User talk:Daniel

Block/edit conflict

Re: [1] I blocked the editor [2] before I saw that. Feel free to unblock or take other action as you feel is appropriate. BTW, your user talk page is still cascade protected.--chaser - t 08:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that - as I noted to the reporter on his/her talk, I got my wires crossed,[3] and was about to block.[4] I forgot about my talk page being cascaded - cheers for that. Daniel 08:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I just dug into the history of the cascade-protection. It's good to have you back, Daniel. I've seen you around and always been impressed by your maturity and level-headedness. I do hope you stay with us; people like you are an asset to Wikipedia.--chaser - t 08:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

My stress yesterday caused a major lapse in any sanity that remains with me, but thanks for your kind words :) Daniel 08:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

unprotected...ZOMG here come the vandals! ;) I was worried you were being harassed? ~Eliz81^(C) 08:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope - stress and a situation I didn't really appreciate lead to a sort of flip-out...probably not a great idea to be placing yourself in a volatile environment just before exams... Daniel 08:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Egads. Well I do hope it's all sorted out and that all is well. ~Eliz81^(C) 09:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Exams... the worst thing you can get except for maybe England winning the World Cup...(I love the Springboks now!) :p --D_arkF_alls ^talk 07:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Tag Removal

The IP user is back to removing tags. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ghayyour&diff=166254166&oldid=166254118 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MorrisRob (talk • contribs) 11:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocked. Daniel 11:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism by Dc76 on Bălţi article and on the Bălţi talk page

Hello Daniel! Thank you for your answer. Following your message I would like to mention that the referecnes I've indicated: spam, sneaky vandalism, nonsense edits, intentional misinformation fully correspond to the definiton and examples given on the Wikipedia article about vandalism[5]. If you wish, I can identify them all on this page, alternatively you can check the Bălţi article history[6], Bălţi article talk page[7], User:Dc76 talk page, User:Edokter talk page User:Persian Poet Gal and my talk page User:Moldopodo.

Could you please indicate what are the further steps for contestation of Edokter's edits on my talk page and leaving my requests to him on the similar issue against Dc76 without any approproate action.

Thank you in advance for spending your time on this. Moldopodo 11:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)Moldopodo

Hello Daniel, please refer to this link[8] to see the characterization of vandalism by Dc76 on Bălţi article. Thank you. Moldopodo 16:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Moldopodo

fogot to add an editor

Hi Daniel. I have proposed formal mediation or Pro-pedophile activism, but I forgot to include an editor, user:Welland R. Seeing that the form of formal mediation is rather strict, I'm asking your help in what to do with that. Can I add it in on the subpage, can you add it in, or should I file a whole new request? Martijn Hoekstra 12:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to add them as you please, prior to the case being accepted. Daniel 00:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

As I said in regard to the "informal mediation": I will assist in whatever ways I can. I'm on-board, if that is desired and considered proper. Sincerely, Welland R 08:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lankans at Adelaide Oval

Are you going to be there? I am currently not in possession of a camera .. . for the next few months :( Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear Daniel, Thank you for your contribution to My RfA, which failed with 3 Supports, 0 Neutrals and 5 opposes. Dreamy § 11:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper

Daniel, can you please assign a mediator for Lake Ontario Waterkeeper? I believe that I am being unduly harassed by one individual, and unduly shadowed by another with which I have had long-standing prior professional relationship.

[User:butseriouslyfolks] is being unduly agressive. I have been at odds with this person since the very beginning. I believed he prematurely AfD'd the [Lake Ontario Watrerkeeper] topic, within minutes, while I was still working on first edits. Prior to that he deleted the first draft of [Lake Ontario Watrerkeeper] leaving no trace in history, forcing me to start over again.

Since then he has repeatedly belittled the object of discourse, and shown no sign of collaboration. The AfD process was not explained to me, and I have already apologized for breech of a then-obscure Wikipedia policy, but this is STILL being brought up by [User:butseriouslyfolks] and others as supposed justification that [User:butseriouslyfolks] is fine being on my tail all the time.

My petition is simply this: I request that some other administrator be involved here, and that [User:butseriouslyfolks] step back. I don't object to oversight at all. I just can't work with [User:butseriouslyfolks]. Repeated requests for more space are being rebuffed by [User:butseriouslyfolks]. Nothing I do is right, it seems. I want [User:butseriouslyfolks] to move on, he's been more than disrupive to flow, thank you very much.

[User:SarekOfVulcan] has been asked several times to not shadow everything I do. In our prior relationship, for eight years he was a user of a wiki website I created and have been running at http://fox.wikis.com. I have asked this user for more space, to let me work in peace, but he's all over the [Lake Ontario Waterkeeper] topic. I have repeatedly asked this user for space but that's just not happening.

This diff shows the depth of my aggravation and exasperation with [User:SarekOfVulcan].

I find it odd that this user should be showing such an interest in Lake Ontario Waterkeeper topic, don't you? I have asked him to move on, and that's not happening. I normally don't have problems collaborating online with people, but [User:SarekOfVulcan] I find very annoying.

At the moment the Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, a short topic, still in draft really, but is festooned with TWO "prose" tags, and one AfD tag that I expect will come down without problems. I expect this topic will ALWAYS be controversial, subject to pressure from quarters jilted by the Lake Ontario Waterkeeper in the course of its environmental justice advocacy. I am not convinced that more "prose" is necessarily the best way for this topic to evolve at this stage. I believe agreement on general structure should come first. Attempts to have these "prose" tag moved to discussion, or reduced in number, are being rebuffed by this collegial clique of overseers.

About personal attacks: I feel attacked by the undue aggressiveness of these powerful overseers, and requests for more space, and generally less prompt input from these people on this topic, has never been respected. All this started with a topic deletion by [User:butseriouslyfolks] due to a bogus copyright violation claim by a bot created by [User:carin]. The bot was in error. This was followed by a clearly premature AfD from [User:butseriouslyfolks] which, so early in the topic's existance and considering the deletion by the same user, I consider to be WAY over the top aggressive at such an early stage. Believing I was being bullied by a troll, I removed the Afd (not being aware of policy and have appologised for that) but apparently, in the eyes of many, that AfD removal gives [User:butseriouslyfolks] carte blanche. Personal attacks arise from my utter frustration.

In both aspects of this mediation request I am asking that I be allowed to work in Wikipedia as I always have: without pressure and undue aggressiveness from other users who are clearly shadowing me, festooning my young article with garish banners, belittling the object of discourse's notability, and being far more disruptive than I perceive fair.

StevenBlack 13:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)