I will be away from Wikipedia for an uncertain period of time. If I am away for a long time, I may be taking a long wikibreak. I might come back to do activities in Wikipedia, but I am uncertain about how long I must stay.
By the way, you are welcome to leave me messages whenever I am away. Depending on my interests, I might or might not respond quickly, but I will be happy to respond. You may also contact my mentor, Magog the Ogre, if you have questions and/or comments about me.
Other banners below (If neither of above nor of below is accurate, feel free to suggest):
Due to personal issues, George Ho will be away from Wikipedia for an undefined period of time.
I must confess that I want to socialize but am bad at it. I'm uncertain whether moderate autism is related to it. Nevertheless, the above message implies that my social skills leaves a lot be desired. If a message is given to me, especially from a newcomer, I will do my best to be friendly and to avoid discouragement.
Leaving Wikipedia in somewhere in the summer (or after)
I've come to the conclusion that my work here in Wikipedia is almost done. I do not have many friends here in Wikipedia. In fact, I've gained resentments and enemies here. Also, I tend to feel like I'm such a bother to people. I have known that, without me, Wikipedia will never be the same. Of course, many, if not some, people would disagree and hope that someone greater than me would come along. Who knows? Also, many would not feel bad about me leaving or my planned absence. I can't just leave yet. I've got some unresolved things, like drafts, FFDs, etc. The big influencers here are also administrators and are willing to make us editors look bad. I'll never be qualified as administrator because I have not taken heavy criticisms well and because I have not worked well with more difficult people. Never mind that. I'm not one of people to be friends with, maybe? Also, I could not handle well difficult situations that I made. I just wanted some agreements, not retaliations and stuff. If people do not commemorate me well as one of reliable editors, then that's fine for me (even when it might make me sadder). The sooner I finish existing situations without making newer ones, the sooner I leave, and the better for everybody to be fine without me. Fair deal? --George Ho (talk) 08:37, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should stay. You might want to take a little time off, but do that and come back! Everyone who wants to work here and tries to makes a positive difference.
We all make mistakes-the losers are the ones who claim they never make any and those who won't admit that they do. A couple of the admirable things about you are that you never stop trying and aren't afraid to speak up when you think something is wrong.
Don't get so focused on being an admin because there are a lot of good editors who've been here a while and who don't ever want to become an admin. Not being an admin doesn't make an editor any less.
So, friend, how about sticking around and being the best George Ho, Wikipedia editor that you can be? Nobody else can fill that spot-only you. :-) We hope (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
From Engleham
User talk:We hope Ho has no real intention of going away beyond stating it to gain attention. But yes, he should leave. As per User:Begoon's comment below, too many other mentors have been burned; too much time of good editors has been wasted endlessly indulging him; and when he posts to Begoon "maybe I'm too two-faced or multi-faced or something like that", but again for those knowing his history of faux-confessionals, merely as another tactic for yet more attention, you know he is in a bad place, and this isn't the right place for him. It's not helping him. It's not healthy. Wikipedia doesn't provide professional psychological counselling. Which is what is needed now. Engleham (talk) 01:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. In 2050. Try it on someone else who hasn't done Psych. Unfortunately you're transparent to me. You know this, and I know it how much it angers you. That's how cancer starts, so you need to move on. Engleham (talk) 01:57, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And you should too. I saw your comments at the RfA, and many were irritated by your less effective "oppose" vote. You stick to your problems; I'll stick to mine. George Ho (talk) 02:05, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My major final task for Wikipedia (delaying my planned exit)
I wanted to leave soon, but I guess I must improve pages related to Cheers and Frasier. This would delay my intended exit to months, like several to one year. I could do other tasks, like verified sexual identity, images of first editions, and copy editing, but they are just minor. --George Ho (talk) 21:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
George, this is becoming stupid now, you're either leaving (and no-one is suggesting you should, although a break would be well advised) or you're working on stuff for up to a year. Either way you are not doing yourself any favours with this pregnant pause and pseudo-quit, it's embarrassing and time-wasting. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:36, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at loss at one of your latest disdains toward me, especially when you said "pseudo-quit". I'm not kidding about quitting actually, but... what's the point of convincing you? I don't have enough friends to convince me to stay in Wikipedia, anyway. I don't know how to be a better, greater person in Wikipedia than I am enough to stay here for years. No matter... Rules are too tough to change because they work too well and become tools for bureaucracy, especially WP:NFCC. Either I finish all the way through Frasier (season 11) or just a few seasons, like Cheers (season 7). If I want to stay forever, I could work on I Love Lucy and other things, but I can't. Researching for Wikipedia is currently too time-consuming to do for older television series and other millennial topics, like old events. Also, I got real-life things to do, like college and finding a job. If I can actually meet anybodya Wikipedian in-person, maybe I could change my mind about leaving Wikipedia. But that's just an ideal. --George Ho (talk) 02:06, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
With regards to this edit, summary: "rm covers per talk page", where's the talk page discussion? I looked for it, but I must be having a "bad search day". Begoontalk20:17, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, awesome one. I already looked there, and couldn't find anything that seemed very relevant. George will be able to clear up what he meant, I'm sure. Begoontalk20:39, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
George, if you really want to get me, please stop delaying and seeking assistance from others like Banedon. I'm sure another trip to ANI will be just fine and dandy, and we can discuss everyone's behaviour (including yours) there. I have no issue at all with being scrutinised again and again, I'm actually here improving Wikipedia unlike some of the drama-mongers. But what I would ask is this: stop canvassing for someone else to do your dirty work. If you really have an issue with me and you really believe that I'm actually contravening the governing policies of Wikipedia, or even the spirit of Wikipedia, do something about it. If it's just about the fact you don't like the way we interact, ask for an IBAN, that's really straightforward. I object to it, and I believe I've got the best for Wikipedia in mind. Don't forget, and Banedon needs to remember this too, I never called you obnoxious, I just wonder at the amount of time and effort you expend on not actually improving Wikipedia. Try to remember that Wikipedia is designed for its readers. Good articles, good reader experiences etc. Spend more time on that and less on the technical/editor interaction side of things and you might find yourself in a better place. Some editors will see even this kind advice as "bullying" (won't they Banedon?) but I honestly think the more time you spend actively working on articles and less on trying to use Wikipedia as a substitute for Facebook the better.
TLDR: Edit articles, stop trying to solve problems that don't exist. If you want to get me banned, take it to ANI yourself. Stop pretending that you're going to quit, eventually no-one (no-one) will take you seriously. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:High numbers side a zoot suit.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:High numbers side a zoot suit.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Orphaned non-free image File:Flashdance... What a Feeling by Irene Cara U.S. vinyl 7-inch Side A.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Flashdance... What a Feeling by Irene Cara U.S. vinyl 7-inch Side A.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 333-blue was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Edward Leung Yiu-ming and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
Hello! George Ho,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 333-blue08:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 333-blue was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Not enough 3rd-party in-depth sources are displayed.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Edward Leung Yiu-ming and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
So do you want your version or a copyedited one? Frankly, I think you caught a break on the GA promotion; it's pretty short (and relatively unsourced, although that's not your fault) and—more importantly to me—the prose needs a fair amount of work (which I was doing). As I said on WP:GOCE/REQ, my WP time is limited and I don't waste it; if and when you want me to resume the copyedit, let me know. Miniapolis19:55, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, George, but I don't play that way; when I copyedit a request article I tag it with {{GOCE}}, and I'm not going to say I copyedited something I didn't. I don't understand why you're digging in like this, because I've copyedited several of your Cheers articles in the past without incident (certainly without complaint). Since you don't seem to want a copyedit from a member of the GOCE, I'm going to recommend that we decline this request (which, frankly, doesn't bode well for Cheers (season 7)). Miniapolis22:59, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's not what I meant. Nevertheless, I realize this is a bad timing. The article is still reassessed, and I added the Nielsen ratings. The plot of the episode... Maybe I'll re-request the editing on the article when the time is right. This should not affect Cheers (season 7), does it? --George Ho (talk) 23:09, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I can only speak for myself, but I put effort into every copyedit and like to think that I improve articles. If a copyeditor is making things worse (sometimes good intentions are not enough) sure, revert away, but that was not the case here. FWIW, I'm a native English speaker; are you? (Not snark; again, I don't know). Miniapolis01:56, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The GOCE has declined this copy-editing request, since the article is still under development. You are welcome to resubmit your request when the article is stable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:33, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have made minor changes to the work done by other editors and now feel that, from a grammatical standpoint, the article meets Good Article criteria and I have closed the reassessment. Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:30, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please deal with the text at James Dreyfus, which, by consensus at WP:BLPN is poor, and, in my opinion is dreadful. If you cannot write coherent English, I wonder why you try, after all this time. There's also a question there which you did not answer. Begoontalk15:23, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have been holding back my recent thoughts about you. I wanted your polite help. Now you have been criticizing me, and I'm portrayed as an unreliable villian. Wherever I go, you pop around and criticize me for everything I do. Do you care about me? How? Which part of me do you care about? If being human is not enough, I don't know what is enough. If you care about me, how do I make you stop criticizing me? --George Ho (talk) 17:31, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Sweet Child O' Mine by Guns n' Roses.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Sweet Child O' Mine by Guns n' Roses.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Courtesy Notification: RfC Opened from a Discussion you participated in
Greetings,
I am sending this courtesy notification to let you know that a Request for Comment has been opened regarding whether or not to add an Infobox to Noël_Coward. The prior discussion has now closed so that a consensus can be reached on the matter.
Would it be possible to 'keep' the link to the MP redesign ideas lab page on the MP Talk Page?
I am not against having #some# discussions on redesign on the TP (the example I gave of linking the text on a list to the picture displayed) - just that they should be reasonably complete. Jackiespeel (talk) 18:13, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need to notify. Based on your criteria - TRM's encounters with those people - TRM has had encounters with hundreds if not thousands of editors. Are you going to notify them all? No. Also, you are far from a neutral party here. --NeilNtalk to me17:28, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And hey, some of those I notified posted their statements at the case request. But I'll stop if you want me to... until you allow me? George Ho (talk) 17:38, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Thanksgiving Orphans for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 03:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
