Jump to content

User talk:Roxy the dog

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 87.200.222.125 (talk) at 18:50, 6 March 2020 (→‎Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


You're rude and condescending

Just what it says in the title about "Polyester is NOT a fabric". I'm done arguing with you. It isn't funny, it's both RUDE and CONDESCENDING.

Sign your posts, I don’t know who you are. Polyester is not a fabric. Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 09:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing weasel word in the article

Dear Roxy the dog. I added the word "Nevertheless" in the Paleolithic diet article at the starting of the sentence "Following the paleo diet can lead to..." since the sentence conveys an idea anti-thetical to the previous one which talks about some improvements in health. I noticed you reverted saying "Weasel word removed". Just wondering how that word would qualify as weasel. This is not to contradict with what you did (for I'm okay with the removal), but only to know about the other view point so as to correct any mistake from my side. Thank you. Rasnaboy (talk) 06:31, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Siddha medicine. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You need to learn how to count to three Ivan. Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 15:59, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Roxy the dog (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Bright line not crossed, no benefit to project blocking me. I am aware of the rules regarding edit warring. The actual edit warrior, who had a grand total of 51 edits when I looked was editing through Extended Confirmed Protection. If ECP worked, we wouldn't be here. Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 17:46, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Unblock requests must exclusively address your own conduct, not that of others, see WP:NOTTHEM. Sandstein 18:11, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Gosh. I didn't know that you couldn't thank people when you are blocked. That's not nice. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 18:00, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I won't decline your request of course, but I do think you need to have a read of the part of the edit warring policy below the big red box with the bright line rule. I'll reproduce it here (from Special:Permalink/938380832) for you: "Even without a 3RR violation, an administrator may still act if they believe a user's behavior constitutes edit warring, and any user may report edit warring with or without 3RR being breached. The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times." (emphasis in original) You clearly don't understand that last bit. You might want to refresh yourself on WP:NOTTHEM while you're at it.
Also, thanks should work while you are blocked, based on my experience being thanked by blocked editors. I'm not sure why it would not be working for you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:07, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ivan. You did decline my request. Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 18:31, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Check again. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, cannot see any "thank" links. I'm getting edit conflicts on my own Talk page FGS. and I'm still blocked. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 18:42, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, sorry for all the pings. Working on getting that resolved. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:54, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with pings. I see that you've blocked the account that the disruptive IP uses. Is it your intention to unblock me? -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 19:10, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It would be my pleasure to unblock you, but at this point I have zero confidence you understand why I blocked you in the first place, and so I'd be shooting myself in the foot. You seem to be under the impression that 3RR gives you license to edit war up to three times before any action can be taken, which as evidenced by the policy I quoted above, is not the case. But you might consider the suggestion I posted at User talk:Aman.kumar.goel as a way to convince me (or any other uninvolved admin that comes by) that I'm mistaken.
As for the "actual edit warrior" and their low edit count, the page was semiprotected, not ECP protected. I don't know who it is that you meant since from my point of view there were four (or more) accounts involved in this edit war, but none of the involved accounts would have been prevented from editing by semiprotection. And I was definitely thanked by one of those editors today while they were blocked, so I'm not sure why it would not be working for you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:33, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That "thanks" thing is most odd, nevermind. We both know I understand the rules, but I am not kowtowing. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 19:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 19:56, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wankers. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 16:10, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sheldrake

A "brand new account" adding biologist to the things Sheldrake apparently is. Guy (help!) 23:29, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

help for article

hi roxy, i have seen you check mostly the articles of wool. please can you help? i have very good information about german-english wool history but my english is not so good. i wroted it in Talk of Wool under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wool#English_%2F_German_Sheep_Market can you insert this information in the article of wool? many thanks and greets from germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.142.56.161 (talk) 21:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wilkommen! I will look at the Talk page and see if I can help. Thanks for asking. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 21:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reiki dispute resolution

Hi, I hope this is the right way to notify you that I have requested dispute resolution for the Reiki article, specifically regarding using the NIH definition for Reiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamxz (talk • contribs) 22:26, 19 February 2020 (UTC) forgot to signPamxz (talk) 22:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

== Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion ==

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the noticeboard regarding NIH definition. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Needs Work".The discussion is about the topic Reiki. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Pamxz (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That link goes to a page called Bulletin board. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 02:20, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FYI I edited your comment on Reiki talk page to insert bullet before it to format RFC. Best. MrBill3 (talk) 13:30, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now I remember ...

Why I take no part in RfAs. It is really really nasty, and petty and everything in between. Unwatched I'm afraid. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 23:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Transclusion

I noticed your question on Macon's talk page. WP:TRANS has more information, but basically, templates are macros, meaning that code can be executed as part of page generation before it is sent to the browser. Any page can be used as a template, even if there's a special Template: namespace for them (that allow them to be used without needing to specify the full path to a page, for instance {{uw-vandal2}} (equivalent to {{Template:uw-vandal2}}) vs {{User:Example/ExampleTemplate}}). Pages used as templates may contain macro code or not (in the case of page transclusion for deletion discussions and RFA, the feature is used to embed the page in other pages, rather than to process custom code). Templates (or pages to be used as one for embedding) can be utilized, or applied, by using brackets like {{<page>}}.

Templates can be substituted ({{subst:<page>}}, Help:Substitution for details) meaning that macros in them like special variables or other code will be executed first then the result "pasted as text", rather than embedding/transcluding the template ({{subst:uw-vandal2|page}}, the normal way to use that warning template, will generate a final (text) message including the name of the specified |page= parameter). Infoboxes and citation templates are templates used without substitution. If the uw-vandal2 template was altered, all previous messages generated using it with substitution (subst:) remain unaltered, for the Wiki software those messages are "text"; for transcluded templates, alterations will become visible everywhere they are used (like the editor-specific RFA page that is transcluded/embedded in the main requests for adminship/bureaucrats page, the deletion discussion pages that are embedded in all sorting lists (WP:DELSORT) as well as in the deletions page for that day.) So in this RFA case it allows a main central page to embed and provide edit access to all currently active request pages.

If the code {{Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Guy Macon}} was inserted (this is transclusion) on your talk page, the whole page would become visible here (and would not be a separate copy). If {{#section-h:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Guy Macon|Questions for the candidate}} was used instead, only the "Questions for the candidate" section would be embedded instead. The WP:SKEPTIC alerts page is transcluded at the top of WP:FTN and on my user page (via another page that transcludes it, recursion is allowed), etc.

I hope this helps a bit, I'll be glad to try to clarify if you have more questions, the WP:HELPDESK is also a good place. —PaleoNeonate – 13:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to thank you when you posted this, and I have achieved some degree of clarity now, so thanks for taking the time. Is it an exclusively wikipedia term, or do people who write code in their sleep all over the world use it? Mind you, I suppose that I've managed all this time without knowing, so how impoprtant could it be to me here, hm. Thanks again. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 18:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You're most welcome. It's a good question, the transclusion terminology is used mostly in relation to hypertext documents from what I see, the concept is old but I can't say that I've seen it used a lot in other contexts (despite being in Computer Science myself). The Lisp languages family use macros extensively and the terminology is different, so it's not closely bound to macros either... —PaleoNeonate – 19:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta
The 2019 Cure Award
In 2019 you were one of the top ~300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a thematic organization whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm quite astonished that what I do makes me a medical editor, I consider myself more of a fiddler, but thanks very much. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 18:52, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Icertainly think of you as a fiddler if that helps

Greetings

Am still alive Roxy, long time no speak, much love my mate Woof Woof 2A02:C7F:4637:F900:C504:EA17:63C8:FD5D (talk) 00:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will not speculate out loud. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 02:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Young blood transfusion

Hey Roxy, I agree it is not really medicine. But I figure that the Transfusion medicine category is a bit more specific than the Blood category, in the same way the alternative medicine is subcatted under the medicine category. I don't feel strongly enough to revert but just wanted to explain my reasoning behind it. Greyjoy talk 07:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I've been a bit petty I know, but I wont revert again if you think it's better for our readers. Of more concern for me is the huge edit request on the Talk page. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 07:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I don't even know where to start with that. Greyjoy talk 07:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Roxy_the_dog&oldid=944263797"