User talk:Fluffernutter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I'm tired. I'm tired of feeling like the community runs on high-octane rage and like every policy or content discussion is all that stands between us and the end of the world. I'm sick of seeing people talk to each other as if they're not speaking to another human being, because typing words on a page makes it so much easier to say things you wouldn't say to someone's face. I'm exhausted from trying, in a tiny way in a few tiny corners, to make things suck here a smidgen less, and mostly feeling like I've failed, when I can muster the energy to try at all.

This isn't a retirement message. I'm still here, and I'm still editing in my usual sporadic fashion. But I'm tired of the bad, and I want to hear the good. I would so, so appreciate it if anyone who stumbles across this message could leave me a note telling me what you love about Wikipedia. What you do or the community does that doesn't feel draining. What's gone right lately, for you and your work here, or for the project(s) themselves. Tell me something good that came out of your time here. Remind me why we put our energy into this thing in the first place. Show me somewhere on-wiki where people completely failed to be terrible to each other even though the chance was there. Show me editors being valued without being showered in the shiny baubles that make this feel a game of trinket collection instead of a collaboration.

Remind me of the good, guys. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:24, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Important Notice: Your 2013 Arbitration Committee Election vote[edit]

Greetings. Because you have already cast a vote for the 2013 Arbitration Committee Elections, I regret to inform you that due to a misconfiguration of the SecurePoll we've been forced to strike all votes and reset voting. This notice is to inform you that you will need to vote again if you want to be counted in the poll. The new poll is located at this link. You do not have to perform any additional actions other than voting again. If you have any questions, please direct them at the election commissioners. --For the Election Commissioners, v/r, TParis

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon" at Queens Library! Friday December 6[edit]

Queens Library
Please join Queens Open History Edit-a-Thon on December 6, 2013!
Everyone gather at Queens Library to further Wikipedia's local outreach
for borough articles on the history and the communities.
Drop-ins welcome 10am-7pm!--Pharos (talk) ~~~~~

Saturday: NYC Art And Feminism Wikipedia Editathon[edit]

Jefferson Market Public Library
Please join Wikipedia "Art and Feminism Editathon" @ Eyebeam on Saturday February 1, 2014,
an event aimed at collaboratively expanding Wikipedia articles covering Art and Feminism, and the biographies of women artists!

There are also regional events that day in Brooklyn, Westchester County, and the Hudson Valley.
--Pharos (talk)

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon[edit]

Upcoming Saturday events - March 1: Harlem History Editathon and March 8: NYU Law Editathon

You are invited to join upcoming Wikipedia "Editathons", where both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on a selected theme, on the following two Saturdays in March:

I hope to see you there! Pharos (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by removing your name from this list.)

GOCE February blitz wrapup[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/February 2014 wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Out of seven people who signed up for this blitz, all copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we removed 16 articles from the requests queue. Hope to see you at the March drive! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by

References in portals[edit]

I see that you've begun fixing the reference errors in portals - the start of a big job! I tried to get a discussion started about this at Wikipedia talk:Portal guidelines#References in portals, your opinions would be welcome. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer, John of Reading. I've commented there. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 23:44, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

iDM is me, iDangerMouse, Cisco98, iDM|Away, and iDM|Peshawar currently since I am there[edit]

Hi... derp drama Danger^Mouse (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Derp evading ban on Wikipedia, Danger^Mouse (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2014[edit]

RE: Your note on JHunterJ's page [edit]


I'm not looking for conflict, but I do have to say I'm dissapointed in your note on JHuterJ's page. The MOS page is covered by a discretionary sanction, but it's not the sexology sanction, therefore the note on his page implying that I was violating that sanction again was incorrect. I've placed a note on his page explaining that as well. Once again, you're using a sledgehammer to swat a fly. You'll note I've spelled out my reasons for removing the section (in violation of WP:BLP and WP:V) I've also noted the reason for both reverts (any item failing WP:BLP can be reverted on sight , and it's noted as an exemption to 3rr (or even 0rr).) As both are policy, this wouldn't fall under discretionary sanctions. It's merely enforcing policy, nothing more.  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh   18:35, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Kosh, I was quite careful to point out to JHunter that I hadn't examined the situation and was simply advising him of a previous sanction from the case he'd warned you about (and which I'd only noticed because he logged it on the case page). I'm sure you feel you were acting according policy, just as I'm sure he feels he was. I have to say, though, that watching you immediately return to exactly the behavior that got you sanctioned six months ago - right down to issuing threats and ultimatums to admins who attempt to get you to tone it down - makes me think that JHunter's warning-only approach was, if anything, too lax to handle the situation. Please consider that you may honestly be misunderstanding what is and isn't disruptive in the topic area of Chelsea Manning/trans issues. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:11, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I didn't immediately return. A few days elapsed before I touched Chelsea Manning's page, and then only the talk page (Just so we're clear, I pretty much banned myself from making any change on the Chelsea Manning article relating to gender , I would only remove obvious vandalism up to May 31. I would discuss on the talk page, but per Floquenbeam's request, if three users in good standing tell me to drop the stick, I drop the stick - I wasn't going to make that public, but none the less, that's what I've imposed on myself to show goodwill (not just talk about it )  :) . See you around  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh   19:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Tech News: 2014-16[edit]

07:18, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

My topic ban[edit]

You issued that after I'd agreed to drop my issue on the MOS page, so that's a bit late, don't you think ? Either way, I won't rant and rave on your page about it, nor try to get it removed. I disagree with your ban, but at this time, it is what it is.  KoshVorlon. We are all Kosh   16:23, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Custom templates[edit]

Hello! If you (or any stalker) would be so kind, please take a look and see if a bit of copy editing would help. Feel free to make any changes you wish while trying to keep the purpose the same.

Here is the page I made to organize my thoughts: User:Anna Frodesiak/Yellow sandbox. In the table, I could use your opinions on items 4, 5, and 9 regarding coiusername template vs. ublock. Please see the bottom where the templates and descriptions are. The items are separated with horrid black bars. They are there to separate the items because some templates have a heading, which makes everything confusing.

Here is a list of the templates themselves:

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:04, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Stalkers and Fluffernutter: in a nutshell, this is about addressing two things:

1. Sometimes ublock should not allow account creation.
2. Sometimes a promo userpage subject is notable. A spamblock loses the chance at an article and a potential editor.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)