User talk:Youreallycan

Welcome to Youreallycan's talkpage. If you are unable to post here follow this link to post at my unprotected talkpage.

This user previously edited as Off2riorob.

This editor is a
Senior Editor
and is entitled to display this Rhodium
Editor Star.

Welcome

If you start a discussion here on my talkpage I will likely respond on this page as I like to keep discussion complete in one location. If you post an imo attacking comment here I will just delete it and you will no longer be welcome on my talkpage untill I remove the restriction.If I feel the discussion is confrontational or attacking I also reserve the right to request you to host it on your own talkpage. If I move the discussion to your talkpage please do not replace it here, I will delete it. Please do not edit war here, this is my talkpage, if I delete or revert your edit don't replace it or escalate disruption on my talkpage, instead please raise your report to an administrator or a relevant noticeboard, thanks

PRSA GA review

Hey YRC, I was looking at another matter on the Public Relations Society of America article and noticed the GA review. While you did fail it at the time and it is now clearly a candidate for a quickfail, you never took the technical steps to mark it as failed. You should leave a subsequent comment on the GA review and follow the necessary steps to have it noted as failing.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 01:33, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok - thanks Devil's Advocate, I will do that in the near future - best regards and wishes - Youreallycan 07:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I saw that you had still not formally failed the GA review so I took the liberty of doing so myself. You might like to make some final comments on why you do not feel it met the GA criteria. For future reference, please look over the review process as outlined at WP:GAN.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 20:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

About Zhou Jun and other things

Hi YRC. Zhou Jun is now referenced, including one added by me. That said, I'm one of the no doubt many other users that admire your WP:BLP vigilance.
My apologies for not responding to your kind message back in October 2012. I share your concerns about the use of Wikipedia for purely commercial ends. A case on point is Aimer, which was cleverly written to avoid G11s and G12s and.. oops, it's been deleted. I'll have to get back to you about that!
--Shirt58 (talk) 10:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Ha, cool, thanks User:Shirt58 - I appreciate the comment, no worries - regards - Youreallycan 14:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Some of your comments were removed because

I removed an entire section begun by a community banned editor here, mostly in the interests of WP:BLP. Your entirely sensible and correct comments were removed at the same time. Unavoidable, but apologies for this! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:05, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks for the note Demi - really appreciate that. I have come to feel that everything I contribute here and however I try to help improve this place, is reverted or removed because it can be , and its at least nice to get a explanation. Thank you - Youreallycan 23:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you helpme , ok, you spend your valuable free time helping and bang - some wiki speak revert and thats it - you just waste your time here - Youreallycan 23:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Anent nothing above - you might read WP:Tiptibism someday. Collect (talk) 00:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh)

International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Why did you request PP? The article is again locked out on the crappiest version any article on wiki which could ever be. I had removed the BLP vio's again. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring of BLP concerned content - its locked at the version you supported and were objecting to - Please make your case on talk or at WP:RFPP for lowering the protection. Regards - Youreallycan

(talk page stalker)I actually think that's the best thing for the article until the facts can be straightened out. It stops the cycle of add, revert and repeat Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

(ec)Sadly no, it is still on the sucky version. Can you look the article over to ensure i have not missed any more vio's? I think I got all the ones sourced to blogs but an extra pair of eyes is usually handy. Hell in a Bucket, the best thing for that article is what I had done, go compare and let me know what you think. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

In every dispute someone has that opinion, you've raised concerns of endless reverts from another editor. This in turn makes you revert them, whether right or wrong and I'm not going into that part, what it ends up being is a disruption, therefore this will force a discourse on the issue. If you wish to make edits there is a process for that even with fully protected pages, and you have the option of going back to the page protection board and asking for it to be unprotected if you feel strongly. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, full support for that position HIAB - Youreallycan 10:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Social/structural change in Wikipedia

If you can add anything to this list it would be appreciated. I think we need to talk about a central repository for this splintered discussion. Perhaps a notice in Signpost? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 14:17, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Anthony - logging off now - tomorrow, or later today I will look at adding something - thanks - Youreallycan 07:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Youreallycan. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help_desk.
Message added by Theopolisme at 22:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

like a star

twinkle twinkle little star - Youreallycan 17:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Moar

See: Marc Walder. --Shirt58 (talk) 11:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks quite promotional - if its a translation of a German article I am pretty sure it needs some it needs some attribution to say so on the talkpage ... citations are a bit self publised/promotional - some content is , or at least appears to be uncited - such as, live in Zurich with ... I would likely trim it in half - as a tennis player - http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Players/Wa/M/Marc-Walder.aspx doesn't look notable Wikipedia:Notability_(sports)#Tennis - doesn't seem notable as a journalist either Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals - CEO , not really notable imo -most is promotional - WP:GNG might get a few keep votes - Youreallycan 19:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

User:Bbb23 deleting my comment

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bbb23&diff=prev&oldid=533617455#deleting_my_comment

Hi regarding this deletion of my comment - diff - the correct thing for you to have done was move it to the talkpage. Please do such in future if a similar situation occurs - and also - if you delete one of my posts in any administrative/policy compliance action, please do me the decency of letting me know on my talkpage - thanks - Youreallycan 19:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You posted a message where you shouldn't have and I removed it with an explanation. I vaguely recall someone else moved it to the talk page, but if they hadn't, you could certainly have done so. The other editor had no obligation to do so, and neither did I. I don't like to presume what other people want, and for all I know, you might have phrased it differently if you'd posted it onto the talk page instead of to the crat page. Frankly, when one posts to such a page, particularly an experienced editor, one would expect that the page would be on their watchlist. I didn't remove your post in my administrative capacity. As for correctness and decency, you should be mildly annoyed (your error wasn't a big deal) with yourself for not following instructions instead of lashing out at others for fixing your mistake. I suspect you'll take offense at this response, but I'm mildly annoyed by your comments.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:31, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry matey - please be aware I care less about what you think I do - I am not even mildly upset - I have pointed out what you should have done and requested you not to do it/to improve your actions next time - carry on regardless if you want - its only a good faith attempt to improve the situation should it occur again - you don't agree - ok - do it again and I will report you. - Youreallycan 01:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

• - Discussion was then deleted by user Bbb23 diff with the edit summary - removing entire section including threat - don't post here again on this issue

Asgardian_appeal

Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#BASC:_Asgardian_appeal. As you were involved in edit wars with Asgardian you may be interested in commenting. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 00:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thanks - Youreallycan 17:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Cheeseman

Hi Youreallycan. Not sure if you have got this watchlisted or not, but it looks like the article had a spelling mistake in the title. AIRcorn (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Kailash Satyarthi

Hi, I've just undertaken the task of trying to improve the Kailash Satyarthi article. I was looking through the revision history and saw that, back in 2011, you were attempting to do the same thing on your old account. It doesn't seem like anyone has been giving the article the attention it needs since then; it's become bloated with unsourced, superfluous information. I've just made some pretty big edits (Mostly trying to remove some of the real problem sections, unfortunately), mainly just the really obvious ones. I'm not sure if you are more familiar with the subject matter than I am, but even if not you have obviously been actively editing Wikipedia a lot longer than I have; I was wondering if you could take a quick look at the article's current state, maybe give me some suggestions on what we should keep, what's most notable and stands the best chance at being salvaged. I'm afraid if I delete everything that's poorly written, unsourced, or biased, there won't be much of an article left at all.Thehumandignity (talk) 08:31, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

I have a lot of sympathy for you. Are you able to make a considered statement showing what you have learned from the incident? I think if you were I (and potentially others) would withdraw from the position of a community ban, because you're right, it is harsh to ban you fro that one diff. See what you can do. It would be a shame to lose you. --John (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Site ban enacted

It is unfortunate to advise you that as per this closure, consensus is that as per your own agreed-to restrictions, you are site-banned from the English Wikipedia at this time. Please see the details in the closing statement for your way forward. It is my sincere hope that when you return in the future (and I know that you will return someday) that you are able to work within not only Wikipedia's policies, but within the restrictions that you yourself set. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

What a very sad day this is..I will see you again in the future....Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for all the hard work you've put into Wikipedia, particularly with regards to the Biographies of living persons noticeboard. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree with this, atall :( GoodDay (talk) 15:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, the bright side is that this isn't any sort of indictment of anything you said or did, and whoever thinks it is is deluding themselves. What this sort of thing comes down to is how many supporters you can line up vs. how many opponents they can line up. It's like World of Warcraft, sometimes there's just too many orcs and not enough humans. Tarc (talk) 16:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Tarc, if you believe that than you and CoM have more in common than you might think. Drmies (talk) 18:43, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

As do you and Will Beback, apparently. Tarc (talk) 18:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Tarc, as someone who supported (and supports) the site ban and who thinks it is a very sad day when an editor is blocked, I can safely say that my support is entirely due to what YRC said and did. I can also assure you that I am not deluding myself. No matter how good an editor someone is, if they are unable to edit in a collaborative environment without making personal attacks then Wikipedia does not benefit from their presence. Thryduulf (talk) 19:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Tarc: I'm insulted. I like Rob a lot; I think he's done good things. I also think he placed himself on a strict incivility probation (for good reason, I might add) and he failed to hold himself to his own standards. This is a shame and a pity, but it's also a fact. Between people claiming established editors get away with murder civility-wise, and people screaming when civility paroles are actually enforced, there is no ground on which to stand where someone is not furious with you. It was hard for everyone on that ANI thread to speak out; no one did so lightly. I know it was with real regret that I did so. I have hopes Rob will be back and he will be able to hold himself to those standards when he returns; I reject utterly the idea that this was some kind of kangaroo court. I'm sorry you are unhappy about the outcome; I disagree with you on what happened. Puppy has spoken, puppy is done. (Rob, apologies for continuing this on your userpage.) KillerChihuahua 20:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I think he was coerced into accepting such a probation, then had the Eagle Eyes upon him ever after, looking for the slightest misstep on which to pounce. All you (a general "you" that imposed that civility restriction, not specifically you you) did was set a user up to fail. Tarc (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

KillerChihuahua, you do not have to be insulted at all. Tarc supported many community bans himself; so of course he meant himself, when he said "orcs", and I am pleasantly surprised that at last tarc has admitted he is not really a human. Rob, apologies for continuing this on your talk.76.126.142.118 (talk) 03:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I support community bans when they make sense, this one does not. Did I cast a support vote in your site-ban perhaps, whoever you are? Btw, Ilike orcs; I have a lvl 90 orc rogue on Arygos. Come visit sometime. Tarc (talk) 03:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

You said: " What this sort of thing comes down to is how many supporters you can line up vs. how many opponents they can line up." It is put very well!You nailed it. It is exactly what so called community bans are about. No community ban has sense. It simply "comes down to is how many supporters you can line up vs. how many opponents they can line up". Period. I'd love to visit with you and to see your orc.76.126.142.118 (talk) 04:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Some here talk about "how many supporters you can line up vs. how many opponents they can line up" as if it was a bad thing. If you really think that, start with someone who has done nothing wrong and see how many opponents you can line up. Then start with someone who has never done anything but disrupt and see how many supporters you can line up. Yes, when you start with someone who has done a lot of good and a lot of bad, lining up supporters or opponents might push the decision one way or the other, but anyone can avoid being in that position by simply not being someone who has done a lot of good and a lot of bad. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:37, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, but that only works if you're not dealing with a cult... or even children. Not that I disagree with the result. YRC is not suited to this environment (which may be more praise than anything else). On the other hand Drmies has, again, successfully made the easy move, without dealing with the underlying issue. YRC has no place here, certainly. But nor does Manus, or any one of the many, many other admins who engage in childish sandbox tactics. Removing YRC was good, but failing to remove the BLP violating scum that opposed him undoes all the good of it. Hell is paved with good intentions, Drmies. As a result of your quite reasonable, but incomplete actions, you've just enabled about four or five people who will libel living people, put pointless, OCD categorisations before humans and generally make the world worse place, on the world's most read website. Well done. No really.101.118.22.167 (talk) 11:19, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I think Drmies read the sentiment at ANI well. It is the wrong outcome, though. The community is diminished by this decision. Another casualty of this site's appallingly vague and inconsistently interpreted civility norms. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 21:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Bwilkins is the one you mean I think, as he closed the discussion. All the same, the sentiment may have been "read well", but the sentiment was misguided and this is one of the problems with community bans. People were basing their votes off their own snap interpretation of what YRC said, and their interpretation was monumentally wrong. The process does not really allow for any meaningful and reasoned discussion to be the basis of a decision, but only really allows for decisions based off shallow appearances and personal prejudices.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 05:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

OK. But still, in my opinion, at the bottom of this and a lot of other shit community decisions lies our completely shit civility "policy". Once that has some clarity and coherence, we'll see a lot less of this. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 05:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

It is sad to see that such a valuable editor was blocked. User:Youreallycan's contributions to Wikipedia, especially to Biographies of living person related articles, are numerous and are the product of hard work and countless hours spent volunteering here. I wish I had seen the ANI thread before and would have definitely commented there if I knew this was going on. User:Youreallycan, I hope that you appeal your block and can start editing again here soon. Your friend, Anupam^Talk 22:28, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

• Need help someday on Simple WP and Commons images: YRC, Wikid77 here.

  Buccoo Reef, Tobago.

  Whenever I get blocked, after I take some time for a relaxing vacation, I again update Simple WP to add more concise articles which young readers, or new readers of English, might find much easier to read than the rambling pages here. Perhaps update 10 important cities in each region: top 10 towns in Scotland, Peru, Brazil, Austria or Greece. Also, there are "9 million" images on Commons which need descriptions translated to Spanish, Portuguese, German, Italian (etc.) and vice versa, where some of the most important, astounding images have no English description at all. Plus, if you like using a digital camera, consider taking many photos during your Wikibreak and perhaps upload some to Commons. When you return to enwiki, then you will have more weeks of dedicated experience to cross-link images here and refer the young readers to explanations of complex subjects on Simple WP (such as "simple:Differential calculus" or such). Please enjoy your time away on Wikibreak and return some day to tell us what awesome adventures you have experienced. Best wishes, Wikid77 06:38, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Others go to WP:Germany, I would help you, too, miss you here, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Spending some time on another project is a good thing; if you can show that you have spent time engaging in collaborative editing elsewhere without any of issues that got you banned then people are much more likely to accept you back - if you want to of course. Thryduulf (talk) 13:09, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Concerns

Hi YRC.
I know you are indeffed, but see Livedrive. Well written, well referenced, 100% notable, and so on.
Such is life.
--Shirt58 (talk) 12:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Don't Be Blue

Hi YouReallyCan. Well I missed it at the time, but I looked up the stuff that the usual suspects went at you most recently about. In an article about some rape gang said by reliable sources to happen to be mainly a particular ethnicity, you stated an opposing editor's viewpoint was compromised because he was of that ethnicity. That was a dumb and insensitive thing to say because A) you don't know that editor's (who is also an admin) ethnicity, B) even if correct, it doesn't mean the editor can't be objective, and C) we should be measured in our words on often sensitive matters like ethnicity. That said, the remark is not really uncivil, WP:CIV. It's not an insult to be referred to as of that or any other ethnicity. It's not mean, it's not hateful, it *is* rather dumb if you don't know what you're talking about. Insensitive, yeah, uncivil, nah. Neither did you fail to assume good faith, WP:AGF, rather you suggested the editor was biased through no fault of his or her or intergender's own. The correct response is "you don't know that about me, and it doesn't make a difference anyway, I'm being objective." There's just not enough there for a indefinite block. Maybe considering your ultra-civility promise, it warrants a week or something. I'm not going to disfigure your talkpage much by criticizing your blocker as he is so ripely due, but I'll venture mildly for the record that his edit record shows routine belligerence and profanity, sorry about that. Other admins need to be doublechecking him, and not just the "good block" backslappers, sorry about that. Well, I started out to just say don't be downcast about this so I hope you're not. You said something dumb and insensitive. It's no reason for you to get kicked out. I think you've done enough for Wikipedia that it needs to be you who decides to walk away for good. Maybe that's not how it's going to be though. Best wishes to you, and I'm confident you're missed by many. This is Colton Cosmic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.43.26.186 (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

AN Notice

I've raised the issue of your ban on this board [[1]], email me at jml81004@yahoo.com and I'll be happy to post anything that you feel you want to add. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I think that there is some encouraging things going on and you may have talkpage access restored but feel free to email me with your response if not and Ill post it. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:26, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd be happy to post for you as well; I believe you already have my email address, and the "Email this user" works just fine for me, too. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:28, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I added a question concerning your restoration to the editorship. — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 17:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah ... although I have a couple of Echo notifications, note that I have restored your talkpage access as per your e-mail request. I urge you to tread carefully (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:52, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Noted and thanks BWilkins - Youreallycan 18:04, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I've copied your comment from your email into the thread; post any more comments here and I'll transcribe them (as will HiaB, I'm sure). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:58, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

s

reply to ‎Onorem

admin help

please post this reply to ANI -

for post to ani - reply to this diff - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=559427347&oldid=559426758

Yes. I was overly involved and attacking of other users in disputes, I am sorry for that and apologize to anyone that suffered from that editing fault and I will strongly focus on avoiding that moving forward. I will also seek to avoid editing topics I have had tensions in previously. Youreallycan 18:31, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

What topics do you plan to edit? How exactly do you plan to be productive? It's not 6 months, but why not treat this like a standard offer now that we are here...--Onorem (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you recall what topics you had tensions in in the past? Which topics were they, and how do you propose to avoid them? — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 18:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Does your apology also extend to myself and you telling me to fuck off with my queer agenda; comments which were made whilst I was discussing with Arbcom what many in the community saw as homophobic harassment of another editor? Do you now recognise that the personal attacks you engaged in against myself were in direct relation to that discussion, or do you continue to say that you had no idea what "queer agenda" meant and that it had no correlation to the discussion with Arbcom members on my talk page. Russavia (talk) 19:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I would consider you and your posts as a topic to avoid. Youreallycan 19:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Um, Russ, the manner in which you said that might come across as rude. YRC, well, there's one topic to avoid right there. — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 19:27, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Since when have you been of that opinion YRC? It certainly wasn't your opinion back in December 2012 (as per your block on Commons), and it certainly wasn't your opinion for months up until February 2013, where you continued to talk shit about me on Jimmy's talk page. So after a long period of open hostility towards myself from you, why should we believe now that you have changed your ways? Sorry to say, but I don't believe a word you have to say. Russavia (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I can not speak for you - but I will aviod you - Youreallycan 19:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

In reply to count Iblis

This user wants me to accept an indefinite 1RR restriction, and also a more restrictive version of this that also applies to reverting vandalism and BLP violations (which are normally exempt from such restrictions) that will expire after 6 months.

I am unable to accept this severe editing restriction

please post to ani in reply to this diff - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&curid=5137507&diff=559429836&oldid=559429355Youreallycan 18:49, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

admin help

please post my relies to WP:ANI - Youreallycan 18:52, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll post your reply, but just so you know...this solidifies my opinion. You were blocked largely because of your inability to accept what was and wasn't a BLP issue...so it is very important that you avoid that topic entirely. --Onorem (talk) 18:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Why can't you accept such a proposed restriction as 1RR on vandalism and BLP? Just curious. — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 19:10, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

vandalism and blp - No - I am unwilling to accept any editing restrictiion to those areas - please show I have violated those areas if you request restrictions - Youreallycan 19:16, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

YRC, note that you can still revert vandalism and BLP violations, but I think you need to learn to communicate more effectively with your fellow editors in the BLP area more, basically that you get more of a mindset that this is really a collaborative project and that there are plenty of other editors here who care just as much as you about any particular BLP. If you have that mindset, then it doesn't matter who exactly reverts what BLP violation. Once you have that mindset, you will be a lot less angry when someone reinserts a BLP violation that you reverted. That anger you had from time to time here caused you to behave in an incivil way toward other editors (not just those who inserted the alledged BLP violations in articles). Count Iblis (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

• Rob, it's not looking so great right now, but things may change for the better. If they do, oviously you'll have to be a good boy. I wish you could accept the 1R restriction. You know that there are always ways to get help after a first revert in some urgent case--I'm one, and Writ Keeper is another, and there's plenty more. Accepting that might swing some votes. Not that we're voting. As for the queer agenda--I don't think I ever met Russavia, but I think that you and I have often gotten along, and I may well have a queer agenda myself (or, if I did, I'd be proud of it). But that sort of comment is off-limits, of course. Take it easy, and good luck, Drmies (talk) 01:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Yes I can easily accept a blanket one revert condition. I think I misunderstood the request. Youreallycan 04:28, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi YRC, good to see you back here! You could make Drmies' suggestion about getting help after the first revert more streamlined by making a directory on your userpage where you put the diffs of your reverts of BLP violations. Drmies or other editors can then look at that page every day to see if the BLP violations have been reinserted and they can then take the necessary actions to deal with that. People then don't have to look at all your contributions and you don't have to argue with people to defend your reverts as it will all be taken care of by others. By spending less time and energy on any particular BLP page, you will be able to edit more BLP pages per hour of editing here, so your net impact on these pages will increase a lot. Count Iblis (talk) 13:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi , yes, thats a good idea. I could accept a O revert restriction for three months if that would allay peoples fears? Rob Youreallycan 16:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Greetings

Hello YRC,

Though we've disagreed sometimes, I have respected most of your work here and think that you can still contribute constructively. So, I hope that you can return with some appropriate (but not onerous) restrictions. No matter how things turn out, I wish you well. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen. I appreciate your work also - Rob Youreallycan 19:27, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

reply to 28bytes

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=559437715&oldid=559436416

Yes - I can accept Pedro's conditions

Rob

{{admin help}}

please Post to WP:ANI

Youreallycan 19:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Posted. — Rickyrab. ^{Yada yada yada} 20:05, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

post to ani

Please post to ANI

Hi - I am not looking for any conflict at all with anyone, I am just looking to be able to make a few gnoming edits here and there. Perhaps I would slowly increase editing , but only slowly as I gain respect. I would be happy to generally aviod any topics users felt I should avoid for a few months and I will definately avoid users I have previousely been in conflict with. Rob Youreallycan 16:12, 12 June 2013 (UTC)