User talk:Tulkolahten: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:29, 30 March 2008

"You have new messages" was designed for a purpose: letting people know you have replied to them. I do not watch your talk page and I will likely IGNORE your reply if it is not copied to my page, as I will not be aware that you replied! Thank you.

Click here to add a new message

Read Signpost Archive

Archives
No.1. No.2. No.3. No.4. No.5. No.6. No.7. No.8. No.9. No.10. No.11. No.12.

Re

Nemam poneti. Viditelne jsou vsichni unaveni temi nekonecnymi putkami. - Darwinek (talk) 21:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Corps (Czechoslovakia)

Sorry its such a small article, but its a start ;o)--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 13:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye

Unfortunately I've decided to retire for indefinite. Please don't write anything on my page now. I may only wish you the best of the luck. MarkBA ^{what's up?/my mess} 20:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AE

FYI, I am starting to look into the AE complaint. I haven't gotten very far into it yet, but just to start with, I would like to advise you to stop using the word "vandalism" in referring to other editors' contributions, unless you are dealing with real vandalism. "Real" vandalism is things like blanking a page and replacing it with a picture of someone's genitals; or changing a birth year to something in a different century, or wiping out a paragraph and replacing it with "HA HA U R DUMB." That's vandalism. :) Simply disagreeing about content though, is not vandalism. And calling it vandalism can actually escalate a dispute. So I recommend that you stop this practice right away.

Stay tuned for more as I dig deeper into it... --El on ka 06:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Also, as I look through this, it does appear that whatever Matthead was doing on March 23, that you were just following along behind him reverting all the way, but you never actually stopped to talk to him about it. I see no message from you to his talkpage, or any other talkpages about it. Or am I missing something? --El on ka 08:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw that, but that was days before you started reverting him. --El on ka 09:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at your message to Matthead.[1] It's a start, but it's a bit accusatory. Could you try again? Think of it this way: Instead of seeing him as the enemy, imagine that he were someone that were an authority figure. One possible technique which might get you in the right frame of mind, is to pretend that you are talking to a retired professor, who used to be quite competent, but has gotten a bit confused as they got older. I'm not saying that this applies to Matthead, but if you imagine that you're talking to someone who you used to respect, I think it will change the tone of what you say. Another thing to try, is that you could ask another editor that you both seem to respect, and see if they have advice on how the two of you can work things out? I just want to see you make a truly genuine effort to reach out. But your current post isn't quite there yet. --El on ka 13:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of editing restrictions

Tulkolahten, after having reviewed the previous cautions in your talkpage edit history, and the complaint at WP:AE#User:Tulkolahten, I have to agree that some of your recent behavior has been of concern, specifically in the way that you have been using the word "vandalism" or "nonsense" to describe other edits, despite multiple complaints from other editors. I am also concerned how you seem to be following the edits of Matthead (talk · contribs) and reverting him without genuine attempts at discussion.

I am therefore adding your name to the list of editors who are under General Editing restrictions, as defined at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Digwuren#General restriction, specifically:

Any editor working on topics related to Eastern Europe, broadly defined, may be made subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator. The restriction shall specify that, should the editor make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be blocked ... for up to a week for each violation, and up to a month for each violation after the fifth.

And I'd like to be very specific here: As part of the above restrictions, if you continue with referring to other editors' reasonable changes as "vandalism" either by calling it that directly or using an acronym such as "rvv", you may be subject to having your account blocked. This means don't use words such as "vandalism" "rvv" "nonsense" or other such pejorative terms in edit summaries or talkpage posts.

Please let me know if you have any questions, --El on ka 11:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 :: Yes, I saw that, but that was days before you started reverting him. --[[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 09:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
-::: I took a look at your message to Matthead.  It's a start, but it's a bit accusatory.  Could you try again?  Think of it this way:  Instead of seeing him as the enemy, imagine that he were someone that were an authority figure.  One possible technique which might get you in the right frame of mind, is to pretend that you are talking to a retired professor, who used to be quite competent, but has gotten a bit confused as they got older.  I'm not saying that this applies to Matthead, but if you imagine that you're talking to someone who you used to respect, I think it will change the tone of what you say. Or ask another editor that you both seem to respect, and see if they have advice on how the two of you can work things out? I just want to see you make a truly genuine effort to reach out.  But your current post isn't quite there yet. --[[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 13:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
+::: I took a look at your message to Matthead.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Matthead&diff=prev&oldid=202031300]  It's a start, but it's a bit accusatory. Could you try again?  Think of it this way:  Instead of seeing him as the enemy, imagine that he were someone that were an authority figure.  One possible technique which might get you in the right frame of mind, is to pretend that you are talking to a retired professor, who used to be quite competent, but has gotten a bit confused as they got older.  I'm not saying that this applies to Matthead, but if you imagine that you're talking to someone who you used to respect, I think it will change the tone of what you say. Another thing to try, is that you could ask another editor that you both seem to respect, and see if they have advice on how the two of you can work things out? I just want to see you make a truly genuine effort to reach out.  But your current post isn't quite there yet. --[[User:Elonka|El]][[User talk:Elonka|on]][[Special:Contributions/Elonka|ka]] 13:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 ==Notice of editing restrictions==