User talk:The Rambling Man

WP:ANI

A courtesy FYI, that I mentioned your name in a thread about the banned user Soft Skin. Just wondering where someone labeled you a Holocaust Denier (which I very much doubt you would be.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:34, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

lol I just bet TRM loves waking up to big new yellow messages entitled WP:ANI :D ;) — O Fortuna! ^{Imperatrix mundi.} 15:40, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Yellow? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:45, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I answered your question at ANI Bugs. In short, ridiculously over-reacting editor upset at wikipedia's quality standards applying to all content (regardless of subject) takes absurd position. Only in death does duty end (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

... and grossly and ignorantly insults two of Wikipedia's longest term editors by claiming their motives are akin to "Holocaust denial"... The Rambling Man (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I've seen it now. And it IS grossly insulting. You have often opposed a main-page posting, not on merit of the subject, but on quality of the article, and that's totally appropriate. Anyone familiar with your work at ITN and the like should be well aware of that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:00, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Well quite, but frankly some opinions are so ridiculous they really do not merit a response. This was clearly in the obviously ridiculous and worth no time or attention area. Anyone who *genuinely* thinks that way should just not be engaged with. Only in death does duty end (talk) 16:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Personal attack

From an esteemed admin. The same admin, I believe, who called me a prick? WOW!! All admins are equal, some are more equal than others. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:49, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm on it. El_C 23:54, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Don't stress it. Some admins can do whatever they like, some can't. Floq is in the former category, I was in the latter. It's not a big issue. I'm getting used to the one-rule/one-rule thing. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:56, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

No, they can't. We all must adhere to the same rules we enforce. I've left the user a warning about personal attacks. El_C 00:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Well it's a repeat offence and nothing is done about it realistically. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, if it repeats, let me know. Otherwise, feel free to submit an ANI report for other admins to comment on. El_C 16:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice but it'll have no impact at all, particularly in this case. The "admins" will simply divert any case onto my former cases, and will probably be heralded for their saintliness. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

You say "admins"—are you not an admin, too? That's a rather cynical view. I would hope any case is considered according to its merits (on the strength of its evidence). El_C 18:25, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Nope, you missed all the drama. I'm a former admin who never called another editor or admin a prick and never told another editor or admin to fuck off. The view is absolutely 100% bang on the money. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:27, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I missed a lot—I stand corrected. Well, I, at least, try to approach any case according to its merits (on the strength of its evidence). El_C 18:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Yep. It's ironic that editors are blocked without hesitation for telling someone to fuck off, yet admins are barely touched, even after the "prick" incident. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

If you're referring to MarnetteD, I was actually in favour of an unblock there, and felt a warning was in order there, too. El_C 21:50, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

2017 Pakistan Super League Final

Hi, do you think this could make potential nominee for ITN? Pakistan Super League is not as big as Indian Premier League which appeared on in 2015 in the ITN but this one surely notable enough and recieved enormous press coverage from every part of the world throughout the tournament. Comments please. --Saqib (talk) 16:04, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I think it's a long shot. The first problem is the proponderence of non-cricket afficianados there, many of the regulars couldn't tell their "carry the bat" from their "stumped off a wide". Secondly, as you note, we have the IPL posted, and we pretty much automatically post the World Cup, so there'll be people saying "only 13 teams play this worldwide so it's only marginally more significant than American Football", for instance. If the article was dazzling, I'd be almost certain to support having said all that. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:17, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

March 2017

To enforce an arbitration decision and for violating a prohibition applying to you as detailed in the response to this enforcement request, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page.  Sandstein  21:45, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Thanks Sandstein, you clearly didn't have any agenda at all to make such a knee-jerk reaction without any commentary at all from anyone whatsoever. You're obviously the best man for the job. I'll carry on fixing up the garbage you people accept as encyclopedic, and I'll accept the fact that admins who call me a prick or tell me to fuck off go entirely un-sanctioned. Thanks again. Cheers Wikipedia and all those I worked with, it was awesome while it lasted. The shit admins won! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/The Rambling Man#The Rambling Man prohibited, "the enforcing administrator may also at their discretion fully protect The Rambling Man's talk page for the duration of the block." I note that in your comment above you continue to engage in prohibited conduct, namely, referring to others as "shit admins". Consequently, your talk page is fully protected for the duration of the block.  Sandstein  22:08, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

How about considering only protecting it for a week while he takes the time to calm down? This way, at least, he'll be able to follow the appeal process in a week. El_C 22:19, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I think this block was a bit heavy-handed and protecting this talk page so RM can't respond is overkill. The only thing it may accomplish is to drive away a valuable editor. Jonathunder (talk) 23:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Protecting so only admins can edit it? No, no. If Sandstein wanted to revoke TRM's talkpage access, then that's what he should have done. I've undone the protection of this page. Bishonen | talk 23:59, 5 March 2017 (UTC).

Thanks Bish, much appreciated! The Rambling Man (talk) 10:07, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

An endless stream of vitriol emanates from TRM towards a good portion of the editors and Admins he interacts with, often with no apparent cause other than TRM disagreeing with them on some matter. We don't need people here who behave like that. StuRat (talk) 16:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Response

I think the block was over the top. I think the talkpage protection was way over the top. I think some of the evidence was ropey and out of context at best, downright irrelevant at worst. The discussion at AN is evidence that several members of the community agree with that. The block should be re-assessed in that light. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Work

5 March

• Howcheng, Casimir Pulaski Day is still looking way too under-referenced for the main page, suggest it's pulled. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
• Fuebaey the Edi Fitzroy bio is ok, but the discog needs proper referencing. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:01, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
• The ed17, David Rubinger is better, but the reference dates need to be made consistent. Once that's done, feel free to strike my oppose. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
• Floquenbeam I wasn't that bothered by the prick or the fuck off comment. I am bothered that it's the sort of thing I put up with for nearly a decade and held no weight with the Arbcom eagles, but that's another matter. Glad you had a good night out after the event anyway. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:04, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

6 March

• Any objections to putting MS Herald of Free Enterprise on the main page for today once all the unsourced and {{fact}} tags are resolved? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:33, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it was all over the radio today as well, I remember it well. Looks in reasonable condition right now, a couple of unsourced paras. Access dates could use coherent formatting, and of course the hyphens should be replaced with dashes in pages ranges etc, but I guess no-one will care about that for the forseeable future! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

7 March

• Howcheng, it's worth expanding the "USA for Africa" acronym because it's misleading to think it means "United States of America". It also links to the same article as We Are the World so I'm convinced the link is really needed. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Cwmhiraeth, prep 3, Graham-White's name is spelt incorrectly. It should also be "the British..." to avoid false titles, and for clarity "his biplane" should be added after "landed" because othewise the fact he landed an aeroplane on a street could be easily missed. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
• Ritchie333 a favour, prep 3, "The Light that Failed", the article contains multiple instances of un-italicised book titles, could you remedy that if you have time? Thanks. The reference also says "four versions", not "at least four versions", so if we believe the Rudyard Kipling Society to be RS, we should tweak the hook for accuracy. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Done (I think) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

WP:AN

There is a discussion about me currently ongoing at AN! I might be interested in contributing there. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:51, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I suggest you concentrate on writing an appeal. El_C 12:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I was simply noting the irony that there's a lengthy discussion going on there yet no-one bothered to let me know. It's funny how quickly people can be forgotten. As for appeal, I've written a response to the block above. It's nonsense, and Sandstein knows it, but he's gone all-in and won't retract. It's happened before, it'll happen again. The community seem to be finding in my favour at this time, but it won't be long before the gloves are off and the hawks come circling. Wikipedia can lose this editor but it can't lose the damage this debacle (yet another Arbcom mess) is doing to the project. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

And the hawks arrive! Having had nothing whatsoever to do with them for months, and thousands and thousands of edits, they're back! Little wonder this place is failing. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:30, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I apologize for failing to notify you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:14, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I noticed the discussion, but think the best thing to do is - as I recommended before - ignore ignore ignore. I didn't appeal to arbcom, I know others who don't appeal, as a matter of pride. Enjoy some time with your kids and be back when this is over. - Wikipedia should not lose this editor. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I linked to your appeal on AN here. El_C 13:50, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt is wise, but on this we differ. If I were to advise you, I would recommend you take an hour to draft a more substantive appeal. One that explains your interpretation of the timeline; which shows at what point things began to go astray. I don't think it's a waste of your time, to more comprehensively articulate your position. El_C 14:34, 6 March 2017 (UTC

I spent as long on that draft as Sandstein did blocking me for a month and protecting my talk page. Right now that's what I have. Try working out how you'd feel if the adminship here allowed you to be a called a Holocaust denier, an anti-Semite, a prick and then be told to "fuck off" with 100% complete and utter impunity? Then everyone's jumping on the baiting bandwagon. I'm sure there are people able to dissect the diffs and explain exactly what each was in context, WJBScribe has already done so with one, frankly laughable, near-offensive claim. The appeal is lodged, now the concerns of the community with Sandstein and Floq's behaviour will need to be heard. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I am not wise, just experienced AE. - I appealed (successfully) for someone else, and am glad that I did, because he was also to proud for what was explained to me as the needed self-abasement. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:44, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

My friend, I totally agree with Gerda on this. Please follow her advice! Keep safe. — Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh | Buzzard |  16:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Strange, I don't see where Rambling Man said any of those things, if anything it seems other people have drawn up conclusions with little to no fact and that some users have punished Rambling Man for miss-understanding him. Govvy (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Whats going on?

Rambling Man, what on earth happened? I just saw you got blocked!! Dam man, what on earth did you do to piss people off that bad?? Govvy (talk) 14:37, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

He exists. Edmund Patrick – confer 15:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Of course he exists, but that is not an explanation, is anything that response is err. Govvy (talk) 16:40, 6 March 2017 (UTC)