Jump to content

User talk:Floquenbeam

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Darwinbish (talk | contribs) at 15:01, 11 May 2019 (→You know what they say...: get over yourself, Old Big). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

KIND OF HERE
I'm not here consistently (especially in May), and reserve the right to disappear for any length of time for any reason with no notice.
You shouldn't count on me for anything remotely time-sensitive.

Folly, thou conquerest, and I must yield!
Against stupidity the very gods
Themselves contend in vain. --Friedrich Schiller

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC) Template:Z83[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

  • In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
  • Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

You immediately resumed the behavior that led to the previous block. Watch it. Also, congratulations on the the AN close, very nice. Bishonen | talk 16:05, 5 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]

You're either omniscient, or Bishzilla is and she narc'd on me. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:47, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We both watch My Little Ponyo's page. That leads to some omniscience, yes. Bishonen | talk 16:17, 6 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]

ANI

FYI diff was after your close. it was another bizarre hostile comment, considering my user page is very easy to find. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We crossed paths in the ether; I saw that, removed it, and left a warning while you were composing this. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like trying to needle after the ANI closing. [[1]] Springee (talk) 23:25, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a little borderline, since User:WanderingWanda started the ANI thread, but ultimately I don't think I see it that way. My biggest annoyance with that post is the smug "Hope you're both having a nice day". But in any case the response WW got was a lot worse. Now that it is clear WW is going to be met with "I know you are but what am I"-type insults, it wouldn't be helpful if they continued to post there. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:15, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The response, notably, wasn't by Guy Macon. And I think a lot of us would take issue with the idea that a childish raspberry-blowing comment like TracyMcClark's is anywhere near as bad as having one's view that singular they (of which many mainstream style guides and other English-usage RS still disapprove) isn't the best gender-neutral-language solution get compared to labeling African-Americans with racial epithets considered offensive for two generations now. WW's post was pure character-assassination false equivalence, as well as a gravedancing and baiting attempt to re-ignite the dispute after the ANI closure.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:32, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't have said anything on Guy Macon's talk page if TracyMcClark's comment didn't pop up on my watchlist. If I see someone making negative comments about trans folks or any other folks on a talk page, sure, I'm going to drop a note saying I disagree. Maybe I could've been more tactful about it, but I'm certainly not looking for any long term feuds and don't wish either of them ill. I'm happy for Guy and Tracy to go their own way. I'd also be happy to have an earnest conversation with them about gender identity if they wanted to have one. WanderingWanda (talk) 02:55, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Review of closure that appears to invent new policy out of nowhere". Thank you.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This re-opening is one of the more useless actions that I have seen recently, and there have been a lot of useless actions about portals to nowhere. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Civility Barnstar
For finding a reasonable way to close a contentious dispute that was partly about pronouns and partly about two editors, and was partly policy and partly conduct. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Robert. It wasn't as smooth as I would have liked, but it seems to be moving toward some kind of resolution. If everyone gives it a chance. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:42, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changing ANI closure

Sitush has a point; but I can solve this, because it's my talk page! --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi, don't want to be a target of personal criticism, so here is a completely neutral note that this has happened. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 14:09, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The thread title change was fine. I'm not sure why everyone seems to be dead set on prolonging this, but I don't really see the point (nor the harm) of Guy's addition, nor of your objecting to it here, nor of QEDK's revert. (And that's just the stuff today I don't see the point of.) While it's a one-way interaction ban, please give it some breathing room. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:40, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the reason of my revert was clear, saying "I'm not sure why everyone seems to be dead set on prolonging this" and then saying you don't see the point of why I reverted is pure contradiction. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:55, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a contradiction: Guy prolonged it. Your revert didn't un-prolong it, it prolonged it some more. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And it is being prolonged elsewhere now! :( - Sitush (talk) 15:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Additional comment about the recent ANI

Posting this here because I don't know where else I would post it (apart from Guy Macon's talk page, but he's made it clear he doesn't want to talk to me) – I want to acknowledge that while I don't think Guy Macon was acting appropriately with regard to Fæ's pronouns (which in turn, in my view, means he also wasn't acting appropriately in regard to my pronouns: as my user page notes, I also prefer they/them pronouns), I do think I was a little hotheaded throughout the process and I want to apologize for that. I should've tried opening a dialogue with Guy on his talk page before going to ANI, I should've been a little more careful and thoughtful with the wording of the ANI, and I shouldn't have posted anything to Guy's talk page afterwards without being much more thoughtful about it. WanderingWanda (talk) 16:08, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to know whether such an apology would be welcome at Guy's talk page; my guess would be "no". I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he saw it here, and you'll probably have to settle for that. FWIW, although it isn't directed at me, I appreciate the self-reflection. It's really easy to get hotheaded around here. Done it myself often enough. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good close

I have just seen the final version of the AN discussion on Legacypac. I think you did an excellent job of bringing a hopelessly confused and incoherent discussion to the best close that was possible under the circumstances. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments at Articles for deletion/Sarah Tuttle

I intervened in one dispute related to Guy and Fae. If Fae pokes Guy with a stick, I want to know. If Fae does anything else unrelated to Guy that upsets anyone else, I do not need to know. I am not their father, prosecutor, defender, friend, or enemy. I am not the Fae admin now. You all know where each others' talk pages are, you know where ANI is, you know where ArbCom is. I'll make one general comment about this; pages with diffs of alleged wrongdoing are allowed for a short while if they are being used to prepare for a potential ANI thread or ArbCom request or similar. They can't be kept around forever if an ANI thread or ArbCom request isn't forthcoming, but I believe the general consensus has been that being up for somewhere between 1 week and 1 month while it's being worked on is OK. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Just a note about this [[2]].Slatersteven (talk) 12:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I provided a link to the related discussion of canvassing by the WiR twitter stream, started because of allegations, allegations which should be taken seriously. I do not name anyone in the AfD or make any allegations about anyone. Why would Floquenbeam need an update on every edit of mine that you do not like the look of? --Fæ (talk) 12:46, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh dear, I see now you are running an "enemy" page against me in your userspace diff. That's not very nice. --Fæ (talk) 12:50, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, you are repeatedly misrepresenting what people have said, Fæ. This is going to end up with another topic ban, I fear. - Sitush (talk) 12:52, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is why [[3]], the issue had been dead for 4 days before you decided to start it up again (hell the thread over at WIR had been dead for 2 days), so all this has done is just restarted a stale drama.Slatersteven (talk) 12:53, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How is linking to a WiR discussion by many interested parties about the serious and damaging allegations by others of canvassing in the AfD, a discussion which has only now been completed so would be irrelevant before today, or linking someone running an enemies page about me, with false claims about me making personal attacks when the diff shows I mention nobody, going to end up with me being topic banned? Thanks for your fears for me.
Let's be clear, if there are more special user pages/enemy pages about me, or off-wiki discussions about me, I would like to see them. Now would be a great time to declare any more of this stuff going on. Thanks in advance. --Fæ (talk) 13:01, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did not say you would be, I made no such claim. Nor did I claim you made a PA against anyone (here). Nor have I had an off wiki discussions about you.Slatersteven (talk) 13:02, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your enemies page states "Personal attacks continue" against my name with a link to an edit of mine. That is an allegation of a personal attack against me. Being on an enemies page in your user space does not stop Wikipedia policies applying to allegations about other Wikipedians. --Fæ (talk) 13:13, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:TALKO, what you just did was totally unacceptable and a clear breach of policy.Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
AGF please, that was an edit conflict. I do not delete other people's comments. --Fæ (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Then I would ask you to do the same for me, and AGF.Slatersteven (talk) 13:16, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Slatersteven: Please delete your enemy page about me. It scares me that Wikipedia is being used this unpleasantly furtive way. --Fæ (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Its not furtive, I have made no attempt to hide it, I will agree to delete if you if agree to make no more comments that can be seen as attacks on me (broadly construed).Slatersteven (talk) 13:16, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it is "furtive", you did not ping me or tell me about it, but it is about me as your "enemy". Delete it please, without forcing me to stop editing as a pre-condition, or making more hounding claims that I am attacking you when you are instigating problems here by your choice. --Fæ (talk) 13:19, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
When did I ask you to stop editing, this is exactly what peoples have been complaining about, you demand I AGF when you (lets assume good faith) make a mistake that breached policy (but was still a mistake), then misrepresent what a user has said (whilst not giving the user an AGF).Slatersteven (talk) 13:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see anything about enemies. It looks like a list of things someone might get together before asking for sanctions. Natureium (talk) 13:32, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As you are complaining about edits of mine which make no mention of you, yet you appear to be reading them falsely as personal attacks, your "condition" for deleting your enemies page of "I will agree to delete if you if agree to make no more comments that can be seen as attacks on me" is wide enough to be interpreted as almost any page or discussion where you are editing. What you are doing is wrong, refusing to delete your enemies page unless I barter for your demands based on entirely undemonstrated claims of what might be "seen" by you as personal attacks, is inappropriate. Delete it please. --Fæ (talk) 13:36, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked you to AGF, in the same way you have asked me. That is my last word on this matter.Slatersteven (talk) 13:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Attack page --Fæ (talk) 13:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Floquenbeam do you think my sandbox section about Fae is unacceptable, if so I will remove it.Slatersteven (talk) 13:27, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Floq, obviously, but I can tell you the boiler-plate response. It is ok if you are preparing to submit it as evidence for some sort of action in the next few days but, failing that, you should compile the information off-wiki.
Fæ, you asked above for discussions about you off-wiki. I would be surprised if there isn't something at Wikipediocracy and Reddit but I'm not subscribed to them. You seem to get "scared" about an awful lot of things and I think I've said before to you that if coming under scrutiny, on- or off-wiki, scares you so much then perhaps you should reconsider your involvement. Nothing is worth that amount of angst over a prolonged period. You do not have to be a martyr. - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That was the intent as I had expected it to continue. To be honest I found another such "report" there as well I had forgotten all about. will remove both in a few days (remind me, as I may forget again) if nothing else crops up I think is relevant.Slatersteven (talk) 14:14, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

You know what they say...

Never fix the printer, lest you become The One What Fixes The Printer. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:45, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Another busybody here. @Writ Keeper: Isn't Nuke your program? If so, I have questions. Lately, when I use it, there's a pattern. First, it takes a long time and then comes back with an error. Second, I reclick, at which point it takes a medium-long time and comes back with a list. Why? Two other related-to-each-other questions. First, what does "recently created" (or whatever the language is) mean? And, second, why does it sometimes delete older ones and not delete newer ones? I know I should give you examples, but that would make it much harder for me and much easier for you. :p --Bbb23 (talk) 14:55, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're talking about Special:Nuke? No, that's not me, that's an official Mediawiki thing, IIRC. Let's give poor Floq's email address a break and take it to my talk page. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:02, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You mean that Floq has his Preferences set to e-mail him every time there's a post to this page?? Personally, I don't even like the fact that my Talk page link lights up. It's always interrupting me when I'm in the middle of something else. Then there are the editors who post to my Talk page, and then make multiple additional posts sprucing up their original post. Aargh.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: Bet you thought that was accidental :p :D ——SerialNumber54129 17:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
To fully annoy Bbb23 (as punishment for adding yet more notifications to my talk page yesterday), we need to actually ping him. Like so: @Bbb23:. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[Bishzilla rolls up spiderman suit sleeves and goes to post up a storm on young Bbb23's talkpage. Giggles girlishly at thought.] bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 17:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC).[reply]
I approve of this harassment friendly teasing. Go for it, Zilla! --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I may have trouble nuking articles, Floquenbeam and Bishzilla, but I have no problem nuking editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2019 (UTC) So, Floquenbeam and Bishzilla, I wave my magic wand and and you are hereby nuked. So let it be written, so let it be done.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't work, still here. You'll need to ask User:Writ Keeper why none of your gadgets are working. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bishzilla attacks.JPG

[Bishzilla breathes a puff of atomic deathray at the little Bbb23 from close range. Looks at smoldering remains with some concern. Stuffs them in pocket.] Oops. Feel better, little user! bishzilla ROARR!! pocket 19:00, 10 May 2019 (UTC). (See how well Zilla gadget work?)[reply]

When is there not? --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Egggsackly! You should put the notice at the top of this page in a multi-colored banner magnified by your usual factor.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:09, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I could require people to notify me when there isn't an ANI thread involving me. Failure to do so punishable by siccing Zilla on them. Well, asking Bishonen to sic Zilla on them; I wouldn't want to overstate my influence in that area. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Bishonen don't scare me none. Takes a lot more than an inflatable bathtub toy to singe my hair (she's not the only one who can mix metaphors). Besides, she's always calling me little (not true, I've gained weight) and young (not true, I'm two days older than two days ago).--Bbb23 (talk) 21:18, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Admin don't just make "difficult blocks", they also make difficult unblocks and difficult closes. You've been quietly taking on a lot of difficult admin tasks lately–thoughtful closes of encyclopedia-length discussions, quick responses to real-time urgent situations–and doing it in a way that shows sound judgment and a desire to do what's best for the community and the project. Thank you for the good work. Leviv ich 15:50, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you, @Levivich:, what a kind thing to say. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Floquenbeam&oldid=896587995"