User:Good Olfactory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This user was lead counsel for Grimace in the landmark case Grimace v Barney. |
 |
This user is as Canadian as possible, under the circumstances. |
 |
This user is interested in the works of Herman Kahn but worries that he was a little bit crazy. |
GMT
+13.00 |
This user's time zone is GMT+13.00 |
|
What you are looking to find out about me can be found embedded within the source code of the userboxes on this page. The hidden meaning can be revealed using a delicate combination of sudoku and banburismus implemented on an original Polish Enigma double (check eBay). (Hint: "U"s are treated as "V"s and the value of any "Z"s and "Q"s are carried over every third pass and combined with the corresponding pass value of "K".)
[edit] Memberships
I'm not a member of any WikiProjects, but I think I'm a member of the CfD Cabal. I'm not 100% sure, though, because no one invites me to any of the meetings and I don't get the newsletter. I can't join any WikiProjects because the string in my leg is gone.
[edit] WikiProjects and categories
[edit] My Wikipedia "philosophy"
If I was uninteresting enough to be able to condense all of my opinions about things on WP by categorizing myself as some sort of "-ist" or a believer in an "-ism", I would still not do it out of pure shame.
[edit] Miscellanea
[edit] Barnstars
| barnstars |
 |
|
The Barnstar of Good Humour |
| For having one of the more unusual and amusing usernames I've come across. Oh how I love double entendres. faithless (speak) 17:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| is hereby awarded to Good Ol’factory for immense amounts of work at WP:CFD. Grutness...wha? 01:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Category Barnstar |
| I award User:Good Olfactory this barnstar for his work on fixing categories.--Lenticel (talk) 22:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Working Man's Barnstar |
| This is for your efforts on categorizing articles. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 09:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Categorisation Barnstar |
| For an eagle eye in helping to improve new categories. Thank you! Eustress (talk) 00:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
The Categorisation Barnstar |
| I'm speechless. You know your way around the category tree. — MaggotSyn 22:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Socratic Barnstar |
| Excellent closing statement on the non-violent fps CFD, very well-thought out and delivered. cheers, –xeno (talk) 13:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Original Barnstar |
| For your excellent continuing work on Categories for discussion, and above all, a willingness to put in extra work to fix any resultant mistakes. Cyde Weys 23:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| For helping out with implementing this. Kbdank71 13:57, 6 March 2009 (UTC) |
 |
|
100,000 Edits |
| I, Bugboy52.4, award you for reaching 100,000 edits according to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits generated 11:45 pm, 24 February 2009. Keep up the good work!________________________________________________________________ |
|
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| Given to Good Olfactory for his amazing work in changing links on over 200 pages to keep the wiki running smoothly, not to mention all the other wiki-gnomery that goes on! Thanks for all you do! You rock! Intothewoods29 (talk) 05:47, 6 May 2009 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| For wisdom and courage in dealing with bully whose threats go well beyond mere heated words. Americasroof (talk) 16:47, 28 May 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| For responding with resounding positivity to the ANI post about West Ridge Academy. Props to you! Exxolon (talk) 16:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC) |
 |
|
Your Opinion is More Important than You Think Barnstar |
| For being an editor whose opinion about complex and difficult topics can be trusted to be accurate and clear-cut, allowing others to improve their own edits.--ARTEST4ECHO talk 16:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Editor's Barnstar |
| For your diligent and outstanding contribution in editing the Mormonism_and_evolution article. I congratulate you on your hard and endless work. Thank you for the great article, and for improving Wikipedia. CABEGOD 23:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC) |
 |
|
The Indiana Barnstar |
| Thank you for your effort categorizing Indiana politicians. Its a tedious task and I am glad someone has done it! —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 12:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC) |
|
[edit] Museum of Stuffed Insults: the only price of admission is not complaining to me on my talk page that the museum exists
| Museum of Stuffed Insults |
- I have engaged in "grotesque" and "revolting trivializations of child molestation".
- Similarly, I have "dismissed the reality of pedophilia".
- I have engaged in "grotesque trivialization" of the experiences of Holocaust survivors.
- I am either ignorant or anti-Semitic, but because we assume good faith on WP—probably just ignorant.
- If I am educated, my soul is in need of prayers.
- I engage in a "mild form of Holocaust denial".
- I am "disturbingly aggressive".
- I have a "bizarrely twisted mind that renders [me] of questionable use as an editor of Wikipedia".
- I generally engage in "problematic nominations" (P.S.: remember what I said about pedophiles earlier?)
- In summary of the above, my behaviour is noted for: "Holocaust minimization, lies, ... defense of pedophilia, insensitive jokes about the Holocauset [sic], obsessive attacks of people who ctiticize [me], and ... threats [against others]".
- I do not have "any clue about German history".
- I am a "crappy sycophant".
- I've no idea about the heartache Christopher Cross went through before he realized some success with the release of "Sailing".
- My actions on Wikipedia result in aiding "corrupt and corrupting politicians". (Update: five months later, I'm reminded that I "sided with corruption".)
- I am a sock-puppet of Snocrates and/or G77; or definitely Snocrates.
- This collection is not making WP a nicer place.
- I make "death threats": [2], [3], [4], [5], [6].
- I have "well-known biases in regard to ethnicity, and Jewish identity in particular".
- My comments are "degrading, insulting, and offensive", etc.
- I removed a claim from my userpage that I attended Harvard University when someone asked me to provide proof. (Actually, I removed it because I was getting tired of users calling me an Ivy-League-candy-ass. (And I got tired of people asking me to look something up for them in Widener.) But if I didn't really attend Harvard, I wish someone would let the student loan collectors at Citibank know that.)
- I am "motivated by medieval hatred and malice towards anyone who actually believes what Joseph Smith, Jr. taught"; I am "a vicious criminal"; an "anti-Mormon jerk".
- This list is a "pointless museum of stuffed sentences".
- I need to "stop believing that [I'm] God".
- "All the arbs and CUs know [that I am] a banned user". See also [7].
- I have a "gigantic ego and sense of self-worth".
- I "might think that [I am] a very important person being able to control categories, but it is all very pathetic, the activity of a pawn".
- By asking another user if they would be willing to invoke CSD G7, I participated in a "an open and shut example of a usurpation of admin powers". (And wow, it wasn't even noticed until 9 months later.)
- My actions imply "a flippant disregard for the sensibilities and differences" of LGBT people of Puerto Rican descent.
- Ha, ha, ha—not really an insult, but a joke about my user name—oh, where do they come up with them? (Wipes moisture from eye.)
- I "stalk [others'] contributions for petty, unrelated items ostensibly to score cheap points".
- I have an "insidious guise of innocence [and] obviously [am] completely incapable of seeing [my]self in any light that would call for any inkling of self-insight, or indeed self-criticism, to arise".
- I experience "obvious childlike pleasure in getting personal or pushing people's buttons, the ultimate testimony to which is th[is] gaudy trophy gallery".
- I am "capricious", "little", and "smug".
- "malicious" behaviour; acting "obstinate", etc.
- Why don't I "just admit [I] know nothing about the topic" of "Swiss Lutherans"?
- It looks like I have "persistently bad jugdment without any ulterior agenda" but "it is hard to tell" because it might have something to do with some other issue from a few years back that makes the whole thing "ironic".
- Am I "stupid"? I took certain actions "simply because [I] felt [I] needed to throw around [my] weight as an admin. This is an appalling case of abuse of privileges. [User] do[es] not have the patience to take [my] sort of armchair-bully through a full wikidrama, but [he or she] will have [me] know that [he or she] think[s my] 'contributions' are detrimental not just to the project but also to the community spirit."
- I'm "a joke".
- I "boggle[ the] mind with incredibly stupid ideas implemented without any discussion whatsoever and almost impossible to fix [sic] because they invest hundreds of edits in creating faits accomplis".
- My insulting wordplay apparently falls below the intelligence standards set by other admins. Mine is mere "schoolboy vulgarity".
- "Being an admin does NOT make [me] god ..."
- I "have a long history of refusing to Get It ... [I] do not even understand the meaning of the word 'eponymous'. [I should] do [my]self a favour and get a dictionary, and then spend some time reading instead of editing."
- User "won't try to convince [me] that [I] a[m] not helping the project by [my] efforts, as [I] a[m] clearly unable to follow such explanations."
- I do not want to listen [and] do not want to rethink [my] approach even if it is painfully stupid.
|
[edit] ANI complaints about me
[edit] Some quotes
[edit] Categories for discussion precedents
My personal record of categories for discussion "precedents" for deletion are at /CFD and the ones for renaming are at /CFR. Feel free to use them.
[edit] Unofficial "CFD-is-broken" tracker (2009–2010)
| unofficial "CFD-is-broken" tracker |
| Month |
No. CFDs[1] |
No. DRVs[2] |
% total[3] |
E[4] |
RL/C[5] |
SC/M[6] |
% "unproblematic" of DRV total[7] |
OT[8] |
RL/I[9] |
NC[10] |
% "problematic" of DRV total[11] |
% "problematic" of CFD total[12] |
% "clearly wrong" of CFD total[13] |
| Jan 09 |
538 |
1 |
0.19% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Feb 09 |
410 |
3 |
0.73% |
2 |
0 |
1 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Mar 09 |
448 |
3 |
0.67% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
33.3% |
1 |
1 |
0 |
66.7% |
0.45% |
0.22% |
| Apr 09 |
493 |
1 |
0.20% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
100% |
0.20% |
0.20% |
| May 09 |
439 |
2 |
0.46% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
50.0% |
0 |
1 |
0 |
50.0% |
0.23% |
0% |
| Jun 09 |
410 |
6 |
1.46% |
3 |
0 |
1 |
66.7% |
0 |
1 |
1 |
33.3% |
0.49% |
0% |
| Jul 09 |
406 |
5 |
1.23% |
4 |
0 |
0 |
80.0% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
20.0% |
0.25% |
0.25% |
| Aug 09 |
480 |
5 |
1.04% |
0 |
0 |
1 |
20.0% |
2 |
0 |
2 |
80.0% |
0.83% |
0.42% |
| Sep 09 |
521 |
3 |
0.58% |
2 |
1 |
0 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Oct 09 |
594 |
4 |
0.67% |
1 |
2 |
0 |
75.0% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
25.0% |
0.17% |
0.17% |
| Nov 09 |
377 |
3 |
0.80% |
2 |
0 |
1 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Dec 09 |
420 |
1 |
0.24% |
0 |
0 |
1 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| 2009 TOTAL |
5536 |
37 |
0.69% |
17 |
3 |
5 |
67.6% |
6 |
3 |
3 |
32.4% |
0.22% |
0.11% |
| Jan 10 |
404 |
2 |
0.50% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
50% |
0 |
0 |
1 |
50% |
0.25% |
0% |
| Feb 10 |
488 |
4 |
0.82% |
2 |
0 |
1 |
75% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
25% |
0.20% |
0.20% |
| Mar 10 |
497 |
4 |
0.80% |
2 |
0 |
1 |
75% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
25% |
0.20% |
0.20% |
| Apr 10 |
454 |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0% |
0% |
| May 10 |
393 |
4 |
1.02% |
0 |
1 |
0 |
25% |
1 |
1 |
1 |
75% |
0.76% |
0.25% |
| Jun 10 |
505 |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0% |
0% |
| Jul 10 |
684 |
1 |
0.15% |
1 |
0 |
0 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Aug 10 |
413 |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0% |
0% |
| Sep 10 |
416 |
5 |
1.20% |
3 |
0 |
2 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Oct 10 |
350 |
0 |
0% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0 |
0 |
0 |
— |
0% |
0% |
| Nov 10 |
392 |
2 |
0.51% |
1 |
1 |
0 |
100% |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
| Dec 10 |
397 |
3 |
0.76% |
2 |
0 |
0 |
66.7% |
0 |
1 |
0 |
33.3% |
0.25% |
0% |
| 2010 TOTAL |
5393 |
25 |
0.46% |
12 |
2 |
4 |
72% |
3 |
2 |
2 |
28% |
0.13% |
0.06% |
| 2009–10 TOTAL |
10,929 |
62 |
0.57% |
29 |
5 |
9 |
69.4% |
9 |
5 |
5 |
30.6% |
0.17% |
0.08% |
[edit] Explanatory notes
- ^ Total number of discussions at CFD. The number of categories discussed may be significantly higher, since often multiple categories are discussed within one discussion.
- ^ Total number of category-related discussions at DRV.
- ^ Percentage of CFDs that resulted in a DRV. Formula: (No. CFDs ÷ No. DRVs) x 100. (This figure is necessarily a bit imprecise on a month-by-month basis, since obviously not every category-related DRV involves a CFD that was discussed in the same month as the DRV. However, over time, these monthly variations won't make a difference to the overall total percentages calculated.)
- ^ Number of DRVs that endorsed the CFD close.
- ^ Number of DRVs that resulted in a relisting of the category and the result after the relisting was closed was consistent with the original CFD close.
- ^ Number of DRVs that were speedily closed, closed as moot, withdrawn, or were otherwise inappropriate.
- ^ Percentage of DRVs that resulted in "endorsed", "relist / confirmed", or "speedy close / moot". Formula: ((endorsed + relist/confirmed + speedy close/moot) ÷ No. DRVs) x 100
- ^ Number of DRVs that resulted in an overturning of the CFD result. Such CFD closes are classified as "problematic" and "clearly wrong" for the purposes of this table.
- ^ Number of DRVs that resulted in a relisting of the category and the result after the relisting was closed was inconsistent with the original CFD close. Such CFD closes are classified as "problematic" for the purposes of this table.
- ^ Number of DRVs that resulted in no consensus in the DRV discussion. Such CFD closes are classified as "problematic" for the purposes of this table.
- ^ Percentage of DRVs that resulted in "overturned", "relist / inconsistent", or "no consensus". Formula: ((OT + RL/I + NC) ÷ No. DRVs) x 100
- ^ Percentage of all CFDs that ultimately resulted in a DRV of "overturned", "relist / inconsistent", or "no consensus". Formula: ((OT + RL/I + NC) ÷ No. CFDs) x 100
- ^ Percentage of all CFDs that ultimately resulted in a DRV of "overturned". Formula: (OT ÷ No. CFDs) x 100
|
|
This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Good_Olfactory. |
.svg){kind=small}
