User talk:Raymond arritt

If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on this page. If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I'll watch your page and reply when able.

Greenwich

May 2024

21

Tuesday

9:27 pm UTC

A note on email: Wikipedia-related discussion should be carried on here, in view of the Wikipedia community. Following the principles stated in this arbcom decision, I will not conduct Wikipedia business by private email. My email is enabled and you're welcome to initiate contact that way; however, I won't respond by email to your inquiry and will instead reply on-wiki.

Care of the cow brings good fortune.

---

The awesome BULLSTAR is hereby awarded for facing down so much BS and yet managing to not lose your self control.--MONGO 08:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't here to take your call. You can leave a message after the tone.

Tone

You guys are all losers

bitches

Attempt to clarify

Howdy. I recently posted to User:ScienceApologist's Talk page, saying more or less, "Yo, dude -- be careful or you're going to get banned." You posted a reply referencing Wikipedia:Don't take the bait which I take to mean "Don't respond to attempts at trolling."
I'm unclear as to whether this was meant to imply that I appeared to be trolling. If it was so meant, I assure you that I was not trolling and do not do so (I consider such behavior to be both unconstructive and undignified.) Obviously, I'd say the same thing if I was trolling, but if you are interested, I think a look at my edit history will illuminate matters.
If you think that anything I posted looks like trolling, please let me know on my Talk page what it was, as I'd like to avoid repeating such a mistake in the future.
Thanks. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 02:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

SA gets a lot of people trying to prod him into going off the handle, and your post seemed like the sort of thing that might get him going. So I was trying to keep him from responding negatively. Looking back it's clear you were not deliberately trying to provoke and I see that my choice of words implied that you were. I apologize for that. Raymond Arritt (talk) 05:28, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

R&I article

I think your warning was premature. --Jagz (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

A look at the revision history for race and intelligence indicates otherwise. Please back off. If you're blocked at some point, don't say you weren't warned. Raymond Arritt (talk) 00:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Meanwhile, I'm about the one only doing anything for the article other than filling up the Talk page. Maybe if I did nothing for the article like everyone else, I wouldn't get in trouble. --Jagz (talk) 02:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Racialist POV? Must be a word to clean up the negativity of "racist." Oh well. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 23:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The word can take several meanings, one being a synonym for "racist." It's never certain which meaning is intended. In some cases the ambiguity may well be deliberate, given that direct and straightforward communication can get one into trouble around here. Raymond Arritt (talk) 00:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm most experienced in that field. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 00:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers

Hey thanx, its a real shame, Dr Kings 40th anniversary was only the other day, how much has changed ?Realist2 (talk) 05:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

You bored

How about checking out the cute 3RR tag thrown on me for going 1RR. I'm loving this place.  :) OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 06:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Response at User talk:Hopping. Raymond Arritt (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

See this. I don't think he gets it. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:08, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

And see this. What is with this guy? OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I was hoping it wouldn't come to this, as several people had tried to clarify the situation. Raymond Arritt (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see your block when I added this to Hopping's talk page. He had called a couple of us "liars". I guess that his DO education didn't include being calm and not pushing it. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:21, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice if you could withdraw your comment at Hopping's page. Kicking somebody when they're down and all that. (Yes, I know that wasn't what you intended, but that's what the exchange might look like to outsiders.) Raymond Arritt (talk) 01:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

OM, you've stood up for DOs every time I've seen you mention them; no need to besmirch your baby's-bottom-smooth rep for this. Antelan^talk 01:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Baby's-bottom-smooth rep? Good one.  :) I thought the comment was withdrawn by someone else, but I see someone reverted and commented further. Oh well. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 16:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

<RI>Instead of creating a whole new section, please see this. Although technically not the third revert, it is adding back language that was not agreed to by any editor (well, except for Levine2112, which speaks for itself). Hopping (talk · contribs) was recently blocked by you for similar tendentious editing. He's back. I don't think he's getting the point. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 00:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I really feel like these two are crossing a WP:NPA line here. The tone is getting nasty. [1] [2] Bryan Hopping ^T 01:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Your edit summary states: "I'm not a nutjob." Well, then prove it. So far your sole mission has been to promote the single word allopathic, and get it inserted whereever you can. Oddly, you failed to identify your school as an Osteopathic school, even after repeated mentions and encouragements to do so. I finally did it myself. Then, again rather oddly, considering your affection for placing the derogatory "allopathic" word all over medical articles, you recently removed it. For someone who claims to not be a "nutjob", your behavior is rather odd. Why the fascination with labelling MDs as "allopaths" (a very misleading term created by Hahnemann), and yet you shrug off identifying your true alma mater. -- Fyslee / talk 07:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, if he's not lying, and it's hard to tell, he says he's been accepted to Touro School of Medicine in NJ. I went to the website, here, and interestingly, it does not use the word "Allopathic" to describe itself, even though the University owns two Schools of Osteopathy. So, if his "medical school" is a medical school, then what's with the allopathy POV? Moreover, I swear he said he was in Osteopathic school. Story seems to be variable, depending on the discussion? OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 07:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, at the time I'm talking about he was enrolled at the Touro University College of Osteopathic Medicine, Vallejo, California. If he really has transferred, he's transferred to a school that hasn't opened yet, and which identifies itself as an allopathic medical school [3]. -- Fyslee / talk 15:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

And despite all of the blowback due to this behavior over the last few days, Hopping's only mainspace edit today was to add allopathic back into Doctor of Medicine. Antelan^talk 06:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

CIV

Much better, thanks. I also agree that the bit about being dumb doesn't belong in the civility policy, but I'd argue that dense people and the things they say and do can stress others as well. Dorftrottel (vandalise) 23:17, April 8, 2008

Meta civility

I like this change of yours; the previous version had meta-problems: It reminded me of a teacher that I had years ago who, in listing for my class the words we should never say, taught me 2 or 3 new epithets. Antelan^talk 05:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Wikipedia suffers from a lack of conciseness, which is natural in a collaborative project -- everybody wants to add their two cents. Raymond Arritt (talk) 14:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

You should be desysopped

Apparently, you are not taking the whole RfA process with the appropriate level of seriousness per this edit. I think we should consider a semi-deletion of all edits made by Raymond arritt. All in favor. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 19:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Great question

Hi RA, great question. . .really made me think. Can't believe I hadn't run across that page before :-) And it really goes to show. . .I should click on the "What links here" option a lot more. R. Baley (talk) 21:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

RE Disappointed

I apologise, it wasn't meant to come over that way. I've struck parts of my comment accordingly. My oppose stands, however, solely on the grounds of the use of the phrase "time to blockyblocky" and the concerns raised by Shalom. Please note that I did explicitly state that I don't doubt R. Baley's good faith or his commitment to the project. Walton^One 16:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Raymond Arritt (talk) 16:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Strange sequence of events

I'm a bit concerned as to your intent when you nominated my user name as being inappropriate. Or rather the way it was done. I realize discussing this might be considered pointless since you could easily just dismiss me as being paranoid, and hopefully thats all it is. Still it makes me feel uneasy, so I might just as well say something. Well, at first it looked like a simple mistake by a new admin, not taking proper precautions before blocking. And thankfully the block was quickly removed. However, I later noticed that you frequent the talk page of the person I had an edit conflict with at the moment, and you two appear to be on a friendly basis. It strikes me as odd that you would complain about my user name at that same time. But what is even stranger is that you, an experienced administrator (as far as I can tell), wouldn't simply discuss any concerns first with me? Well I think the whole incident and the edit conflict was rather unpleasant and this have somewhat disheartened me. Hopefully you can alleviate any suspicions. Regards --Apis O-tang (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I first saw your username at WP:ANI if memory serves. The offensive connotation immediately jumped out at me. Since these things can be a matter of judgment I referred it to WP:UAA for a third party to look into the matter. I was very surprised when he blocked your account -- at most, I though that the person reviewing the UAA report might ask you to change your username. Had I known that it would work out this way I'd never have made the report. Just out of curiosity, what is the origin of your username? (Please don't respond if it would reveal personal information or otherwise make you uncomfortable.) Raymond Arritt (talk) 04:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok :), It's just uncomfortable to suddenly be "attacked" (and blocked!) from all sides the same day, after several years of peacefull editing.

Well, I usually use only apis, which originally was the name of a toy monkey I had when I was a kid (apis as in ape). I've been on the internet since I was 14 or something so it has just stuck with me since then. Although it also has other meanings like Latin for honey bee, etc. However, apis was already taken of course, so I had to come up with something else. Being tired of always trying to come up with new names (and not wanting to use my real one, which contains non english characters anyway) I appended o-tang, which simply is short for orangutang (swedish spelling, thus the g).

I was rather surprised that someone found it offensive, perhaps silly (or biased!) :) but I certainly had never heard of tang meaning that.

Hmm, the other user:apis account doesn't appear to be active! How long does it take until the username becomes available again? :) --Apis O-tang (talk) 23:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

You must have seen it somewhere else though, since I had never posted on that page at that time. --Apis 13:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. What a mess. Again, I'm really sorry but hope you will accept that it was an honest mistake. Maybe your user name could be considered as sort of a Rorschach test (hmmm, wonder what my response says about me). I've not heard of recycling user names but will look into it. BTW who was the person you were in a dispute with? There are lots of people here with whom I am on a "friendly basis" (including, I hope, you). Raymond Arritt (talk) 12:11, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I do, as I said, I just felt uneasy about the whole thing. It's not fun to think that a group of people have ganged up on you. I'm sorry if it felt like an accusation, I just needed a confirmation so as to feel a little bit better about it. I guess I'm a bit sensitive about such things. Regarding who, Id prefer not to say, it's not really relevant and I don't want to "point a finger" (I certainly didn't behave exemplary either then). I hadn't edited on any of the politically charged articles before and that was a entirely new experience for me so I got a bit emotional which is never helpful I guess, (particularly for one self)! =) --Apis 23:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, God Save the South (talk · contribs) needs to go

I'm pissed. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 21:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you're trying to do. But I'm shaking with anger when I read "Jew anything." You do realize that Nazis, during the 1930's, would call Jewish professionals, Jew this and Jew that. It's more offensive than hearing a car dealer tell me, "you're trying to Jew me down on price." We would block an editor who called someone "a nigger." Well this is similar. And I'm reading what other editors are writing in the AN/I. It is sad that so many editors think civility matters in the face of unfettered hatred and racism. Why should I be nice to a person who, in another era, would be sending me to Treblinka or Sobibor? Why should I be nice to a person who denies being a Neo-Nazi but basically admits to being a KKK-member (marginal difference, if any), who lynched blacks, Jews, Catholics, and anyone who didn't have pure Aryan blood? I put up with a lot of crap on this project. I realize a homeopathic potion promoter is annoying, but a racist is purely evil. We shouldn't wait. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 04:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree 100% but we also have to take into account the dysfunctional nature of the Wikipedia environment. My goal is to keep bigots out of the project. It would be counterproductive to give these folks a chance to play the victim and appeal to a softhearted (or softheaded) admin. It's virtually certain that he will screw up again and when he does there will be rock-solid justification for a block. Raymond Arritt (talk) 04:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Patience isn't one of my strong characteristics. Bet you didn't notice.  :) BTW, see User talk:Hersfold. I'm taking Xanax to stay away from it. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 05:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Naomi Oreskes

Can you take a look. It seems that my reversions there, may have caused media attention. I'm off for the day, taking my children to a play-land. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 11:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Good for you. I noticed he didn't even get your gender right! So much for the fact-checking standards of the National Post. Raymond Arritt (talk) 17:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

The Expert Withdrawal Pages

Should these be at least be partly archived so there is room for more? We should write the summary document.

Also, what about appearing on Not The Wikipedia Weekly?--Filll (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

It's been going on and on and on, to the point where I don't regularly follow it any more. I'll look into putting one of those auto-archive thingies on it. Writing up an essay that summarizes the main points would be a good idea. I've been replaying the NTWW stuff occasionally but my schedule is such that it's difficult for me to commit to participating at a given place and time. Raymond Arritt (talk) 12:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a heads up

While updating instances of Image:Barnstar2.png on fully-protected pages, I updated the image on User talk:Raymond arritt/Archive 1. To do that, though, I had to remove a link that had been placed on the blacklist (even editing just that section won' t bypass a blacklisted instance).

While ultimately this isn't a big deal (and I can't imagine you'd be terribly upset), I still thought I should let you know that I had to make an actual content change to your archives. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Horrors! How could you? (Thanks for letting me know.) Raymond Arritt (talk) 08:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

It would be an honour

Thank you, and I'd be honoured to be blocked by you. I will send you a list of my worst offences in the unlikely event that anyone challenges it — along the lines of Borges: "Any time something is written against me, I not only share the sentiment but feel I could do the job far better myself." :-) SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 09:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it was The Undertow you wanted to block. Back to my dreams, then. SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 09:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, it was on your talk page, and you didn't delete it, so you're equally culpable. Or something like that. Raymond Arritt (talk) 12:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Please be more careful with your statements. Claiming someone is "culpable" can be read as a personal attack, and your whole attitude appear to be dismissive to a degree that is close to incivil. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a hilariously out of place warning. If you read both threads, it is clear that the_undertow and Raymond_arritt were joking with one another. Antelan^talk 17:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but WHOOSH!  ;-) --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Pappy with the khaki sweatband, bowed goat potbellied barnyard that only he noticed. Raymond Arritt (talk) 17:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Damn, I WP:FAILed to get it! OK, you may each place one (1) civility warning tag on my page as your reward for trouncing me in the 'who's gonna fall for it' game. Antelan^talk 17:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, can't do. See WP:DTTR. Of course, instigating such an act may be actionable... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Our friend again?

[4]. New paper, but same modus operandi. BTW, I looked at the paper, and cannot reconcile the byline with the summary - any opinion by an expert would be welcome... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Raul already got him. Raymond Arritt (talk) 09:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 00:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

GijsvdL

Raymond, user has been harassing me for over six months now on nl:Wikipedia. He has just discovered that I am a user here, and has already placed defamatory remarks and false accusations on a dozen or so pages. Guido den Broeder (talk) 08:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

For your information: NL.wiki arbcom has taken severe measures against Guido den Broeder for self promotion. We have invented the unimportance of his work. He's also blocked at NL.wiki at the moment. GijsvdL (talk) 08:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Q.E.D. (check with nl:Arbcom). Guido den Broeder (talk) 08:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

GW disinformation and Wikipedia

Re:your comment here - you're one of the few people here who's really competent to debunk the disinformation that Wikipedia's deniers constantly try to get included in our articles. Your non-participation makes it harder for the rest of us, as well as hurting the cause in general (of keeping Wikipedia's articles free of denier misinformation). I ask you to reconsider. Raul654 (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Global Warming and related articles

Raymond, I've noticed that you do a good job of helping keep the Global Warming and related articles NPOV, balanced, and complete. I've seen some complaints both on and off-wiki that those articles are supposedly a walled garden protected by a group of POV pushers. But seeing as how you're actively involved with them, I know that can't be the case and that I don't need to involve myself. Please keep up the great work. Cla68 (talk) 21:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)