User talk:David.Mestel

Template:AMA alerts

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User_talk:David.Mestel/Archive 03. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

See Archive 1, Archive 2 and Archive 3.

Re: Happy First Edit Day!

Thanks for the wiki-birthday wishes :) — FireFox ^(talk) _{11:43, 30 July '06}

Don't mention it - just taking an oppurtunity to spread Wikilove. --David Mestel^(Talk) 14:46, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Report On Lengthy Litigation

My only problem, and the reason why I've written it since I started at the Signpost, is the appearance of bias in writeups. For that reason, I'm always a little hesitant about other users doing it. If you want to do it, with the understanding that on any case where you're involved, you'll let me handle the writeup, I don't have a real problem with it. Ral315 (talk) 14:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just make sure it's written by 17:00 UTC tomorrow. Start it at User:David.Mestel/Arbitration report, or something like that, and post it to the newsroom when it's done. Thanks for your help. Ral315 (talk) 14:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The report is now finished. I hope it's OK. --David Mestel^(Talk) 21:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

You forgot about the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Coolcaesar case which was rejected, but has been merged with the Ericsaindon2 case, but was not included in your issue. It was a pretty big deal Sunday-Friday of last week. You might want to add that to your article about the Arbitration Happenings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.227.162.99 (talk • contribs) .

Thanks - I've added EricSaindon2's conterclaims to the report. --David Mestel^(Talk) 07:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the one that is published or your own version? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.227.162.99 (talk • contribs) .

It is the version that will be published, which I have written. By the way, it's helpful if you sign your comments by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. --David Mestel^(Talk) 07:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be a pain, but you forgot to add that Coolcaesar conducted over 200 Personal Attacks to the part regarding his actions and Ericsaindon2's. That was the big point. --69.227.162.99 08:06, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where are these alleged personal attacks? And even if they are there, it'll be hard to report them while remaining neutral. --David Mestel^(Talk) 10:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advocacy request

Excellent :-) Could you take on DrL's case over at WP:AMARQ? Just sign with acceptance and set it to "(open)". Peace! אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) 12:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re User:DrL and User:Hillman

This issue is already being discussed extensively and is nowhere near a clear violation. You should read WP:AN/I#Posting Personal Information, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Hillman/Dig, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/DrL, and Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-07-30 Hillman posting personal information. Posting such a comment to User_talk:Hillman without looking into the context and support he has is unlikely to be an effective way of helping with the issue - he has already been reported to AN/I, and was not blocked, and the MfD currently seems to be leaning rather heavily toward keeping the pages. --Philosophus ^T 13:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not the Miscellany is deleted is irrelevant. I am simply requesting the removal of the personal information contained therein, and its removal from the history, as per WP:STALK. --David Mestel^(Talk) 13:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Hillman has placed on the page your "client" is worried about is based on nothing more than her own edit history, and the big quote which mentions past bad behaviour is a link which she herself posted. It is taken from a magazine article which mentions Gina Langan nee LoSasso, in which she herself told the interviewer certain things. The same GL posted that link to the Mega Foundation site (where it is hosted), since she's the webmistress there. All that Hillman has done is track DrL's edits, and conjecture, and it is clearly marked as conjecture that the two people are the same. WP:STALK states that information may not be posted unless the subject has offered it herself. All information on Hillman's page is offered by DrL and Asmodeus through their actions, and by DrL posting links on Wikipedia. Byrgenwulf 13:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can claim that she's giving away the information herself freely based on one edit, especially since she has repeatedly denied it on other occasions. --David Mestel^(Talk) 14:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, DrL has never denied anything, she has equivocated and prevaricated. She has, moreover, tacitly admitted her identity on a number of occasions, and you have made it clear who she is here. Anyway, I'm not going to get sucked into an argument about this, I was just pointing out what should be obvious. I'll go away now. Byrgenwulf 14:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, David. I am not going to respond to Byrgenwulf's comments. He is arguably another stalker and has been tracking and following me around on Wikipedia, often intimidating me. He is an improvement over Hillman in that he does not post a great deal of personal information. Just a little. I would appreciate any advice you may have as to how I might be able to appropriately set limits with this user.

Anyhow, Hillman continues to post personal information and conjecture to his page as well as other user talk pages. See the bottom of this page. Christopher Thomas kindly redacted that page, but he has also posted this type of personal information on other user's talk pages. He seems to be spamming WP with my personal information. Can this user be blocked? DrL 22:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

David, thank you so much for your help in my case. I am amazed that the situation could have gotten this far without more people commenting that this behavior is just not in the spirit of Wikipedia and moving to handle it a different way. I'm glad to see that's happening now. People like you, stepping in and adding your voice really makes a difference.

I've been leaving the bulk of Hillman's page intact because I feel that it would be best if Hillman redact the page himself. I did put up a disputed tag and made a couple of comments to point out some of the WP violations. I would ask that someone redact, blank or speedily delete (preferred) the page if he doesn't do so within a reasonable period of time. Again, thank you. DrL 12:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My wikibreak

David, I replied to your reply on my user talk page. See you around the middle of next week. ---CH 17:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:ScienceApologist barnstar cluster

Heya, rather detailed questions you got there. To be clear the barnstar cluster theme was a stylistic choice based on the user; rather than an actual journal article or formal review process. (eg. we used a gem theme for User:Vsmith) So it wasn't blind, but he had distinguished himself to merit our attention. As with any barnstar we informally judged his edits to be grammatically and scientifically excellent when compared to average edits... so that was kind of random. So since there was no actual methodology to review, no one reviewed it :'D, although several people signed the award after conducting their own reviews of SA's edits. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 13:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thought that was likely... but you got me in the morning, I'm not exactly a morning person. :"D There are several candidates that need barnstar clusters. Sometime soon I'll be restarting the process on my meta. Feel free to vote/nominate someone, though it will take some time to get things going again. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 14:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for July 31st


Volume 2, Issue 31	31 July 2006	About the Signpost

Onion riff prompts some to cry for change	Professors criticize, praise Wikipedia in listserv discussions
Wikimania last-minute information	Report from the Polish Wikipedia
News and notes	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	The Report On Lengthy Litigation


Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	RSS Shortcut : WP:SIGN

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks!

Hi! Thanks for wishing me a happy first edit day! =) That was a spirit lifter for sure!