User talk:Seb az86556/archive40

My Bad

Thank you for the notification concerning my talk page edit summary. Can any Admin remove it please? Kaz 21:20, 2 October 2012 (UTC) And is there any way can I get a block on my talk page from ever getting it edited by non-Admins ever again please? I have suffered my fair share of harassment. Kaz 21:22, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

talk pages are protected only in exceptional circumstances; you can try requesting it, but I don't see any reason. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

and "stalker" is also a personal attack. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:33, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for chiming in!...

It seems like you are an experienced editor. Thank you so much for chiming in into this mess that is ongoing for the past month or so regarding Karaites and these so-called "Crimean Karaites." I have written a series of remarks and objections to this random, partial, religiously motivated rewriting of history, and no experienced editor to this date has reacted to the series of warnings I have posted along the way. The two edits you just did show you know what we are talking about here, and you are not going to be misled by false allegations. I have a pretty good of the historical issues, but my WP editing/administrative knowledge is still much weaker than I would like, especially to meet the enormous challenge that is being represented by this under-the-radar, stealth threat to WP's historical integrity. I am really grateful for any assistance you can provide. Regards, warshy ^talk 22:05, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I am not particularly knowledgeable about this topic, but there clearly is some hard-headed disruption going on. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 22:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd say it is hard to fathom and to really describe in short, accurate sentences the amount of religiously motivated re-writing of history that has been going on in this area. I wish I was good enough at the art of "diffs" to show you how I warned about all this over a month ago, and now, today, this cancer really started to spread beyond my technical ability to contain it, or to really cope with it in a technically satisfactory manner. Unfortunately, I still have a lot to learn about the "art of the diff" here in WP to be able to do that in a couple of minutes. I think the adjective you used above is a very appropriate, and it does show that you know what I am talking about here. Thanks again for chiming in, as I was starting to consider just 'leaving WP to the vultures.' warshy ^talk 22:17, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

B. Hussein Soetoro

Why do you find this username inappropriate? [1] NTox · talk 02:46, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind on this one. I've been informed. NTox · talk 03:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pointy....

With regards to [2]: I understand where you are coming from, but see WP:POINT. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:10, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't. Unless you want to remove the entire section. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:11, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The original question is not particularly well stated, but has already collected a number of useful replies explaining e.g. how a mistaken impression of rudeness could arise. Your question is much more inflammatory, is unlikely to produce similarly useful answers, and runs afoul of WP:ARBR&I discretionary sanctions. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I completely disagree; the initial post is blatant racism (albeit cloaked in polite language and some weird episode-derived theories) and the people politely answering it are either too naive or too whatever to notice it. My question "why would you even answer that?" didn't ring a bell either. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:18, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So if somebody lets his dog poop on the street, do you gain anything by squatting down and leaving a bigger one? Why don't you explain your concern directly? If people are as naive as you think, they might assume you are a racist now. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just did. Now, are you willing to chime in and do something about the remaining racist post, or are you here to defend it? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:23, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

racist header

I suggest you modify "why are indians so rude" to "why am I offended by the personal interactions of certain Indians" or something similar. See WP:MOS re neutrality in section heads. (BTW, I would simply have hatted the discussion, but too many of the usual suspects have provided their "answers".)μηδείς (talk) 02:09, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

racist header

I suggest you modify "why are indians so rude" to "why am I personally offended by the actions of certain Indians" or something similarly neutral. See WP:NPOV. (BTW, I would simply have hatted the discussion, but too many of the usual suspects have provided their "answers".) μηδείς (talk) 02:13, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Crimean Karaites

Hello, your input would be appreciated more on the subject of the name and content of the article again which has arisen again here Talk:Crimean Karaites#Turkic Karaites - Edit request. Having read through the disputes thoroughly, I am getting the feeling that really this is all about a certain Ukrainian user who is going to maximum cry-wolf efforts to try and ensure that the article does not lose the "Crimean" label. Hope you will stay involved. Budo (talk) 11:24, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. I'll be observing the situation. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 20:07, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

--Jethro B 00:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi Seb az86556. I noticed that you opened a successful sockpuppet investigation against User:Mangoeater1000 pertaining his/her edits regarding NYU Poly-related articles. I opened a new one and would appreciate if you could weight with your experiences if possible. Thank you and regards. -- Marco Guzman, Jr Talk 20:58, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Marco Guzman, Jr

please block user Marco Guzman, Jr because

1. Desperately trying to promote California State Polytechnic University, Pomona by citing self-aggrandizing, self-hosted webpage of CalPoly http://www.dsa.csupomona.edu/visitors/Distinction.asp which clearly has wrong info(it say there are 9 true polytechnic in the USA, in reality there are more than 10) in reputed colleges' wiki pages such as http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Rensselaer_Polytechnic_Institute http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Institute_of_Technology_(United_States)&action=history

2. keeps adding unsourced promo materials to all California State Polytechnic University, Pomona articles, lowering their quality. Sometimes the sources don't agree with the content. I just fixed the CalPoly engineering college article. This is how the article looked before I fixed it http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Cal_Poly_Pomona_College_of_Engineering&oldid=515273265 This is just one example. He included academic boosterism in all California State Polytechnic University, Pomona articles

3. I think most of these user's IP addresses are socks of Marco Guzman, Jr http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Cal_Poly_Pomona_College_of_Engineering&action=history

4. Marco Guzman, Jr and his socks create pages like this http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/List_of_Cal_Poly_Pomona_presidents which are not allowed in wiki and is supposed to be merged with the college's wiki page

You misunderstood the warning. Seb az86556 is not an admin and cannot actually block users. All Wikipedia users may place the warning template to encourage users to act/edit more appropriately. If you feel there is sufficiant evidence of a sock, please use Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations.--Amadscientist (talk) 04:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Crimean Karaites

Hi Seb, I left a reply to you on Talk:Crimean Karaites on 15:00, 11 October 2012 and am waiting for your feedback. Best wishes. Budo (talk) 13:36, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know I am still waiting for your response at Talk:Crimean Karaites and by the way I requested on the [Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Request_deletion_of_misleading_edit_summary|Admin notice board] that someone delete your last talk page edit summary. I don't know how you thought I'd do such a thing to you? :( Budo (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

it says revert to not revert by. And you don't have to notify me every time you give a response to what I post on talkpages; I'm observing it, and if I think I have something to contribute, I'll chime in. thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 10:34, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I can see now it does say "to", thank you for that. I hope you know I have no bad feeling towards you and vice versa as a result of that misunderstanding. Budo (talk) 16:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Self revert on You didn't build that

I'm going to ask you to self revert your undo. If you want to argue for including the content, then open a discussion on the talk page. The IPs revert was clearly disruptive based on the edit summary, and his other edit clearly indicates that he's one of the banned editors under WP:ARBR&I sanctions. That he reverted me for "vandalism" immediately after a content free comment on Talk:Race and intelligence is precisely the sort of shenanigans that these editors engage in. See amendment 3 for further details. aprock (talk) 18:31, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't indicated whom you suspect; file an SPI, wait for the CU-result. Simply reverting by claiming that an IP is that of a banned user ain't gonna fly with me. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 18:42, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And you haven't given any content based rationale for including the content. As you appear to not be interested in discussing the content, I've gone ahead and restored the original edit. aprock (talk) 01:42, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, you have been reverted again. As a courtesy, I remind you that the article is under probation. You are presently headed for a block. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 04:15, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article probation on You didn't build that

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, You didn't build that, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/2012 Presidential Campaign/Log. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. --v/r - T P 18:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Duh, I know. Read the post above this one. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 18:10, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just crossing "I"s and dotting "T"s.--v/r - T P 18:14, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually looking forward to your answer...

...on WP:ANI. You're not usually that rude. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I'm not. Please close that thread. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not closing it - kinda need to know why you simply didn't reply to the editor when they asked a simple question; twice. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:06, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing to say. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 22:07, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why not simply explain why you a) reverted the change and b) refused to tell them why - you do have a responsibility to explain your reversions if asked. I pretty much opened the door for a nice close, if you take the time to reply (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:09, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am replying. To you. Not to numbers. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 22:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So reply to me in ANI now :-) (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:27, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am following; you're doing a good job speaking for me there. I am simply not in the mood to deal with this right now, lest I really piss off some people. OK? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 22:29, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]