User talk:Salvio giuliano/Archive 39

Trouted

Whack!

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: because your user page asked me to. And the pixies were egging me on. -- role^player 16:17, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I stand trouted...

Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 16:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

		Happy 2012 !!!
		Dear Salvio, May the Year to Come Bring You Great Happiness. Very Best Wishes, Super Mario Man 02:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion

Hello. There is currently a discussion at ANI regarding a matter in which you have been involved. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C04:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

mail

Hello, Salvio giuliano. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 11:58, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your request on my talk page

I did strike my comments as you requested here. But I am curious: Why did you not ask User: Nobody Ent to strike his baseless accusations against User:Deb that she implied that editors were "stupid or lying" [1]? --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 14:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because I wasn't online... I spent my New Year's Day away from my computer and I'm now catching up... [By the way, thanks for striking your comment, it's much appreciated!] Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 14:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Al right, but you are online now. Could you ask User:Nobody Ent to strike his baseless accusation against Deb? --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 15:38, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mistakenly thought you were referring to the bits that had already been stricken, I'm sorry. I've now left a message on his talk page too. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:52, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Salvio. --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your request on my talk page

Thanks. I've replied on my talk page. Leaky Caldron 14:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. If he had not been an Admin. (who should know better) I would have left it. There is a discussion on his talk page where I explained why his question was, in my opinion, inappropriately worded. Leaky Caldron 15:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've read it; now let's see Boing's reply... My aim would be to try and get you two to talk to each other and not at each other, because I consider you both great editors and I believe it was just a bad case of reciprocal misunderstanding... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:21, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the contentious bit out of respect to your request and the difficult job you have on this. Leaky Caldron 16:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 16:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Interview: The Gardner interview

News and notes: Things bubbling along as Wikimedians enjoy their holidays

WikiProject report: Where are they now? Part III

Featured content: Ghosts of featured content past, present, and future

Arbitration report: New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

Clerking

Hello Salvio. I noticed quite a few redactions from various editors when I checked the Malleus evidence talk page this morning, and after looking at their talk pages I see why. I just wanted to drop by and offer you a sincere thank you for raising the level of discourse and encouraging people to set aside unnecessarily provocative and confrontational phrasings. Clerking seems to me like it might be a somewhat thankless job, but in your case certainly thanks are due. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 17:09, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words, 28bytes! I really appreciate them! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please strike my evidence, or do whatever is customary. I am no longer pursuing the matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for your message. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 16:59, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know that I have posted on the evidence talk page of this case; if you could ensure that the post does not go unnoticed, that would be great. Thanks, Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clerical help

Rather than expending your time to break apart threaded discussion (I know it is the convention, but the conversation becomes harder to follow), could you have a look at the substantial issue I raised about Pedro? I feel guilty about making you clean up my threads. If you stop, I will do it myself. Many thanks. Jehochman ^Talk 14:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've hatted the conversation and left a message on Pedro's talk page. That was clearly inappropriate and a blatant personal attack; let's see what Pedro's reply is. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 14:50, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. If any of my comments need formatting, moving or refactoring, please ask me to do it and save your time. Jehochman ^Talk 15:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. And next time I'll be glad to ask you. Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Graffitti

What is the big red X on your user page? Do you know its there? Is it graffitti or did you spill red paint? Just curious...Ive never seen that before. Buster Seven Talk 17:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reaper Eternal (talk · contribs) came up with it, though we stole the design. HurricaneFan 25 — 17:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What he said.

Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Add me to that list!

— Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 07:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hodwy Cymru! Long time no see! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 13:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeahh! Took some time off Wikipedia after getting back to the States because I was so overwhelmed with school! Things have quieted down (well, a bit), so I'm baaaack

17:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Glad things have calmed down a bit, though I'm gladder (eww) to se you back! Now let's get back to work...

Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 18:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Salvio giuliano. You have new messages at Calabe1992's talk page.
Message added 15:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Calabe 1992 15:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Salvio giuliano. You have new messages at Arunsingh16's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Salvio giuliano. You have new messages at DoverGwiki362's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

User:Ikonoblast

Support appreciated, thanks - I was trying to be as lenient and uninvolved as I can, because I work in an admin capacity on a number of India-related articles -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Ikonoblast was behaving disruptively and had to be blocked! Besides, your work as an admin in that general area is both incredibly needed and always professional. Personally, I try to keep an eye on India-related articles, but sadly I don't have enough time... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 20:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grateful for those words of support too, thanks - and even half an eye for half an hour is welcome any time :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will not stand

Please review [2]. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was already about to write Pedro a short note...

I really appreciate you chose to ask a clerk to intervene! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 21:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Double-checking

Hi Salvio, I was wanting to make sure that I didn't place a comment in an inappropriate place concerning the current ArbCom Civility (Malleus) case. Is this the correct place for stating observations? Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 03:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it is a general comment on the case, you can place it there, but I fear it'll get very little attention; so, it would not be inappropriate, but, instead, a bit superfluous, perhaps. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 14:51, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. In that case would the following be appropriate for the evidence page?

I feel that some of the evidence presented is off the mark.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 16:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it believe this comment would be appropriate on the evidence page. Please note however that this is my personal opinion... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 17:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting observation, and definitely worth noting as evidence. However, may I suggest that the term "strawman argument" (misrepresenting an opponent's position, then arguing against that) is not particularly accurate here? "Off-base" perhaps?

In my own view, the relevance of variations in English language usage is clear from the extensive way they has been discussed from multiple viewpoints. Consequently, the issue may have influenced editors and admins in their comments and actions, through perceptions or misperceptions, irrespective of the nationality of the editors themselves.

I agree with you that views centered on "blam[ing] Americans" are inappropriate, and would hope such views are marginal, and opposed by the vast majority of reasonable editors. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, I recommend taking care that you do not yourself construct a straw man argument in response! All the best, Geometry guy 21:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pleased to see this evidence has now been presented. I originally stopped by here to encourage Salvio in his commendable clerk work: so, Salvio, please continue your excellent efforts to keep all of the RfArb pages on track, moving or hatting comments accordingly. I have been very impressed by your politeness and tenacity. Geometry guy 00:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I must say, when this case opened, I was a bit worried things would turn ugly, but all participants have been on their best behaviour so far. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 18:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A thank-you

(edit conflict)?-Thanks for watching over me. Sorry that vandal is so persistent against you. It got two others to attend to my talk page very helpfully and I've thanked them. Maybe I can take some heat off for you, since this kind of thing no longer matters to me. Let him vandalise all he wants, you have much more to lose so I'll be his target a while. Djathinkimacowboy^(yell) 04:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've left the above so you can see what happened. I tried to leave this post, the computer hung up a good while, and now look at it. Is this something someone else is doing to us? Djathinkimacowboy^(yell) 04:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not having any issues, but something obviously is wrong here. Calabe 1992 04:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right, Calabe1992, that's what I mean- no other problems anywhere else. But here, bang. Poor Salvio, this creepy "editor" really has an ax to grind. Djathinkimacowboy^(yell) 05:06, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what happened here, I'm not the most computer literate person around.

Regarding our friend the vandal, you're welcome. I've got your page on my watchlist, so when I'm online I can catch him quite quickly. And I want to thank you for proposing to be his target for a while! I really appreciate it, but don't worry, it's not necessary. He doesn't bother me: I block and, if he perseveres, I just protect my talk page. You know the old adage, sticks and stones...

Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 14:59, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This vandal should be blocked permanently. Looking at your page history it's clear you've been harassed beyond belief. Is there any way of blocking or tracing him ArmadilloEater (talk) 15:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, ArmadilloEater. This was a tough decision for me to raise the issue, but what about a range block for the vandal? Clearly, not being an admin, I don't know if I am on track, but if there's to be any hope... or else I'd recommend indefblocking.--Djathinkimacowboy ^{vandals' playground} 06:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, see he's been up to his tricks again this morning, trolling both Djathinkimacowboy and Salvio Giuliano, this guy is a serious jerk and needs stopping immediately. I'd suggest a range block and something that stops him from impersonating respected editors. ArmadilloEater (talk) 10:09, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is this??

Salvio, firstly let me thank you for covering my back, with all the weird vandalism flying round. I'm wondering about this[3] (I've never seen a diff that states "You cannot view this diff because one or both of the revisions have been removed from the public archives. Details can be found in the deletion log for this page.") and this[4]. Here[5] I managed to find some explanation... what's going on here? Favonian, I am CC'ing you with this post to my good protector Salvio.Djathinkimacowboy (talk) 04:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)Wikipedia:Revdelete. If it was really offensive or insulting, or too disruptive, it's hidden from public view using revdelete. The username can be hidden as a part of that.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I certainly have no problem with standard Wikipedia practice- I only question whether it is a wise thing to hide this kind of awful act. How can we track the perpetrators if we are hiding things? Besides, as for me, there's nothing I haven't heard before.Djathinkimacowboy ^{vandals' playground} 05:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admins can always view it. After all, they are the ones making the blocks of the vandals.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:20, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. But they are not always free enough to note these things in the first place- it is up to the vigilant editor to assist with that part. Salvio, chime in when you can. I wish my comments to be directed at you and not to be holding conversations with another editor on your talk page. And please, please do not misunderstand me... but I do not like the idea of admins doing that kind of unilateral action on my talk page. I have a right to see what that vandal wrote. It's not like I'm going to cyberslit his cyberthroat! --Djathinkimacowboy ^{vandals' playground} 07:00, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper is one of my talk page watchers, he was contributing with some helpful piece of advice, considering I was not immediately available.

That said, Jasper's correct; when an edit is revdeleted, admins can still view it; and, since only particularly disruptive edits are revdeleted, the idea is that the target of the attack will not mind it it is redacted. In this case, our friend created a username attacking you and left a nasty attack on your userpage. Nothing worth seeing, really... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Salvio giuliano. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Help

Hello Salvio, I noticed that you placed a template on User talk:Clignett73. Right now I use {{Wel..come}} to advice new users. Can you please tell me how can I use the template you used as I find it very useful? Thanks in advance. Cheers AKS (talk) 11:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's my welcome template of choice,

, to post it on someone's talk page, you just have to type {{subst:WelcomeMenu}}. Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 11:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orban

Hi, why did you take off Viktor Orban from the list of the modern dictators in Europe? He is a really dictator, the whole world press is full with this fact. Best regards varcsabika (Csaba Varga from Hungary) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Varcsabika (talk • contribs)

Actually, I did not remove Orban's entry from the article; I merely semi-protected the page, because many users kept inserting him in without having discussed the issue. If you believe Orban should be added, you should please start a thread on the article's talk page and try to get a consensus to do so. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 14:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, it will be never consensus, when the party of Orban (Fidesz) can remove the name of their leader from the list. Orban is dictator in Europe for the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/06/hungary-democratic-dictator-europe), The Economist (http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2010/12/hungarys_media_law), The NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/13/opinion/hungarys-backward-slide.html?_r=1&ref=viktororban, and all of the leader media in the world. The ZDF mad made a film for children to show how the government of Orban build down the democracy in Hungary http://videa.hu/videok/nagyvilag/zdf-magyarazza-az-alkotmanyt-alkotmanyozas-kormanyellenes-tuntetes-Nkd7sgWCd97wsXuo . Finantial Times: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/306d5342-36db-11e1-b741-00144feabdc0.html

Please do not hate me; help needed Fedora

I wish to ask whether you'd help me monitor the article, especially since you helped so much with Porkpie hat. No one caught this massive edit[6] until I saw it and fixed it. It was not too bad in a couple of its points, but the rest was unconstructive and immature. I need help with this, because the other two editors who like giving me a hard time don't seem to care when anybody else edits this! Please assist from time to time?--Djathinkimacowboy ^{vandals' playground} 15:34, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article is on my watchlist and I'm keeping an eye on it; I'll try to provide as much help as I can, although I cannot really guarantee much, as I'm rather busy both on-wiki and off-wiki... Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated and it is OK. That means nothing compared to the problem I have, see sec. below which was supposed to be a happy thing.--Djathinkimacowboy ^{vandals' playground} 16:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]