Jump to content

User talk:Gwen Gale: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m →‎CANVAS: correct indenting, add close
Cerw (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 50: Line 50:
*Second, I think the block of that sock was good, but an SPI is in order to get to the bottom of this, if the sockmaster is an established user, more than just a block seems warranted. Why have you told Collect not to file SPI reports? Do you have a problem with someone else filing one? (did one happen already?)
*Second, I think the block of that sock was good, but an SPI is in order to get to the bottom of this, if the sockmaster is an established user, more than just a block seems warranted. Why have you told Collect not to file SPI reports? Do you have a problem with someone else filing one? (did one happen already?)
Hope that helps. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 21:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Hope that helps. ++[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 21:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

== Mick Gerace==
Hi there, Can i get back the latest relase of this article? Also I have followe Wiki rules, copy paste similiar artiste so not sure why this has been delete? I alwo own Copyright for the image, which is used on myspace and wiki. How can i proof this?
Ta
petr

Revision as of 04:21, 18 July 2010

archives
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21


If I left a post on your talk page...

Please answer there. I'll see it, no worries.

Are you here because I deleted your article?
Please read through this first to find out why.


CANVAS

User:Collect about 50 diffs worth of canvassing 14 July 2010 between 12:29 and 13:02 Cereal Surreal Cereal Surreal (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was canvassing. I've told him so. Gwen Gale (talk) 08:20, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
and done with absolute conformity with Posting an appropriate notice on users' talk pages in order to inform editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who participated in a previous deletion debate on a given subject) may be appropriate under certain circumstances on a case-by-case basis. In short a specific allowed usage. Cheers Collect (talk) 11:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And the definition of "appropriate notice" says, Do not send notices to too many users. Dozens is way too many. It was canvassing. Please don't do that again. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And how, pray tell, can "everyone" not be interpreted as "everyone"? It was, per the policy, appropriate notification - and I have asked others as well <g>. Meanwhile, look at the user page of the complainant who , for some odd reason, picked you to post to. Including the bit where he states
You sent too many. This is not anything near a big worry and I truly don't think you meant to do anything untowards or "stacky" at all. Please don't do it again, is all. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"I have another account. The other account has a name that is really really good at only two things: being extremely cool, and insidiously convincing everyone that sees it that they know just exactly what kind of an editor this guy is, before they even read my edits. So at the expense of a small amount of extremely cool, I hope to be taken as just another editor, without the speeding baggage train that is my other username. It is probably doomed to failure, as my writing style is also very distinctive. It may never be used, as my arguments are extremely good anyway, and I hope one day to meet people on WP who aren't easily confused by their prejudices. At least with the other username I can identify those who get an instant attitude quickly and effectively." Cheers. Collect (talk) 12:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you telling me this? Gwen Gale (talk) 12:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, never mind, I see. Anyway, next time, please don't send wlinks to dozens of users, it's too many. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Highly unlikely - it is a very boring task at best <g>. Meawhile, why not pruse the material at hand - the person is clearly one who was involved in Sarah Palin per [1] and thst he is one who had a run-in with me in the past under one or more of his other accounts is quite likely - you may get several birds with this one! Collect (talk) 12:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If that means you won't be doing it again, there's nothing more to talk about. As for the diff you gave me, so what? Gwen Gale (talk) 14:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Collect stopped by my page to ask me about this situation. I've decided to share my views, take them as you like.

  • First, I think when deciding to give notice, one should use a mechanical approach... set criteria (participated within X weeks, or what have you) and then notify everyone who fits. Collect seemed to have (from this distance) complied with that. Winnowing down to a smaller list by applying judgment... seems like it might introduce bias, and that would be bad.
  • Second, I think the block of that sock was good, but an SPI is in order to get to the bottom of this, if the sockmaster is an established user, more than just a block seems warranted. Why have you told Collect not to file SPI reports? Do you have a problem with someone else filing one? (did one happen already?)

Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 21:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mick Gerace

Hi there, Can i get back the latest relase of this article? Also I have followe Wiki rules, copy paste similiar artiste so not sure why this has been delete? I alwo own Copyright for the image, which is used on myspace and wiki. How can i proof this? Ta petr