Jump to content

User talk:Jehochman: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
HRCC (talk | contribs)
HRCC is abbreviation for old name
HRCC (talk | contribs)
Line 128: Line 128:
==answer==
==answer==
User:Hillary Rodham Clinton constituent. Coren wrongly blocked this citing a name of a person or organization. There is no such person as the constituent family. There is no such organisation either. Coren didn't even ask me to change the name. Why don't you block him for 24 hours for violating Wikipedia rules? The last (first) time I mentioned it, another Nazi admin blocked me because they said I shouldn't complain. The trouble with admin is they have no accountability. If they violate the rules, they must be subject to punishment. I don't seek a harsh punishment. Maybe a series of points. Once they exceed a certain number of points, then punishment is given. [[User:HRCC|HRCC]] ([[User talk:HRCC|talk]]) 20:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Hillary Rodham Clinton constituent. Coren wrongly blocked this citing a name of a person or organization. There is no such person as the constituent family. There is no such organisation either. Coren didn't even ask me to change the name. Why don't you block him for 24 hours for violating Wikipedia rules? The last (first) time I mentioned it, another Nazi admin blocked me because they said I shouldn't complain. The trouble with admin is they have no accountability. If they violate the rules, they must be subject to punishment. I don't seek a harsh punishment. Maybe a series of points. Once they exceed a certain number of points, then punishment is given. [[User:HRCC|HRCC]] ([[User talk:HRCC|talk]]) 20:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Your tone is getting aggressive. What is your point? HRCC is the only account I use. Period. Having another account is permitted even though I don't. [[User:HRCC|HRCC]] ([[User talk:HRCC|talk]]) 21:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:05, 17 August 2008

Wow. A clean talk page.

I'm definitely open to mentorship

Just let me know. Cheerio! ScienceApologist (talk) 15:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you are trying to plug every leak with your thumbs, but you don't have enough to go around. A better approach would be to rebuild the dike one section at a time so it stops leaking. What I suggest is that we identify a high importance article that has been overrun with fringe views and original research, then clean it up to good article or even featured article standards. I have found that quality certification helps prevent backsliding, by establishing a consensus for what the article should contain, and by bringing in lots of eyes, especially those of quality-conscious editors. I think I can find a mentor who could help you with this endeavor. However, I'd like you to agree to disengage from the multiple disputes you are involved in (take them off your watchlist), and focus on a small number of "renovation project" articles. The mentor that I could find for you would help deal with any disruptive editors. Jehochman Talk 20:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have plenty of experience cleaning up articles to good and featured status. However, I have absolutely no desire to do this for articles outside of my discipline. I've run-off the vast majority of astronomy pseudoscience POV-pushers, so I'm not sure what else you are wanting. The closest I can think of it cold fusion which has been plagued by editors with very particular agendas and administrators in great need of WP:CLUE, but there's no way I would be able to devote myself full-bore to just that article as I find dealing with the likes of the characters that hang out there to be overwhelmingly aggravating and dull for anything more than a week. ScienceApologist (talk) 21:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

Just so you know, 208.54.94.111 is requesting an unblock. PhilKnight (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I left a note there. Jehochman Talk 13:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep.

I agree with the "officialness" of the warning, I'll reiterate I called it "appropriate". Fritzpoll posted on my talkpage, I'd been watching this issue unfold/develop over the weekend and was tangentially involved. While you were (presumably) typing up your edit there, I was compiling a list of the contentious areas that the user in question has decided to "do battle", and was shocked at how many divisive issues he is involved in in just the past week. I went to his talkpage to post my post, and was surprised (and refreshed) to see someone already there. Keeper ǀ 76 15:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Playing devil's advocate

It wouldn't take too much digging to show that I am a UK resident, and that the IP accused is also from the UK. Does this shift the balance of evidence in Abd's favour for a CU? Why am I asking this? Because if it is to be done, then t'were well it were done quickly Fritzpoll (talk) 19:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. I have worked on enough RFCU cases to be familiar with their standards. There is no evidence to connnect you; no check can be run. Abd is bluffing and trying to get you upset. Just ignore any further provocations. You should see some of the things that people have said about me![1] Jehochman Talk 19:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe - cool, just throwing it out there. Fritzpoll (talk) 19:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SA

I'm not sure this is a job for the mentor since the damage is already done. I am probably more concerned than MartinPhi is but I hate to see an editor come back to this. This kind of behaviour wears down editors. Martin left feeling discouraged, and despite the encouragement of several editors who felt he had a lot to offer. He has finally returned. This kind of behaviour undermines Wikipedia civility and collaborative editing at a subtle level call it what you will on the surface. Thanks and best wishes.(olive (talk) 01:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Damage done can best be resolved by offering assistance to repair the problem. Additionally, you can request more "eyes" in the form of uninvolved parties. We don't sanction editors to compensate for past errors. We do sometimes use sanctions to deter or prevent future problems. Since one (and possibly a second) mentor have been engaged, I think that remedy should be utilized first, before we move on to the next possibility. Jehochman Talk 02:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that we don't sanction as punishment. I also feel concern about this kind of situation. I have no desire to punish anyone. At the same time, I have no desire to see an editor face unfair situations and environments in attempts to edit. However, The mentor will know best what to do, and I'll leave my concerns in his hands. Many thanks for your comments.(olive (talk) 02:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)_[reply]

Java

Hey,

I'm trying to put a javascript menu on another wiki.... any idea who I could ask about the mechanics of that? ——Martinphi Ψ Φ—— 06:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a note

I sent you a personal email about a situation that I find troubling. I hope you understand and I hope you don't take offense from me emailing you. I welcome any communication or discussion. My feelings and thoughts are very scattered, so please take that into consideration before reading. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck

It looks like you're the new tar baby, Jehochman.  ;) Now you're also harrassing Abd. S.D.Jameson 04:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When stepping in between a troll and a target, I often get attacked. It comes with the job. Jehochman Talk 13:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your question:

I have voluntarily given you my identity and IP address on a popular WP discussion site of which you are a member. If you need further information, you may contact me there. (As a reference, it was the place in which we were discussing who to invite to the party...) Gretab (talk) 21:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will use that information if necessary. Jehochman Talk 21:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GlobalCollect page

I am curious to know why you speed deleted the page I wrote regarding GlobalCollect without any prior warning as to what was unacceptable in the article. My goal was to create a sterile company profile (similar to the pages of CyberSource, Basic Research, Aveda, and a myriad of other companies on Wikipedia), not blatantly advertise for this particular company. Furthermore, you protected the page so I could not even rework the content to meet the Wikipedia standards. Any information you can provide would be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.195.98 (talk) 17:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the company appears to be completely non-notable, and the article appeared to be blatant advertising. Since this article was deleted once before, and nothing seems to have changed since then, I have protected it to prevent circular debates over the same thing. If you like, register an account, read Business' FAQ, and then create an article in your userspace. If you have any connection to the company, best practice would be to disclose this. You can edit the page User:YourUsername/GlobalCollect (replace YourUsername with your real username). Feel free to ask me or another administrator to review the article and see whether it complies with policy well-enough to be moved into the encyclopedia. I hope this advice helps. Jehochman Talk 17:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abd talk page

Abd has specifically asked you not to post on their talk page, and (like any other user) is entitled to remove comments from their own talk page. Why not just stop baiting? DuncanHill (talk) 17:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abd has followed me around and disrupted my conversations. I left him a warning about that, and replied to a question from another administrator. If Abd does not interfere with me, I have no intention of going near his talk page. I disagree with your assessment that I am baiting him. How exactly do I warn off a user who is disrupting my conversations without leaving a note on their talk page? Per this essay I started, I am going to back off, but I am still free to respond to any criticism directed at me. Jehochman Talk 17:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contact me regarding "plan of action" for ScienceApologist mentorship

(See: [2]) We need to get in touch to organise a 'plan of action' from here on in, regarding guiding ScienceApologist back onto the right path. I am aware that you had a proposal to focus S.A.'s contrib's on a few, select articles, with a view to bringing them up to featured status. If you wish to endure with that (it certainly seems like a good plan to me), we'll need to co-ordinate how we're going to enforce it, which articles to pick, how far we should ask S.A. to restrict himself from other articles (compile a "blacklist" of articles he should stay well away from?), and so on.

I've also asked S.A. and Fritzpoll (the other mentor) to contact me. Would email be an okay forum by which to discuss things (it would probably be easiest -- could CC everybody into the one thread)?

Anthøny 22:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, email me. I should be able to respond fairly promptly. We might start by asking SA to make a list of articles he'd like to edit, and we can supplement that, and maybe strike those which seem too trouble-prone, and then ask him if he would agree. Jehochman Talk 22:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Medicine is not even a good article yet. That would be a good place to start. Jehochman Talk 16:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just waiting on Fritzpoll returning to editing (he's away over the weekend). Regards, Anthøny 16:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block just now

FYI, if it helps. rootology (T) 18:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching?

Hi. I'm interested in having an admin coach, and I saw you had an opening. What is your method for coaching your students? Would you be interested in coaching me? Thanks. SunDragon34 (talk) 03:45, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to my talk page. I'd be happy to help you. I think you have been here less than six months and have less than a thousand edits, yes? As a practical matter, it would be difficult to pass RFA before you have more experience. I'd like you to pass with a high percentage, not just squeak through. Could you begin by choosing an important article, and bring it through good article or featured article candidacy? I've had my eye on medicine, but you could choose another topic if something else interests you more. I recommend choosing a serious academic subject, rather than pop culture for the purpose of this exercise. When you run into difficulties, you can ask me for advice. Jehochman Talk 20:44, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your comment. I wasn't aware of that. PHG (talk) 16:30, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus Sockpuppet

No. I really did suspect that those three were sockpuppets - read my later contributions.

I have been met with resistance on the Solar System pages, then when I show analytical thinking, then logical conclusions: I'm met with silence. -HarryAlffa (talk) 18:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

answer

User:Hillary Rodham Clinton constituent. Coren wrongly blocked this citing a name of a person or organization. There is no such person as the constituent family. There is no such organisation either. Coren didn't even ask me to change the name. Why don't you block him for 24 hours for violating Wikipedia rules? The last (first) time I mentioned it, another Nazi admin blocked me because they said I shouldn't complain. The trouble with admin is they have no accountability. If they violate the rules, they must be subject to punishment. I don't seek a harsh punishment. Maybe a series of points. Once they exceed a certain number of points, then punishment is given. HRCC (talk) 20:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your tone is getting aggressive. What is your point? HRCC is the only account I use. Period. Having another account is permitted even though I don't. HRCC (talk) 21:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]