User talk:Heimstern: Difference between revisions
re failure to enforce WP:3RR |
|||
Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
::::I warned B'n'C not to make personal attacks on you after I saw the comment on her talk. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] [[User talk:Heimstern|(talk)]] 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC) |
::::I warned B'n'C not to make personal attacks on you after I saw the comment on her talk. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] [[User talk:Heimstern|(talk)]] 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC) |
||
:::::Thank you, I saw it. I am really, really trying to keep myself out of that spat until it settles down, but it is very difficult not to defend myself. Please continue to keep an eye on things, and be aware that I am not going to respond on B'n"C's talk page until asked to respond. [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|(talk)]]</sup> 00:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC) |
:::::Thank you, I saw it. I am really, really trying to keep myself out of that spat until it settles down, but it is very difficult not to defend myself. Please continue to keep an eye on things, and be aware that I am not going to respond on B'n"C's talk page until asked to respond. [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|(talk)]]</sup> 00:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC) |
||
== Re:Your 3RR report == |
|||
You, too, are edit warring, even if not breaking 3RR technically, and you've carried on with this for far too long. I've watchlisted the article to watch both you and ILike2BeAnonymous. If you continue the edit war, I will block you. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] [[User talk:Heimstern|(talk)]] 07:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC) |
|||
*Your complaint is complete and total bullshit. Even the most careless reader would see that there are multiple individuals adding sourced content and one individual who has been removing it with flimsy excuses, trying to refight the AfD that failed just weeks ago. That you can find some moral equivalence here to justify your inaction on the clear WP:3RR violation and your failure to enforce Wikipedia policy, and can come up with threats is shameless. [[User:Alansohn|Alansohn]] 13:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:29, 21 October 2007
Archive:17 Feb-30 Nov 2006
Archive:1 Dec 2006-31 Jan 2007
Archive:1 Feb-25 Mar 2007
Archive:27 Mar-9 May 2007
Archive:10 May-5 June 2007
Archive:6 June-3 July 2007
Archive:6 July-10 Sep 2007
Archive:11 Sep 2007-present
Thanks! :D
![]() |
Thanks Heimstern |
I would like to thank you for your participation in my successful RfA, which passed with a tally of (44/10/5)[1]. Whether you supported, opposed or were neutral in my RfA, I appreciate your participation and I hope that we can continue to work together to build a stronger and better Wikipedia. | |
Regards, nattang 04:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC) |
Can you please protect the article again or block User:Digwuren who constantly removes POV tags from this havily-disputed (and being considered for deletion) article? You've already blocked him for 2 weeks, but there was opened an arbcom case against him and you then unblocked him to allow him participate in the case. Instead you protected the article, but now it is unbrotected and Digwuren continues his edit-war.--Dojarca 10:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- Nevermind. The article has been deleted.--Dojarca 01:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
![]() |
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For everything you do to keep this place free from vandalism, I award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Sometimes the best contributions an editor can make are the ones that restore what once existed. Thanks for defending the work of others. - auburnpilot talk 17:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC) |
Don't let the world get to you. Your contributions are invaluable. - auburnpilot talk 17:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, man. Stopping vandalism is something I can still do here and care about it, so I'll do that. If only Wikipedia's community were a little less of a shark tank, I'd be willing to do more, but that's just not happening. And the recent problems ArbCom is having even rendering decisions is worrisome to me (at least they acknowledge the problem, though). Oh, well, we will see. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 04:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
RFA Thank You Note from Jehochman
![]() |
Ready to swab the decks! | |
Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! - - Jehochman Talk 05:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC) |
70.48.246.221
Hi Heimstern, see [1]. I was considering unblocking, but I thought you might want to handle the unblock yourself, since you are the blocking admin. Nishkid64 (talk) 19:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I did, with a proper warning concerning what will happen if he fails to keep his word. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'd like to see what happens now. :-P Nishkid64 (talk) 20:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
may need some support
Seems User:Nathweni and User:Bananas'n'Cream have a problem with my very existence and are now resorting to threats and personal attacks. See User talk:Bananas'n'Cream. I archived the spat I had with these two over shetland pony after a third party opinion settled the matter, so it wasn't cluttering up the talk page, and to cool the discussion have removed some of the flaming that was getting started on my talk page, though if you care, the discussion was here with the heading "Where do you get off?" I am concerned with their level of threat, and feel that it is best for a third party to step in and help cool things down. So, given that you intervened with Nathweni blanked my talk page, I am simply giving you a heads up that things are heating up again with these folks, who seem determined to declare that I am acting in bad faith, which I am not. (That I am occasionally tired and snippy, I confess). Thanks for any help. Montanabw(talk) 04:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I had a quick look at this. My immediate analysis is that the two other users are assuming bad faith with you, which is obviously against our behavioral guidelines. I don't quite see that they have escalated to the level of personal attacks as yet (if I'm wrong, show me some specific diffs to let me know). Have you pursued mediation yet? You could head for the Mediation Committee and see if they can help, or you could pursue more informal mediation. The mediation cabal is one place you could look for this. If you're wondering if I'd be willing to mediate, I could consider this, but I warn you that I don't have lots of experience in this, and am disgruntled enough with Wikipedia at large that I might not be the best. Anyway, that's the advice I have for you now. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- Appreciate it, and sure, you can feel disgruntled, that's OK. (grin) Sometimes I do as well, like today. If you wouldn't mind keeping my talk page, Driving (horse) and Mare (horse) on your watchlist for a little while, seems this gang weighs in about once a week or so, not necessarily every day. Basically, the spat archived in the Shetland pony talk page that I got into with Nathweni was one with a level of meanness that I don't care to have repeated. I suppose I am just gun shy. I found the comments on the talk page of B'n"C about how terrible I am and how I should be turned in to be borderline personal attack as they stood, though it wasn't on my talk page...I had actually gone over there to tell B'n'C that she made a reasonable edit to Mare (horse) (where she and I have had previous disputes) in an attempt to show her that I don't just revert things for no reason, and found the discussion. Then an anon IP who traces to Australia reverted my tweaks of her edit to the mare article, pretty sure it was B'n'C. Her ad hominem attack on me about the Driving (horse) article on my talk page (that link I provided above) was pretty over the top as well. The basic problem seems to be that what I consider to be a style edit to make things read better is perceived as some kind of control freak thing by these two. This all started when I removed a photo of a pony (possibly her own) from several articles where it didn't seem to fit, and tweaked some captions to be what seemed to me to be more encyclopedic. Guess I just really am unhappy about being viewed as something I am not and having my motives deliberately misunderstood. Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 06:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- I warned B'n'C not to make personal attacks on you after I saw the comment on her talk. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you, I saw it. I am really, really trying to keep myself out of that spat until it settles down, but it is very difficult not to defend myself. Please continue to keep an eye on things, and be aware that I am not going to respond on B'n"C's talk page until asked to respond. Montanabw(talk) 00:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
- I warned B'n'C not to make personal attacks on you after I saw the comment on her talk. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
- Appreciate it, and sure, you can feel disgruntled, that's OK. (grin) Sometimes I do as well, like today. If you wouldn't mind keeping my talk page, Driving (horse) and Mare (horse) on your watchlist for a little while, seems this gang weighs in about once a week or so, not necessarily every day. Basically, the spat archived in the Shetland pony talk page that I got into with Nathweni was one with a level of meanness that I don't care to have repeated. I suppose I am just gun shy. I found the comments on the talk page of B'n"C about how terrible I am and how I should be turned in to be borderline personal attack as they stood, though it wasn't on my talk page...I had actually gone over there to tell B'n'C that she made a reasonable edit to Mare (horse) (where she and I have had previous disputes) in an attempt to show her that I don't just revert things for no reason, and found the discussion. Then an anon IP who traces to Australia reverted my tweaks of her edit to the mare article, pretty sure it was B'n'C. Her ad hominem attack on me about the Driving (horse) article on my talk page (that link I provided above) was pretty over the top as well. The basic problem seems to be that what I consider to be a style edit to make things read better is perceived as some kind of control freak thing by these two. This all started when I removed a photo of a pony (possibly her own) from several articles where it didn't seem to fit, and tweaked some captions to be what seemed to me to be more encyclopedic. Guess I just really am unhappy about being viewed as something I am not and having my motives deliberately misunderstood. Thanks. Montanabw(talk) 06:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Re:Your 3RR report
You, too, are edit warring, even if not breaking 3RR technically, and you've carried on with this for far too long. I've watchlisted the article to watch both you and ILike2BeAnonymous. If you continue the edit war, I will block you. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 07:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
- Your complaint is complete and total bullshit. Even the most careless reader would see that there are multiple individuals adding sourced content and one individual who has been removing it with flimsy excuses, trying to refight the AfD that failed just weeks ago. That you can find some moral equivalence here to justify your inaction on the clear WP:3RR violation and your failure to enforce Wikipedia policy, and can come up with threats is shameless. Alansohn 13:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)