Jump to content

User talk:Sceptre/Archive 6: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 115: Line 115:


:::I'm sure 3RR limits breaking of it to clear vandalism '''[[User:Sceptre|<span style="color: #09F">Sceptr</span>]][[WP:EA|<span style="color: green">e</span>]]''' <sup>(<em>[[User_talk:Sceptre|<span style="color: #606">Talk</span>]]</em>)</sup> 17:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm sure 3RR limits breaking of it to clear vandalism '''[[User:Sceptre|<span style="color: #09F">Sceptr</span>]][[WP:EA|<span style="color: green">e</span>]]''' <sup>(<em>[[User_talk:Sceptre|<span style="color: #606">Talk</span>]]</em>)</sup> 17:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

== [[User:Locke Cole]] ==

Please reverse this deletion. Locke_Cole is a party to an Arbitration request, and there are edits in the page history that may be necessary. You may either blank it or redirect it to his talk page (even protect it, if necessary) after restoring. Thanks. -- [[User:Netoholic|Netoholic]] [[User talk:Netoholic|@]] 20:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:50, 20 March 2006

Messages

Archives
Archive #1, Oct-Dec 2005
Archive #2, Dec 2005-Jan 2006
Archive #3, Jan 2006
Archive #4, Jan 2006
Archive #5, Feb 2006

Milestones

I took a cue from you and added a Milestones section to my userpage. But in the case of editing articles that have been recently deleted, wouldn't that make edits harder to track? I can't track anything after 1 for that reason..unless you have any suggestions? Thanks in advance - File:Ottawa flag.png nathanrdotcom (TalkContribs) 20:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just put it on 1000 contribs/page (you'll have to manually change the url argument value from 20/500 to 1000), and put every 1000th article there Sceptre (Talk) 21:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, is that how it's done. Thanks for telling me. - File:Ottawa flag.png nathanrdotcom (TalkContribs) 21:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


JavaScript comments

Hey... just a random comment. I stumbled across your userpage — nice design — particularly liked hiding the userboxes. Anyhow, I noticed the link to your MySpace profile and your comment there "MySpace filters out the hash sign. In Javascript, it's used as a COMMENT, not as some mad hax symbol (don't believe me? Check this)". Just felt compelled to drop you note and say that I'm sure the hash sign cannot be used as a comment in JavaScript... many programming languages (such as Perl) yes, as your link to Wikipedia shows... but not JS. JS comments are // or /* */ à la Java. Not sure quite why MySpace feels the need to remove # however, as I'm not sure it could be used for much malicious intent... UkPaolo/talk 15:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thanks for participating in my RfA. It passed with a final tally of 98/13/10, just two short of making WP:100. If you need my help with anything, don't hesitate to ask.

Naconkantari e|t||c|m 23:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deathrocker starting again

Seeing as yew helped out with the problem between us last time, i thought id come to yew to sort the user out this time.


Recently the user added an infobox to the article for the band Moi dix mois, [1].

I corrected some gramma and restored the genres to what they previously where, before Deathrocker changed them [2].

Deathrocker reverted this, marking the revert as minor [3].

After reverting their edit [4], i posted to Deathrocker on their talk page, making a polite request concering the article, aksing them not to start a revert war and to post to my talk page if they have a problem with my edits [5].

Deathrocker deleted this [6], and then went on to revert me, inciting a revert war and making personal attacks using the edit summary [7]. 

I reverted this, noting that i had asked him not to revert war, and noted id be informaing an admin [8].

He reverted me again, making yet more personal attacks in the edit summary [9].

I reverted this again with some neutral wording [10], which then a user seemingly in the intrest of ending the edit war changed it [11].

Deathrocker however immediatly went on to revert back to his copy, violating 3RR [12].

At this point, i reverted his version again, leaving the note that the neutral attempt was good, but wasnt in Wikipedia prose [13].

Deathrocker then went on to attack me on the Moi Dis Mois talk page calling me an idiot, [14], to which i responded [15], which he then went on to revert the Moi Dix Mois article calling me a troll 'unwilling to partake in discussion on the talk page' [16].

He has also attempted to edit what i have written to you, changing what i have written to insult me [17], which i reverted, noting the vandalism [18].


This is the situation as i wrote this, i will add more as this continues. I beg for assistance in this matter. Ley Shade 16:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Myself and an other user who is editing the article; flowers, have agreed on a neutral version of the article. Leyasu continues to go against that concencus without any explination POV pushing a version to include a musical genre which she is a fan of (as she does in every other article on Wikipedia).

She has also tried to bullshit you here, I said she was 'unwilling to partake in discussion on the talk page' BEFORE she even attempted to discuss any points (at this point she was just vandalising the page, as myself and flowers were discussing the issue in depth, trying to come to a neutral concencus; which we did. Before Leyasu returned once again to vandalise the article, with her POV pushing.

Also claiming I was "attacking" her in the edit summarys, more rubbish as usual. - Deathrocker 18:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


ON top of everything here, Deathrocker just made more personal attacks, and claimed im bullshitting even though i provided diffs and they, havent. They have also continued the revert war, even though Flowers has left the situation and Deathrocker is claiming to 'revert back to Flowers', yet is reverting back to their version. Irony, no? Ley Shade 18:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sentox Nerve Gas

Hey man, this is user:Waldo J. Cartridge, but you can call me Woody. I'm just getting back to you on that Sentox nerve gas page I started. I was a little annoyed when you deleted it, but I completely see your reasoning. Truth is, I only had about ten minutes online and I quickly wrote that one sentence up. I was planning on finishing it later.

-Woody

okay, okay, but if I put it back on with more info I don't want it to be deleted again.

Deathrocker commiting serial offences within 12 hours of being unblocked

I logged all of Deathrock's offences on a page from my user page, so only myself and Admins can edit it. The link is here, [19]. I urge yew to look into this matter immediatly. Ley Shade 21:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stealing your talk page

In other words, congratulations. --Cyde Weys 23:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aah, it's not stealing if you have the owners consent Sceptre (Talk) 23:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blast you got me there. Anyway, I ended up making some significant modifications but the end product doesn't quite look as good. You're welcome to see what I've done with it and maybe make some modifications :-P Cyde Weys 23:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deathrocker/Parole/Bragging

If yew check this evidence page i made, he actually goes on to brag about having protection due to being pally with an admin, policys not applying to him, and the fact he can get me 'banned for violating parole'.

Ive blatantly violated it, and ive been counting, im over 40 reverts today, he is over 100!!!!.

Hes taking advantage no end, and just made a comment on the Gothic Metal talk page, that you dont exist!!! Ley Shade 23:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stressfulness

Sorry to hear that you are stressed out! I hope all your stress blows away soon (just like the image says... :) -- Natalya 20:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the Barnstar, dude!Finite 01:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rschen7754's 3RR block

May I ask why you blocked him/her? Were there any other reason than reverting User:SPUI's allegedly "joke" edits? (Please see WP:ANI for more details on this.) If there are not, I don't think he/she should be blocked. --Nlu (talk) 02:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The edits in question are reverting SPUI's request for proof of flat-out vandalism on his RfC. Those edits he made weren't vandalism, just in bad faith (The page was WP:CASH, and with Goal 1 being ??? and 2 (SPUI's) being Profit!, it's a bad joke, and a reference to the South Park episode Gnomes). There's a fine line, but I'm going to incline with SPUI that it wasn't clear vandalism Sceptre (Talk) 11:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if it's not clear vandalism, I think the most can be said about it is that it's not clearly non-vandalism either. In which case, I don't think a block is justified. --Nlu (talk) 16:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure 3RR limits breaking of it to clear vandalism Sceptre (Talk) 17:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please reverse this deletion. Locke_Cole is a party to an Arbitration request, and there are edits in the page history that may be necessary. You may either blank it or redirect it to his talk page (even protect it, if necessary) after restoring. Thanks. -- Netoholic @ 20:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]