User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise

Archives

Note: If you leave a message here I will most often respond here

User:Bertport

Hi, Future Perfect at Sunrise. Since you blocked twice my access to English wiki, I have no choice but contact you anonymously. Firstly, I want to express my deepest regret and disaffection for the two blockages. How could people jump to a judgement only by listening to one side's words? Don't you know the villain always sues his victim before he himself is prosecuted. It's User:Bertport who made the very first revert [1] at 00:19, 19 February 2010 while I, mainly with User:Clemensmarabu, had been contributing days to the article Tibet. I never see he does any constructive edit but only undoes others' contributions or stealthily stuffs his biased words.

I waited one week to finally edit the article, if you please have a look at what content is restored [2], you'll tell at once good from bad. Both sides' opinions are presented and historical events are scholarly argued, thus I wonder where come from the courage of Bertport to revert such an edit and his boldness to accuse others anticipately. Regards. -- LaGrandefr

Watch out

See this. Not another interest party flood. Just a heads up ;) Michi

Talkback

Hello, Future Perfect at Sunrise. You have new messages at Jéské Couriano's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Questioning ban of HistoricWarrior007

Hello. I questioned already the ban of user HW007, but received no reply from you.

I think that

• Long-term/infinite ban of an user who is obviously not a vandal (HW007 was obviously not a vandal, he made numerous serious contributions, he was active at talk pages) is not something which lies within the authority of a single admin.
• In your case there was certainly a conflict of interests, since you edited the same article that HW did, and issued a lifetime ban for him for editing that article -- 2008 South Ossetian War.
• That's why I propose to unban user HW007 as a temporary measure and launch the usual procedure in such cases -- ArbCom case. Let multiple users and admins review the case and make a qualified decision regarding user HW007.

Please, find some time and reply my repeated request.

Regards, ellol (talk) 11:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

If HW wants to appeal the sanction, he is free to do so through the normal channels. I see no reason to discuss this issue with you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. But this issue is not only of you and HW alone. It sets an important precedent — that any user can be banned by any admin for no reasons. Or on grounds of personal perceptions or even admin's mood. It threatens the spirit of cooperation in Wikipedia, and is very disruptive for Wikipedia.

That's why I make my request sounded in my previous post and ask you to reply on the matter. Regards, ellol (talk) 12:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Indefinite topic bans are by no means outside the routine repertoire of admin actions under the discretionary-sanctions Arbcom rules, and long-term blocks, even indef blocks, for persistent edit warring or disruptive editing have always been possible and common. Now please go do something else. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Okey, but who can judge if there were disruptive editing? I think, it's too an ambiguous, even subjective issue and shall be determined by a community, i.e. the ArbCom. As for persistent edit-warring, it makes two to play a tango. Let's then find the opponent of the HW and topic-ban him for disruptive editing and persistent edit-warring?

Still, you did not answer a point regarding your conflict of interests in the case of 2008 South Ossetia War.

Regards, ellol (talk) 14:15, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I do not consider you among the Wikipedians towards whom I would feel an obligation of justifying my actions. This discussion is over. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:17, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

You are a Wikipedia Administrator, one of the people who "have been trusted with access to restricted technical features (tools)" and are "never required to use their tools, and must never use them to gain an advantage in a dispute in which they are involved."

Of course, you are not obliged to reply to me. But speaking impersonally, the questions I sounded do exist, regardless of who sounded them. And it's somewhat deplorable that you could not answer them. Even if you do not like me personally that's not an excuse.

Thanks for your time, ellol (talk) 14:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Hetoum again

Hetoum is back as ErmeniQuzeyli (talk · contribs). I think something should be done with regard to NY University IPs. Otherwise it is pointless to block socks on a daily basis. We might as well lift the community ban, since he evades it anyway, and there's no way of enforcing it. Grandmaster 12:15, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

That sounds as if it might cause quite a bit of collateral damage, unfortunately. Could you provide a list of relevant IP ranges, so somebody could check how much legitimate traffic there is? Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure. I have already filed a new CU request on Hetoum here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hetoum I, and there's a list of relevant IPs in the archived SPI requests, here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hetoum I/Archive. Most of the IPs point to NY University. It is a pity that admins, CUs and regular editors have to waste so much of their precious time to track the socks of this person almost on daily basis. I've been thinking maybe there could be a more permanent solution to the problem? Maybe someone could contact the Uni and inform that their computers are used for edit warring, death threats, racial slurs, etc in Wikipedia? I don't think they would be pleased to know that. Grandmaster 12:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Štip/Shtip

Hey, Future Perfect at Sunrise. Could you please see the discussion going on here at my talkpage? Relativefrequency and I disagree about the proper transliteration of Macedonian and it seems as though we won't resolve anything ourselves. Thanks and Happy Easter. --Local hero ^talk 21:42, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

User --Nikplas (talk) 11:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi! I currently gathering info in order to update the archaeometry lemma. I have a question: Can I delete parts of the current text and replace them with new? how much intervention can I do to the existing text? Thanks in advance --Nikplas (talk) 11:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

3RR

This is to inform you that you are in violation of the WP:3RR with these three reversions if this continues I will seek administrative action. Thankyou and have a nice day. --EmersonWhite (talk) 07:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Macedonian genocide

No comment really.--Anothroskon (talk) 08:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Template:Table Greekletters

Please see the recent editing history @ Template:Table Greekletters and the brief discussion at User talk:Scientizzle#Name. Since you protected the page and seem to know more about what's going on with these topics in general, maybe you can clear up what's going on? The edits of 204.152.215.115 (talk · contribs) alse seem to have a fixation on you... — Scientizzle 14:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. Another open proxy used by Wikinger (talk · contribs). Please block, revert, ignore. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Gotchya. I also blocked 96.44.132.12 (talk · contribs) w/ the same justification. Cheers, — Scientizzle 14:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI post regarding Conservapedia

I've posted to ANI regarding your BLP-based reversions at Conservapedia to get more admin eyeballs on the issue. In no way was it intended to be an accusation or an attack on you, though it would have been better for you to bring in an uninvolved admin. ...comments? ~BFizz 05:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Semiprotection of Conservapedia

Could you unprotect Conservapedia please? -- Nx / talk 09:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Future Perfect at Sunrise. You have new messages at Shirik's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 17:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Corrupted article on Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

The page on "Macedonia (ancient kingdom)" and other pages on Ancient Macedonia are probably corrupted. Therefore the editors of the page are warned to be aware of potential sockpuppeters (a report of the recent sockpuppetry investigation is displayed). Please do not repeatedly erase that report, or you risk to be blocked.Draganparis (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Are you even aware you're on an administrator talk page? FYI, FPAS is an english wikipedia administrator. (hope you dont mind this, Future) Outback the koala (talk) 04:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I doubt it. Dragan isn't aware of much at all ;p He just likes to throw empty threats at everyone... Simanos (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion discussion: Comparison between roman and han empires

Hello. You are invited to take part in the deletion discussion on the redirect Comparison between roman and han empires. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Hi there, as you have previously wondered about the reasons behind the ban of Offliner, I think you may be interested in this request for clarification. Colchicum (talk) 10:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)