User talk:Toddy1

Egyptian Navy Ensign

I think there was a mistake in reverting back to the Egyptian Navy unofficial flag. I see you said that the one I made has no reliable resources. Have you checked the file description page? The ensign you reverted the page back to has no existence whatsoever in Egypt. It's completely made up. I added a link to an image where the 4 flags of the Egyptian Armed Forces are next to each other and you can see the navy flag. you can also google it or search for any other photo for an armed forces commander.

Also, I live in Alexandria, Egypt, the headquarters of the Egyptian Navy and I'm telling you that the blue flag is the only flag we have ever seen whether on the navy headquarters or any navy building or a ship.. This is the true and only Naval Ensign for Egypt.

--Zo3a (talk) 07:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Egyptian Navy Ensign follow-up

here are some link for images and youtube video including the flag i spent hours making

Graduation ceremony of the Egyptian Naval Academy

• at 1:20 behind the TV reporter and WAY MORE OBVIOUSLY at 8:30 The Giant middle blue FLAG

Yes saw a flag like your flag at 8:30. Whether that is the Egyptian naval ensign is hard to say.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• If it wasn't enough at 5:30 here a close up loock for the complete flag, enjoy it

Unclear.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Formal Navy Commander in Chief Mohab Mamish

• Mamish official photo with the blue flag to the right

No, does not show it.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Egyptian Army Spokesman

• Egyptian Army Spox - second flag from left
  

Unclear.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Another Angle

Unclear.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Field Marshal Tantawy

• Tantawy - Second flag from left

Unclear.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

General Sisi

• General Sisi - Ousting Morsi speech - second flag from left

Unclear.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

--Zo3a (talk) 07:49, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

It's clearly the flag of the Navy, there's various sources that do show that. But without proof of it being flown from a ship, calling it an "ensign" is not proven, and it should not be treated as such. There are many countries which have a naval flag and naval ensign which are separate designs, there's no reason to believe Egypt doesn't have both as well. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:57, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars Interview: What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Acts on user talk pages

You had directly contorted what another user said noting against it. Yet spoke to them in the very same manner. This in inappropriate conduct and standards. I did not change what you meant in any way considering what you linked. Only negated the personal snip at that user. Try to shy away from those when doing talk page edits. We are all a community.

Your original message : Hello, I'm Toddy1. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Muawiyah I seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Toddy1 (talk) 06:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Yet: The user made no real mention or length of discussion on what they did. So the designation to deem it 'less than neutral' is questionable. Maybe they needed to cite it, though there was nothing applicable to state your mention. And you acted in a manner you stated the other user should not act in. You acted less neutral to their edit. When it was just a basic edit, then stated "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and and so is not a useful place for you to express your point of view". I would say this falls into : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TALKNO#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable Do not associate someones behavior wrongly , ask them to cite instead.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkreign11 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Claude Barnes

Hi, You posted something on my page regarding my interest in seeing CLaude Barnes entry deleted. I don't think the person rises to the notability standard as deployed by wikipedia people. The entry basically reads like a resume and many of the references are dead links--which I will try and fix. Seriously, if this person deserves an entry, you might as well give one to everybody. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.37.195 (talk) 20:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

"This user does not understand English"

Для чего на вашей странице пользователя данный юзербокс? -- A man without a country (talk) 09:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Re: ANI

Toddy, do your goddamn homework. I'm assuming good faith and taking it that you don't speak Japanese and so "Jimmu" and "Jingū" look the same to you, but those two RMs went the opposite way. The latter one saw the IP as the ONLY one opposing, while the former had no relevance whatsoever to the thread in question. If you think Enkyo2 shouldn't be indefinitely blocked for continuing to post bizarre moon-speak on talk pages and making revenge edits after he has already been warned about it in two separate arbitration cases, then please bring it up in the relevant thread. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:14, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

The question at ANI is not one of how to transliterate Japanese into English.

The question is one of conduct (behaviour). You made a complaint about the conduct of another editor. This is what is being discussed.--Toddy1 (talk) 12:35, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

What the fuck is your problem you goddamn idiot!? I have explained to you numerous times now that the Jimmu RM and the Jingū RM were two completely different issues! Why do you persist in linking to the Jimmu RM and calling it the Jingū RM!? You brought the Jimmu RM into the discussion completely out of nowhere, apparently so you could use it as an excuse to canvas Enkyo2, and claimed it as evidence that "Jingū RM was opposed by the overwhelming majority of participants": the result was actually 4-1 in favour of the move, with the only oppose !vote being the anon in question, who only opposed because he didn't read the RM properly. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:24, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Re:JoshuSasori

Nice work showing sympathy for the latest in a series of probably 20+ socks of this stalker douchebag. That guy is probably one of the most thoroughly and righteously banned users on English Wikipedia. There's probably no way back for you after trying to get his latest sock unblocked solely because your intense and unjustified hatred of me. The last user to try that got himself banned pretty quickly. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 14:16, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

For the record, this isn't strictly correct. JoshSasori supporter User LittleBenW was banned for various behaviours of which support for JoshuSasori and socks was only part of the picture. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:28, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Email communications with blocked users

I noticed this following the blocking of Edgarwang at the latest JoshuSasori SPI. This is before the blocking so I'm assuming Good Faith and that you had no inkling the two JoshuSasori puppets were the same person, or that JoshuSasori had made (and carried out) real life threats against Hijiri88 (not that I approve of the bad language, but if you or I had had real life harrassment and Hijiri88 was defending the person, maybe we'd be using bad language too.

Also for reference WP:SPI advises against notifying suspected socks, I am told that this is partly because an alerted sock may take traces to cover/confuse tracks before an admin can look at it.

Enjoy your editing. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:24, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I have little idea who JoshuSasori is.

Did you bother to read my posts on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JoshuSasori? If you had, you would have understood that I had a very strong inkling that the two sock-puppets were the same person - though I guessed wrongly as to whom they were a sock puppet of.

I received two Wikipedia emails from Edgarwang. As this was a user I had had no previous contact with I was very suspicious. His/her contributions record also aroused suspicion, as his/her first edit to Wikipedia showed knowledge of various hard-to-understand templates, etc. The first email said "Greetings, how are you doing?" I thought that the most likely purpose of the email was to find out my IP address, so I replied on the user's talk page.[1] After I received a second email from the same editor giving me this IP link [2] I made this posting on the SPI report.[3] I did not send an email to this user, because I did not trust him/her.

As regards your statement that "WP:SPI advises against notifying suspected socks", you need to read the advice given more carefully.[4] This says "You may wish to notify the accused with {{subst:uw-socksuspect|casename}} ~~~~" --Toddy1 (talk) 07:37, 11 September 2013‎ (UTC)

Ok,

I thought that contradictory advice had been fixed. It caught me before as it caught you now. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The advice also appears in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/guide, This says: "You can notify the suspected accounts by adding {{subst:socksuspectnotice|PUPPETMASTER|sig=yes}} to the bottom of their talk pages. (Notification is courteous but isn’t mandatory, and in some cases it may be sub-optimal. Use your best judgement.)" I know it is not mandatory, but I think it is the right thing to do, as it gives people a chance to defend themselves. Mistakes can easily happen, especially when people use the "duck test" for sockpuppets. There was a case the other week where a user who reverted a reversion by another user was blocked on the basis of the duck test. (The reverter had not done an edit summary, so it looked like a sock making exactly the same posting.) The user only discovered that he/she was a suspected sock puppet, after he/she got blocked. He/she was soon unblocked - but it shows the problems that can be caused by not telling people that they are accused of something.--Toddy1 (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Well that's what I used to think as well.

Btw, how did you get involved in the JoshuSasori issue in the first place? In ictu oculi (talk) 01:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I did not get involved at all.

I commented on a report at ANI in which your friend was criticising an IP editor. But what I expected when I looked at the behaviour of the IP editor was not the case; in fact the IP editor was blameless, and the person making the report was sometimes uncivil in his/her dealings with other editors. The person making the ANI report was then uncivil to me for daring to disagree with him/her. Well that seems to be how he/she is a lot of the time. Then the sock intervened, and suddenly the person who made the ANI report starts telling me that I am supporting someone I had never heard of, and I got this suspicious email that seemed to be fishing for my IP address.

It is a pity the admins did not give your friend a 24 hours block for his/her being so uncivil with me. He/she needs to learn to be civil, and not to try to bully people. I had dealings with a user who the admins lets get away with all kinds of bad behaviour, with people saying that it was just as much the fault of the people he/she disagreed with. As a result, the user started to believe that he/she could get away with anything. In the end he/she went too far and got an indefinite block. If actions had taken action earlier, he/she would probably be contributing now. Like your friend he/she used to try to use ANI to attack people who dared to disagree with him. Please try and get your friend to behave better.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:49, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I was not uncivil in my previous dealings. Enkyo2 indicated that he didn't care whether the Jimmu article was moved, and then when I removed a ridiculously out-of-place footnote, he suddenly decided to vote against me not only there but in other places, and revert a whole bunch of my edits. How is this not "revenge"? I was then uncivil to you, not because you disagreed with me, but because you posted patent nonsense about me on ANI. I apologize for using foul language, but you had already started an unprovoked and unjustified attack on me by that point. I also told you that you were supporting the sock because you posted an apparently supportive message on the sock's talk page, and continued lying about me (I knew it was a sock, but it was IIO, and not me, who started the SPI). Additionally, you were wrong about the anon: I worked things out with him/her, and he/she admitted to having been in the wrong in the discussion that prompted me to go to ANI. I am going to ask for an IBAN with you if you continue following me around numerous forums (your solo defense of Enkyo2's activities, when everyone else agrees sanctions are needed, is worrying) and trying to revise the history of my interactions with you and other users. Also, Kaz wasn't blocked for being uncivil when provoked: he appears to have been blocked for abusing multiple accounts, and you're the one who opened the SPI. In fact, he never had any history of getting blocked for incivility. Why are you trying to associate me with a user I've never heard of and whose activities appear to have nothing in common with mine? Can you point to any place where I used ANI to attack a user I disagreed with? I've used it to bring users engaged in what I perceive as disruptive behaviour to task, and 90% of the time these users get sanctions because almost no one agrees with you that I am abusing ANI. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Watch out, watch out, there's a troll about

Hi Toddy1. I'm JoshuSasori (talk · contribs). I want to warn you about something. I tried to email you but you seem to be suspicious of email. Here is what happened to me. I first encountered Hijiri88 (talk · contribs) (then known as Elvenscout742) on Talk:Ryo Kase. First of all he started moving articles which I'd created, like Sonezaki Shinju, Reikou, and Ryoko Nakano. He then suddenly discovered an interest in Japanese cinema, my specialist topic on Wikipedia. He followed me to articles like Kuroneko and started subtly vandalizing the article, adding original research and other nonsense. At the time he was editing from his workplace. He didn't seem to have much to do, and he'd basically spend his entire day trying to find ways to annoy me or create arguments and conflicts with me and other users. He rarely if ever made a constructive edit such as adding a category to a page. Once he succeeded in having me blocked on the basis of a bunch of lies, he then stopped editing any articles about Japanese cinema. He only came back to the topic when I opened another account, Mysterious Island (talk · contribs), and started his trolling again. Now he never edits in that topic at all. If you have a topic which you're interested in, don't be surprised if Hijiri88 suddenly shows up and starts creating conflicts with you.

As you have experienced, Hijiri88 is totally paranoid and will go on and on about how everyone else is making personal attacks or revenge edits and so on. I can show you edits from 2005 where he was doing this. One funny one was when he started complaining that I'd used the term "orientalist drivel" in an edit summary, even though he has a web page called "Ian's orientalist drivel". He has a friend in diacritics troll In ictu oculi (talk · contribs), a person with no interest in Japanese topics but who will turn up to support Hijiri88 in exchange for Hijiri88's support in his trolling on Vietnam or Roman Catholic related discussions.

The problem for you is that now Hijiri88 has succeeded in having Enkyo2 (talk · contribs) blocked, he's looking for his next target. I don't know if he'll pick you, or someone less able to fight back, like Enkyo2, but be warned that he is a troll, he has limitless time, and he has no interest whatsoever in creating encyclopedia articles. If you see him making productive edits to articles, it's almost certainly immediately after I've pointed out somewhere or other that he never does this. He starts making normal edits for about fifty or so edits, enough to have a page of respectable-looking contributions which is enough to fool people who don't go past the first page of edits. Please consider yourself warned, and if you want more information please reply to the email I sent you from the Wangedgar (talk · contribs) account. I'll do my best to help you fight off this evil troll and give you as much information as you need about him. Hiding in a bowl of rice (talk) 02:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)