User talk:Ched

Please note

I have moved my talk page to archives, and so the 4+ years of history from 2008 to 2012 can be found there (link). If there's a past discussion you want to view, you can find it there. Thank you.

Note 2

Alt account: User talk:Chedzilla

Sticky Note

deletion or enforcement policy sections of WP:UPDATE re: Dank

Request

{{helpme}} I'm looking for editors here on en.wp but who speak and edit on projects in the following languages:

1. French, (User:AlexandrDmitri or User:Maxim seem active)
2. Serbian (User:WhiteWriter
3. Chinese (User:OhanaUnited or User:Penwhale)

I'm asking this in regards to a name change on those projects so that I can unify my Commons login. Thank you — Ched :  ?  18:36, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Two suggestions for places to look:

• Wikipedia:Local Embassy
• The user language categories Category:User fr-N, Category:User sr-N, Category:User zh-N.

JohnCD (talk) 18:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I suggest asking a steward; they're helpful at sorting out cross-wiki problems. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Special:ListUsers/sysop works on every wiki, regardless of language, so you should be able to find one that speaks English by looking at their userpage. User:Bencmq should be good for Chinese. --Rschen7754 23:29, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

feedback request

Hi Ched, I was wondering if you could spare a few minutes to give me your take on User:WereSpielChequers/Going off the boil, cheers ϢereSpielChequers 08:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi WSC, great to see you. Actually, I did see and bookmark that page a while back, but failed to get back to you with any input. I had never heard the term "Going of the boil" before, but in reading through it - I'd have to admit that I can see some clear relevance to it. I'm not sure if you're interested in a critique of what is there, or my own personal views on the topic. I think it is very well written, so I'll likely only have comments on the later. I'm still rather spotty on my appearances on-wiki at the moment, but I will try to share my views next week at some point. Cheers and have a great weekend. — Ched :  ?  16:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ched, If "going off the boil" is one of those phrases that hasn't crossed the Atlantic I might try and think of a more global name. Critiques and personal views are both welcome, I'm hoping that I've got all the main theories in one place. Though the more I look at it the harder it is to weight the relative importance of different elements, especially as some will have already had full effect and others are still working their way through. No great hurry in giving your views, I was thinking of making it a signpost op ed but that has been delayed by Sue going, or otherwise I might file an RFC. Though I can see that getting complex, but I would literally like to make a "Request For Comments". ϢereSpielChequers 17:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Some variation of "losing steam" might be more accessible to those who don't often use British English or more archaic American constructions. Intothatdarkness 13:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

A shining smiling star

Hello Ched, AutomaticStrikeout has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shining Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • AAPT) 17:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Why thank you ASO - that's very kind of you. :) — Ched :  ?  16:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	You know only too well that you deserve it! Thank you for all the help and the insight into every single detail!! Please don't ever think of leaving!! You still gotta look after me! The Wikimon (talk) 13:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Wikimon, that's very kind. We do seem to get a bit over-run with foolishness on the project at times, but I'll do my best to keep an eye open and help where I can. — Ched :  ?  16:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

References needed

Help! I can't find good references for my article I'm creating. I'm creating an article about Jaap Edenhal in Amsterdam, Netherlands. It's part of Jaap Eden baan. It has hosted some of the biggest names in the music industry. Can you PLEASE find me a few good references? Evangp (talk) 23:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey Evan, I'm not real active at the moment, and I'm not real familiar with the topic, but I'll see what I can find over the next few days. Perhaps early next week I'll drop a note on your talk about what I can dig up. — Ched :  ?  16:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ched! I sincerely look forward to your next reply. Evangp (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Real quick on the way out .. apparently there's some Marley/Cruyff connection link, might be worth following up on. I don't speak Dutch, so I'll have to depend on google.translate for most things. I think there's going to be a WP:N here, it's just a matter of finding the WP:RS to support the article. I will try to find you some things by early next week though. Have a good weekend Evan. — Ched :  ?  20:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

You have a good weekend too! Evangp (talk) 06:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Comment on your Comment

Ched, you have nothing to apologize for. Having opinions is what makes us human, and you manage to express yours in constructive ways even if they don't toe the politically correct line that will accelerate this place's death spiral. The indifference of good men is the doom of this place, and your justified outrage at times indicates that you are not indifferent. Far better to defend the work of others than to hunker in the corner OWNing policy and refusing to admit or see that change is inevitable and that it only becomes harder and more painful the longer the OWNing continues. Staying true to yourself is difficult here, and from what I've seen you've managed to do just that. My hat's off to you. Intothatdarkness 14:22, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for that Into - it is very much appreciated. Hopefully I can regain a certain objectivity and focus in the next week or two. Best to you and yours my friend. — Ched :  ?  22:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Your comment at the recent AN thread regards Niemti

• I don't want to make too much of this but just some food for though... You stated in that WP:AN regards Niemti a few days ago that Niemti was never given a second chance, baited and whatever else. That was completely spurious: outside of whatever's been going on with Sjones, plenty of editors - of whom I'm just one - made patient, good faith efforts to collaborate in his GA VG efforts (suggest checking my reviews from everything from UFO: Enemy Unknown, to Curse of Enchantia, and then to the reviews brought up in the RfC; or noting that, say, DaveFuchs, an editor of excellent standing who has largely remained above the subsequent fray, patiently and impartially reviewed his work). His present difficulties are entirely his own fault, and indeed it's mind-blowing to me that he's still editing, after being community-banned for years for the same stuff, being unilaterally unbanned without consensus, and then despite a clear majority supporting another banning at the last RfC, cannot be banned due to no consensus. You also brought up Niemti's supposedly prolific creation of quality content. The number of successful of GAs is a reflection of patchy reviewing standards at GAN, and Niemti's passive-aggressive filibustering of attempts to improve his awful content (as well as his taking credit for others' achievements on his user page: as was pointed out in the AN thread, your claim of a successful FAC nom was incorrect, and it was made by someone else). More telling is that so many of his GANs ran into the same negative feedback, exemplified by that Taki (Soulcalibur) review which was de-facto failed by 4 different editors before being formally so, such was the supposed impatience and intolerance exhibited towards him. This is what really gets me about the whole saga: it has been solely viewed as a civility vs. contributions issue (Malleus-syndrome), when in fact in content alone, Niemti is a terrible, net negative to the project. As has been demonstrated so many times before (and completely ignored by commentators on the various AN(I) threads), Niemti is an exceptionally bad video game writer, his contributions being full of biased, arbitrary collating of one-liners from his secondary sources, and purple prose-laden plot sections full of fictional detail.
• And a footnote to all that... much seems to have been made of the fact the RfC dragged on for months, supposedly a reflection of SJones and perhaps Sergecross's "hounding" of him. Neither of those two were involved in writing the original statement; it was I who wrote it, and the reason no closure was sought (aside from the fact it has remained relevant and found new signatories for months, due to Niemti's ongoing behaviour) is simply that I have largely not being editing for months. And on that note, you said that Niemti's troubles are relevant to the question of editor retention. Indeed it is. As was again pointed out by others in response to your AN comment, I am no longer contributing, in large part because of Niemti, and other incompetents who are given ridiculous leeway and second chances (see also Jagged_85). Perhaps, like Niemti, I should have screamed it in the various threads, but I have at least 20 successful GANs (in far longer time than Niemti, but without all the drama and multiple attempts), an FA, and as people have been kind enough to acknowledge (User:Bridies/Barnstars) managed to partially standardise and revamp the topic of video game genres a few years ago. No more of that for Wikipedia.
• Now having written all that, it reads like waaaayyy more a rant that I intended. But basically, your assertion that Niemti was never given a second chance is untrue and quite insulting, and if anything brings one to opine no wonder why people get disgusted with this project it is the continuing, baffling tolerance shown towards Niemti by the community (though not by those who actually have to collaborate with him). And so - spurred by the fact that, unless I'm much mistaken, it was you who unblocked Hanzo in the first place xD - I was irked enough to want to respond. Cheers, bridies (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2013 (UTC).

Thank you for your input, and I will take that into consideration in moving forward. — Ched :  ?  16:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

From what I've seen, there was enough bad conduct to go around for everyone. Intothatdarkness 17:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I'd fully agree to that. — Ched :  ?  17:16, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!

Theonesean has given you a Hershey Bar! Hershey bars promote WikiLove through chocolately goodness and hopefully this one has made your day better. Hershey bars are wonderfully delicious! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Hershey bar, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Hey, I just wanted to thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia! I just wanted to give a Hershey bar to my new favorite WikiYinzer!

Spread the goodness of Hershey bars by adding {{subst:Hershey Bar}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

How could I not love that? Made right here in our very own state too!! And I'll admit - my fondness for chocolate is rather well known too. Thanks TheOneSean .. good luck here, and welcome to the project. — Ched :  ?  00:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the note. I did consider WP:RFPP, but figured that a response there could take a while, so I just went for it myself. Thanks for offering to watch the page. Zagalejo^^^ 01:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem - just had a look at your RfA too .. Impressive! Sorry I missed supporting that. One minor thing ... "Go black and gold" ... LOL .. Steeler/Penguin fan in da house. — Ched :  ?  01:27, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Yep, you win!

Jack Sebastian has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Congrats on catching the obscure movie quote. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

LOL .. TY Jack. And in the interest of sharing .. to my (talk page stalker) I'll ask the same question: What movie is the following quote from: "You changed, man..."? Step right up - ring the bell - and get a free plate of cookies. (if you were born after 1984, you may not get this one) — Ched :  ?  18:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Is it School of Rock? If not I can't wait to find out the correct answer because all I can hear in my head is Bart saying it in "The Otto Show". Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 18:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm .. I do like Jack Black - and have even caught a few of the Simpson's shows .. but actually what Jack Sebastian and I are thinking of is a quote from a movie long before either one of those. Hint #2 "Look, man, I ain't fallin' for no banana in my tailpipe!" — Ched :  ?  18:43, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm guessing that this might be the one. If so I wanna add that "Gosh time goes by too fast." It only feels like it was a few years ago that I was in a theater watching that and it is more like three decades. Thanks for the extra clue. MarnetteD | Talk 18:49, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

You got it. Cookies are on the way. :) — Ched :  ?  19:06, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks for the cookies and yes dirt and I shared a crib at one point :-) With the way the technology is going - HDTV, and HD audio systems, Bluray etc - future generations may never step into a cinema. That will be kinda sad. For a wonderful site dedicated to the film palaces of the past you might like this [1] one. In particular I was very lucky to be in the audience at this theater [2] many times over the years. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 19:09, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

pong (I love internet table tennis)

ygm? you gibbering meathead? were you indeed intending to post on my talkpage? LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

LOL. ygm= You've Got Mail, per {{ygm}}. It's basically asking you if you had time to have a gander at User:Ched/RfC - Infobox. Basically there's an infobox war brewing (again), and rather than have it spill out any more than it has on AN/I and multiple talk page, I was hoping to have some discussion where maybe everyone could get on the same page. I don't want to get into any instruction creep or anything - just a general consensus that everyone can either agree on, or at least "accept". Right now a lot of it has to do with the Classical Music composers group. But if it goes well, it could be a future link to other such "groups" or "Projects" that run into that crap. Anyway - the reason I pinged you is because I remember how much you helped with the WP:RIP stuff, and I thought maybe you would be willing to have a look and offer any advice you might have. I figured if you really weren't interested in editing, you might look and drop a line in email. Gibbering huh? Well ... Haarumph! — Ched :  ?  21:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I am really sorry, but I am in no frame of mind to get involved in something like this matter; when I briefly re-activated recently I found I hit a wall very quickly, and simply do not have the energy or enthusiasm to participate in a meaningful manner. Rather than start and then bail out, leaving other people to pick up or clean up whatever I leave, I think it best that I stay away. I hope you understand my viewpoint. LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

No apology Mark. All that's important to me is that you keep being my friend. You're always there to talk to when I need a friend, THAT is what's important to me. More often than not I'm hanging by a thread myself here. You helped me keep my focus and find a way through some times that were rough for me. I may leave tomorrow myself. Suffice to say that I DO understand. — Ched :  ?  11:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

FWIW

Hi Ched, we've never really interacted but of course I see you around. I noticed your post on Iri's page and peeked at your contribs. Not sure how much my opinion counts and I haven't looked closely but I think this is a terrible idea. From where I sit it will only drive away productive editors. If that's the goal, and they're not considered "quality editors" then go for it, but truth be told, there are a very small handful (very small) of editors who are pushing this agenda. Most editors don't care, just want to get on with editing, but this, in my view, will cause much more drama than it's worth. You haven't asked for my opinion but thought I'd butt in. Anyway, good luck with whatever you do, but it's one RfC I'll be ignoring. And in ignoring it, most likely walking away from the all the pages I've recently edited to get a sense of what I need to work on - this after a winter of writer's block. Oh well, that's WP for you, half a step forward and two backward. Truthkeeper (talk) 04:24, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Furthermore - because I don't believe in back channeling - I'll lay it all out here. I've put up with this crap since November 2011 after a particularly unpleasant run-in w/ Br'er Rabbit (going under another name at the time), which then quickly morphed into another unpleasant encounter regarding ref templates, and finally infoboxes - all on articles on which I'd put in a lot of edits and effort. From there it pretty much spiraled out of control with people taking sides and trench warfare. I just want to write; I find it relaxing. A few minutes ago I thought maybe I could pull myself back in, but after seeing this and anticipating unnecessary drama am tempted to turn the semi-retired to a black retired tag. Let them have the templates if that's what they want. Let the people who come here to relax and indulge in writing as a hobby be pushed out. I don't really care. I'm sorry to soap-box like this, but in four months have lost 2 close family members, one less than 48 hours ago, and really really thought maybe I could spend some time doing what I really enjoy instead of the non-stop fighting I've seen for more than a year. Am I personalizing? Yep, I am, but from where I stand, I've been at the tip of this iceberg and have watched it play out in all its nastiness since the beginning. None of it has been necessary. Anyway, done now. Do what you want and what you think is best. Truthkeeper (talk) 04:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

BTW, you're aware that Wikidata infoboxes will go live on Tuesday, right? --Rschen7754 04:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Nope, haven't been around. Truthkeeper (talk) 04:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Truthkeeper88, it's a pleasure to finally meet you because I've seen you around a lot too. Actually, my goal is to avoid losing our top quality editors like yourself with this. I can almost hear the frustration in the voices of some of the people on both sides of the issue, and I'm hoping to sit and talk and try to reach an understanding with everyone. I wanted to get away from that horrible AN/I type of discussion where people are asking for bans, and blocks and such I want to avoid the "oh user:xyz is an idiot", or "user:lmn never listens" things and just talk and listen to all sides. PLEASE feel free to jump in there at any time. I honestly was going to stop by your talk page and invite you personally once I rolled it out and posted it to a RfC page, not just because it was a chance to say hi, but also because I know it's a topic of great interest to you. For myself, and I suppose most folks don't care but, I'm not likely to edit much of the cultural style of articles like fine art, classical music, and thing like that. I tend to stick to sports, movies, military etc. But anyway - I do see people on both sides of this infobox thing that I KNOW are our "best editors (including you)" that don't agree on this. If you have some suggestions, ideas, thoughts, or even just want to blow off some steam - Please feel free to talk to me. Well hopefully people won't be "blowing off steam" at the RfC, but I hope you know what I mean. — Ched :  ?  04:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

No! I've talked until my face is blue and no one listens! I've gone from bringing seven articles a year through FAC to two - and after Rschen's bombshell will most likely give up. Seriously. Real life sucks (I can just hear MathewTownsend aka Matisse saying "why does she complain about how bad her life is?") but when people are dying in your life and all you want is to write but instead have to defend why the humanities can't be shoehorned into an infobox, that's just not fun. At all. Anyway, thanks for listening. I'm logging out. Was hoping to work on some articles tomorrow, but can see more strife ahead and I don't want it. Sorry, but that's the way it is with me. Truthkeeper (talk) 04:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Rschen, ironic you should mention that. I've been aware for a while that wikidata existed, and noticed earlier the delivery of the newsletter. So I finally went and took a look around to see what it was all about - I may even find a way to chip in over there with a few things once I get my bearings and understand how it works. Without a doubt it has been a thought in my mind over this whole infobox/metadata situation. TY for the heads up - great minds think alike? — Ched :  ?  05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

@ Truthkeeper88 (is it ok if I just use TK?). I am so very sorry to hear about your losses. I'm getting older, and I've lost no less than 6 very close friends and family over the last year, so yes .. I do understand how you feel. Maybe the "Wikidata" think isn't what you think it is .. it's not going to make it harder for you to work on articles - honest. And if you ever need a shoulder to lean on, you can stop by anytime - or even drop me an email. Take care, and sleep tight. — Ched :  ?  05:05, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I think we should have more enwiki admins who take an interest in Wikidata - trying to bridge the gap was one of the reasons why I went for sysop there. Of course there's the other extreme of trying to push our views on other projects like some other badly behaved enwiki-ers who go to Commons/Meta, so there's a balance. Truthkeeper, I'm sorry to hear that - both about your losses, and that you've been unable to edit due to frustration. I've gotten back into the FAC scene over the last few months, and it's definitely taken some getting used to. --Rschen7754 05:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

• Ched et. al., please read this discussion re an infobox on Ezra Pound. It's more than a year old, the first such discussion I was involved with, and deteriorated quickly. The arguments I present there are arguments for that page only, but also have a look at how many edits I made to the page, the number of sources (a lot of reading!), and then read what Riggr writes about the pursuit of knowledge. Some biographies are difficult and Pound was, to say the least, a complicated personality, hence shoe-horning is hard. I like how google presents Pound, data somehow they found without WP's infobox, and with images we can't use (or at least the last time I looked). I'm not a die-hard "I hate infoboxes" editor. I think things through, analyze and then make a decision; I have infoboxes on some pages, not on others. We could probably have an infobox for Pound, and I'd certainly put a lot of weight on the opinion of the editor with the second highest number of edits who is in favor of one - but I do feel strongly that the "infobox" wars detract from the real work that needs to be done to create and write a comprehensive encyclopedic entry. For example, no one actually dug into Bach and edited or tidied the page there during that protracted conversation - yet wouldn't our time be better spent doing that? That's really my stance re infoboxes. Anyway, thanks for the kind words from you and Rschen too. It's a lovely day where I live, we might actually get spring one of these days, so I'm off for a while. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:16, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the links and input TK. It's a much bigger picture than I first imagined, so it's going to take me some time to wrap my head around the whole thing. I had hoped to be more timely, but I can see that I need to do a lot of reading before I can really understand the big picture. I also have a couple articles that I want to get back in NASCAR area, I'm trying to get up to speed on a couple other projects (Foundation, Meta, Wikidata, etc.), I have an essay I need to review, and as always - real life keeps me busy as well. A real pleasure getting to know you, and I will get back to you as soon as I can. As always, feel free to drop by with links, notes, thoughts or just to BS a bit. Best — Ched :  ?  21:42, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Help

• Is there a way to turn off the SUL thing for just commons? That is to say, until I get the name User:Ched registered there at commons, can I find a way to stay logged in at commons as User:Chedzilla, without having it log me out of my other wiki projects such as simple, here at en, foundation, etc.? The problem is that there are 3 foreign language wikis that have a "User:Ched", ones I'll never edit by the way, and commons won't let me use that name until I have usurped the accounts on those foreign language sites. Any help or advice is appreciated. Thanks. — Ched :  ?  21:47, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know, there's not a way to turn off SUL on your end. You may wish to ping the people at WP:VPT and ask there, and the equivalents on the wikis in question if there's a server/admin/steward-side way to do it. This was a lame response because I don't know, but it was bothering someone that an *admin* was using a {{helpme}}... :) gwickwire^talk_editing 02:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and now MF-Warburg has told me to tell you: "Please ask on m:SRSUL" gwickwire^talk_editing 02:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Gwickwire. I've had the VPT thing in mind for a bit, but haven't posted there ... {yet). Why would it bother anyone that an admin would ask for help? Just cause I have a couple extra buttons doesn't mean I'm all-knowing, any smarter, or any better than any other editor here. There's a LOT of non-admins around that know bucket-loads more than I do. But now I'm curious - who was bugged by that? (I also thought of IRC too, but didn't want to get back into that again - hard enough staying away from FB). MF-Warburg? ... hmmm .. I've seen a "Warburg" around before, but I was thinking it was Jake or something like that ... meh .. anyway ... tell him I said Thank You very much. I did get a reply from someone on the Serbian thing .. and have posted to a couple others for the Chinese and French, but know it's the weekend too. And thank YOU too gwickwire - I very much appreciate you going to the trouble of following up on that for me. I'll be looking into that m:SRSUL link. — Ched :  ?  02:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hehe, Helpmebot in -en-helpers on IRC goes crazy and pings us when someone uses the helpme. It's just kinda weird seeing an admin use it, probably cause I don't usually help admins with stuff :) gwickwire^talk_editing 04:28, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

LOL .. well thank you. I do appreciate it. — Ched :  ?  04:30, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, MF-Warburg is me, I happen to be a steward and was on the help IRC channel (because gwickwire made me :O) when the bot reported your request. I wasn't exactly sure of how your problem could be solved a day ago, but I think I meanwhile remembered: That is to say, until I get the name User:Ched registered there at commons, can I find a way to stay logged in at commons as User:Chedzilla, without having it log me out of my other wiki projects such as simple, here at en, foundation, etc.? -> Yes, your Commons account can be "unmerged" from its SUL account Special:Centralauth/Chedzilla, much like the current user:Ched@commons is unattached from Special:Centralauth/Ched. That way, there would of course not be any automatic log in anymore to other wikis when you log in on Commons as Chedzilla. (The account can then later be renamed to Ched, once Commons allows it, etc.) If you would like the unmerge to be done, you can request it on m:SRSUL or here, since I'll be watching the page for a bit ;) --MF-W 14:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

He makes me sound so evil... But seriously, I don't mind replying (when it's something I know!) to {{helpme}} from anyone :) (there's always -en-help on IRC for a faster response). Have fun with your Bishzilla impostor :P gwickwire^talk_editing 14:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi MF, apologies for confusing you with another editor. I just got done requesting the French usurp this morning, The Serbian request hadn't been responded to when I last checked, and the Chinese request has a 7 day wait. So at this point, I'm content to wait until early next week to see where I stand, rather than confuse matters any more than they already are. I'm going to hold on to your post and will go that route if one of the requests fails, and I do thank you for the help. To clarify a bit, I do have a main account on commons, but it has my last name attached to it, and I've uploaded maybe a half dozen pics with that one. My rename on en.wp went smoothly, but some of the other language wikipedia.org sites already had a "User:Ched". Thank you very much for your help, and I'll follow up with you in a week or so. Cheers. — Ched :  ?  15:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

@Gwickwire. I do have to admit that the Chedzilla editing is much quieter - and I don't have to worry about any of the adminy stuff when I'm logged in with that one. (Chedzilla have great honor to be friends with Bishzilla .. rrawrrRR) :) — Ched :  ?  15:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the (edit conflict) :) Seriously though, Chedzilla need run adminship. We need more dinosaurs and other mythical/monstrous creatures in the admincabal. gwickwire^talk_editing 15:10, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm .. that is a thought. But, in the last year I have: Asked to have my last name removed, which required a usurp. Asked to have my admin. tools removed when someone in North Carolina tried to hack my email. Asked for my tools back about 3 months later. I'm thinking maybe I should leave the 'crats alone for a bit. :) — Ched :  ?  15:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Bah, what else will they spend their days doing? More usurps and sysop tool removal/regainings? :P gwickwire^talk_editing 20:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Chinese SUL

You can request it through this page. I think it has enough English for you to continue. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:32, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you .. I will do that. — Ched :  ?  03:33, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ched. For French SUL, go to this page. The instructions are mostly in English. The fr:User:Ched account last edited on January 14, 2013, so I'm not sure if they'll grant you the rename. You could just file the request now and see what happens, or I could try and figure out later what the chances of a rename would be. Maxim_(talk) 02:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks you Maxim ... I will follow up on that the first thing in the morning. — Ched :  ?  04:07, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done — Ched :  ?  15:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

How 'ya doin'?

Very good indeed. EotW is getting great response, newbies are being welcomed daily, the BP article is being reconstucted, the presidents timelines have been troublefree for years, Will may return (I'm surprised at our difference in that regard)and WP life is good. As always, I'm concerned about your well-being. I dread the thought of the crap you have to deal with. Recapture Your Enthusiasm. Stay well, my friend. ```Buster Seven Talk 04:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad you are well, and that projects and pages are doing well. Trying to stay focused, on topic, and balanced here; so no complaints on my end. — Ched :  ?  13:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

\o/

[3]

Think I'm done here. 88.104.2.228 (talk) 06:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

See also [4]. 88.104.2.228 (talk) 08:09, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh good grief .. I thought BMK had more clue than that. sigh. — Ched :  ?  12:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Ched: Sorry, I don't understand your comment. A editor put a "help" request on my talk page (not theirs). I wasn't asking for help - I know what the policy means as well as anybody and didn't need an admin to explain it to me - so I removed it; if an editor wants help, they can use their own talk page to ask for it, and not usurp someone else's. How is what I did indicative of not having clue? For sure, I'm a sinner and I ain't no saint, no argument from me, but I truly don't know what you're referring to in this instance. (Not being rhetorical either, I'm really looking for an answer.) Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't offended, just confused. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

88.104... is rapidly digging himself to 6 feet under. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I've gotten some advice from another Wikipedian much wiser than I, and I've left a note here. If it is an editor in good standing, then there should be ways to resolve it. My understanding is that the 88.104.xxx.xxx range comes from an ISP that offers a very "dynamic" option. I've never been one to play the "catch my sock if you can" game, so I'm not exactly in familiar territory, but I'll do my best at finding some solution or notifying someone with better clue to this than I have. TY for the note Bugs. — Ched :  ?  14:13, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice how he's splitting town, or claims to be. Typical behavior of a block-evading sock. He can't go to ArbCom because then they'll know who he is and probably sanction him further, such as maybe a permanent ban. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

It's moot, because I'm being hounded off any discussion I contribute to - see for example [5].

The misinterpretation of SOCK demonstrated in [6] means they consider any IP that dares join in any discussions to be 'avoiding scrutiny'.

It's impossible to challenge the anti-IP attitude because it is so pervasive amongst admins; any attempt at discussion quickly gets closed down. It's a horrible environment, and those bullies have got their way by driving me away.

Good luck, goodbye. 88.104.2.228 (talk) 19:58, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh don't be so ridiculously melodramatic. The only IPs that are affected by the proper application of the sockpuppetry policy are those who are obviously not newcomers, exhibiting their understanding of Wikipedia's ins and out, and who edit disruptively, as you have. The vast majority of IPs will never fall under suspicion. (And, actually, those editors with accounts who use IP editing as an unofficial but true clean start, who edit productively, without disruption, and outside the ares of their previous interest, will almost certainly get away with it. What gives up the socking IP, such as you, is their behavior, and their attitude.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

• Bugs .. you've got email. :) — Ched :  ?  20:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Note

I don't agree with your reasoning as I see several editors using warnings like this User_talk:IRWolfie-/Archive_5#The_TM_topic to try and have a chilling effect on discussion in this topic area. I think that's wrong. I didn't bring the issue to Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/John_Hagelin/1 because it's not a content issue, so I brought it to their talkpage and left them a note. I think I have been civil at all places. These are also the entirety of my edits to that editors talk page ever: [7][8][9][10]. I think saying that borders on harassment is unfair, but I will voluntarily stop posting to the editors page if you wish (except standard notifications I am required to leave). IRWolfie- (talk) 00:06, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

IRWolfie, it is very late for me here, so I will discuss this tomorrow if you wish. It is not up to me to say "don't post to User:xyz page", that is up to the individual user to request that. Personally I don't really care about the whole "TM" issues. I have my thoughts, and respect the thoughts of others. Your recent efforts are however not in line with the goals of this project. Wikipedia was built on the concept that anyone can edit. And any attempts to badger another editor into providing private information are totally unacceptable. Deal with the content, and do NOT try to manipulate other editors. If I haven't made myself clear here - feel free to ask. — Ched :  ?  04:14, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

The request I made wasn't about private information; I wanted to them to stop mentioning sanctions where it wasn't appropriate. Can you at least clarify to olive that this wouldn't be a violation of discretionary sanctions: [11] as she appears to think here: [12]? Olive and Keithbob appear to be under the impression that bold edits violate discretionary sanctions. Do you agree that this warning is inappropriate? IRWolfie- (talk) 09:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)