User talk:Timotheus Canens: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Trout this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
clear
m Reverted edits by T. Canens (talk) to last version by MiszaBot III
Line 1: Line 1:
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{cquote|Abiit, excessit, evasit, erupit.}}
|minthreadsleft = 2
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(3d)
|archive = User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/%(year)d/%(month)d
}}
{{mbox|text=If you are interested in trying [[User:Timotheus Canens/Kissle|Kissle]], please ask another admin to modify the permissions page, as I'm on an admin tools break. Please leave bug reports and feature requests on this page. Thanks.}}
{{/talkheader}}
{{/Persistent}}

== Doncram verbatim quotes ==

At [[WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive224#Doncram NHRP stubs]], you said that {{user|Doncram}}'s "excessive use of verbatim quotes...is unacceptable". Would you consider {{diff|Liederkranz Club|467942293|467940366|this diff today}} to be a violation of that finding? How about {{diff|William H. Allen (architect)|prev|466753123|this one from last week}}? Thanks. --[[User talk:SarekOfVulcan|<span class="gfSarekSig">SarekOfVulcan (talk)</span>]] 17:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
:Yes, these are rather excessive. [[User:T. Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:T. Canens|talk]]) 07:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
::{{tps}} The Liederkranz Club thing is just a blatant and unambiguous, straight-up copyvio - quotes don't make up for laziness. It should be immediately removed as such: we can't just copy-and-paste text from sources, slap barely noticeable quotes around it and present it as the body of the article. This could be a serious problem, with an editor as prolific as this committing such an egregious move after being here for so long. 6 months for edit warring was far too kind. [[User:Doc9871|<font color="#000000" size="2">'''Doc'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Doc9871|<font color="#999999">'''talk'''</font>]] 07:57, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

== Your comments at the uninvolved admin section at AE ==

Hi Timotheus, You are not currently an administrator, so you should not be commenting in the Uninvolved ''Administrator'' section at AE. Please move your comments to a correct section. Thank you. Also, your proposal to topic ban MN who has an impeccable block log [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AMichaelNetzer] for six months while suggesting that Nableezy who has ban and blocks logs to the yahooz should be topic banned for 3-6 months is a joke. Best. --''[[User:Brewcrewer|<span style="font family:Arial;color:green">brew</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Brewcrewer|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#2E82F4">crewer</span>]] [[User talk:Brewcrewer|(yada, yada)]]'' 16:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
:I will put my comment where I see fit. [[User:T. Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:T. Canens|talk]]) 22:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
::see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FClarification&action=historysubmit&diff=468356630&oldid=468094930]--''[[User:Brewcrewer|<span style="font family:Arial;color:green">brew</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Brewcrewer|<span style="font-family:Arial;color:#2E82F4">crewer</span>]] [[User talk:Brewcrewer|(yada, yada)]]'' 23:32, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

== AE abortion case ==

The Esoglou case was closed on a similar basis by WGFinley where there was also clear evidence of blatant edit-warring and where the filing party was well aware of the discretionary sanctions. Could that case be reopened for the same reasons as the Netzer case?--[[User:The Devil&#39;s Advocate|The Devil&#39;s Advocate]] ([[User talk:The Devil&#39;s Advocate|talk]]) 16:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
:If it were up to me I'd rather reopen the Cptnono case. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 18:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
::I didn't see what else to do with it. I suggested indef and people complained, I suggested warnings to both and people complained and then Nableezy withdrew it. I left that for a couple days and decided to close, if you really want it reopened I'm not opposed to it I just have no clue where it would go. Cptnono is aware he's on thin ice, if he slips the indef is coming. As far as TDA I think he should preface with his remarks that he's been blocked and banned by me, might explain his unusual interest in my decisions and while I did say he should ask Tim in response to a question on my talk page I didn't mean he should be looking for someone to wheel war with me. --[[User:Wgfinley|WGFinley]] ([[User talk:Wgfinley|talk]]) 18:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
:No, that close was good. Looking at the filing party's conduct is entirely ''discretionary'', and usually it's either because we have to look at it anyway to arrive at a fully informed disposition of the case, or because there's something wrong with the filing itself (frivolous report, etc.). In this case neither applies because the case as it was presented can be dealt with through a warning without a detailed review of the incidents. If anyone wants to file a case against Roscelese, they are free to do so. [[User:T. Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:T. Canens|talk]]) 22:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
::Just to be clear, I also was asking about the fact that there was pretty clear-cut evidence of edit-warring in that case, which, as you said with the Netzer case, could have easily been dealt with on its own without consideration of arbitration policy requirements for a warning.--[[User:The Devil&#39;s Advocate|The Devil&#39;s Advocate]] ([[User talk:The Devil&#39;s Advocate|talk]]) 01:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

== Talkback ==

{{talkback|WT:AFC|Severe Backlog!|ts=19:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)}}
<small style="font:bold 12px Courier New;display:inline;border:#009 1px dashed;padding:1px 6px 2px 7px;white-space:nowrap"><font color="#000">[[User talk:Mabdul|mabdul]]</font></small> 19:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

== '''[[Wikipedia:Meetup/NARA 4|<span style="color: #4169E1;">National Archives Extrava<span style="color: #FF0000;">SCAN</span>za</span>]]''' ==

{|style="border: 3px solid #6881b9; margin: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em; {{border-radius|8px}}" cellpadding="5"
|-
|You are invited to the '''[[Wikipedia:Meetup/NARA 4|<span style="color: #4169E1;">National Archives Extrava<span style="color: #FF0000;">SCAN</span>za</span>]]''', taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my [[n:Wikinews interviews US National Archives Wikipedian in Residence|stint as Wikipedian in Residence]] at the National Archives with one last success!

This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—''currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships''—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions<sup>1</sup> as possible can come. [[Wikipedia:Meetup/NARA 4|Please join us]]! [[User:Dominic|Dominic]]·[[User talk:Dominic|t]] 01:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

<small><sup>1</sup> Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.</small>
|[[File:National Archives ExtravaSCANza.png|300px]]
|}

Revision as of 02:29, 2 January 2012

Please click here to leave me a new message.
AfC submissions
Random submission
3+ months
2,629 pending submissions
Purge to update

Notes

Notes
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
July 2010
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
March 2010
PGP key 
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
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=
=oCnW
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

Doncram verbatim quotes

At WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive224#Doncram NHRP stubs, you said that Doncram (talk · contribs)'s "excessive use of verbatim quotes...is unacceptable". Would you consider this diff today to be a violation of that finding? How about this one from last week? Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, these are rather excessive. T. Canens (talk) 07:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) The Liederkranz Club thing is just a blatant and unambiguous, straight-up copyvio - quotes don't make up for laziness. It should be immediately removed as such: we can't just copy-and-paste text from sources, slap barely noticeable quotes around it and present it as the body of the article. This could be a serious problem, with an editor as prolific as this committing such an egregious move after being here for so long. 6 months for edit warring was far too kind. Doc talk 07:57, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments at the uninvolved admin section at AE

Hi Timotheus, You are not currently an administrator, so you should not be commenting in the Uninvolved Administrator section at AE. Please move your comments to a correct section. Thank you. Also, your proposal to topic ban MN who has an impeccable block log [1] for six months while suggesting that Nableezy who has ban and blocks logs to the yahooz should be topic banned for 3-6 months is a joke. Best. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will put my comment where I see fit. T. Canens (talk) 22:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
see [2]--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 23:32, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AE abortion case

The Esoglou case was closed on a similar basis by WGFinley where there was also clear evidence of blatant edit-warring and where the filing party was well aware of the discretionary sanctions. Could that case be reopened for the same reasons as the Netzer case?--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 16:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it were up to me I'd rather reopen the Cptnono case. EdJohnston (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see what else to do with it. I suggested indef and people complained, I suggested warnings to both and people complained and then Nableezy withdrew it. I left that for a couple days and decided to close, if you really want it reopened I'm not opposed to it I just have no clue where it would go. Cptnono is aware he's on thin ice, if he slips the indef is coming. As far as TDA I think he should preface with his remarks that he's been blocked and banned by me, might explain his unusual interest in my decisions and while I did say he should ask Tim in response to a question on my talk page I didn't mean he should be looking for someone to wheel war with me. --WGFinley (talk) 18:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No, that close was good. Looking at the filing party's conduct is entirely discretionary, and usually it's either because we have to look at it anyway to arrive at a fully informed disposition of the case, or because there's something wrong with the filing itself (frivolous report, etc.). In this case neither applies because the case as it was presented can be dealt with through a warning without a detailed review of the incidents. If anyone wants to file a case against Roscelese, they are free to do so. T. Canens (talk) 22:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to be clear, I also was asking about the fact that there was pretty clear-cut evidence of edit-warring in that case, which, as you said with the Netzer case, could have easily been dealt with on its own without consideration of arbitration policy requirements for a warning.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Timotheus Canens. You have new messages at WT:AFC.
Message added 19:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

mabdul 19:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National Archives ExtravaSCANza

You are invited to the National Archives ExtravaSCANza, taking place every day next week from January 4–7, Wednesday to Saturday, in College Park, Maryland (Washington, DC metro area). Come help me cap off my stint as Wikipedian in Residence at the National Archives with one last success!

This will be a casual working event in which Wikipedians are getting together to scan interesting documents at the National Archives related to a different theme each day—currently: spaceflight, women's suffrage, Chile, and battleships—for use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. The event is being held on multiple days, and in the evenings and weekend, so that as many locals and out-of-towners from nearby regions1 as possible can come. Please join us! Dominic·t 01:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1 Wikipedians from DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, New York City, and Pittsburgh have been invited.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timotheus_Canens&oldid=469041793"