Jump to content

User talk:Daedalus969: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 185: Line 185:
:And finally we've got a bunch of admins watching it all in disgust.
:And finally we've got a bunch of admins watching it all in disgust.
Anything else I'm missing? I'm not sure if the RfC can't yet get back on track, but it's going to take a huge effort. Don't know why I'm so philosphical all of a sudden, but there were several points that I knew, and wished I remembered: you don't get points for the last word, if you have legitimate reasoning behind your argment, those that matter won't need you to refute every argument made, and that sometime's it's just better to wait :([[User:Soxwon|Soxwon]] ([[User talk:Soxwon|talk]]) 08:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Anything else I'm missing? I'm not sure if the RfC can't yet get back on track, but it's going to take a huge effort. Don't know why I'm so philosphical all of a sudden, but there were several points that I knew, and wished I remembered: you don't get points for the last word, if you have legitimate reasoning behind your argment, those that matter won't need you to refute every argument made, and that sometime's it's just better to wait :([[User:Soxwon|Soxwon]] ([[User talk:Soxwon|talk]]) 08:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

::You're missing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#RFC the request for help in how RFC's are SUPPOSED to work]

and

::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Admin_enforcement_requested#RFC_HELP_desperately_neeed the request for Admin enforcement] [[Special:Contributions/207.237.33.36|207.237.33.36]] ([[User talk:207.237.33.36|talk]]) 09:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:53, 21 April 2009

8:25 pm, 12 November 2024 (PDT)
  Welcome to my talk page! I will reply on your talk page unless you prefer otherwise as usually noted on your talk page. If you are an anonymous editor, I will reply here.
When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps:
  • Use a descriptive subject/headline
  • Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages
  • If you are continuing a conversation with me, please edit the relevant section instead of starting a new section
  • Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date
  • Please also note that I have a problem with dropping things, but I am working on it, and have made progress.
  • If you are going to use {{talkback}} templates, date them, so they can be archived properly.

Click here to leave me a message

Talkback

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Livitup's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

tb

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at roux's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing this template.

Thanks for dealing with the vandalism at Troy Davis case

Smile!

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at MathCool10's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at MathCool10's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

"Spelling" Article

While I appreciate your efforts to keep the pages on Wikipedia clean, the edits I made on the "Spelling" article clearly were constructive. It stated that "Hercules" is a common misspelling of the "correct" "Heracles." This is factually incorrect.

"Plaxico"...

...is a metaphorical character inspired by the real-life public figure Plaxico Burress. When a user brings a complaint to ANI and ironically becomes the one getting blocked, that's a metaphorical "Plaxico". One of the most interesting in recent times was just last weekend, when Buttermilk1950 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) brought a complaint to ANI about another user, then made the classic mistake of being logged in as a different account ItsLassieTime (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and responding in the voice of the original complaining account. That led to an investigation that uncovered a large sock farm of users that had mostly been under the radar, and led to the banishment of all concerned. [1] If you haven't read that thread, you should. [2] It's priceless. That was more than just a "Plaxico". That could be called a "Plaxico avalanche", or maybe some better term that's not coming to me at this hour. :) The avalanche or maelstrom or cyclone or whatever had the unfortunate side effect of nearly sucking down the innocent new MoreThings (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and nearly drove him away, but I think he decided to stick around. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 09:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 09:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I must confess that I started this, about two weeks after the actual incident, during a similar situation [3] in which user Fru23 messed up and revealed his IP address, which led to his connection to a banned user KingsofHearts. In that case, the user had not brought the original complaint, it had been brought against him. But by making a classic sockpuppet mistake, he gave his game away, and that's when the "Plaxico" analogy came to me, since I couldn't think of any other recent public figure who had "shot himself in the foot" (or leg, actually). A few users since then have referred to it occasionally, although the story has sort of become old news by now. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 09:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I assume Plaxico is used because he shot himself in the foot. Which is also a saying "to shoot oneself in the foot" is to mess oneself up or do something that hurt one's own cause. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a correct assumption. If you can think of another well-known figure that shot himself in the foot or leg or whatever, we could use that as a synonym or a substitute. There was a novelty song back in the 60s or so called "The Ballad of Irving", about "Big Irving", the "142nd fastest gun [bang!] in the west", who went looking for number 141, and in the ensuing confrontation, "gunned himself down". We can't really use that one because of (1) ethnic issues; and (2) no one under the age of 50 will have heard of it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 08:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know what, I think you are right. However, the other general tone in his request was inappropriate in my view. However, if you think he deserves another chance (if not fully unblocked but at least to edit his talk page), go right ahead. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 08:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine to me. Generally, I assume that people who have been here since last June (with discussions here and here) would act better but that's me. He's been told for a few weeks but if you want to engage him further, undo the protection. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:33, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 10:15, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in this case, I'm going to leave it to someone with the bit. Nothing personal but if he starts up again, I'm not in the mood for dealing with him. He's been here long, been warned long enough, and if he can convince the email list, he can come back. Mention it at ANI if you really think he deserves another shot. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Am I correct here?

Hi, Daedalus. I don't know if I'm seeing the real picture, but I scrolled through recent changes and found that you probably made a questionable rollback as seen here. Since I don't know the subject, I am asking you to explain the rollback in hopes of confirmation. —Mythdon t/c 22:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 22:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

This is your big chance to explain why you flagged my account as being permanently blocked. Go for it. Spotfixer (talk) 23:42, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 00:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And an FYI that the above user has opened an admin noticeboard thread on you, if you wish to join in there. - TexasAndroid (talk) 00:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Green text

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Greg L's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 03:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for reverting the van--Abce2 (talk) 00:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)dalism on my talk page![reply]

Re: RFC comment on my talk page

Thanks for reminding me on my talk page to place my comment in the correct place. But I guess I'm confused...Though I moved my comment to the discussion page where you suggested, isn't this edit also a "discussion" to be moved to discussion page? Please advise. Thanks. 207.237.33.36 (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 20:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pack of cards

I think an Alice in Wonderland logo is what I need after seeing the votestacking weird abuse of WP policies and rules. Thanks for archiving part of it -- recall that Phoenix of9 has two other AN/Is out n me and seems perfectly willing to post another dozen. He has gotten his main wish -- I have asked an admin to be ny proxy in the RfM/Rick Warren for the duration. If you can watch as well, I would be most grateful . {All the other asmins are officially "biassed" in my favor according to Phoenix <g>) Collect (talk) 17:57, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm

Should the RfC be closed and if so, when? Soxwon (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 20:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh crap, forgot to mention I always watch talk pages of convience lol. But uh, who is going to do it then? Soxwon (talk) 20:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'll ask the assitance of an univolved admin.— dαlus Contribs 20:36, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unforetunately I did, we may have trouble finding one willing to step into this mess. Soxwon (talk) 20:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Discussion about you

Hello, Daedalus969. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Courtesy_failure_.2F_Reword_Template_.2F_Reword_Header. Exxolon (talk) 01:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Related; I can't block him when he's under scrutiny like this. I'll join in on the discussion if I've got anything to say, though! Thanks for letting me know. Cheers, Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :D 04:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Request

Re your message: I do not follow RFCs very much, so I would prefer not to step in to close any particular RFC because I am not familiar with the particular nuances of RFC closure. RFCs are just not a part of Wikipedia that I have gotten involved with. I am sure that somebody who participates in RFCs will close it as they deem necessary. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 05:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DID we NOT comeTO consensus?

regarding which information goes on the RFC and which goes on the discussion page? From your first section on my talk page to your last, to the "PROPOSAL" section on the RFC discussion page, I believed this was agreed upon. Perhaps you could verify that before I need to provide diffs of it. 207.237.33.36 (talk) 07:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the title of this section again?

Proposed Solutions? 207.237.33.36 (talk) 08:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's funny, it looks a lot more like indef block to me. You should have your eyes checked, also, I replied on your talk page.— dαlus Contribs 08:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
EXACTLY. Section: "Proposed Solutions", SUBsection: "Indef Ban". Reading is Fundamental. 207.237.33.36 (talk) 08:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Insulting my intelligence will get you nowhere. I was referring to the section that was titled indef block, and there is way you can argue against what I was referring to, so your argument is completely moot.— dαlus Contribs 08:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was the first to refer to the title of the section : here. And my point remains: the section is titled "Proposed Solutions": an indef ban is a proposed solution. Might not be a good one or one that can be instituted immediately without further collection of info at the RFC...then again, it might be. I think you need a break. 207.237.33.36 (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon guys

I suggest we all just go to bed (or, depending on where you are, go do something else until the rest of us wake up) and stop all of this for now. I think a little time to think would do us all gooo. Soxwon (talk) 08:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*sigh*

Now that that's over, shall we tally up the damage report?

We've got my AN/I for the RfC being in bad faith.
We've got Ikip accusing me of bad faith for my AN/I.
We've got general flaming, trolling, and chaos at the RfC.
We've got you and the Anon going at it.
And finally we've got a bunch of admins watching it all in disgust.

Anything else I'm missing? I'm not sure if the RfC can't yet get back on track, but it's going to take a huge effort. Don't know why I'm so philosphical all of a sudden, but there were several points that I knew, and wished I remembered: you don't get points for the last word, if you have legitimate reasoning behind your argment, those that matter won't need you to refute every argument made, and that sometime's it's just better to wait :(Soxwon (talk) 08:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing the request for help in how RFC's are SUPPOSED to work

and

the request for Admin enforcement 207.237.33.36 (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]