Jump to content

User talk:Anynobody: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Anynobody (talk | contribs)
→‎Returned to sender: sorry bout that---?
→‎Returned to sender: Stop trolling now.
Line 72: Line 72:


:Why would you post something without expecting a reply? Sorry about the confusion but you do understand that it would be appreciated if you not "help" over there. As I said above we won't blindside you with it. [[User:Anynobody|Anynobody]] 08:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
:Why would you post something without expecting a reply? Sorry about the confusion but you do understand that it would be appreciated if you not "help" over there. As I said above we won't blindside you with it. [[User:Anynobody|Anynobody]] 08:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
::Anynobody, this is an official warning to stop trolling and provoking other editors. ''You'' were the one who posted Justanother's text in [[User talk:Orsini/Sandbox3]]. Justanother wrote it on ANI on April 1 (UTC), you posted it—quoted it—in Orsini's sandbox on April 3. I don't blame you for getting it wrong originally. It was a natural mistake, since you had included Justanother's actual signature in the post, without setting it off typographically in any way. I put that down to inexperience. But it's incomprehensible, and unfortunately of a piece with the rest of your behavior, that you continue to insist, after Justanother has ''given you a diff'' demonstrating your error. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orsini/Sandbox3&diff=prev&oldid=119907105 Here] it is again. See the text? With JA's signature in it? See where it says "Anynobody" at the top? I don't know how to make it any clearer. Now apologize nicely and leave him alone. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 10:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Revision as of 10:52, 8 April 2007

March 2007 - 1 April 2007

Archive Positive Feedback 1 Jan 2007 - April 2007

AN/I again

And AN/I again for you, my friend. --Justanother 13:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the effort at informing me, but going through the whole WP:ANI list is a pain, so in the future would you please provide a link to the section you're referring to? You can do this by adding a # after the main page name in a wikilink, and the section name. Like this WP:ANI#Another weird one User:Anynobody using Editor Review as a back-door User RfC on me. If you want it to not show the whole name, but still link there the format would be like this: [[WP:ANI#Another weird one User:Anynobody using Editor Review as a back-door User RfC on me|And AN/I again for you]], my friend.
The WP:ER is not an attempt to back door RfC you. Perhaps you didn't read it very carefully, so I'll point out that it is asking for uninvolved editors to give me feedback on the whole issue we seem to have. Honestly, from the first disagreement I've just been trying to point out mistakes you are making in your reasoning for certain actions, your attitude towards those who don't agree with you, and your inability to either pursue or accept WP:DR.
Either I'm grossly wrong about these issues, the system doesn't work, or prhaps a combination of both. When in a situation like this an outside opinion is the only way to get the real story. I don't agree with any of your points about my motives, and you've mistreated many of the editors I know so editors who know nothing about the situation can give me an unbiased opinion.
Do what you have to on the AN/I board, the ER is about how I dealt with you. I don't need a back door to a RfC for you, frankly several editors are willing to go through with one on you. Before I go any further this seemed like a good idea. Anynobody 02:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your WP:ER

As an admin, I can see the deleted text of your request. While you did say you wanted input on your behavior, the questions focused on Justanother's behavior to such an extent that it was clear what you really wanted (and what you really do want, from your comment to me just now) is community input on his behavior. RFC is the appropriate venue for this kind of thing, and a new RFC can achieve that purpose. If you want to try the editor review thing over again, some advice: (1) don't make your interaction with Justanother the only thing you want to know about, (2) don't get into his behavior in detail (or your own, really: just sum things up). And (3) as feedback from me: you have concerns that are not totally unreasonable, but the letter & spirit of WP:AGF is that you do the best you can to work with people despite your concerns about them. If (as an example), Justanother removes something in an article and you disagree with it, spend the discussion on how the article should be written and how the change affects that, argue from WP basic policy, and if disputes still come up, you will have tried to resolve them. Mangojuicetalk 11:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editor review is much more about your general performance as an editor, not about you trying to minutely examine a specific events even if you do perceive the subject as yourself.
I have read the review as have many others and it comes across as inappropriate and concentrating on the actions of another editor. Editor review is an inappropriate forum for that. The fact that many experienced editors (some admins) are telling you that it was inappropriate yet you continue to pursue it, speaks great volumes about your behaviour in dealing with contetious issues/disputes.
Combine the fact that the main supporter of your RFC springs up to try and help you undelete the review should also send alarm bells as to how it is being perceived, for me it merely comes across an effort to prolong a dispute. --pgk 11:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I want to thank you both for responding, I honestly appreciate you taking the time to address my concerns. I was presumptuous to assume it would be understood that I'm interested in a review of all my time here, since that is what a WP:ER is for as you've both pointed out. However I was attempting to get those specific questions about Justanother answered because I really think I must be doing something wrong. I included the diffs to mke it easier to spot those edits I'm asking about(I already figured out that the edit summary is good for both remembering what I was doing AND allowing others to figure that out too), I was assuming that in regards to the rest of my work here that any reviewing editor would go over my history and look at what they wanted without suggestion from me. I know I'm making mistakes, but since Justanother is either so afraid of or hates me that anything I say about him is assumed to be an attack that's the possible mistake I am most concerned about). Anynobody 23:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
pgk I didn't ask, but do appreciate Smee's participation in my request for WP:DRV. I understand how that could look suspicious to you, especially since Justanother is accusing us of tag team harassment. The truth is we both, I think, feel a bit cheated by how the first WP:RfC was terminated the way it was. If I had submitted the RfC and it was rejected by whoever reviewed it, I would have let the situation go because an uninvolved party would have said it's not an issue. That is not what happened, the subject requested it be deleted and uninvolved administrators wouldn't. The administrator that Smee consulted and I attempted to work with did. Since that admin and Justanother have had prior dealings and what appeared to me as a friendship I disagreed with said admin's assessment Smee efforts at WP:DR. I personally think the admin was a bit embarrassed that the RfC in question was in fact approved despite their POV.
Honestly it's not just Smee and I who've had difficulty with Justanother. I hate to trouble anyone else, but would it help if I invited a few editors who haven't joined in say a few words about his style of editing? (I assume they haven't weighed in because neither Smee or I have asked them and like all of us have much better things to do than deal with just him). Seriously, I just want a shot at WP:DR and am willing to live with whatever comes of it. The issue here is that hasn't happened in a way that WP:RFC or WP:DR say it should. Anynobody 23:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Anynobody here, I was simply requesting that the Editor Review be allowed to run its course. This seemed like an unduly hasty maneuver... Smee 02:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

RfA

Thank you for the support vote in my recent RfA. Although it wasn't successful I appreciate your vote of confidence. Anyway, I'm continuing on with editing Pacific War-related articles and hopefully you'll see several of them on the FA nominations page in the future. Cla68 23:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's no problem, we seriously need more admins. Hope you run again sometime. Anynobody 23:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I attempted to fix this. [1] Lakers 08:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Close, the puppeteer is The real Barbara Schwarz blueblueswhatever is the sock. Anynobody 08:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up Lakers, I've noted {{Sockpuppet|1=name}} for the future. Anynobody 08:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Lakers 08:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks from Akhilleus

Akhilleus gets new weapons.
Akhilleus gets new weapons.
Anynobody, thanks for your support in my successful RfA.

As the picture shows, the goddesses have already bestowed my new weapons,
which I hope to use to good effect. If you ever need assistance,
or want to give me feedback on my use of the admin tools,
please leave me a message on my talkpage.
--Akhilleus (talk) 17:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome, and congratulations :) Anynobody 23:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Returned to sender

You are confused, AN. I did not put that there. You did [2]. Again, you are wasting your time over there but you have already demonstrated that you will not listen to me (or anyone else, for that matter, at least on this subject). Enjoy the holiday. No need to reply at my page please. Reply here if you care to but no real reason to, I am not looking for a reply, just returning your mail erroneously addressed to me. Good night. --Justanother 08:43, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We're actually preparing the RfC on your behavior so your diff and comment are out of place there. I'm not saying you aren't entitled to your opinion, or to explain your perspective but that time will be when the RfC is submitted. I promise you that we will let you know before we submit it so you can get prepared, I realize you think my WP:ER was going behind your back somehow (I wanted people to tell me if I was wrong about you). On anything where I'm asking for comment on you I would never just submit it without some sort of mention to you.

It's not so much about "you" as it is about your actions on Barbara Schwarz and refusal to accept WP:DR by asking for the first RfC to be deleted. I'm not looking for any kind of punishment, since it would probably be unfair to punish you so long after the fact. Anynobody 02:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

diff Really sorry to be here again but his relentless creepy preoccupation with me just seems to have no end! Looks like clear misuse of the Editor Review process...Justanother 13:34, 1 April 2007

Why would you post something without expecting a reply? Sorry about the confusion but you do understand that it would be appreciated if you not "help" over there. As I said above we won't blindside you with it. Anynobody 08:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anynobody, this is an official warning to stop trolling and provoking other editors. You were the one who posted Justanother's text in User talk:Orsini/Sandbox3. Justanother wrote it on ANI on April 1 (UTC), you posted it—quoted it—in Orsini's sandbox on April 3. I don't blame you for getting it wrong originally. It was a natural mistake, since you had included Justanother's actual signature in the post, without setting it off typographically in any way. I put that down to inexperience. But it's incomprehensible, and unfortunately of a piece with the rest of your behavior, that you continue to insist, after Justanother has given you a diff demonstrating your error. Here it is again. See the text? With JA's signature in it? See where it says "Anynobody" at the top? I don't know how to make it any clearer. Now apologize nicely and leave him alone. Bishonen | talk 10:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]