::*Dont try and play a snide little OWNership accusation by using "your" in inverted commas. That is gaslighting and your passive-aggressive approach to editing is rather distasteful. Editing should be an enjoyable activity, but when someone stalks your edits, it becomes unpleasant, nasty and very creepy. - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 21:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
::*Dont try and play a snide little OWNership accusation by using "your" in inverted commas. That is gaslighting and your passive-aggressive approach to editing is rather distasteful. Editing should be an enjoyable activity, but when someone stalks your edits, it becomes unpleasant, nasty and very creepy. - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 21:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
::: Agree editing should be an enjoyable activity. Still disagree about [[Wikipedia:Ownership of content|whether anyone owns any articles]] here, but we're clearly not going to resolve that now and here. Let me thank you for your work, as an author of many FA's you are clearly a better writer than I am, and I enjoyed reading Tottenham Outrage, it's a fine job, I hope you make more. I hope you <small>(the plural you this time)</small> have a good day, I did not intend to ruin it. --[[User:GRuban|GRuban]] ([[User talk:GRuban|talk]]) 21:14, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
::: Agree editing should be an enjoyable activity. Still disagree about [[Wikipedia:Ownership of content|whether anyone owns any articles]] here, but we're clearly not going to resolve that now and here. Let me thank you for your work, as an author of many FA's you are clearly a better writer than I am, and I enjoyed reading Tottenham Outrage, it's a fine job, I hope you make more. I hope you <small>(the plural you this time)</small> have a good day, I did not intend to ruin it. --[[User:GRuban|GRuban]] ([[User talk:GRuban|talk]]) 21:14, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
::::{{tpw}} [[User:GRuban|GRuban]], whatever your intent but you're coming across as a really, really, creepy stalker in virtually every word of your posts above, and I can entirely see why every other person in this thread is finding your continued presence unwelcome. To add a little more weight to what [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] says above, now you've been told by {{em|every single person to comment}} that your {{tq|"following user edits"}}—which, when done in the circumstances in which you're doing it, is [[Wikipedia:Harassment#Wikihounding|an explicit breach of Wikipedia policy]]—is unwanted, I won't hesitate to take you to ANI, Arbcom, or block outright as appropriate if I see you harassing any of them again. If you want to make this official I can give a {{tl|Uw-harass4im}} on your talkpage, but you've been here long enough that I'd expect you to know a basic policy like [[WP:HARASS]] without having it explained to you. ‑ [[User:Iridescent|Iridescent]] 21:25, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Revision as of 21:25, 17 January 2018
Please leave a message; I'll reply here.
This is Cassianto's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.
For standing up against anti-own template,warriors. This also goes to Shrodo, another astute voice pleading into the void. Ceoil (talk) 00:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cass, and a very warm happy new year to you. A few months ago you were kind enough to comment on the PR for the Aberfan disaster. After a slight delay to allow some of the images to become PD, the article is now at FAC. Any further comments would be most welcome. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:21, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I trust that you weren't including me in your besieged by idiots sobriquet. I merely offered a friendly thought, which you are free to disregard. Not my issue. 7&6=thirteen (☎)17:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You can trust, implicitly. As far as I can see, you didn't even take part in the thread, so I don't see how you made the connection. Anyhoo, thanks for the advice; I'd never even heard of the Streisand Effect until today. CassiantoTalk20:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cassianto, I was wondering if I can ask for your help/or just tips in drafting a infobox criteria (that needs to be followed prior to any comment about including/not including infobox), similar to your input at Talk:Michael Hordern. As you mentioned, if gaming "consensus can change" is a problem, I was thinking perhaps having a streamlined prerequisite in WP:INFOBOX might be a good place to start to reduce future time sink. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There wasn't any need to start AN/I report as I've already closed the RfC just now. I just wanted to ask, maybe I missed something, but I did not notice the bot closed anything? Alex Shih (talk) 19:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all. I'm quite grateful to Phil, she did the right thing, and I told her as much. (For other readers, there was a source calling "Nairne" "Nairn". I added the "e", being sure it was in error, but no, it actually said "Nairn" in the source. Phil reverted, quite properly; though with a comment implying that I had hurt her feelings, which I certainly didn't mean to, so I apologized!) We all fix each other's errors here, that's why the Wikipedia works. --GRuban (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In future, do not stalk me, or any other editor, between articles. Now you have openly admitted that's what you do, if you go through my edits again and pop up on another article I am working on, I shall use the diff of your comment and drop you into ANI. For the record, your addition and comments at the FAC I was running were not welcome. I suspect the same is true for others you have also stalked. - SchroCat (talk) 20:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I believe contributing to what other editors edit is a perfectly legitimate use of the Wikipedia. And I do believe your contribution to Modest Stein improved it, and am grateful for it, even if you did delete my comment saying as much. This isn't a war. This is a joint effort. We are all on the same side, the side of trying to contribute to the "summary of all human knowledge". That's a really good thing. Anything that leads to article improvement should be encouraged. --GRuban (talk) 20:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, passive aggressive behaviour that makes other people feel uncomfortable, annoyed or angry is not acceptable. Following other editors around is WP:STALKing, and if you do it to me again I will file a report on you at ANI. You can take that as official notice. Given Sagaciousphil's comment below, and the fact she has stated she feels harassed by you, if I see you doing it to her, I will also file an ANI report on her behalf. You may take this as official notification too. It is not acceptable. - SchroCat (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I had been refraining from commenting after becoming extremely upset this morning and then even more so after watching some of the antics taking place throughout the day. As a female editor (which I thought was fairly common knowledge and there is a template that is readily available to check anyway when people have the courtesy to use it) who has previously been subjected to hassle from banned and/or indef blocked users - Coat of Many Colours and Singora plus others, administrators like Drmies are aware of this and some of the personal problems it has caused - I find it very unsettling that (a) I was described as "an attack dog" by Jcc recently and, despite requests by others to an Admin, to address and at least reprimand/warn, no action was taken; and (b) that GRuban, another male editor, has started to follow me around (see Bute witches where he arrived after encouraging me to comment on Talk:Josephine Butler only to ridicule me there when I did so. He then miraculously appeared on Witchcraft in Orkney today after he had made an incorrect edit that I reverted on Carolina Nairne. What is at the root cause of all this? In my opinion, it seems to be IBs and the GGTF/WIR crew. SagaciousPhil - Chat20:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I admit, I did assume Phil was a male name, was just informed of your pronoun preference, correcting above. I'm also quite grateful for your reversion, as I wrote, and I hope the edit on Witchcraft in Orkney was an improvement. (I changed the link to archipelago to point to the more specific archipelago, Orkney, because, in my humble opinion as someone who knew what an archipelago was is not as knowledgeable of what Orkney was, one was needed.) As above, it's a joint effort, and I'm not going to admit that having someone edit "your" article should be seen as a hostile act. I also didn't intend to ridicule you after you gave the example of "Josephine" usage, you gave a good citation, which was appreciated, and could well have helped turn the resolution of the question. Which is what we're all here for, after all, not to "win", but to get to the best article? I still disagreed, and explained why, but surely that's not ridicule? --GRuban (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dont try and play a snide little OWNership accusation by using "your" in inverted commas. That is gaslighting and your passive-aggressive approach to editing is rather distasteful. Editing should be an enjoyable activity, but when someone stalks your edits, it becomes unpleasant, nasty and very creepy. - SchroCat (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree editing should be an enjoyable activity. Still disagree about whether anyone owns any articles here, but we're clearly not going to resolve that now and here. Let me thank you for your work, as an author of many FA's you are clearly a better writer than I am, and I enjoyed reading Tottenham Outrage, it's a fine job, I hope you make more. I hope you (the plural you this time) have a good day, I did not intend to ruin it. --GRuban (talk) 21:14, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) GRuban, whatever your intent but you're coming across as a really, really, creepy stalker in virtually every word of your posts above, and I can entirely see why every other person in this thread is finding your continued presence unwelcome. To add a little more weight to what SchroCat says above, now you've been told by every single person to comment that your "following user edits"—which, when done in the circumstances in which you're doing it, is an explicit breach of Wikipedia policy—is unwanted, I won't hesitate to take you to ANI, Arbcom, or block outright as appropriate if I see you harassing any of them again. If you want to make this official I can give a {{Uw-harass4im}} on your talkpage, but you've been here long enough that I'd expect you to know a basic policy like WP:HARASS without having it explained to you. ‑ Iridescent21:25, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
_Raw_sugar_jaggery_gud_Punjab_India.jpg)
