User talk:Neutralhomer

---

Orphaned non-free media (File:WNRV-AM.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:WNRV-AM.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Chaswmsday#Stop Striking

Hello, Neutralhomer. You have new messages at Chaswmsday's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Chaswmsday (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Re:98.204.145.138

Seeing that the vandalism was centralized on the one article, I protected that. If there's only one article that's being affected, it's better to protect the one article, because a range block could have collateral damage (prevent others from legitimately editing). In any case, there will now not be a bunch of IP ranges vandalizing that article for a bit. Best, Spencer^T♦C 04:20, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

WP:RANGE gives a little more info about range-blocking. (It says what I was trying to say above a little more clearly). Spencer^T♦C 04:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The user had previously edited under the IP 98.204.146.142 and on the sign-in account Zimmermanh1997. You can tell from the edits that they are the same person. The two IPs trace back to the same ISP and the same location via InfoSniper.net (one of our GeoLocation links). My fear is the user will pop up on a different IP and move onto another article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Range blocks are really a last resort, and especially if its only 2 IPs (not lots more, as in other cases), I'd say protect the page now and wait and see if that's sufficient. It probably will be, but if you notice a rampage from all around the range on a large number of articles, report it to AIV. Spencer^T♦C 20:35, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

File:WICL-FM 2012.png

In response to your request on my talk page, I deleted the file history, and tried to restore just the latest version. I had never done this before with an image file, and naively assumed it worked the same way as with a page, but it didn't. The result is that I have restored only the image description page, not the image itself. As an admin, I can look at the deleted image, but I can see no way of restoring it for the public to see. Sorry about this cockup. Perhaps the easiest thing is for you to just upload it again. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

No worries, it happens. :) It's an easy reupload, but thanks taking out the file history. I will reupload the file posthaste. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:31, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I had reuploaded it when you deleted it to make way for the upload. :) LOL! Oh well, no worries, that's what happens at 4 in the morning. :D - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:36, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

(Total egg-on face) I promise I won't touch it again. Honest. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, no worries! :) I am getting a good chuckle out of it myself. :) Just reuploaded it, so all is right with the world. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:40, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Since you don't want a template

I have reported your reversions to WP:AN3. Note that undo-button reversions are different from attempts to reach out to other editors by making bridging edits. 12.153.112.21 (talk) 22:36, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Connection?

I saw some odd stuff on my watchlist:[1] and [2]

Are these guys^[3][4] somehow connected? Am I missing something?

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:44, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I think there is a good chance they are. I would ask a checkuser to be sure. Coming from you, an admin, would carry more weight. I have an active list of Checkusers here for easy searching (to see if they are online). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:24, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the eyes, both. I am not connected with IAmCoolForever2023, as you can see by my edit history before my interest in this article overlapped with IAmCoolForever2023. That user's unsophisticated move has been properly reverted, and I have not yet reviewed the user's edits to the U-verse guide in detail but mine have always been sourced and these are not. I am not sure that checkuser works well for IPs and would reveal nothing new about my doppelganger, but I certainly invite review. 12.153.112.21 (talk) 14:35, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Userfication of channel lists

Hi. I saw that you userfied several channel list articles. Please see WP:Userfication#Cut and paste userfication and WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Userfication. I can help provide the missing attribution if you need assistance. Flatscan (talk) 04:14, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I forgot that the bulk of the lists is factual, non-creative information (WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Where attribution is not needed). I'm going to wait a few days for the dispute to cool down. Flatscan (talk) 04:32, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The one, User:Neutralhomer/List of AT&T U-verse Channels‎, was from a page that was deleted earlier today per AfD. The rest are probably going to go up for AfD after that page's deletion. If you can help with the missing attribution on the others, that would be great, I just did a copy/paste instead of a standard move since they are still active pages. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:20, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually the page was not deleted, it was moved to User:IP 12.153.112.21/List of AT&T U-verse channels by User:The Bushranger per your request to move it to user space. It was then moved to User:List of AT&T U-verse channels by User:IAmCoolForever2023. Now it was requested that it be speedy deleted by you. I suggest you take back your speedy deletion request and move it to your user space so there is attribution. Powergate92Talk 06:06, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I decided to remove the speedy deletion tag from User:List of AT&T U-verse channels as your "copy/paste" of that same article in your user space does not attribute and therefore may violate the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. So it would be better to moved that version of the article to your user space in replacement of the one that's already there instead of deleting it, as that version has the revision history and therefore attributes. Powergate92Talk 08:03, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Based on the logic of the channel-list deleters, your copypaste of U-verse is ripe for WP:MFD, and I would agree, because the history of the original article should be preserved. As I've hinted, I would have no problem with you moving User:IP 12.153.112.21/List of AT&T U-verse channels to User:Neutralhomer/List of AT&T U-verse channels, as this makes no difference as to our content dispute. (Note your current copypaste is a different page with "Channels" not "channels"; you can request housekeeping deletion of that.) However, we do need to discuss that dispute eventually on grounds other than vandalism, as consensus appears to turn against you on the vandalism charge. Thank you. 12.153.112.21 (talk) 14:16, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

@Powergate: I asked for it to be moved to my userspace, not his. BIG difference. It was already approved by two admins, so I don't need your permission.

@12.153.112.21: You are nothing but a common vandal, so you can remove yourself from my talk page. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Being "approved by two admins" doesn't mean anything when it violates CC-BY-SA 3.0 License therefore making it a copyright violation. As well it violates WP:Copyrights#Re-use of text. Powergate92Talk 02:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

One, what? The page wasn't under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License to begin with. Two, admins override you. You can remove yourself from my talk page as well. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Everything on Wikipedia is released under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. See the bottom of the page where it says "Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details." Also see Wikipedia's copyright policy. Powergate92Talk 04:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Plans

Re the potential MfD, can you provide a description of what your plan is to overhaul the content and organization and sourcing of the article and whatever else you have in mind so that it would not be the same article that failed NOT:DIR and was deleted? -- The Red Pen of Doom 04:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I have been thinking about that. As a member of WikiProject Radio Stations, we sometimes have to remove schedules (per WP:NOT#DIR) off radio station pages (an example of this would be WUSN#Airstaff) and put them in writing (ie: John Doe is heard mornings, Jane Doe takes Middays, etc.). So, that is my idea for the pages, I am just not sure exactly how to do it. I haven't had the chance to look at the pages this evening. Was hanging out with my Mom looking through an old box of photos, so that took up some time and on-wiki time has been spent discussing things here on talk. I haven't even gotten the chance to look at my watchlist yet. Let me take a look and I will try and give you a better idea of what my plans are. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This is an idea off the top of my head. Take the channels, divided into categories for easy reading (ie: entertainment, sports, movies, etc.) and have a 3 or 4 column list of what networks AT&T U-verse or DirecTV carry. There wouldn't be full detail and the information could be easily sourced via numerous websites. This could then be intergrated into the main article, in a section titled "Programming" or something similar. Let me see what I can put together on the fly in my sandbox. Give me about 20 minutes. It won't be perfect, but it will give you an idea. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

You should post that at the MfD TheRedPenOfDoom is talking about: WP:Miscellany for deletion/User:IP 12.153.112.21/List of AT&T U-verse channels. Powergate92Talk 05:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict): This would be my idea. Of course, there would be more information and of course sources, but you get the general idea. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

@Powergate: I thought I said to remove yourself from my talk page. I could be wrong, it has been known to happen. You aren't helping things and I would rather discuss this with admins and other editors who don't have a interest in seeing these pages go. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

And I did remove your talk page from my watchlist, but I had to come back to see if you replied to my above comment. Also I never said that I want the these pages to go. I've actually been watching the discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/List of AT&T U-verse channels since User:Masem brought it up at WT:WikiProject Television a week ago, but didn't comment or vote as there was nothing to be said. In fact I actually looked into the rules of Wikisource and Wikibooks to see if it could be moved to either of those. However it seems Wikisource does not allow list and Wikibooks is only for textbooks. Powergate92Talk 05:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

By the way, if you read Wikipedia's copyright policy that I linked above you'll see that all you to do for attribution is add a hyperlink or URL to the page your "copy/paste" was from (can't do that one since the page was deleted), add a hyperlink or URL for to an alternative (User:The "good guy"/List of AT&T U-verse channels, actually I think you could just link to revision history of that page[5]), or just "a list of all authors." It's not that hard to do. Powergate92Talk 06:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I would be fine if there could be a reestablishing of the List of AT&T U-verse channels page for the sole reason of moving it to my userspace (per permission). The others (FiOS, DirecTV, etc.) are in response to the annoucement that those pages could be deleted per the U-verse AfD. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

that page was restored and moved to User:The_"good_guy"/List_of_AT&T_U-verse_channels and is under MfD at User:IP 12.153.112.21/List of AT&T U-verse channels - a whole lot of poorly executed name moves etc. -- The Red Pen of Doom 14:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Once you convert it to prose, its not really a List of X stations, what do you propose to call it? Stations carried by X? -- The Red Pen of Doom 13:11, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I was going to put it in the main article, but it doesn't look like that will happen. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thread on WP:AN about your actions

Hi. I notice that this thread has turned into a discussion of your actions. I realise that you have already responded to the thread, but thought that you might be unaware of this change in direction and so I wanted to give you an opportunity to defend yourself. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 23:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Indefinite block for severe off-wiki harassment

I have blocked your account indefinitely for severe off-wiki harassment. You called the employer of an IP user to report them[6]. Such actions are very heavily frowned upon, and are not appropriate at all in the circumstances. Considering that you are an experienced editor, and that you have had blocks for harassment before (though not recently), you should have been well aware of what is and what isn't acceptable here, and this went far beyond a borderline case.

Indefinite is not meant to be infinite here, just as long as needed to convince me or any other uninvolved admin that you are aware of what is and isn't acceptable here, and that repeat offenses are unlikely. Fram (talk) 11:48, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Neutralhomer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Look, I know I went too far. To put it bluntly, I fucked up. I could give you an excuse, but it wouldn't matter. I did screw up. Was my intention to get him fired? Never! In this economy, I would have felt like crap if he had. My intention, when calling his place of employment, was to get his boss to maybe suspend his internet privileges. Since he is clearly editing while on company time. This, obviously, didn't happen (I don't think they were really concerned anyway), so I call it a "no harm, no foul". But I did screw up. I am aware I went too far. Will I repeat this behavior? Not likely, as I am removing myself from any and all television station and network articles, including WP:TVS (the Television Station WikiProject). I am going to focus my attention on other areas of media (radio, newspapers, etc.), articles that are very uncontroversial. I also plan on focusing my attention in some Virginia history articles and towns/cities in Virginia. Unless the anon user comes into those areas (which I doubt highly), I don't foresee any future interaction with the anon.
Again, I am sorry for my behavior. I went too far and I know I went too far. Even after I made the call I thought "you probably crossed a line with this one". But I will take measures, if unblocked, to insure our paths will not cross (also, I am tired of the stress of dealing with television station and network pages). If you or another admin choose not to unblock me, it's been a good run. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You have stated that it is "not likely" to happen again - not good enough, I'm afraid. We need assurances you will never repeat this behaviour. Until we get that, you should remain blocked indefinitely. GiantSnowman 13:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Generally speaking I think it is permissible to contact the Internet Service Provider of a repeat vandal or serious problem user. That contact however, needs to be done carefully, diligently, calmly, and in as much as we can see into the human heart, without malice. Neutralhomer was the wrong person, doing the wrong thing, at the wrong time, the wrong way. We are not in the revenge business. The issue is not a particular user v. user interaction, but an editor's flawed sense of judgement. This kind of behavior is a breach of trust. And restoring trust doesn't only require contrition, but time and a growth in judgement. At this time, I oppose an unblock.--Tznkai (talk) 12:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Question before considering unblock request - I need clarification first on your comment above that "My intention...was to get his boss to maybe suspend his internet privileges" - yet on the AN thread you made plenty of comments about him losing his job, including the (awful) comment of "if he is still employed, then it didn't have the desired effect". Which was it? GiantSnowman 12:14, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

@Tznkai: You know what, you're right. I wasn't the right person to do that, I should have asked an admin to do so. But, I wasn't looking for revenge. I was looking for the vandalism to stop. I didn't want the person fired, just his internet access suspended. After issuing AIV report after AIV report, asking two admins for help (they told the user to stop editing and establish consensus) and trying (and failing miserably) at talking with the user, I thought I had no other choice. But you are right, it was the wrong choice. Like I said above...I fucked up.

@Snowman: I was meaning if he was still employed (meaning still able to access the internet from that IP) it didn't have the intended effect. As I said above, I was not looking to get the user fired, just his internet access suspended. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

But losing internet privileges, and losing your job, are not the same. GiantSnowman 12:26, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

@Snowman: Very correct, I was trying to get his internet access revoked, not his employment revoked. It's no harm, no foul (well, for him anyway) because the person I spoke to obviously didn't take it seriously. I didn't want him fired (and he wasn't), just the vandalism to stop. I believe I even said "I think you should take his internet access away, so he can get back to work". I am not a revenge sort of person, just wanted the problem (ie: the vandalism) to go away. Folks shouldn't be editing Wikipedia from work anyway. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Note to the admin/s considering unblock: I had to intervene recently with the oversight tool, following onwiki posting of IP sleuthing by this user. See ([7]). I don't think that my gentle warning had the desired effect at all. --Dweller (talk) 12:34, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok, and I respect you and Fram, but I'm inclined to unblock. His response seems to show that he understands that what he did is unacceptable, and I'm certainly not of the opinion that he'll do it again if we unblock. And it's easy enough to block him again if needed. Dougweller (talk) 12:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
    • I don't think that an unblock would be justified - furthermore, I've just posted a proposal for community ban to AN. One mistake may be forgivable, but it isn't Neutralhomer's first offence. Max Semenik (talk) 13:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Dweller, you shouldn't be oversighting information obtained via WHOIS or geolocate for an IP. It's public information and the template is on the bottom of every IP page. Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
    • @Doug: I know I will have plenty of admin eyeballs watching me. It won't happen again. As I have said, if unblocked, steps will be taken by myself to assure that.
    • @Dweller: I do agree with Elen, if we are not allow to post on-wiki where an IP is registered or what town/city, then why do we have two GeoLocation links at the bottom of each and every IP user talk page? I have seen the names and locations of IP users posted on high viewership boards like AN, ANI and others. Why was I oversighted, when others are not? Why have the links if we aren't allow to post the findings? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I believe my use of the tool was entirely justified under point 1 of the policy, to oversight the words "I backtracked your edits to [name of company redacted], which is based in [location]". The OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument is nonsense. I have to treat each notification of a potential privacy breach on its own merits. --Dweller (talk) 12:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Having seen the actual oversighted edit, I agree with Dweller. It contained more material than an RIRs/Geo lookup would provide. Whether this info was true or just came out of NH's assumptions, it was still a clear attempt at outing. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I do as well. Drmies (talk) 17:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Hang on a minute - Neutralhomer contacted someone's employer to pressurise them to try to win a content dispute, and he hasn't actually stated that he won't do the same sort of thing again, only that it is 'not likely'. An unblock is clearly not on the cards under such circumstances, surely? AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

@Andy: No, I didn't call them to "win" anything, only to stop vandalism. Also, I say "not likely", it's a force of habit. What I mean by "not likely" is "it won't happen again". - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Neutralhomer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

As I just said above (why don't people give me time to respond?) I say "not likely", it is a force of habit. I talk in kind of a "clinical" way after years of being treated by doctors. As I said above, "not likely" is the exact same as "it won't happen again". - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:18, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Sorry, that's not good enough. Given your long history of blocks for incivility and other problematic behavior, your prior promises to change which have resulted in no changes, and the absolutely beyond-the-pale abhorrant nature of the harassment involved in this most recent block, I would not be comfortable letting you participate in Wikipedia any further. Harrassing people whom you disagree with by calling their employers is simply too much. Write WP:BASC if you like, but you're not going to be unblocked by me today. Jayron32 13:28, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• Note - I am not going to deal with any further unblock requests. But a note to any admin who does - NH's block log is certainly something. GiantSnowman 13:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I notice that there's been a call at AN for a community ban. I think any further admin action here should wait for the resolution of discussion there. --Dweller (talk) 13:24, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Neutralhomer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Since I am not being given the chance to respond before you all pass judgement, let me say this on my third and final unblock request.
I said above I won't speak, interact or call the user's place of employment again. You all don't believe me. Semantics cause you to think "not likely" means I will call them again, even though I said I won't. Now there is a call for a community ban, I can't defend myself. My record is not a pretty one, but prior to this block, I was a year and a half without a block and the one in 2011 was done by an involved admin (I will let you all debate that). I kept my nose clean, did what I was told, jumped through the hoops, was trusted with access after access, I screw up, admit I screwed up, say it won't happen again, and everyone comes out the pitchforks and torches to run me out of town.
So, let me put it straight out here for you all: I screwed up, I will not call the user's place of employment again, I will not interact with the user. If you all still don't trust me, if you still don't believe me, if you would rather look at the bad rather than the multitude of good, then so be it. Ban me from Wikipedia. But if you all think that the good should overrule the bad, that a royal fuck up is embarrassment enough, that losing the trust of my fellow editors is bad enough, that a public flogging is bad enough, then unblock me, let me do what I said (take TV station and network pages off my watchlist) and try to win your trust back. Because I can't give you anymore than that. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I'm declining this request, with no prejudice, purely because I think the timing is inadvisable and emotions are still running high and that a few days away from the dispute would help us look at the whole thing in a calmer manner. There's no "3 strikes" rule regarding unblock requests, and even if there were, this decline should not count as one strike. I'm declining it because I think it is currently in your best interest for me to do so, and it would improve your unblock chances to let the storm pass - there will be calmer weather next week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Would someone do me a favour and post a link to the thread at AN? I can't find it. Peridon (talk) 13:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Bottom of this section. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I can rarely find things I'm looking for there. Peridon (talk) 16:02, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Neutralhomer, I would venture to say that one of the things making people uncomfortable about your unblock requests is that so far, you've focused on "Ok, I agree, I won't call this guy's job again." In a situation like this where your overall judgment is being called into question, people are going to be looking for something more like, "Ok, I agree. I will never again contact any user's place of employment off-wiki or do any other "sleuthing" like this." Just telling us you won't call this guy's boss again doesn't go far enough; it might help if you can express the degree to which you're sure anything like this won't happen again. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 14:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Well, I figured that was a given. If I have caught hell for calling one user's place of employment, I am pretty sure I would for anyone and I am VERY certain that if I did it again (for any user), it would be an instant indef-block. I was focusing on this user, because that is the user we are talking about. Yes, I am not going to contact any user's place of employment. If I thought it was stupid after I did it, I don't think I will do it again. But it is pretty moot at this point as the Community Ban discussion is underway and it isn't likely I am coming out of this one. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I gotta say I concur with this block. Just because someone uses company time to use wikipedia is really none of your business. Perhaps they don't mind. Perhaps he's allowed/encouraged to do so. A simple "I understand and I won't do actions like this ever again." would go a long way toward mending relations with WP. Buffs (talk) 14:20, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

You aren't the first and won't be the last. I was trying to stop vandalism. The company obviously didn't mind, I would like to think they didn't encourage it. I do understand and I have said it will never happen again, but the ban discussion rolls on and people still don't believe me. It's done, it's over with, I'm gone. That's all there is to it. I've accepted what's going to happen...if it hasn't already, haven't looked. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Final Edit

Apparently my words are falling on deaf ears or people are seeing what they want to see, whatever. I screwed up and I was punished. There is a 99.9% chance I will be the subject of a community ban probably within the next two hours. To be honest, I deserve it. It's done, it's over with, I'm gone and there isn't anything, apparently, I can say or do to make you all change your minds.

So, let me take this time to say "Goodbye" and "I'm Sorry".

A GA/FA/TFA article, a Class A article and a couple DYKs, along with being trusted with numerous tools, couldn't make people look away from that block log. That was and still is all people see. Whatever they give me, it's just.

But I let you all down. I failed you all in more ways than one. Trust me when I say, I do feel bad about what has happened, what I have done. I let you down when you trusted me with so much. I screwed up and I can't fix this. As of today, my "career" at Wikipedia ends at 6 years, 1 month and 18 days (according to the userbox on my userpage). It's too short, filled with too many screw ups, too much drama and not enough good.

I am sorry for failing you, for letting you down, for losing your trust, for causing problems, for making Wikipedia a worse place than when I came. But most of all, I am sorry for losing your friendship. I'm just sorry.

This will probably be the last time we will speak, so let me end this by wishing you well in whatever you do from this point on. I wish you the best in health, business, family, and life in general. Take care of yourself. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:35, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

One last thing: To answer User:Niteshift36's question on the Community Ban thread, I believe that when people go to work, they are there to do a job, whatever that maybe. I believe that, unless you are on break, you should be doing that job and not surfing the web and getting paid for it. To me, that feels wrong. It feels like someone who is stealing from the company they work for. Stealing by doing nothing and taking home a paycheck (ie: money) for not doing what they are employed to do. I believe that during break and after the employee leaves the parking lot, whatever they do in their free time is their business. But, on the job site, at their desk, or wherever their job is, they should be doing that job and not playing around on Wikipedia, tweeting friends, checking their Facebook page or doing whatever else online. We are at jobs to work, not play. People who want to play, should stay home. That's just my opinion and as my father says: opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink. Gotta love my Dad. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:44, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• As I said in my post, I respect you and your opinion. Yes, we all have different opinions and we can disagree civilly, uncivilly or whatever. However, as I said, that is between that editor and their employer. The employer determines what is or is not acceptable time use or internet use policy. Your totally subjective and uninformed opinion should not be a factor. Were this person harrassing you personally via his company internet access, I'd support you 110%. But just because you think he is goofing off or what have you, well, that is impossible for me to support. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Don't over-react, there is a lot of discussion still to be had, but so far there does not appear to be any consensus for a community ban. GiantSnowman 15:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• No Homer, this isn't about opinions or assholes. These comments, while I understand you have the need to vent, won't salvage the matter. What is needed is an unequivocal "I screwed up"--the arguments about avoiding vandalism or the greater economic good simply don't apply and they weaken your case. Leave that be. You'll find that other editors besides me are breaking lances for you at AN; I don't want to see you get banned and apparently I'm not the only one. Don't keep the kettle boiling with more commentary: this is a time to reflect and respond sparingly, and to consider what kinds of things have gotten you in trouble. Getting too worked up and personally involved with editorial matters is possibly one of them: if problems come up, let admins (try to) deal with them. If they can't or won't, it's something you can't fix either unless by breaking some rules. Getting too excited over IPs (I think I know what gets your goat--the perceived anonymity of it all) is of no use either, and checking deeply into the histories of editors and IPs is likely to get you into trouble. The problems you find may well be legitimate, but unless you give up the idea that it is your personal responsibility to solve them you'll keep running into trouble since not all problems can be solved. Ah well. I hope this takes a turn for the better. Take it easy, close this browser window, and go for a walk for a day or two. The weather is gorgeous. [ec with Snowman; in addition, what he said.] Drmies (talk) 15:04, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Actually Drmies, what is needed is a "I will never, ever do anything like this ever again, ever" - which we haven't had yet. GiantSnowman 15:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• I think both need to happen, and I think there needs to be some time delay. I don't think saying it today works. Neutralhomer should come back in a week with an unblock request and make that clear. In addition, he needs to make it clear that regardless of his opinions on people editing from work, it is none of his business. Ryan Vesey 15:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
• Snowman, I think he knows that. I don't want to be encyclopedic here. But, and this is a philosophical note, one can do no more than promise such a thing; I do get a feeling that the modifiers Homer has used in his comments are prompted by the reality that sometimes we don't have everything under control, and that not stating absolute certainty that it won't happen again (which is an impossibility) is bothering other editors, including you I reckon. I can't fault him for not making the statement you say he should make, though I also understand the desire to hear him make that statement. Drmies (talk) 15:14, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Still reading; but great advice from Drmies and others, just above. You need to make a simple, clear, statement, here; “Sorry, never again.” Then we can move forward. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 15:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

And drop the vandalism shtick. You know perfectly well that if this was outright vandalism it would have been quite easy to get the IP blocked without resorting to calling his place of employment. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

What Beeble said--I guess he's more clear than I was. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Community ban looks unlikely

Don't give up, you aren't going to be banned. Just say what Giant Snowman wants you to say (yes, you may think that's what you meant, but it will show your good will). Dougweller (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Exactly - some of your wording so far has not filled me with confidence to be honest. If you state clearly what you mean, then there can be no complaints. GiantSnowman 15:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Be patient; he may have been up all night, is certainly stressed. Drama and its subject are often out of sync, with the “fresh” participants at an advantage. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 15:35, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Nobody is rushing him. If anything, I'd personally prefer he took a few days to clear his head. GiantSnowman 15:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Dr Boing's prescription: Switch off your computer, go and have a nice long weekend away from Wikipedia, and come back a bit more relaxed next week. A number of less emotional !votes have now been cast, and I'd say a community ban is looking unlikely at this stage. They way to an unblock is still open, even if it might require a little time away in order to satisfy community consensus, but I don't think your 6 years, 1 month and 18 days is the totality of your contributions just yet. (And however badly you fucked up this time, you have not lost my respect for all the good work you have done here). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
• The whole situation is rather unfortunate. I have faith that calmer voices will prevail at WP:AN, but that doesn't change the fact that Homer must reflect on this and figure out what he needs to ensure it won't happen again. I'm hoping he can take a couple of days off, reflect a bit on the entire situation, and figure out how to insure that his emotions do not override his common sense like this ever again. If he can articulate this, I would be happy to welcome him back. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Sorry, rode up to the doctor's office with my Dad (he was just picking up some meds, no worries), so I was away. I did look in at the WP:AN thread and while I am very surprised people have !voted "oppose" and it does make me feel good, I honestly don't see me getting unblocked. I thought I said what everyone wanted me to say (things I do honestly mean when I say them), I thought I gave a path forward for myself, but I guess I didn't say enough. My block log shows (as does my sanction page) that I have said "I won't do this again" only to do it again. I'll be honest, I suck at social situations, always have (chalk that up to my Aspergers) and Wikipedia is no different. Even though it is online, it is still a social situation. I fall back into the same bad habits that I always have. I cause the same problems I always have (this one is different and really really bad). It is best for me, for the project, for the community, that I walk away. Cause after a little over 6 years, if I can't get my act together, I don't trust myself to do it. I don't want to open the project up to any offline problems if I screw up again, which my history, block log and sanctions page show, I will. I no longer trust myself to edit Wikipedia. I thank everyone for their support, but it's best for the community and the project if I step aside and I am. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 17:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

  Best to shut up in the heat of the moment. Just take a few days per Boing's and others' advice. The AN discussion was dying fast last I looked. We pick this up next week. where you make a clear statement and unblock request, and do *not* pile-on too-much-information. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

• Put a notice above your screen saying "Brain in gear before fingers or mouth!" or "Will this still seem a good idea tomorrow?". Then take Dr Boing's advice. Peridon (talk) 17:11, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
• Alright, the ban is in the can. You've gotten a ton of good advice here on how to request an unblock (give it some time) and on how to handle things in the future. What you could consider is getting a mentor; Wehwalt has indicated he might not be unwilling. I've proposed, in my usual vague manner, some editing restrictions to consider--I think particularly that 1RR, limiting yourself to one revert and no more in what for you are contentious areas, would be a good idea. I'm not just thinking that this is a way for other editors to police you, so to speak, but especially as a way for you to police yourself, if you want to come back here, and if you think this might be helpful you can make that explicit in your unblock request. Well, Homer, if I see you back again, don't make yourself scarce; drop me a line if I can help. If I don't, all the best to you: it's been a pleasure having been your mortal enemy for a while and a much greater pleasure having had you as a collaborator. All the best to you and to your dad, and happy trails, here or elsewhere. Drmies (talk) 04:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Let's Try Again

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Neutralhomer (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

After clearing my head, letting things cool down and taking a couple days away from Wikipedia, I would like to try again.

Yes, I am sorry for calling the anon's place of employment. No, I was not trying to get him fired. Yes, I would have felt like crap if he did actually get fired. No, I will never call any user's (anon or sign in) place of employment ever under any circumstances. I will also go so far as to say I will never call any school (attached to a school IP, in cases of vandalism or otherwise) under any circumstances. Yes, I will steer clear of the anon (and his named account) and all pages the anon (and his named account) edits, even if they cross paths with me. Yes, I will agree to mentorship...if anyone is willing to take me.
Again, I am sorry for what I have caused, for what I have done, for losing folks trust, and I do feel bad and would like to make things right. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 15:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Please note: I am going to lay down for a nap as I am fighting a stomach bug, so I do apologize if do not respond to any questions or posts right away. I will respond to any posts or questions posthaste when I wake up. - NH

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=After clearing my head, letting things cool down and taking a couple days away from Wikipedia, I would like to try again. <br> Yes, I am sorry for calling the anon's place of employment. No, I was not trying to get him fired. Yes, I would have felt like crap if he did actually get fired. No, I will '''never''' call any user's (anon or sign in) place of employment ever under any circumstances. I will also go so far as to say I will '''never''' call any school (attached to a school IP, in cases of vandalism or otherwise) under any circumstances. Yes, I will steer clear of the anon (and his named account) and all pages the anon (and his named account) edits, even if they cross paths with me. Yes, I will agree to mentorship...if anyone is willing to take me. <br> Again, I am sorry for what I have caused, for what I have done, for losing folks trust, and I do feel bad and would like to make things right. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #900;padding:1px;">[[User:Neutralhomer|<span style="color:#900;">Neutralhomer</span>]] • [[User talk:Neutralhomer|<span style="color:Black;">Talk</span>]] • 15:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)</small> <br> Please note: I am going to lay down for a nap as I am fighting a stomach bug, so I do apologize if do not respond to any questions or posts right away. I will respond to any posts or questions posthaste when I wake up. - NH |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=After clearing my head, letting things cool down and taking a couple days away from Wikipedia, I would like to try again. <br> Yes, I am sorry for calling the anon's place of employment. No, I was not trying to get him fired. Yes, I would have felt like crap if he did actually get fired. No, I will '''never''' call any user's (anon or sign in) place of employment ever under any circumstances. I will also go so far as to say I will '''never''' call any school (attached to a school IP, in cases of vandalism or otherwise) under any circumstances. Yes, I will steer clear of the anon (and his named account) and all pages the anon (and his named account) edits, even if they cross paths with me. Yes, I will agree to mentorship...if anyone is willing to take me. <br> Again, I am sorry for what I have caused, for what I have done, for losing folks trust, and I do feel bad and would like to make things right. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #900;padding:1px;">[[User:Neutralhomer|<span style="color:#900;">Neutralhomer</span>]] • [[User talk:Neutralhomer|<span style="color:Black;">Talk</span>]] • 15:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)</small> <br> Please note: I am going to lay down for a nap as I am fighting a stomach bug, so I do apologize if do not respond to any questions or posts right away. I will respond to any posts or questions posthaste when I wake up. - NH |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=After clearing my head, letting things cool down and taking a couple days away from Wikipedia, I would like to try again. <br> Yes, I am sorry for calling the anon's place of employment. No, I was not trying to get him fired. Yes, I would have felt like crap if he did actually get fired. No, I will '''never''' call any user's (anon or sign in) place of employment ever under any circumstances. I will also go so far as to say I will '''never''' call any school (attached to a school IP, in cases of vandalism or otherwise) under any circumstances. Yes, I will steer clear of the anon (and his named account) and all pages the anon (and his named account) edits, even if they cross paths with me. Yes, I will agree to mentorship...if anyone is willing to take me. <br> Again, I am sorry for what I have caused, for what I have done, for losing folks trust, and I do feel bad and would like to make things right. - <small style="white-space:nowrap;border:1px solid #900;padding:1px;">[[User:Neutralhomer|<span style="color:#900;">Neutralhomer</span>]] • [[User talk:Neutralhomer|<span style="color:Black;">Talk</span>]] • 15:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)</small> <br> Please note: I am going to lay down for a nap as I am fighting a stomach bug, so I do apologize if do not respond to any questions or posts right away. I will respond to any posts or questions posthaste when I wake up. - NH |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

• I've pinged Fram, the blocking admin. While not strictly required, I think it is good to have him in the loop. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that 3 days is a long enough time, but the offer to edit under an mentor interests me. If someone willing was found, I would be inclined to support, with the understanding that neutralhomer will not only be expected not to revert to the behaviors that brought this block on, but in fact was to become a better editor than that. Crossing the line suggests you need to return to a place safely on the other side, after all.--Tznkai (talk) 01:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to do everything in my power (and with the help of others) to return to that place of safety on the other side. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:54, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

• I support unblock. The behaviour that led to the block was an aberration, driven by frustration rather than malice, and Neutralhomer is clearly a dedicated Wikipedian who genuinely wants to help improve the project. Mentorship would be good, but I don't think it should be a condition of unblock -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

• I have preemptively removed all TV station and TV network templates and pages, noticeboards and other related pages from my watchlist as they were a source of stress and problems now and prior. I have kept radio station pages on my watchlist as those have not been a source of stress and problems now or prior. I have also preemptively removed the anon's talk page and all related pages from my watchlist as well. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:12, 9 October 2012 (UTC)