into. And my guess is he was, in fact, an IP address that decided to create a user ID. If so, he'll be easy to spot if he comes back again. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Something odd here. The contents of User talk:Parappa664 indicate he's been around at least two years, but his contrib list only goes back a couple of weeks. I wonder what's up with that? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I get it now. It's like you said. Duh! Too early in the morning (or too late at night). Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:26, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

And this [2] is where he copied it from. That suggests activity from 165.139.22.67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) bears watching. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 07:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Probably, yes. Someone really needs to get around the MW bug of not being able to watchlist dynamically-generated pages. Even if you could (with a bot) subst contribs pages every 15 minutes or something... that gives me an idea. I must find a bot person. //roux   07:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Rowdy

Thanks, I didn't catch that. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 16:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

hello

Hello I was in the process of editing an entire article. However as I was editing the following log appeared -- The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) was changed by WetDesert (u) (t) deleting 27431 characters on 2009-03-08T17:03:08+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 17:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC).

I was about to extensively re-write this page, with appropriate references (currently there are hardly 10 references in that article). However due to some kind of a problem (I really don't know what!!!) I got that error (only a few minutes after my editing had begun -- which looked like some kind of a automatically generated message), that reported my sincere efforts as VADALISM.

Kindly fix this problem for me so that I can carry on the work of editing.

Regards WetDesert

User:Rjecina

Following this proposal, what should we do with this? I'm close to just an indefinite block and asking for a community ban. That space of articles is hard enough to patrol but the smearing of everyone makes a lot more sense now. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

That is ridiculous. Unless there's a good and non-disingenuous response, I would absolutely agree with you blocking indef outright. Falsifying sources should simply never be tolerated. //roux   13:12, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help.

Thanks for your help, with the template, can we use one of the reference tags, perhaps the one that is used to generate references, to be consistent, blocking the date part. ? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 02:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Why? External links have a pretty well-defined and simple format. Use the same that is used on every other page on Wikipedia. //roux   13:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the best is to link to the homepage of the official web site as you have demonstrated. Thanks. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Current events

Hi. Long time no talk. Hope you are doing well and finding fun things to edit.

I noticed a reasonably good article at wikinews:Canadian teams vie for spot at the World Curling Championship that I thought would be good to use for the portal but after stumbling around the current events section forever (well, okay 5 minutes anyway) I gave up trying to figure out how to update it. It does not appear to be part of the big beautiful update you guys made several months ago but I thought I'd spew my frustration in your general direction anyway. :-P Seriously, If you ever feel like cleaning that mess up or telling me how to easily add a new article to it, go ahead. Cheers! DoubleBlue (talk) 02:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey.. yes, I'll have a look. //roux   03:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Since you brought it up...

Albeit at AN/I but still. Would you accept a nomination for adminship? I know that some people stay "normal" for reasons of there own so I thought I'd ask first. Padillah (talk) 18:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

You should probably look at this first... Thank you for the vote of confidence, though :) //roux   18:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to hear it. Padillah (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

No need to be sorry; just showed a lot of the flaws in the WP-o-sphere. //roux   19:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Padillah is just overflowing with generosity today, as he wants to nominate me also. And I have a hunch that what happened with yours would be a good predictor of what would happen with mine. It might be a useful exercise, though. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I just figured If it knows as much as an admin, and gives advice like an admin ought... Some of you guys have been seriously overlooked and I wanted to give some props. BTW, the enormous "DON'T PANIC" that shows up during editing may not have the desired effect. In point of fact it startles the crap out of me every time I see it. I dig the cat though. Padillah (talk) 12:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your support. It's likely to fail, but it's been a useful exercise. The biggest legitimate complaint seemed to be that I do too much on ANI, so I've taken that off my watch list for awhile, as well as some of the lightning rod articles like Obama. My efforts to defend that article were not appreciated, so there's no point continuing. I'll see if I can focus on baseball articles more, especially with the season just around the corner (after the winter storms taper off). I'll probably take the RFA off my watchlist sometime soon also, as the critics are pretty much parroting each other. It is kind of funny to see a topic-banned user griping about my behavior. Good luck mentoring him. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

MAKE IT WORK! FIGURE IT OUT!

dude i want help make the livechat help thing work! dont reply if you dont know! WHY DIDNT YOU JUST GET SOMEBODY WHO DID KNOW?!?! im barly on those things for gods sake! MAKE IT WORK! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cabbagenoob (talk • contribs) 04:55, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

TY

thanks for reverting the "vandalism" on my talkpage. α§ʈάt̪íňέ-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 12:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Bold

You explained to me to be bold and I was and it has now created a conflagration. How to avoid this in the future? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caverty (talk • contribs) 21:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

re. adminhelp

I've responded in my talk. --  Chzz  ►  22:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Ha!

I really did laugh out loud - Thanks! --EEMIV (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Roux. You have new messages at Cannibaloki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cannibaloki 05:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Cannibaloki 05:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Outlines

They're hierarchical outlines, usually just referred to as "outlines". They are a type of list. These particular ones lack the numbering system common to most hierarchical outlines, because the MediaWiki software does not yet support outline formatting and presentation, but the hierarchical structure is still there. It's a hybrid form (without numbering).

Are you familiar with hierarchical outlines?

Outlines on Wikipedia are all part of a larger whole called the "Outline of knowledge".

The scope of this project is similar to a much more famous outline of knowledge called the Propaedia.

The Transhumanist    00:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

CopyVio problem

Thanks so much for your suggestion. It was great to get some help. Invertzoo (talk) 00:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. //roux   00:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

NAC?

I'm not objecting, but what does NAC mean? Thank you for your time.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 08:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

non-admin closure :) //roux   08:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

When in doubt, prefix three-letter acronyms with WP:. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 13:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

>.> Thanks and thanks.. <.< c.c — Dædαlus ^Contribs 06:46, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed.

I only joked because It's a fellow user of ED. Him and I are different on the perspective of vandalism to Wikipedia (I oppose and he vandalizes) No intention to hurt the user. It's okay though, not a big deal. Message me back if you feel the need to, peace with you. -THE MATTY! TALK! 10:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Your comment on User talk:Hersfold

Thanks for that! I tried that and I think it worked. My mind is at peace now :) Inferno, Lord of Penguins 22:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

17:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 17:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Enjoy the bubble tea!

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Barnstar

For reverting all the vandalism on my talkpage that pops up from time-to-time. Thanks! α§ʈάt̪íňέ-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 12:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Why not report him, see his talk page. He needs to be blocked. α§ʈάt̪íňέ-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 12:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) And please see here for the sockpuppet & CheckUser stuff. //roux   13:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Your recent statement on my talk page

I would like to ask why you have fraudulently accused me of edit warring. I have never been in an edit war because I have never reverted a page more than thrice except when reverting vandalism. Please see Wikipedia: Edit war before making any further accusations of edit warring. -- IRP ☎ 22:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC), modified 23:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I tagged for speedy--quite appropriately, as it was a G4 recreation. You removed it. I put it back, you re-added the pointless AFD link. Editwarring. Stop wasting peoples' time when things are obviously speedy and it has been explained to you why they are. Thanks. Bye. //roux   23:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Wasting peoples' time does not constitute Wikipedia: Edit war. I'm sure there may be an essay somewhere that advises users not to do so, however, I did nothing terribly wrong. Besides, all I did was restore the {{AfD}} tag after you replaced it with the {{DB}} tag, however, I did not remove the DB tag twice, I only removed it once, so please look at the diff before claiming that someone was edit warring. -- IRP ☎ 23:12, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

No, repeatedly reinserting something after you have been told why not is edit warring. In other news, you can stop being condescending right now, kiddo. Don't bother responding; further messages you post here will be removed on sight, seeing as you and reality don't appear to be on speaking terms. The best part is when you say you didn't remove the db tag twice. Seeing as I never said you did, one has to wonder what you're going on about. //roux   23:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I believe that this conversation may result from a misunderstanding. It's not edit warring to reinsert the tag of an open AFD on the article up for deletion, even if that article is currently tagged with speedy. Our deletion policy requires that these tags remain so long as the AfD is open. Among the reasons for this is that admins viewing CSD tags need to be aware of other factors that may determine their speedy choice. It also allows them to close out the AfD at the time if they accept the speedy, as User:SoWhy did. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Bed

Hope I didn't bore you to sleep! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

First

edit :P the_undertow ^talk 05:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Mark Kimmitt

Hey, wanted to thank you again for helping out on the MedCab case a few months ago at Mark Kimmitt. Recently the other editor User:Gregorywill has been adding information that reads in a negative (rather than NPOV) tone within the article and trying to remove items that have been included on the page (with a past discussion) calling them "self-serving". This user has also removed anything he or she claims is "unsourced" - even those things that User:Gregorywill added in the first place. I also feel that the repeated claims that I am Mark Kimmitt not only show bad faith in the process but I also take as personal attacks on me. I have been editing Wikipedia for 4 years and to claim that I am this person or have a personal bias is insulting and demeaning. Anyway you could take a look at the last few edits and maybe keep an eye on the page? I am putting a significant amount of work into just this page and cannot devote as much time to expanding and creating other articles. Also, I'd like to get another opinion just to make sure I'm being reasonable. Thanks!--Fresh (talk) 21:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh dear. I'll take a look, but probably not tonight. //roux   21:19, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much. No rush, just hoping that another set of eyes will help.--Fresh (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Recall

Just so you know, the question about Recall was highly criticized about 3 or 4 months ago. It is a question that garners opposes regardless of how the person answers it and it has not teeth. Look up the thread "adminship is dead" or something like that and you will see why everybody and their cat condemned the question.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:13, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

And? Assuming someone has a decent amount of policy knowledge and reasonable experience, the most important thing to me is whether they view the bit as 'admin for life' or 'if I fuck up, please do these things to remove me.' The fact that certain asshats oppose over it is immaterial; certain people will find anything they can in order to oppose, or indeed make things up to oppose over. e.g. "oppose per age" in Bugs' recent RFA. //roux   04:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

No the problem is that the question asks for a campaign promise that has absolutely no strength whatsoever. It doesn't determine if people see adminship as something for life or as something that can/should be revoked, but rather a meaningless question with no right answer. Take me for example, I'm the biggest proponent of systemic change to make it easier to remove the bit from people... but, I have no desire to put some artificial construct such as AOR out there... it is a system that is abused and misused---see the recent attempt on MBiz. It is also a system that leads to some pretty obscure and impossible criteria. Some fo the criteria created are just not going to happen---and it is 100% reliant upon the person who made the campaign promise to live up to it. We've had at least one admin who "promised" not keep the promise when the criteria for her removal came about. I strongly urge you too look up the discussion on why people accross the board hated that question.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 05:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Except no... the MBizanz thing worked exactly as intended: someone brought a frivolous complaint, it withered on the vine. Ironholds has done the right thing in saying "this diff is proof that I will stick to my promise, any crat can direct a steward to desysop me." Can't get around that--unless crats suddenly stop paying attention to what people request. //roux   13:50, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey Roux, I had assumed that you would be watching the RfA's that you participate on and would see the discussion that has (once again) arisen from this question, but you haven't chimed in. You might want to revisit your past questions (namely on Ironholds RfA) to the see the discussions that are going on and to defend your question.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 15:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Who said I'm not watching? I just don't particularly feel like sticking my face in a blender or becoming a target for people like Hipocrite. //roux   18:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

That works for me... I had assumed you were watching, but when you never posted, I wanted to make sure you were aware of it as it does deal with the question you'd been asking. (As an aside, I mentioned it here first because I *knew* it was going to become an issue---There is a lot of baggage to this question, and didn't want you to feel as if you were thrown into the blender unaware.)---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 15:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Nice

Regarding this... You went through a pretty solid list of deplorable acts by a brand new WP:SPA, and then in the same breath you admonish a veteran editor of 5 years and around 10,000 edits. Then you come back and point out that the editor is indeed socking (not to mention obviously POV pushing). Now, I'm all for being examined as closely as anyone else, but I should think that my reputation and my solid history of constructive contribution to Wikipedia for nearly a half a decade would invite a little more good faith. Quite frankly, if you're not and admin, and you take it upon yourself to reply to a veteran editor asking for help at the Administrator's noticeboard, you should weight your responses more accordingly. Ironically, the follow up posts (from you and others) seem to confirm what I was saying all along. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 17:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, yeah. You go to AN/I, you're going to get a spotlight on your actions too. The fact that the other guy was acting far worse doesn't mean you get a pass on your borderline poor behaviour. //roux   18:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Obama articles/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 18:20, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thread

Hi, I don't understand your reply at the admin thread. I didn't generate any drama. I was mentioned in the thread circa 6 times, so I think it is natural for me to comment on it. Rjecina, said that Ricky's mistake was that he stated that I'm not from Hungary. That's not true, as it was Rjecina who said that. I only pointed that out. Stop being so authoritative.--Bizso (talk) 18:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I replied at the thread.--Bizso (talk) 19:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't being authoritative, I was making a suggestion to prevent drama from occurring. You and Rjecina are--for whatever reason--a toxic combination. Sticking your two cents into the discussion was likely to produce more heat than light, which is why I suggested you stay away. //roux   23:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Bravotv5050

I was going to leave a message for Bravotv5050 regarding their username when I noticed that you left a similar message for them back in late January. Was that ever resolved? Thanks. -Chunky Rice (talk) 18:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Nope, the user didn't respond. I am firmly convinced that it's someone from Bravo who doesn't care that what they're doing isn't allowed. It's probably time to get an admin involved.//roux   18:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I've left them a fairly strong warning and will keep tabs on the account. If it continues to edit without addressing the username issue, I'll block it. -Chunky Rice (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Maybe this is why I'm not an admin. I would have blocked as soon as they made afew edits after the first warning. I have approximately zero patience for spammers or people with obvious COI. //roux   23:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thought about it and policy certainly allows for it. I'd just rather resolve this amicably than through blocks if it is at all possible. So, one last warning. I'm probably wasting my time, but it's my time to waste. -Chunky Rice (talk) 01:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

But I don't want to ruin Wikipedia and I am worried that I might but is the page okay.--AKM73 (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Dude, why was my article deleted? --8675EO9 (talk) 00:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks

No. No it does not matter whether he said it first. And Wikipedia is not fair. You are required to be civil. Is that clear? Do not just blindly revert this with some statement in the edit summary, engage in actual conversation to show me why I should not ask an admin to block you to prevent further attacks. //roux   00:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Isnt he also required to be civil and not personally attack me as he did? Also thank you for giving me the tip on how to do that reference thing easier, and if I seemed to disrespect you that was not my attentio-(offering hand out to shake). Because i am just going to ignore Stephshep's attempts to lure me into getting blocked.--Threeblur0 (talk) 00:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC) --Threeblur0 (talk) 00:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Roux. You have new messages at Bradp521's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

someone else needs the whois speech

User talk:98.194.197.134 is doing the same thing as the other IP did, would you mind telling him about it? Momusufan (talk) 18:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Akron Reflinks

Hello, Roux. You have new messages at Talk:Akron, Ohio.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

§hep^Talk 20:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Arguably of interest to you?

You may be interested in scanning User talk:Tznkai#Missed the point?

In this context, you may be unexpectedly gratified by Caspian blue's arguably constructive contributions at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty. --Tenmei (talk) 20:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I am simultaneously singularly uninterested in anything Caspian Blue does, and very specifically interested in keeping the hell away from his shotgun blasts of incivility and personal attacks. So, no. //roux   03:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I apologize for the unwelcome consequences which developed after my message on your talk page. It is plain that my words were a causative factor which led to the following recidivist blast from the past. In this context, no reasonable person would construe your words as a personal attack. --Tenmei (talk) 13:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

In an attempt to change tone, I've underlined three words above: "arguably constructive contributions." My intentions were overly optimistic -- wrong. I won't make this mistake again. --Tenmei (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

21:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Delivered for the WikiCup by  GARDEN  at 21:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC). Queries to my talk.