User talk:Matthead

User talk:Matthead/Archive2006

Copernicus

Did you read Matthead the question in "German or English Engineer"--131.104.219.177 03:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Your edit probably isn't bad but you should provide an explanation at Nicolaus Copernicus because it's a controversial article and that would set a good precedent. Sciurinæ 23:51, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Map

Yeah that was me. To lazy to log in ;). --Bigbrisco 15:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for 48 hours

You've been blocked for 3RR. You responded to the report here, so you've already seen the evidence. No matter how in the right you believe you are, edit warring is still a blockable offense. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 13:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Not if it fights vandalism. Too bad you blocked me so quick that I had no time to illustrate my view. Please look at this diff, which compares my edits of today, implementing the good suggestions of others, with the consensus of the last few days, maintained by at least 5 editors other than me. This version was approved by a GA review stating "The history section looks great!" before Piotrus mangled it. He started his editwarring attack in order to push his POV into the article before it gets GA status. I've neutralized that within 3RR. He then was followed by Szopen (what a coincidence!), who also did 3RR, which I deliberately[1] neutralized to protect the consensus of the last days - while merging in good faith edits in the process. Piotrus and Szopen obviously were willing to go to the limit of the rules, 1RR was not enough for them. Piotrus, who was repeatedly under scrutiny himself, predictably reported me for 3RR [2]. You reverted [3] to the last version by Szopen - are you not confident that other, uninvolved editors would take care of that if necessary? -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       14:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a content dispute, not overt vandalism, so that argument simply doesn't hold water. Finally, I reverted your final edit(s) to the page, not because I have any opinion in the content dispute, but only to revert the extreme abuse committed by the blocked user: you. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 14:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia:Three_revert_rule#Exceptions "reverts to conform with community consensus on geographic names which fall within the scope of the Gdansk Vote" are excepted. Cracow was as Krakau part of German-speaking Austria for about 100 years, a fact which Piotrus tried to conceal by erasing[4] large part from the history section, as well as {{lang-de|Krakau}} from the intro.-- Matthead ^discuß!     O       14:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Gdańsk/Vote is about Gdańsk, not Kraków. Austria is not Germany. The community consensus was against you. The edit war was about more then mere naming. Gdańsk/Vote is not applicable here, please don't abuse it in attempt to gain 3RR immunity.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:30, 27 September 2007 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

As per 3RR exceptions, "reverts to conform with community consensus on geographic names which fall within the scope of the Gdansk Vote" are permitted. See my reasoning given above, Piotrus and Szopen erased not only the German language name Krakau, but also large parts of the history section

Decline reason:

I have had a look with fresh eyes at the subject of this dispute and I have come to the conclusion that your invocation of the Gdansk vote is an attempt to 'game the system' of the three revert rule. This is a simple content dispute and you were engaging in a revert war about it, which is precisely what the three revert rule is there to stop. The block is appropriate. Sam Blacketer 14:50, 27 September 2007 (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.

• Support block of Matthead (as if my opinion mattered) as his long time record speaks for itself - and against him. Denying centuries of Polish history by pushing German POV over it is Matthead's only agenda. As long as he is around, development of the German-Polish-related topics on Wikipedia will stagnate as his behaviour is driving away good faith editors. After all this time he's been here, it should be him who is made to go elsewhere, e.g. to the Wiki articles covering modern Germany (or motor sports). Sincerely Space Cadet 14:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

How flattering, Space Cadet is copying my edit to the recent Proposal to ban User:Space Cadet from German-Polish-related topics on the Community sanction noticeboard. -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       15:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course! I always try to learn from Great Masters. Space Cadet 15:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I corrected your German oder into English or. Don't thank me or anything.

Oder is German, indeed.-- Matthead ^discuß!     O       16:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

You mean as a river? Keep dreaming! Space Cadet 16:11, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Curiosity question

What city are you from? Stuttgart maybe? Why do I care? Nothing really, I just had a drinking buddy from Stuttgart ages ago, before the WIKI, when I was still "on the sauce". Space Cadet 16:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Non-aggression Pact

How about we both commit not to:

• call each other names
• portray one another as a nationalist
• criticize each other's personality and/or mental capabilities
• revert each other without satisfactory explanation on a respective Talk page
• interfere with eachother's block/ban processes
  

You can come up with more and I will carefully evaluate them. Why am I doing this? Well, despite our past differences, I hate to see a fellow Wikipedian being blocked. If our Non-aggression Pact works, you may consider a similar pact with Piotrus and maybe even others. That would drastically limit (IMHO) your risk of being blocked again. Your wanna be friend Space Cadet 16:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)