Jump to content

User talk:ChildofMidnight

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 32.172.183.204 (talk) at 01:29, 25 January 2010 (→‎Stop). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The prophetic view of a heavenly-anointed master of rhetorical interaction and richochetotry (aka Proofreader77)
Rhetorical verse in Shakespearean sonnet form — noting that when someone knows enough about rhetoric to know where the knobs are, he or she can attempt to turn it down, but not before. {serious smile}


Midnight Comes


{CoM.001.01} ____ WHEN GANGS OF BULLIES gather, Midnight comes
{CoM.001.02} ____ destabilizing bullshit with her own.
{CoM.001.03} ____ The truth is wasted on the nasty bums
{CoM.001.04} ____ who fill up "ad hoc firing squads" well known ...

{CoM.001.05} ____ ... at ANI — which gives the vile a role
{CoM.001.06} ____ with T-shirts marked "community" to wear.
{CoM.001.07} ____ Decision on the facts is not the goal.
{CoM.001.08} ____ Humiliation is. No, not "what's fair."

{CoM.001.09} ____ Some vague aspersion cast is made to stick
{CoM.001.10} ____ by snowball bullshit that's then packed on top.
{CoM.001.11} ____ Antagonizing target till they're sick
{CoM.001.12} ____ with social blows which no one will make stop.

{CoM.001.13} ____ THEN ChildofMidnight comes and says: FUCK THAT!
{CoM.001.14} ____ (No matter if you're Wales or Bureaucrat.)



I have had tears of joy come to my eyes frying an egg remembering ChildofMidnight in action — defending someone while they slept, leaving them safe from harm until they arrived, and found nothing they needed to do. The horror had past. And by the way, God Herself sent me here to say this, ladies and gentlemen. Have a care with ChildofMidnight — Judgment Day comes ... sooner than you think. {Serious smile}
-- Proofreader77 (interact) 10:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Users [and beyond] who endorse this summary:

  1. God
  2. Archangel Gabriel
  3. Guardian angel, Oh Mi (on loan from Proofreader77 who has 11 more)
  4. Trusilver 21:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Grundle2600 (talk) 17:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Off2riorob (talk) 08:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Barnstar of Integrity
For balancing the scales amidst the flames. Proofreader77 (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In Other News

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU to everyone who participated in Doughnut Drive 2009!!!! There are still a lot of holes in our coverage, but a lot of progress was made in ringing up some great content fillings!!! Is there anything they can't do?

Apples are said to be good for the heart
Gifts for teacher and preventative medicine, or so it's claimed. Also used for Æbleflæsk

The Bacon Challenge 2010 event is underway. SIGN UP NOW before it's too late, and get started immediately!!! There are plenty of non-pork bacon/ fakon articles to work on, so everyone can participate in the extravaganza!!!!!

Sign in drive 2009: Please leave your mark on the signature page


Hasta manyana

Talkback

Hello, ChildofMidnight. You have new messages at Jayron32's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Working on

Possibly unfree File:Box of Columbiana brand Pandebono.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Box of Columbiana brand Pandebono.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

  • Child, you should be able to rescue the photo by replacing the license template info with the following [removing the (nowiki)] tags:

{{logo fur <!-- REQUIRED --> |Article=Pandebono |Use=Product <!-- HIGHLY RECOMMENDED --> |Source=own work by uploader who releases photo under CC-BY-3.0 <!-- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION --> |Used_for= |Owner=La Venezolana Corp |Website= |History= |Commentary= }} == Licensing: == {{Non-free logo}}

Stuff

  • Windsor school history (google book source) [5] Recommneds closing winsor
  • plans for a school[6]
  • Page 3888 [7] Otis Elevator add for Woolworth building work
  • [8] page 90 notes source with pics
  • Frederick Douglass school history [9]
  • Pendretti family [10]

James Keys Wilson & George F. Hammond

Hey PFHLai, if you're interested I'd be happy to have help doing some DYK noms. For example James Keys Wilson and George F. Hammond. If you like doing noms I have more. :) Cheers. Have fun regardless. No worries if you'renot interested. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, ChildofMidnight. I'll look into them. Is there any more info about Wilson? Right now, his bio has much more info about the Plum Street / Isaac M. Wise Temple than about him. So it doesn't look right. For Hammond, how about a double hook with the early 20th-century Cleveland landmark Hollenden Hotel? I'll let you know if I can come up with other ideas. Happy typing. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 10:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for expanding the bios, ChildofMidnight. Nicely done. JKW is now nom'ed. For GFH, I was thinking of sth like "...that the Hollenden Hotel, designed by architect George F. Hammond, had the longest bar in Cleveland, and provided accommodations for the five POTUSes following Cleveland when they visited Cleveland?" So when will the hotel article be ready for DYK? :-) Type faster! :-P -- Your Taskmaster (talk) 07:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, boy! Am I working up an article??? I thought you were, ChildofMidnight! Sorry, (besides being a taskmaster) I only make hooks in WP.
To me, becoming an architect is impressive. (But that's hardly hook material.) I know zilch about architecture. I go for things that readers can relate to when I make up hooks. I don't know Kent State. Now that I know it is a big university (I am so ignorant... good that we have a long article about it), I'll read up and work on a hook about it. --PFHLai (talk) 13:20, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a hook for GFH & Kent State yet, but I'm glad that you approve of my POTUS5 hook. Instead, I have a hook for another article of yours: "...that John Eisenmann, designed the Cleveland Arcade, the first indoor shopping mall in the United States, and wrote the nation's first modern comprehensive building code?" Is the article done? There seems to be little biographical info on Eisenmann in his wikiarticle. --PFHLai (talk) 18:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
GFH is now nom'ed. Gotta do it today before the article is more than 5 days old and loses its DYK eligibility.
The J. Milton Dyer article's DYK eligibility expires tomorrow. You may want to add to the article the fun stuffs you mentioned above soon, if you want to nominate it for DYK.
The John Eisenmann article's DYK eligibility expires in two days. So you have a little more time. (Need to merge with John Eisemann?)
Yeah, many interesting people in history are missing in Wikipedia. We have to thank writers like you for contributing their wikibiographies to the encyclopedia. Happy typing. ... Sorry about the Dallas Mavericks. They're trailing by 10+ right now..... --PFHLai (talk) 18:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crop of photo of Zanesville PO/Fed building

Hello, ChildofMidnight. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Photography_workshop.
Message added 15:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- DMS (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a moment to spare, could you let me know if you're happy with this photo so I can mark the request in Graphics Lab resolved. Many thanks. -- DMS (talk) 05:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cuisines of the Axis of Evil

I think you would like to expand the article of Cuisines of the Axis of Evil and Other Irritating States up for DYK.--Caspian blue 14:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Prater

Hi, ChildofMidnight. I was glancing through the page history of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Prater and am curious as to why you removed your comment with the words "I don't want to get in any scuffles." Cunard (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a two-way editing restriction for the nom and myself that we are not allowed to comment to or about each other. I don't see how voting in good faith in an AfD violates that, but there are so many trolls and disruptive characters running around, that it's just not worth it. Many of them have been coming after me for a long time, and being constantly attacked and smeared gets old after a while.
It's certainly unfortunate that the article may be deleted (and Perry Jones also), and I feel bad about not being in a good position to help try and keep it, but that's the way things are here on Wikipedia. There are lots of things that are messed up that I'm not in a position to do much about.
I also noticed that Grsz voted in that AfD but no others around the same time. It ceraintly looks like he was improperly canvassed, but maybe he has a reasonable explanation?
Anyway, I'm always sorry to see articles written in good faith about subjects that have been covered substantially in reliable independent sources get deleted, but as long as abuse like that engaged in by Bigtimepeace, Georgewilliamherbert and RD232 is allowed, it pays to be careful. I certainly hope that their aggressive pursuit of those they disagree with will be stopped, but there appears to be a cull in full swing of blocking and banning those who don't hold popular views here. That kind of jackbooted censorship is troubling, but I don't know what I can do about it. I've certainly been outspoken that intolerance and censorship is wrong and damaging. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By numbers, the AfD looks like a "delete", but I hope the it gets closed as "no consensus" or "keep" since I see no policy-based reasons to disregard the ample coverage in reliable sources and delete that article. It's too bad that you can't participate in the AfD as you are a good debater. Oh well. I hope that you can avoid those that cause you discomfort. Best, Cunard (talk) 01:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Michael T. Flynn

Updated DYK query On January 17, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michael T. Flynn, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 06:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYKs

I commented on two DYK noms of yours (T:TDYK#Pretzinger and the one immediately following). Ucucha 08:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting Website

Hi CoM! I came across this site [11] today. It has some interesting sandwiches that I've somehow missed in my travels. Shinerunner (talk) 00:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks shine. I like that list and the picture. I have enjoyed the torta and the banh mi out here. They are very good indeed. Last night it was pulled pork with a mayo-free slaw. Mmmmmm. And Frito nachos with beans, cheese, and more pulled pork. Aaaaaaahhhh. I ate too many pickled jalapenos though. Be glad you're not in the same room with me! :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa, I'm glad too. Pulled pork...hmmm...A sad thing happened today: a colleague walked into my office and mistook my Frank's Red Hot for Tabasco sauce. What is this world coming to? Drmies (talk) 21:47, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

  • gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

WP:NODRAMA/2

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 02:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Loose ends

There was nothing in Mutual Home & Savings Association Building that wasn't already in Liberty Tower (Dayton), so I simply redirected Mutual to Liberty and added an improved infobox. Nyttend (talk) 20:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

Arlington Hotel

No, the hotel is gone; the building in the center of the picture now occupies 722 Main Street. See its Ohio Historical Society profile page for a photo. Having walked along Main Street from the Y Bridge (where the numbering begins) to St. Nicholas' Church (in the 900 block), I can assure you that the building in the OHS picture is no longer in existence. Nyttend (talk) 21:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is common in downtown Zanesville, unfortunately — of the 25 NRHP listings downtown, 4 are destroyed; all 3 of the others have been converted into parking lots. By the way, you may have more pictures available than you expected: I just realised that I'd forgotten to add several pictures to the list that I took on the same day. Nyttend (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you could upload the OHS picture under fair use? It's surely no more replaceable than a photo of a dead person. Nyttend (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Pretzinger

Updated DYK query On January 20, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pretzinger, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

NW (Talk) 00:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for George J. Wimberly

Updated DYK query On January 20, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George J. Wimberly, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

NW (Talk) 00:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ChildofMidnight

Has hit the thirty day mark and is awaiting a closing admin or other neutral party. If you have anything you'd like to add, now is the time. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RfC closed

I have closed the RfC and posted a summary here. I hope this can be productive and that positive change will come because of it. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'm now watching this page for any reply. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 08:48, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a very poor close because you ignored a great many comments made there in good faith and you completely disregarded my own response. It appears you have an axe to grind or at least a strong opinion of your own. You also ignored the trolling, personal attacks, and buffoonery engaged in by Tarc, Phgustaff, Sceptre and MagnificentCleankeeper, the type of abusive behavior our dispute resolutions processes are meant to address. Very poor showing. Incompetent, unconstructive, biased and unhelpful. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't own an axe, nor do I have a strong opinion regarding you, but I'm willing to let you create a strong opinion of you for me. It would seem the RfC has done little to change the behavior brought up by many people in it. If you continue down this path, you may not be happy with the consequences. I will make no further comments regarding this as I believe the summary speaks for itself. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Daniel Christensen/Row crop

What do you think of that article? I got started on it and User:Royalbroil got interested in it when I made a red link to row crop and found a whole bunch of sources for me. I was surprised at how much info there was; when I did a quick little Google search for sources I found none really but the definitions.

I had completely forgotten about Google Book results and will now do some searching for some other potential articles I could find no sources for! Daniel Christensen (talk) 14:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a very good article: well illustrated and informative. It's not a subject I know a lot about so I was interested to read it. Godo job. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have used the code word

http://rotteninlarimer.blogspot.com/2008/07/sheriff-announces-new-weight-loss.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oberonfitch (talk • contribs) 01:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

signing interrupted by out-of-doors-escapades-i.e.-hound-on-the-loose Oberonfitch (talk) 01:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that repeatedly pushing a boulder up a hill, only to have it roll back down again, is likely to bulk a person up rather than slim them down. I suppose it's a lot better than drinking cherry coke on the couch, but as with doing lots of squats and low reps with lots of weight at the gym, I'm not sure it's the best approach for a trim physique. What about a more balanced cardio approach? Instead of "running for Arbcom" we could have them RUN for Arbcom. I want to point out that since I started editng Wikipedia regularly I've quickly developed great strenght and stamina so that I'm now in the best shape of my life. Sitting here typing has prepared me to meet any challange, especially marathon running, team sports, and mountain climbing. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if the bulking up aspect is addressed in the myth. However, I've found that maintenance of a growing watch list has been a great weight reducer. Who has time to shop when trying to piece together the intricacies of the 2010 Disappearing BLP Invitational? I'm down to a few gluten free foods...and then, I'm thinking of trying canine if he runs away again at night. (Joking, of course. Guinea Pigs first.)  ;-) Oberonfitch (talk) 02:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DBLPI? Not bad. But officially it's known as UBOM, the Unmitigated or Unreferenced (depends who you talk to) Biography Obliteration Movement. ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice

I'm watching the Unwrapped episode on bacon right now. Man, thick slices of bacon, deepfried and then grilled, unbelievable. Drmies (talk) 04:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced biographies

There is some important discussion and polling of views at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people that people might want to have a look at. There is a proposal to delete all unreferenced BLPs "on sight". ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
Issue 2 (January 2010)

Previous issue | Next issue

Content

RE: Jokes

See, I removed my response to you immediately because humour is something subjective and I didn't want to be so dismissive about a mere joke, especially after checking you page (Ich bin ein Berliner, really?! ;-) Hekerui (talk) 09:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Burns night approaches

Haggises

Time to gather the wee ones and boil them up!

Early Burns supper night before last, complete ceremony: the pipers pipin', lassies dancin', the cuttin' o' the haggis, Burns recitals, tasty haggis and roast beef, topped off with a nice flight of scotches from lowlands to highlands. Och, laddie! Geoff Who, me? 17:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those look like brussel sprouts. Are you sure you weren't duped? I just had a beef stick from Minnesota. Pretty tasty! ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you'd enjoy this YouTube video.

link Grundle2600 (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have struggled mightily with my multi-front strategy to editing Wikipedia. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible photo

I'm up in Cleveland at the moment; if my driver says that it will work, I'll try to get a picture of the old Walker and Weeks office on Carnegie Avenue as I'm leaving. Nyttend (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I ate at Subway. The historic buildings on Euclid Avenue are in areas other than where I was; most of the NRHP buildings that I saw were ones on upper Prospect Avenue that I've previously photographed — see {{Upper Prospect MRA}}. A family member was driving me to a doctor's appointment, so no cab and no bicycle: just a little bit of convincing the family member that stopping at the Walker and Weeks building and at St. Paul's Episcopal Church on Euclid wasn't a bad idea. I'm staying with a friend tonight (since I'm on his computer, I'd be using my alternate username, User:Nyttend backup, but this IP is autoblocked because it was used by a vandalism-only account), but I should be able to upload images tomorrow when I get home. Nyttend (talk) 05:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A Polish Boy would have been more encyclopedic, but Subway has come a long way. Which one did you have? The new Barbaquoa (sp?)? ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, never heard of a Polish Boy until I saw your comment, just a few minutes before I left the response. I always get the footlong Spicy Italian; I used to get the BMT until it was removed from the list of $5 footlongs — the only difference between the two sandwiches is the lack of ham (my least favorite of the meats on the BMT), and the similarity is great enough that I'd rather pay less. And also, here are the pictures that I got — sorry for the side view of the Walker and Weeks building; traffic was heavy, so I couldn't cross the street to get a better picture. Nyttend (talk) 03:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dr. James Bell House
    Dr. James Bell House
  • Walker and Weeks; I already had a picture of this building, but it was poor enough quality that I never uploaded it
    Walker and Weeks; I already had a picture of this building, but it was poor enough quality that I never uploaded it
  • Neff Apartments; this replaces a poorer version that was already online
    Neff Apartments; this replaces a poorer version that was already online
  • St. Paul's Episcopal Church; this replaces a poorer version that was already online
    St. Paul's Episcopal Church; this replaces a poorer version that was already online
  • The most notable of Cleveland architectural constructions
    The most notable of Cleveland architectural constructions
You got some good shots. The James Bell House is a very strange design with the chimney in front like that and a fairly plain facade with those columns and arched window treatment in one area. I'm curious what it looked like originally. The polychromatic aged brick is nice. But it's very strange looking overall somehow. Where to next? ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have been blocked for responding to KimDabelsteinPetersen's ongoing assaults on Global Warming skeptic articles. I stated that:

Exposing your arguments as being specious and hypocritical is entirely relevant to stopping the BLP violating assaults that you and Connolley and others in your cabal have carried out. If you're serious about the sourcing standards that you're arguing for, then please apply them equally to all articles in this topic instead of gunning for subjects that you disagree with. You behavior is entirely inappropriate and enormously damaging to Wikipedia.

The issue was the repeated removal of large sections of sourced content, reverted by several editors. The deletion included removal a statement that Lawrence Solomon is a columnist for the National Post.

I have no idea why Stephan Shulz, Dabelstein, and Will Connolley have been allowed to continue their POV pushing rampage and are free to continue their efforts to disparage those they disagree with by the smearing them in their biographies. I have no objection to the inclusion of properly sourced criticism, but their use of innuendo and specious arguments in support of gutting content and coattracking in smears is unacceptable. It is very ironic that at a time when a deletion rampage against unreferenced biographies is going on these editors and their admin allies are allowed to violate our core principles and continue to abuse wikipedia for propaganda purposes.

I would also note that I was given no warning and no opportunity to amend my comment, if in fact there is soemthing objectionable about it. If someone felt it was inappropriate I would be happy to address that. But once again we have tool abuse by incompetent and dishonest admins who see themselves as being above the rules. It's grotesque. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:58, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well that sucks. Grundle2600 (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support Grundle. No worries. I need to get some stuff done anyway. The claims of "personal attack" and "harassment" are bunk of course. But 2/0 has, unfortuntely (past experiences suggests he's a decent fellow) been quite active along with Jehochman in carrying out a reign of censorship against those with opinions they don't share. This abusive behavior is damaging to the encyclopedia and is anti-intellectualism of the worst kind, but not much different the Climategate nonsense we've seen. Dishonest, misleading, misinformation campaigns like these are very harmful to the pragmatic solutions to protect the environment, so it's pretty disheartening that somemthing I'm involved in, Wikipedia, is being abused to this extent. The dishonest manipulation of sources, the smearing, and the bullying cabalism are very discouraging. But the world is not a perfect place.
I smiled at a few of the discussions on your page. Your good cheer, good faith and patience are an inspiration.
Please check with User:Drmies about the Markus article. They are both indigineous to Alabama and are very likely to know one another, although I don't know how intimately. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. I left your message on Drmies' talk page. Did you watch this YouTube video? Grundle2600 (talk) 21:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I like the Featured Article version even better. Did you see that one? I think the kernal of seriousness in the meme is a little too distressing for the humor to come through fully when it is used in relation to politics, but I did laugh at the objections made to your posting it. Why are the biggest stalkers and bullies on Wikipedia so ridiculously hypocritical? Anyway, I'm gathering my troops to the North for a run on some fried chicken. I shall return after the campaign is completed. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I didn't see that. What are you talking about? Grundle2600 (talk) 22:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[12]. Captions need to be turned on (for any of the brown shirted bullies, thugs and censors that may be watching). ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Heh heh. Grundle2600 (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that, old chap - my exopolitical masters prefer a less industrialized planet in preparation for their glorious arrival. You know how it is. - 2/0 (cont.) 00:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Template:Z8

Your comments on talk:Lawrence Solomon have been simply disruptive editing and personal attacks/ harassment. You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours. It appears from your block record that you have had similar problems previously. I would suggest after this block is over that you be more careful with your editing, refrain from attacking other editors and strive to be constructive in your editing. Vsmith (talk) 19:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how my comment about another editor's arguments and a pattern of abusive behavior from a group of editors amounts to a personal attack and/ or harassment. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ChildofMidnight (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My comment was not a personal attack or harassment. It's been removed so this block is not preventative. No warning or suggestion that it was inappropriate was ever made.

Decline reason:

Your comment was, frankly, not that bad. I reject Vsmith's characterization of them as "attempting to harass other users", but you have a history of making snarky comments. Rather then encouraging you to test the waters to find the limit of acceptable snarkiness, it'd probably be best for me to just suggest you tone things down. Unblocking you, I'm afraid, would discourage you from doing so. And the RfC should have been warning enough. I trust that you can figure out where people found/find a problem in your comments. -- tariqabjotu 00:49, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

William Connolley also has a history of making snarky comments, yet he's allowed to edit. I appreciate that you recognize that this block was fundamentally flawed, but we shouldn't block people under false pretenses or leave them blocked on whims or because of perceived sarcasm.
I certainly intend to engage in constructive editing and will, of course, be doubly careful about my comments since there are disruptive admins who abuse and misrepresent policies to go after those they disagree with, but I can't accept an outcome where I remain blocked unfairly. You or anyone else is always welcome to suggest I tone down a comment or disengage from a dispute, but it's completely improper to dole out blocks to unpopular editors or to censor some parties from contributing on trumped up allegations. Please unblock me. Thank you. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This [13] for example is a clear abuse of talk space, and something I would never get away with. Stop being hypocrites and respect our core policies. If anyone has an issue or a question about a comment I make or thinks something needs tweaking, drop me a courteous note, as I do for other editors. Don't act like completely dishonest assholes. It's unbecoming. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:06, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an example of a personal attack: "You are dense. Nevermind, I'm sure you'll get there in the end (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)" Pointing out the hypocrisy of someone's specious arguments and nmoting their POV pushing disruption such as the removal of a statement from Lawrence Solomon's article about him being a colmnist at the National Post columnist is certainly not a personal attack or harassment. A polite request to tone it down was all that was needed instead of more uncivil abuse where there is already heaps. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:03, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) By no means am I a fan of CoM (tbh, it's usually the opposite), but this block strikes me as a tad ludicrous. I don't know the related situation with that article, but CoM's comments are not worth waving arms about. He was getting a little feisty, and it probably wasn't conducive to a "nice, civil discussion". But honestly, snatching that one comment and giving a 31 hr block for "harrassment/attacks" is unwarranted. While I understand keeping an editor's past history in perspective, I tend to disagree with the unblock decline reason above. Unfortunately, this seems to be the way with editors who have troublesome histories; every admin wants to lay hands on them, so odd blocks get doled out for borderline comments that aren't really disruptive. It's a no-win situation. JamieS93 01:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jamie on this. Going over the articles and talk pages that CoM frequents, I see a hilarious double standard. People who are on one side of the argument are basically given free reign to behave however they want and while they are inconsistantly warned to be civil from time to time, they are rarely, if ever, held accountable. On the other hand, CoM has been blocked for a comment that is no more questionable than a dozen others on that same page (some made by admins) and I can't help but note that those people weren't blocked. Trusilver 02:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah real hilarious. Oh well. Thanks for helping get me unblocked finally. It allows me to run the gauntlet of abusive admins and pov pushers for another day. Hoorah. Seriously, it's amazing that there is such a lack of common sense or collegiality that an admin would think it appropriate to jut block without any warning or any suggestion to tone things down. And I'm disappointed in Elderleft that he would support this bullshit. But oh well. The edit I reverted was already reverted three or four times and includes the removal of such controversial claims as "Lawrence Solomon was a columnist for the National Post". Meanwhile GoRight is indefinitely blocked. What a joke. You guys should go check on that. Jehochman offered to unblock at one point, but then wanted to play some game about GoRight would have to say Jehochman wasn't involved in order to get unblocked. It's a fucking circus on here. And would someone please explain to your fellow admins that being blocked does not help people be more civil. It's infuriating and uncivil and should always be a last resort. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Point made. The original blocking reason was weak enough.

Request handled by: -- tariqabjotu

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Articles in the topic area of climate change are under general sanctions due to continued disruptive editing

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Lawrence Solomon, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. - 2/0 (cont.) 19:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above block does not invoke the probation, but please be aware when it expires to be especially careful in that topic area. - 2/0 (cont.) 19:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barney Frank / Herb Moses

When you get a chance could you add the Herb Moses information and cites back into the Barney Frank Article. It's pertinent and needs to be in the article, which I've stated in the discussion section. We should probably keep closer tabs on the article.

Thanks.

Lordvolton (talk) 07:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. Going round and round with disruptive POV pushers is not really my idea of a good time. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damon de Szegheo

Hi. There has been no further comment on this since your offer nearly two weeks ago to rework it into an article about the company: are you still willing to do that? If so, I will close the AfD (unless someone else does so first) as "rename and rework to be about the company." In that case, I suggest I do the rename, and leave you to do the rework. OK? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks. Still not a lot of sources for the label, but it's probably worth including as a historical footnote. We'll see. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

Welcome back. I spared you a thought this morning while I was preparing Biscuits and gravy. Drmies (talk) 17:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had a pretty good guacamole burger and fries at Carl's Jr. last evening. I topped it off with a "Supreme" Red Barron's pizza. Enjoy your weekend. Thanks for helping with the article on your old friend and associate. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I taught him everything he knows, but I kept my signature move to myself. Your dessert sounds like more than I can handle, but a guacamole burger....hmmm... Drmies (talk) 18:06, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since when is getting slapped considered a "signature move"? ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm you'll have to explain that one. And for male prostitutes, I think slapping is mandatory--I didn't have to teach him that. Drmies (talk) 19:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to imply that your "signature move" didn't result in a welcoming response. But Conan and I don't seem to be hitting the punchlines these days. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Frederick W. Garber

Updated DYK query On January 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frederick W. Garber, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

7 templates

I don't get it :S but thanks for posting :) Hekerui (talk) 00:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Up your alley?

Hi CoM

I just created this stub. Thought it might be up your alley. Wanna help expand?

Bongomatic 01:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Glad that bogus block was quickly lifted.

I took a look at the NYT article. Some nice photos. I'm okay with the Wikipedia article being a stub though. :) Cheers Bongo. How are things going? The drum beat here seems to be in rhythm with your views on article "clean up" lately? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really understand all the fuss about it, to be honest, although I think a less disruptive way would be to have some process parallel to a {{prod}} but one where the impending deletion can only be averted by sourcing. Deleting the articles first means only admins can realistically do a decent job at attempting to find sources, which reduces the pool of editors by too much. Bongomatic 23:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the consensus is headed in that direction. Giving some time to address the unreferenced articles would be nice. I was actually looking for the complete list so I could knock off a few, but I couldn't remember where I saw it. Maybe someone watching know? ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BLPD2010

Regarding your recent objections, I commend to you the "Parable of the little bird". Sometimes life is just like that. -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 01:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's an interesting parable. It's not clear to me how it applies to my comments or the circumstances being discussed though. Are unreferenced articles birds that aren't ready to fly south? Jimbo is a cow? How does that comport with my comment in which the ones getting dumped on are good faith contributors?
The claim that articles that have been here for years and only need references are at the core or even related to the BLP problem is the ultimate fantasy. I'm not sure where this delusion was born or why it's held so tightly, but forestalling the loss of so many good stubs is certainly worth advocating for over the appeasement of the misguided and confused. Is there a parable that captures that reality?
I've been thinking about the emperor wearing no clothes story lately, but not in relation to Wikipedia. But I have no objection to more clothes here, at least enough cover all the asses and boobs. Cheers. Thanks for the note. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:10, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK: George F. Hammond

Hello, ChildofMidnight. Would you like to handle the comments and suggestions at T:TDYK#George F. Hammond, please? --PFHLai (talk) 09:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I meant those comments by Collectonian (talk · contribs), not my comments. If you don't feel like writing up the article for "Hollenden Hotel", don't worry about it. --PFHLai (talk) 09:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note. I hope you're enjoying your weekend. I know Drmies is excited to watch Jerraud Powers in the playoffs. ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WMC

He would prefer you not call him 'Will' or 'Connolly'. I assume you were unaware of that, in which case he's removals do seem somewhat arbitrary and his accusations insulting. But now that you are aware, that hopefully makes sense, and you can simply refer to him as "WMC", etc. Prodego talk 21:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Civility warning

You know this already. I'm just putting it here so everyone else knows that you know. From User:William_M._Connolley/For_me/The_naming_of_cats: If you think you are on personal terms with me, you can use my first name, William. If you think you're on very personal terms, you might be tempted to use a contraction of my first name; this simply proves you are wrong. Just for you, I've strengthened it [14] William M. Connolley (talk) 21:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're on about, but if I mispell something you are welcome to refactor. I do not object to collegial copy-editing, although given your history of antagonism and uncivil attacks towards me you should be careful to show you are acting in good faith and with respectful comments and edit summaries. Also, please undo your improper refactoring of my notice to you on your talk page regarding your abusive incivility that is being discussed on the appropriate noticeboard. I am required to notify you of that discussion so your allegations of harassment are uncivil. You also need to remove the attack page you are keeping in your userspace. You are not allowed to harass and attempt to intimidate other editors or you will be blocked or banned. Your COI on climategate issues with you past involvement as a part of RealClimate and your personal feud with Lawrence Solomon also need to be addressed. You should not be editing articles related to those subjects. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you're on about...: OK, for the *very* hard of understanding: don't call me Will. Is that simple enough for you to understand? William M. Connolley (talk) 21:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no requirement that I refer to you as "Dr. William R Connolly" or whatever it is you're trying to foist on the rest of the community. Per your previous incivility I avoid interacting with you wherever possible, but I'm sure you are aware that I am required to notify you when your abusive behavior and incivility is being discussed on a noticeboard. Misrepresenting my notification as "harassment" and improperly refactoring my comments to falsely indicate that I made a personal attack when I didn't [15], are examples of your highly abusive behavior that simply cannot continue. If you cease engaging in this kind of misuse of your editing privileges and cease violating COI rules, further discussion of these problems won't be required. Obviously, you shouldn't be referring to other editors as incompetent, even if you have allies working on your behalf and defending your abusive actions. As you've indicated that you don't welcome my communications with you on yoru talk page (something I have respected) I would request you show similar courtesy and reciprocity towards me. Thank you very much. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:54, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
At this point ChildofMidnight, I have asked you to give me diffs of exactly what you find objectionable, and you have not. You've been given a fairly reasonable request about how to refer to another editor (you do not have to call him 'Dr.' if you wish not to, there are several options), and you have ignored it. You continue to make claims of inappropriate behavior that have either been refuted (COI), or that you have not backed up. If you have a genuine issue with William M. Connolley's behavior, the invitation still stands to give me diffs on my talk page. If not, you need to stop making claims about him. Prodego talk 21:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The place to discuss his improper behavior is on the appropriate noticeboard. I have been responive, but I can't do more than one thing at a time.
The claim that his COI problem has been refuted is obviously false. Please provide diffs where his involvement in advocating on climate change issues with the RealClimate group has been disproved or where his personal feud with Lawrence Solomon has been shown to not be going on. Your statement seems ridiculous on its face.
As far as diffs go, I'm willing to put in the effort to provide ADDITIONAL diffs, several have already been provided. If you can't be bothered to look in his talk page history and at the diffs already provided, it seems unlikely that you will be responsive to additional evidence I present. Several editors have noted his incivility already and have provided diffs of his calling other editors incompetent, a clear personal attack, and of his abusive refactoring of comments, even after objections were made. Frankly, it's very hard for me to believe that you were unable to find the diffs where he refactored my comments on his talk page (where they occured is obvious). If you seriously can't find them and ask nicely instead of in a way that seems bullying, I will provide you with specific diffs that you are unable to find on your own, but typically I try to avoid wasting my time on wild goose chases when people are obviously unwilling to take appropriate action. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


COI issues

(sectioned by CoM to differentiate from section above)

I have already given WMC a warning note about civility, and the COI questions have been addressed. If you have a specific action you would like taken, please let me know what you would like done and why (with diffs). I have already taken an action on the civility issue, what I am more interested in is these two claims:

  1. "Please undo your improper refactoring of my notice to you on this page that your abusive behavior is being discussed on the noticeboard."
  2. "You also need to remove the attack page you are keeping in your userspace."

Prodego talk 22:17, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide diffs where that editor's COI problems have been "addressed". That editor continues to abuse his editing privileges and to use his position here to go after the articles of biographical article subjects that he has personal disagreements with (as well as to violate our core NPOV policy by pushing a particular point of view for propaganda pursposes). I've provided diffs of his refactoring and other editors have provided diffs of recent edits where his long streak of incivility and personal attacks has continued. Even as those problem edits were being discussed his abusive refactoring and civility violating misrepresentations have continued. So the "action" you've taken is clearly inadequate. If I have made a personal attack against him please provide a diff. If you and he are unwilling to provide evidence in support of this lie, then his blatantly false statements need to be corrected. Perhaps you aren't aware Prodego, but the civility policy has been updated to include dishonest smears and misrepresentations. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see he's also removed my response to you on his talk page [16] so maybe that's why you're confused and making false allegations that I haven't been responding? ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want something done, I'm offering to look at it for you. In exchange all I ask for is for you to present your case. If you will not do that, then you need to stop complaining about him, as that would be harassment. As for COI: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 39#User:William M. Connolley and Global Warming, and the civility warning: [17]. Prodego talk 22:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, but I did provide a diff with my report. You have so far failed to address whether an editor is allowed to refactor other editors' comments, even after objections are made, to interject their comments inside those of another's. You also reiterate an abhorrent and completely false allegation of harassment. My only edit to that editor's talk page was to notify them that there was a discussion about their abusive behavior. And the diff of the COI discussion you provided absolutely DOES NOT suggest in any way that those concerns have been "addressed". I hope you don't edit articles by misrepresenting sources in this way.
In addition to the diff of his refactoring I provided already provided, here is another diff that shows [18] an improper refactoring of my comment to include a misrepresentation that I made a personal attack. This behavior is not acceptable and violates WP:Civility. He did the same thing on the noticeboard.
The place to discuss these civility violations, the COI issues, and the abusive refactoring, is on the appropriate noticeboard where the community is looking into them. Instead, and despite my requests and respectful responses, you have continued to come after me in a way that is abusive and harassing, including repeatedly making false allegations and insinuations. I am well aware of what wikistalking and wikiharassment are about, because I have had to get Wikirestraining orders taken out on several editors who couldn't leave me alone.
It's often the case that when an editor's improper behavior is pointed out they attempt to retaliate. I'm not sure why you're aiding someone engaged in such obviously inappropriate conduct. I don't understand why you're coming after me instead of addressing their refactoring, referring to other editors as incompetents, and as needing spoon feeding, but I ask that you follow appropriate process in discussing the issues I've raised and other editors have supported with additional diffs in the approrpiate forum, instead of coming after me on my talk page in a harassing, bullying, and threatening manner. If you want additional diffs I will provide them, and other editors can do the same, but please make your requests where the discussion is taking place and explain why the diffs already provided are inadequate. Thank you. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:48, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Given that he interprets as a personal attack you could rephrase your comment to use something like WMC, and remove the "PA" reference you object to. Would this resolve that problem? Prodego talk 22:54, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whether someone named William interprets people calling them Will as engaging in a personal attack is completely frivolous. Most everyone knows that Will is short for William. this is common knowlege. This is a nonsensical distraction from his abusive behavior on a par with the Chewbacca defense. So let's stop monkeying around. That editor's repeated abuse of his editing prileges, his personal attacks, his improper refactoring of other editors' comments, his COI issues, and his BLP violating assaults on article subjects he doesn't care for is my concern. Please address those and the diffs already provided in the appropriate forum. If you are more concerned about how I shorten his monker, then I'm happy to satisfy your qualms by referring to him by his last name Connolly, by his initiails W.C. or as Will. All of those are very reasonable choices and completely within policy. No one is required to refer to me per my personal preferences, and I refuse to call him "Dr. William M. Connolly Jr." or by any other titles that may or may not have attained legitimately. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have examples of abusive behavior that I have not already warned him for, and have not been dealt with on COIN, then please provide them. Otherwise you are just being disruptive, and deliberately calling WMC names you know he dislikes is part of that. Prodego talk 23:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not allowed to shorten his name to Will and he gets to decide how I refer to him then I want him to be required to refer to me as ChildofMidnightI. Or His Honor ChildofMidnight. He's being purposely disruptive with this bullshit pretending he doesn't know that Will is short for William. What does the M stand for anyway? You're playing games Prodego and you still haven't addressed his refactoring of another editor's comments that has been diffed in the complaint, you haven't explained why he's allowed to refactor my comments to insert misrepresenatations, or why he's allowed to accuse me of harassment for notifying him that his abusive behavior is being discussed even as he continue to troll my talk page. Am I allowed to refactor his comments anytime he doesn't refer to me as ChildofMidnightI or His Honor ChildofMidnight to make it look like he mae a personal attack? What a pile a rubbish. Get your act together and shape up. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Peter Bonnett Wight

Updated DYK query On January 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peter Bonnett Wight, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest

You step back and take some time to write a decent report about your issues, that is that best way for you to express yourself. Off2riorob (talk) 00:57, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abusive behavior by William Connolley and Prodego

Anyone following the above discussion will note that Prodego repeatedly asked for more diffs (several were already provided). Since what I was citing was obvious on the pages under discussion, I had a feeling he was playing games, I've been through this kind of abuse before, but he persisted. So after his repeated requests I provided diffs, only to have him immediately close and collapse the discussion.

I don't know why he think it's important to obscure William Connolley's abusive behaviors as detailed below, but his actions are outrageous and sickening.

At a time when BLPs are such a hot subject, we continue to allow a pack of POV pushers to disparage biographies of article subjects they disagree with and to advocate and propagandize our climate articles.

Here are some of the recent diffs illustrating the abuse form just one member of the Global Warming cabal Anyone familiar with Connolley's disruptive behavior will know about his game playign with his "naming of cats" nonsense, so it's particularly amusing to see him referring to notable subjects he disagree with as "Lord M" or by parts of their name.:

Diffs [19], [20] and [21]. I know he has friends and allies, but this report should not be disrupted with mirespresentations about what is a clear pattern of abusive behavior, incivility, refactoring, remocing of comments, and making false allegations. ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This problem has been goin on for a long time. I think the diffs showing abusive refactoring, referring to other editors as incompetents needing spoon feeding, misreperesnting the comments of others, the making of false allegations are enough to warrant action, but here are some more examples per repeated requests for more evidence of William's abusive behavior.

  • Here's one of his abusive talk pages titled "whinging" [22] Please note that if this is allowed I'm going to start a page on WMC with a diff noting that this kind of attack page was endorsed per this discussion. I don't want to be maligned in his talk space space and view this type of abuse as a clear example of his harassment and disruptive attempts to intimidate other editors.
  • You are dense. Nevermind, I'm sure you'll get there in the end William M. Connolley (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
  • "He is clearly to busy to review the actual terms of the article probation; he is clearly to proud to undo his errors; please DO NOT invite him back in again, we do not need his elephant-like blundering in this situation William M. Connolley (talk) 10:05, 24 January 2010 (UTC)" (Sorry about the grammatical errors, but I don't want to refactor someone else's quote.
  • [23] Irrelevant digression to call someone a noob. Per William's declaration that calling someone named William, Will is a personal attack, this must be taken as the worst sort of slander!
  • Another attack page titled "curse of the gnome" [24]
  • And here's one of the many instances where he dishonestly refactors my comments to make it look like I made personal attack [25]. If he's allowed to do that then I expect I will be allowed to do the same to him when he doesn't use another editors full name.
  • Here's an example where he uses his blog to engage in a personal feud with Lawrence Solomon [26]. Clearly this COI involvement in a dispute of this type should prevent him from editing related article subjects since his involvement is not neutral. The same issues are involved with his editing of climategate subjects because he was a named party in the RealClimate advocacy website where he had a biography page included (it might still be there, I haven't looked). Wikipedia should not be used as an extension of his personal and professional interests in advocating a certain point of view. I certainly hope this is obvious to the vast majority of editors here. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • And another example where he discusses a climate scientist he disagrees with under the cateogry "general stupidity" [27] You'll note that he does not use the individual's full name, let alone his title, once again demonstrating a level of hypocrisy that is fairly awesome. His edits to that individual's article include edit warring to include a photo that he says on his blog "makes Lord M look like a bit of a wacko". ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

Stop questioning WMC!! We already lost Kenosis where would we be with WMC there to keep the trolls at bay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.175.112.160 (talk) 01:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which trolls are you talking about? If there is inappropraite content or editing please let me know so I can take a look and fix it. If the fix doesn't stick we can take it to the appropraite noticeboard. What we can't have are packs of POV pushers engaging in all kinds of abusive behaviors including attacks on other editors and article subjects. That would be enormously damaging to Wikipedia's content, reputation and mission. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do not vandalize my talk page again. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one can sanely disagree with WMC. They must be trolls. And what vandalism? You are not allowed to attack WMC! It's harrassment!!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ChildofMidnight&oldid=339837374"