User talk:Cassianto

Please leave a message; I'll reply here. best wishes Belated Merry Christmas For standing up against anti-own template,warriors. This also goes to Shrodo, another astute voice pleading into the void. Ceoil (talk) 00:04, 29 December 2017 (UTC) Cheers Ceoil, and the same to you! I hope you and yours had a great new year, and all the best for 2018. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC) Aberfan Hi Cass, and a very warm happy new year to you. A few months ago you were kind enough to comment on the PR for the Aberfan disaster. After a slight delay to allow some of the images to become PD, the article is now at FAC. Any further comments would be most welcome. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:21, 1 January 2018 (UTC) About bloody time! Happy to. Have a great New Year! CassiantoTalk 13:24, 1 January 2018 (UTC) WP:Revdel For future reference, I have found that e-mailing a friendly WP:Administrator to ask for this works really well, and avoids the Streisand effect. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:21, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Nope, transparency is always the best policy. It's not my fault if I post a concern to ANI only for it to be besieged by idiots. CassiantoTalk 14:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Hey listen... Babs may be a yuchna, but she’s no shnook already. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC) I trust that you weren't including me in your besieged by idiots sobriquet. I merely offered a friendly thought, which you are free to disregard. Not my issue. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:47, 10 January 2018 (UTC) You can trust, implicitly. As far as I can see, you didn't even take part in the thread, so I don't see how you made the connection. Anyhoo, thanks for the advice; I'd never even heard of the Streisand Effect until today. CassiantoTalk 20:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Really?? I think ANI is pretty much awash with the damned stuff. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC) It is indeed. Although I'd be spoilt for choice at picking a friendly administrator to email my request to. CassiantoTalk 21:21, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Hahahaha. I feel I have fatally corrupted you. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC) That happened long ago, Martin. Although I now fear I've run out of songs to link to. CassiantoTalk 22:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Well, I know you like to focus on good article content. But we haven't even started on the singles yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Request Hi Cassianto, I was wondering if I can ask for your help/or just tips in drafting a infobox criteria (that needs to be followed prior to any comment about including/not including infobox), similar to your input at Talk:Michael Hordern. As you mentioned, if gaming "consensus can change" is a problem, I was thinking perhaps having a streamlined prerequisite in WP:INFOBOX might be a good place to start to reduce future time sink. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC) Hi Alex, hope you're well. Absolutely, can I get back to you on this in a few days? CassiantoTalk 08:33, 12 January 2018 (UTC) Yes of course! Thanks for your time. Alex Shih (talk) 08:39, 12 January 2018 (UTC) Happy Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you! Happy Thai Pongal, Makar Sankranti, Lohri and Bihu to you! May all your endeavours have a fruitful beginning and prosperous ending!  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 12:21, 14 January 2018 (UTC) Cary Grant Just curious, why'd you delete my notification about responding to your post on the Cary Grant discussion? Banaticus (talk) 16:57, 16 January 2018 (UTC) Just curious, why don't you provide me with a link? CassiantoTalk 18:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC) Rather than edit war over your deleting my opinion in the Talk:Cary Grant RfC I can't force you to discuss on your talk page, it is yours to delete from. But I do want to state my opinion. And yet not edit-war. So, unfortunately, There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. GRuban (talk) 19:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC) There wasn't any need to start AN/I report as I've already closed the RfC just now. I just wanted to ask, maybe I missed something, but I did not notice the bot closed anything? Alex Shih (talk) 19:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC) How coincidental is it, GRuban, that you flag your support on an article that's had its RfC template removed, yet minutes before, engage with Sagaciousphil (who reverted you on Carolina Nairne) who's been active on Grant's RfC? CassiantoTalk 20:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Not at all. I'm quite grateful to Phil, she did the right thing, and I told her as much. (For other readers, there was a source calling "Nairne" "Nairn". I added the "e", being sure it was in error, but no, it actually said "Nairn" in the source. Phil reverted, quite properly; though with a comment implying that I had hurt her feelings, which I certainly didn't mean to, so I apologized!) We all fix each other's errors here, that's why the Wikipedia works. --GRuban (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Not coincidental - just stalking, right? CassiantoTalk 20:08, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Sure. I find many, maybe most, of the topics I want to work on by following random links. I've written Modest Stein from a request on a person's talk page, Barnaby Conrad III from a comment on a noticeboard, Circle of Chalk from a FAC review, a dozen articles from two deletion discussions. And even by following user edits - though that naturally rarely leads to complete new articles, it quite often leads to improving the Wikipedia: after I had an argument with User:Softlavender, I added an image to an article she worked on, and she later asked me to add more. After I had an argument with User:SchroCat, I added an image to an article he was trying to get to FA. And - just today even - SchroCat improved Modest Stein right back! It works quite well. I've got a quote at the top of my user page about it ... I found it by following a user link! --GRuban (talk) 20:22, 17 January 2018 (UTC) In future, do not stalk me, or any other editor, between articles. Now you have openly admitted that's what you do, if you go through my edits again and pop up on another article I am working on, I shall use the diff of your comment and drop you into ANI. For the record, your addition and comments at the FAC I was running were not welcome. I suspect the same is true for others you have also stalked. - SchroCat (talk) 20:37, 17 January 2018 (UTC) I'm sorry you feel that way, but I believe contributing to what other editors edit is a perfectly legitimate use of the Wikipedia. And I do believe your contribution to Modest Stein improved it, and am grateful for it, even if you did delete my comment saying as much. This isn't a war. This is a joint effort. We are all on the same side, the side of trying to contribute to the "summary of all human knowledge". That's a really good thing. Anything that leads to article improvement should be encouraged. --GRuban (talk) 20:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC) No, passive aggressive behaviour that makes other people feel uncomfortable, annoyed or angry is not acceptable. Following other editors around is WP:STALKing, and if you do it to me again I will file a report on you at ANI. You can take that as official notice. Given Sagaciousphil's comment below, and the fact she has stated she feels harassed by you, if I see you doing it to her, I will also file an ANI report on her behalf. You may take this as official notification too. It is not acceptable. - SchroCat (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC) I had been refraining from commenting after becoming extremely upset this morning and then even more so after watching some of the antics taking place throughout the day. As a female editor (which I thought was fairly common knowledge and there is a template that is readily available to check anyway when people have the courtesy to use it) who has previously been subjected to hassle from banned and/or indef blocked users - Coat of Many Colours and Singora plus others, administrators like Drmies are aware of this and some of the personal problems it has caused - I find it very unsettling that (a) I was described as "an attack dog" by Jcc recently and, despite requests by others to an Admin, to address and at least reprimand/warn, no action was taken; and (b) that GRuban, another male editor, has started to follow me around (see Bute witches where he arrived after encouraging me to comment on Talk:Josephine Butler only to ridicule me there when I did so. He then miraculously appeared on Witchcraft in Orkney today after he had made an incorrect edit that I reverted on Carolina Nairne. What is at the root cause of all this? In my opinion, it seems to be IBs and the GGTF/WIR crew. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Apologies, I admit, I did assume Phil was a male name, was just informed of your pronoun preference, correcting above. I'm also quite grateful for your reversion, as I wrote, and I hope the edit on Witchcraft in Orkney was an improvement. (I changed the link to archipelago to point to the more specific archipelago, Orkney, because, in my humble opinion as someone who knew what an archipelago was is not as knowledgeable of what Orkney was, one was needed.) As above, it's a joint effort, and I'm not going to admit that having someone edit "your" article should be seen as a hostile act. I also didn't intend to ridicule you after you gave the example of "Josephine" usage, you gave a good citation, which was appreciated, and could well have helped turn the resolution of the question. Which is what we're all here for, after all, not to "win", but to get to the best article? I still disagreed, and explained why, but surely that's not ridicule? --GRuban (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Dont try and play a snide little OWNership accusation by using "your" in inverted commas. That is gaslighting and your passive-aggressive approach to editing is rather distasteful. Editing should be an enjoyable activity, but when someone stalks your edits, it becomes unpleasant, nasty and very creepy. - SchroCat (talk) 21:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Couldn't agree more, and GRuban seems to be a notorious stalker. Eric Corbett 21:30, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Agree editing should be an enjoyable activity. Still disagree about whether anyone owns any articles here, but we're clearly not going to resolve that now and here. Let me thank you for your work, as an author of many FA's you are clearly a better writer than I am, and I enjoyed reading Tottenham Outrage, it's a fine job, I hope you make more. I hope you (the plural you this time) have a good day, I did not intend to ruin it. --GRuban (talk) 21:14, 17 January 2018 (UTC) (talk page watcher) GRuban, whatever your intent you're coming across as a really, really, creepy stalker in virtually every word of your posts above, and I can entirely see why every other person in this thread is finding your continued presence unwelcome. To add a little more weight to what SchroCat says above, now you've been told by every single person to comment that your "following user edits"—which, when done in the circumstances in which you're doing it, is an explicit breach of Wikipedia policy—is unwanted, I won't hesitate to take you to ANI, Arbcom, or block outright as appropriate if I see you harassing any of them again. If you want to make this official I can give a {{Uw-harass4im}} on your talkpage, but you've been here long enough that I'd expect you to know a basic policy like WP:HARASS without having it explained to you. ‑ Iridescent 21:25, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Thanks for your comment, will try to seem less creepy. :-) --GRuban (talk) 21:30, 17 January 2018 (UTC)