User talk:SPACKlick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This page was last edited or modified by Legobot (talk).

Older Discussions[edit]

2012 Discussions[edit]

January 2014 Discussions[edit]

February 2014[edit]

May 2014[edit]

Current Discussions[edit]

Explaining[edit]

I patrolled your page. I went through the enormously-backlogged list of newly-created pages and confirmed that your page was okay: not spam, not an attack page, not a copyright violation, not any of the other reasons for which I would delete someone's page without asking. Then I clicked "patrolled" to remove it from the list of "pages that have not yet been patrolled", and moved on to the next entry. That's all. DS (talk) 14:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Right Back Atchya[edit]

I replied to your gracious note here. Thank you. David in DC (talk) 21:35, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

User warning[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Trial of Oscar Pistorius. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. ’‘‘Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. ’‘‘Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you’‘‘may be blocked from editing. HelenOnline 09:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

As a note in case this becomes relevant later. The "Edit war" is two reverts of an edit to Oscar Pistorius as I believe the charge being placed by HelenOnline violates BLP. Per BRD I reverted her Bold change and discussed on the talk page. Most sources call it one thing and further discussion is ongoing there. SPACKlick (talk) 09:51, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Your request for rollback[edit]

Wikipedia Rollbacker.svg

Hi SPACKlick. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback should never be used to edit war.
  • If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
  • Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — xaosflux Talk 11:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks SPACKlick (talk) 11:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Hey. Just a note asking you to sign your comment on the Smeetesh Patel ANI just so users know who commented. Cheers --’‘‘NickGibson3900 Talk‘‘‘10:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Whoops, thanks for the catch. SPACKlick (talk) 10:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Article lede for Electronic cigarette[edit]

Thank you for your work on the new lede. I've finalized adding citations and wordsmithing the text on the Talk page. Please do a final review and proceed to update the article proper. Should be an easy copy/paste job. Mihaister (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that I'll come have a shufti. SPACKlick (talk) 09:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks like the good Doc reverted to the old lede, because the new one had only 2 paragraphs. I've broken the one on the Talk page into 3 paragraphs, so let's try again. Mihaister (talk) 17:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

November 2014[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg Please read this notification carefully:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Gamergate controversy.
The details of these sanctions are described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date. Dreadstar 12:40, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thanks, that's very kind :) I must say I was impressed with the way you handled the summary of everyone's position, and your comments about the previous such summary. Good luck for the future :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 02:26, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Giving a barnstar[edit]

Are you serious about giving Bretonbanquet a barnstar for civility [3] during the DRN? Ok, the user was civil in concession, but this [4] and this [5], coming from that same DRN, don't quite demonstrate much civility. And why did you give only that particular user such a barnstar? I would think that GyaroMaguus, Burgring and maybe even Twirlypen are even more entitled to receive such a barnstar. Tvx1 (talk) 16:45, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

@Tvx1: I tend only to give the barnstars to people who I disagreed with, it's a lot less fair to judge people who you are in agreement with as you almost always see them in a more positive light. I also particularly noted Breton because I was uncivil towards him in places and he didn't get baited by it. The first diff you posted was borderline uncivil but was far less snarky than I'd have been in his position and the second diff wasn't uncivil at all. Now GyaroMaguus was certainly civil and if any of those disputing with him felt civil enough for a barnstar then i'd wholly support that. SPACKlick (talk) 09:36, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Alien or Xenomorph[edit]

You closed the discussion, but i'm not sure a clear concensus was reached for Alien. In fact, when i count, i reach the opposite conclusion. Pro Xenomorph: Urammar, Nytemyre, 94.208.108.19, NinjaRobotPirate, ミーラー強斗武, me (PizzaMan) Pro Alien: Serendipodous, Lagrange613, Rhododendrites, McGeddon That's a 6 to 4 majority for Xenomorph. Just because those four editors keep replying to every point made pro Xenomorph until other editors are done with it and move on, that doesn't make them right.PizzaMan (♨♨) 11:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@PizzaMan:: Per WP:Consensus Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which, although an ideal result, is not always achievable); nor is it the result of a vote. Decision-making involves an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I looked at the strength of the case rathter than a simple tally of pro and con editors. I did not feel a compelling case had been made for Xenomorph as the common name, which surprised me because in my social circles it is referred to as the Xenomorph, but we're geeks and personal usage doesn't define common names. If you feel I closed it inappropriately please see here for the process for dispute. SPACKlick (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't care much for the Alien franchise, i just saw the RfC and gave my opinion that it's not right for any franchise to claim the generic word "Alien". I've had a discouraging amount of WP: policies thrown against me when i once dared to disagree with the majority on another topic, so i just wanted to point it to you that you went by the minority opinion when closing the RfC. I'll leave it up to you if this was a correct decision. PizzaMan (♨♨) 15:07, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

RFC's[edit]

Older RFC's[edit]

December 2014[edit]

Please comment on Talk:Nibiru cataclysm[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nibiru cataclysm. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of literary awards[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of literary awards. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:River Soar[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:River Soar. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nibiru cataclysm[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nibiru cataclysm. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Executioners[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Executioners. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Montgomery County, Pennsylvania shootings[edit]

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Montgomery County, Pennsylvania shootings. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2014 (UTC)