User talk:Pablo X: Difference between revisions

Four years ago ...
twelve years
	... you were recipient; no. 223 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:11, 3 September 2019

yahn (2005—2007) | tahn (2009 part 1) | tether (2009 part 2) | mether(2010) | mumph (2011)

hither (2012) | lither (2013) | auver | dauver | dic

Please click here to post a new message. You'll be joining these people. If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on this page; if I have left you a message on your talk page please reply there, I will be watching it. There's no need to leave one of those ugly {{talkback}} messages.
You can email me if you wish, however I prefer most wp communications to remain on-wiki and also only access this address between about 20:00 and 23:59 Zulu on (most) weekdays; response may be slooooooooow.
This page was last edited by me. Now it's your turn.

arb case

Hi Pablo - I appear to have misremembered who actually got banned from participating in the case; Giano hasn't been (and Giano, if you happen across this edit, I apologize for the error.) However, Courcelles banned Viriditas from participating without specifying a particular policy violation for mocking my health and genetic mutations across a number of pages. Such a ban could have been placed under WP:NDP, WP:NPA, or WP:HARASS. All three policies specifically cover attacks or harrassment related to disability; if I was writing a motion related to the case, I would likely stress NDP and HARASS over NPA, because NDP is a WMF board level policy (which covers harrassment due to disability and as a board level policy must be enforced by local projects and cannot be weakened by them) and HARASS, since it covers more general patterns rather than specific attacks (which is what Viriditas was banned from the case for.) I'm only posting here since I'm preparing to post evidence, which means I won't be able to use my section to respond to questions. Kevin Gorman (talk) 02:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kevin, and good luck with the case. (pinging Giano as I think it unlikely he is watching this page) pablo 14:17, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping Pablo. The edit thank thing does not seem not be working this evening, so I'll say 'thank you'. Giano (talk) 19:27, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, Giano - it seemed the right thing to do. Luckily the simple and easy method of writing on another editor's talk page seems to function correctly. pablo 20:01, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RfC announce: Religion in infoboxes

There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes concerning what should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:08, 17 January 2016 (UTC) Blimey. This again. Will do. pablo 23:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems I was wrong

Per this 2006 email from Erik Moeller and a thread at WO that I haven't been following, Jimmy's position on the board has to be re-affirmed every three years by the board. I'll vote for any community-nominated board candidate who vows to kick that huckster off. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They go through the motions every three years, but effectively your original take of seat-for-life was spot on.
I'll be voting for Kevin, if he maintains current form. pablo 11:06, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start a meta RfC on the usefulness of Jimbo in two and a half years. Kevin and Fae are both doing well in this instance. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 12:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. A pleasant surprise. pablo 20:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda! And thanks for the reminder. pablo 09:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am happily busy singing, here on Saturday, music by Reger with "his" choir, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I like Bruges. It's like a fairy tale! pablo 07:46, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. As you may have seen in the choir article, we took a break singing there, the more excited I am! (more top of my talk) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Five years now, so it must be 13 years of service now ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Six years. How are you? Today's music is connected to a memorable concert, in memory of a memorable man. Ever since I meant to fill the red link. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:42, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

seven remembered ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:37, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Allow private schools to be characterized as non-affiliated as well as religious, in infobox?

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:11, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for the thanks. There should be a button for thanking thanks. Or maybe not... -- Begoon 10:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeez, no! That way madness lies! pablo 11:34, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Begoon 11:54, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I found a way (with help from Black Falcon) to make red categories that are tolerated by [insert name for people who care about users expressing feelings in red cats]. Miss him. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:07, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Pablo X. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely

Hi.. you appear to have made a mistake. 'Twee' is the Scots word for too much Scottishness. Much like Americans use the word 'kitsch'. I know because I'm Scottish. It's not guess work. as proof, here's a link: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/twee

Dava4444 (talk) 07:00, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neither that link (or the entry in the longer Oxford dictionary http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/207965?rskey=IKXAtF&result=3#eid) make any mention of Scots or "Scottishness." pablo 09:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So how is 'kitsch' any better being an American word?

Dava4444 (talk) 22:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't make any comment on the word being better. Just stated a fact - it is not Scots. Which it isn't.
p.s. "Kitsch" is a German word and has been part of the English language since at least 1926. pablo 13:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Pablo X. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2019

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019

begin it with music and memories

Not too late, I hope ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda you are a love, but I have lost a lot of faith in this project. xx pablo 19:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Rachel McKinnon. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. It is not acceptable to misgender people in talk page comments. It is very highly offensive. If you were not a well established user I would have given you a final warning for it. Please stop. This is not a legitimate thing to try to raise. DanielRigal (talk) 19:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are not going to give me a final warning for anything. I did not "misgender" McKinnon. I can, however, correctly identify McKinnon's sex; which is male and has been from conception. Now go bother someone who might be impressed. pablo 20:11, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 133: / Line 133: @@
 == August 2019 ==
 [[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at [[:Talk:Rachel McKinnon]]. Your edits appear to constitute [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. Repeated vandalism may result in the [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|loss of editing privileges]]. ''It is not acceptable to misgender people in talk page comments. It is very highly offensive. If you were not a well established user I would have given you a final warning for it. Please stop. This is not a legitimate thing to try to raise.''<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> [[User:DanielRigal|DanielRigal]] ([[User talk:DanielRigal|talk]]) 19:16, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
+:'''You''' are not going to give me a final warning for anything.  I did not "misgender" McKinnon. I can, however, correctly identify McKinnon's sex; which is male and has been from conception. Now go bother someone who might be impressed. &nbsp;[[User:Pablo X|<tt>pablo</tt>]] 20:11, 3 September 2019 (UTC)