User talk:TParis

X!'s Tools are currently being migrated from Toolserver to Wikimedia Labs. If you'd like a status update, connect to #xlabs ^connect on IRC.

This is TParis's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

If you have come here to change my opinion, be ready to also change yours.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by .

Notice of discussion on Administrators notice board

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Regarding the question at WP:AN

Hi Tom, I phrased it as a hypothetical at AN because I viewed it as a systemic question, and because I did not want to duplicate an open discussion on a particular user. I didn't see an e-mail address for you, so I'll provide the links to the examples on which I based the question here: the archived ANI report is here and the recently-retrieved-from-the-archive ANI report is here. Even as recently as yesterday, interactions with others get results like this edit summary [1]. Yet the report has been open since June 21 with no action taken. So, that's the background context on which I based the hypothetical question. Regards -- Taroaldo ✉ 03:41, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per your suggestion

Per your suggestion to read your article on ANI Advice: I read about three lines of it, looked at the photo and the caption, and decided that reading any more was a waste of time. Above, here on your talk page, you have written "Please assume good faith in my edits". There's no good faith in your article, and there was no good faith in you jumping to conclusions regarding my reverts at the Dimensionaut article. Even after I tried to explain things had already been dealt with, you returned with more evidence that you weren't going to even consider having good faith with me. Directing me to your insulting and dismissive article was lack of good faith. Especially considering one of the opening statements. "If you want your thread to be successful so you can obliterate your enemies". Apparently, you wanted me to read that article based on your assumption I see Spanglej as an enemy who should be obliterated. How insulting. And completely wrong. It's no wonder new editors in Wikipedia are at an all time low and others are leaving post haste. It's the kind of crappy attitude and bad faith you display in the article as well as what you barfed at me in ANI that makes Wikipedia appear to be a very unfriendly place. I understand that Administrators get cranky and have seen a lot of garbage from various editors over time -- that would certainly lead to a callous attitude. But not everyone deserves that callousness. Good faith is quickly becoming a joke and just words (maybe it's already at that point). Your article is clear evidence of it, sad to say. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 02:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What are you hoping to accomplish with this message?--v/r - T P 02:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merely letting you know I think you seriously jumped the gun and were wrong to not assume good faith. It's one of the pillars, it's what you ask others to do. I just don't understand why you thought I needed berating when all I did was come to ANI for some assistance and hopefully some constructive and informed advice. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 02:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you realize the one of the most often failures of good faith is accusing others of failing to assume good faith? I'm brash, but I'm not mean-spirited. Don't confuse honesty with bad faith. And thanks for the feedback, I always take feedback into consideration. Now if you will, kindly find something else to do other than talk to me until you're ready to hear truths.--v/r - T P 02:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brash is one thing, you were just wrong. And now you're just being intentionally rude. Whatever. I now know what administrator to never come to for help or advice. Thanks for narrowing down the field. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 02:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you won't understand how right I was. There is nothing that Administrators can do for you, you're in a content dispute. One which you are losing, by the way. You've reverted the same content 6 times in a month. Ed let you off easy. Why? I don't know, but it's his prerogative. It doesn't make me wrong that Ed handled it differently, it makes me different. Nor does it make you right that you escaped a block, it makes you lucky that the administrator you received that day was in forgiving mood. No one on ANI is going to spend their time on a content dispute. That's why no one is taking notice to your reports. You're in the wrong place, you should be at WP:DRN. Had you read my essay, it would've dawned on you why administrators arn't going to get involved. If you want to go to another administrator, that is of course fine by me. There are well over a thousand active administrators and my pride isn't hurt any. But being that I'm the only one who bothered to even comment should clue you in that this isn't an "administrative" issue. We are tool wielders. The term "Administrators" is only a word for us in the technical sense. We don't run Wikipedia. What you need is dispute resolution and consensus and currently the consensus is against you. So again, put the revert button away (I'm sorry, did I offend you again?) and engage is dispute resolution. And if and when it doesn't go your way, get over it and move on. Knock off the ANI reports. They'll go nowhere. Especially if you get upset when an administrators tells you so. Since you couldn't resist the urge to respond to me the first time I gently asked you to leave, I assume you're still watching my talk page. So anything else I can help you with?--v/r - T P 02:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

xLabs

I haven't seen you there in a while. I know you've been busy with real life, but I was wondering if I can quickly chat with you over there. :-)—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:09, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at home and I have a family thing as soon as I get home tonight. Could you email me about it?--v/r - T P 14:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or if you have gmail, we can use gchat.--v/r - T P 14:24, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have gmail, but I don't like using it. I'll just email you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TParis. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

A cheeseburger for you!

Eat this! MONGO 18:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MONGO ;).--v/r - T P 19:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer steaks but all they had available was this cheeseburger thingee.--MONGO 19:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I am of age and I know there is a {{wikiLove-pint}} template ;) --v/r - T P 19:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

64.85.214.47 has given you a tall pint! Pints promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a tall pint, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Here you go.^†

And because I am German, how about some Amber Weizen?—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 03:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN

[2]

Please, wait until your fellow admins explain you what was wrong with the “ANI notice”. Glad to have acquaintance with you ;) but now it’s night in my city, sorry. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:49, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uh huh. Good night.--v/r - T P 19:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TP, I don't think we've ever crossed paths before, but I saw your very nice comments at AN. I'm just writing to let you know that I just became aware Incnis Mrsi's allegation that I defaced someone's user page, and your exchange with him about it. I know that when you hear what actually happened, you'll fully realize Incnis's deception, and his motives for supporting the proposed sanctions at AN. I posted the comments in the AN discussion, but didn't know if you'd see them because it's buried in the middle of the entire thread. I honestly was shocked to see the extent to which Incnis attempted to deceive you about that "deface" issue. If you want a shorter version of what really happened, just read this entire exchange between admin Drmies and Incnis (and Sitush). I just wanted you to know the truth. Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 08:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know what happened, I wanted to see Incnis Mrsi get on his high horse and arrogantly point out that it was a user page as if mistakes don't happen so I could slap him down with a "So what?". We haven't crossed paths but I've read your comment before. You'd face less animosity if you registered an account. If I can make a suggestion, if you do register an account then avoid the noticeboards and controversial for awhile.--v/r - T P 12:45, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TP. I think that someone who's been caught blatantly lying in order to destroy someone's reputation, particularly where santion voting is happening, that editor should not only be banned from the discussion, but also blocked for a bit. It's outrageous how he completely tried to deceive you. But now, all his attacks throughout that discussion remain, even though his motives have now been revealed. Anyway, thank you for the advice. I appreciate it. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He's a Wiki-dick (you can comment in the up-coming ANI thread about this 'personal attack' next, as he is surely watching my talk page). He runs around and tries to make himself better than others. Had I been in the conversation earlier, I'd have nipped this in the butt. But now the conversation is too far along to change the course now. I'm going to see if I can't nudge a few people into retracting their !votes.--v/r - T P 13:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not true. I am not a dick, and one can convince me that I made a mistake relatively easy. What is true is that I have a hatred for social beings in Wikipedia. And this wasn’t by no means started from my quarrel with 76.189.109.155 and his then-enablers in May. This already existed many years ago, when I edited another wikipedia. Generally, a person who improves encyclopedia is my friend, and persons who create a social-networking stuff, as well as theirs enablers, are my foes. There is nothing personal about it, guys. Have a nice day, and try to edit articles sometimes. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it's true that you can be convinced, then sit on your ass for a moment because I'm compiling diffs of exactly how your behavior caused this mess.--v/r - T P 13:59, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LoL… you’ll likely find a conspiracy against cable modems’ users, directed and financed by rival ISPs who bribed several sysops of en.wikipedia to maintain unbearable conditions for Time Warner’s IP users in Wikipedia. Incnis Mrsi is, obviously, anything else but an elite sock of conspirators created by acquisition of an account of a retired user of ru.wikipedia. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:30, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ANEW

Can you look at this? It was declined by the same admin who started the AN. And look at the bogus reason for the decline. The reverts were on my talk page. I'd like it decided, but I'd be totally satisfied if you or another admin would simply educate the reported editor on the following three simple things: (1) That 5 reverts in an hour is edit warring. The edtior's excuse is that because it was 3 reverts of one item and 2 of another, it doesn't count as edit warring. (2) That a user editing their own talk page is not vandalism. They insist that my relocating the IP template on my talk page qualifies as vandalism. (3) That an IP template is not, as he described it, an "established vandal static IP address maintenance template". How/why are editors like this allowed to perform functions like that when they clearly don't know what they're doing? Haha. The editor refuses to read the relevant policies on 3RR, NOT3RR, and vandalism. So if you could set them straight, that would be great. I don't even care about the ANEW being decided if you could do that (although it should have been decided). Thanks. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 14:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Poke

Hello, you got the talk page, but the user page has the same content. Rgrds. --64.85.214.47 (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]