User talk:Andy Dingley: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:15, 15 July 2011

Careful

I don't care how much hate him. Comments like this are childish and disruptive. Don't do it again. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:15, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then take it to ANI, I'm sure you know the way.

My comment was posted as a response to User:TreasuryTag's far from flattering description of another editor here, accusing them of breaching any number of WP policies. Strangely this had only been made very shortly after they had been somewhat critical of TT at his Editor review.

This was a post to their own talk page. It was not to a communal board, to the editor concerned, or on the public talk of any affected article. As such, what could its point be? An aide memoire, to track TT's many grudges? Or simply as a self-important attack on another editor, hidden as always beneath TT's lawyer's wig.

What was the response to my post? Summary removal by TT. This does of course mean that it was politely removed as an indicator that he'd read it, as is well established behaviour for user talk pages. That'll be why he hid this behind an edit summary of "fix" - wouldn't want anyone else to think there was someone other than TT commenting there, would he. How nice not to waste other reader's valuable time by helping them like this.

The funny thing is, which I'd never have noticed if you hadn't highlighted it, is that SarekOfVulcan had already commented to TT's same post. This time TT reverted it as vandalism. Oh dear. Who'd have thought user:SarekOfVulcan would ever stoop so low.

Andy Dingley (talk) 23:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

سلام‎;
I've just left a short note on Fastily's talk regarding how he's choosing to communicate. The one I leave here will be shorter: Please don't be so snarky. No matter how correct you are (and I'm not taking a side on that right at this second) there are plenty of people who'll never look past the tone. Cheers,
Aaron Brenneman (talk) 01:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair comment, thankyou. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some problems with tone in your comment at the current RfA as well. It may be your opinion that another editor is "a lost cause", it may in fact be a widely held opinion, but that's not a constructive or helpful way to refer to another editor anywhere on-wiki, and especially not at RfA where there are enough problems already. Someone's a lost cause when they're indefinitely banned from Wikipedia; declaring it before that time is rather too much like a self-fulfilling prophecy. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:06, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A day that's long overdue. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:26, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gertrude Sheldon Sands Whitney

Since you dePRODed the article, I thought I should inform you that I opened an AfD for it, in case you wanted to participate. Thanks, Yaksar (let's chat) 02:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Please do not edit my talkpage again other than to leave AN/ANI notifications. This is not a demand, and it is not binding; it is merely a request. Thanks. ╟─Treasury Tag►Counsellor of State─╢ 09:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, but I would point out that it will make very little difference. I will of course continue to inform you of the relevant necessary notifications, including AfD (and there's nothing personal about that one, I assure you). However if you use your talk page for attacks on other editors, like your comment on BoP (however deserved, that was just plain bitching to no positive purpose), then you should expect it to attract comment and criticism from others. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My request is that you do not edit my talkpage other than to leave AN/ANI notifications. If you choose not to comply with my request, then I obviously can't prevent that, but it would be an unfortunate situation. That's all. ╟─Treasury Tag►collectorate─╢ 10:10, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recognise that you don't wish to have any avoidable contact with me, probably on the wise grounds that it is likely to escalate on either side. I do regard AfD notifications as a courtesy (do you create articles? I have no idea) and would see it as a rather feeble excuse in fact to AfD some of your work and not notify you, hiding behind a weak "but he asked me never to call again".

I recognise your wishes here and will generally respect them. But there are limits, and I see attack pages on other editors, like your BoP complaint, as being well beyond that. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your question, I do indeed create articles; see the "achievements" section of my userpage for some examples. ╟─Treasury Tag►directorate─╢ 10:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You bore the hell out of me...

I only recently began editing again after a long break since mid-February, and I have not touched any of the steampunk-related articles. So, your old and tired accusations are utterly without merit. Please cease leaving me messages. You bore the hell out of me. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 17:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read your contributions history? You 'retire', then you return, and one of the first acts of editing is to remove any categorisation as "steampunk" from over 40 film and media articles. Please, do not take me for such a fool with your, "I have not touched any of the steampunk-related articles".

I guess I should just be grateful that at least you're a little more polite than last time. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:09, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User warned. --Guy Macon (talk)

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2011_July_1#Category:Boats_designed_by_Isambard_Kingdom_Brunel

I completed your nomination with which I agree. You may wish to comment at the above thread. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jez, Andy Dingley (talk)

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 : [[/Archive 2011 June]]
 </div>
+'''F U Bitch! Block away!'''
 == Careful ==