User talk:Worm That Turned

User	Talk	Articles	To Do	Toolbox	Subpages	DYK	Awards

Welcome to my talk page. Leave me a message!

I'm moving into a period of low activity. Do not expect a rapid response from me.

This user is stalked by friendly talk page staplers.

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Resolution

Dear Worm That Turned, please see this polite request, and provide a positive thoughtful response there, if you have one. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:59, 9 August 2014 (UTC).

Gender Gap Task Force Issues RFAR

Re: your statement "Overall, I don't believe this issues is ripe for arbitration, but I do think it's getting close. I'm leaning decline, but am willing to be persuaded otherwise."

Can you give a little more detail about why you don't believe it is ripe, and the criteria for determining ripeness. What kind of persuasion would you need and what would make this an arbcom issue?

Mind you, I have just been named as a party to the case, by a clerk acting as a proxy for an anonymous arbitrator. I have no idea who had me added as a party to the case, or why, but it is pretty obvious to me that if I say anything that might have the effect of getting the thing accepted as a case, I stand a pretty good chance of being stomped on by the arbcom. I can't offhand think of anything more intimidating, unless it's the last week that I spent observing this gender gap group that somehow got on my watchlist.

This group isn't getting much guidance for solving their problem. They took it to ANI, and the thing was closed only a few hours after the voting started. So the only real community comment they got was that if a female editor doesn't want to be harassed, she should hide her identity. The only advice from the closing admin is that they should grow up. [1] I don't know if that's how this guy talks to his grandmother, it sounds pretty condescending to me, but he seemed to like that bit of advice enough to say it twice, not counting the first time he closed the case and had his close challenged. I tried to have a discussion with him on his talk page about it, and he called me "very emotionally involved", "irrational", repeated his "act like an adult" mantra, then he complained about my edit history, and insinuated that I was not a "useful member of Wikipedia". I suppose I shouldn't be surprised to see an admin act this way, but I thought it was rude.

This group has been posting links to studies about governance and systemic bias, which I found interesting to skim, and it was pretty clear the group had a fairly knowlegable following, but since the ANI closed, TKOP reverted SlimVirgin's archiving of the off-topic and disruptive material, so it looks like from here on out, it's going to be the Eric Corbett, SPECIFICO, and Two Kinds of Pork show. Frankly, I've had enough of Corbett calling me a liar.

Is there any info I can provide to the committee that would help them in their deliberations about this matter? Otherwise I will be quite relieved to take this mess off my watchlist. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 22:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neotarf. Sorry about the delay in replying, I've been rather busy of late. I generally accept arbitration cases when I'm convinced that the community cannot handle the issue and at the moment I've not been convinced of that. So far, I've seen a complaint at ANI, which is never going to work out - ANI is not proper dispute resolution. Administrators have authority over clearcut issues, but in cases like this a proper community consultation should happen. I'd recommend an RfC on the Gender Gap task force - with the primary question of "what are we trying to achieve". Criticism isn't necessarily disruptive and with a bit of effort it can be used as a constructive mechanism. I hope that helps. Worm^TT(talk) 11:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

BlueSalix

As a follow-up to your posting calm, level-headed posting awhile back: Do you mind checking in on a recent comment on the User talk:BlueSalix page? I'm not sure that bygones are allowed to be bygones - not that I haven't had some frustration with the user myself. There's no need to respond to me. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:18, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Carole, I'd love to be able to do something there, but that's another unhelpful comment from User:BlueSalix. If he had used the wording that User:NE Ent had provided, I'd be considering unblocking. At the moment, I'm considering removing talk page access for more double talk, as I suspect this user is acting this way intentionally, leaving it to BASC to listen to an appeal. I think I'm going to leave things at the status quo. Discussion of the block and commentary should be kept to a minimum there, preferably zero. BlueSalix himself can comment - and make an unblock request. Worm^TT(talk) 07:23, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Cool, time for me to unplug. Thanks.--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:39, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Repeating copyright violations

Hello, could you please look at this issue [[2]]? Thank you. DocumentError (talk) 19:34, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, disregard (or regard, if you like). I meant to leave this message for someone else. DocumentError (talk) 19:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Mentoring Program

Hi Worm! I'm interested in the WP:AAU program. It seems like you're a very experienced user, so I'd appreciate it if you could mentor me some time. I know all your slots are full at the moment, but when there's an open one, please let me know. Thanks! Writing Enthusiast ^☎ 01:57, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Bluesalix

So, here is the thing. First edit by Bluesalix after his unblock [3], is a delete !vote on an AFD of an article I created last week. Granted, he is now unblocked and he can do whatever he wants, but I find it hard to believe that this is coincidental. After all he has gone through, and the substantial feedback he has gotten through that process, his first edit related to an article and subject that he has never edited before, is basically a silly taunt. See what he has replaced his user page with [4]. - Cwobeel (talk) 01:18, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

(#1) It wasn't my "first edit," (#2) thirty-six percent (36%) of my previous edits have been contributions to AfD discussions and, (#3) I have a proved history of contributing to discussion regarding police organization, police brutality, etc. (I created the articles Andres Valdez, David Correia, police uniforms of the United States, and so on and so forth, etc. etc.) So the chances I'd happen to register on that AfD - a subject that is current and active in the news and relates to police brutality - were statistically pretty high and definitely not out of thin air. If you would like to ask for an WP:IBAN I most certainly won't object; I'm at my wits end and would ask for it myself if it weren't for the WP:DRAMA involved. In the meantime, if you are going to be block shopping me with these kind of notes to admins and bureaucrats, could you give me a heads-up by pinging me as per WP:NOTIFY? You've been a little lax in doing that across the vast spectrum of user space on which you've been initiating discussions about me. I AGF that it was a long series of unintentional oversights ... BlueSalix (talk) 05:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I will let others judge your behavior which in my opinion is FUBAR. In the meantime, stay away from me, there are thousands of articles out there. - Cwobeel (talk) 13:44, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't obfuscate. It was your first edit after your block (not counting edits to your own user page) and highly suspicious, as the only way you could have arrived to that page was by following my edits around when you were blocked. Just leave me alone, will you? I have no patience for games. - Cwobeel (talk) 14:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh lord. Here we go again. I arrived at the page because I've occasionally followed User:Gaijin42 since I invited him to participate ([5]) in the long and tortuous Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Live Wire Radio; he also posted in the Thomas Jackson AfD ([6]). I didn't even know you were the one who started the article until you announced it here. Please just ask for a WP:IBAN. I didn't come here for this. BlueSalix (talk) 16:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't need to ask for an IBAN. Just stay away, and I'll do the same. Thanks. - Cwobeel (talk) 23:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

If I haven't made it clear by now, interacting with you is the last thing I have a desire to do. And while I will make every effort to avoid repeating this poisonous experience, there's no way I can promise there might not be inadvertent edits in "your" articles, as per above. If you genuinely want no interaction between us you might have heeded my three previous requests that go back 2 months to you to that effect ([7]). Between continuing to contact me despite those, and starting four different WP:NOTIFY-free conversations about me on various user Talk pages where you repeat the kind-of evidence-free accusations you just did here, it seems your show of yelling "leave me alone!" is just that - a show. And I'm pretty sure there's only so much longer this 4Chan game of yours will keep fooling people. In the unlikely event I'm wrong about you, and this is a misunderstanding, then let's agree to make this the last post in this thread, as well as the various other ones you're participating in about me. Thanks. BlueSalix (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Your last suggestion of making this the last post is a good one, BS. Have you both forgotten this is Worm That Turned's talkpage? What a thread for him to find upon logging in. Please shut up both of you until Worm is at leisure to comment here. At least until then. Bishonen | talk 00:17, 21 September 2014 (UTC).

So it is proven now?

Hello Worm,

Remember I asked you once, if you're discussing our private email exchanges and me with demiurge1000? So, looks like it is proven now that you do. You were the one who offered me WP:RTV, which I declined not because I do not like to vanish (I do, it is my greatest wish), but because this option does not work, and it takes less than a second to locate a so-called vanished user. The communications were private, but somehow demiurge1000 found out about your offer and my decline of it. You're the only person who could have released the content of our private communications to the one of the worst wiki bullies demiurge1000. I am ready to apologize if I'm getting it wrong. 50.150.100.229 (talk) 05:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Whatever Worm may or may not have proposed or offered elsewhere, I was the one who suggested an offer of WP:RTV, as well as an unblock, in this edit. And that is what I was referring to. As I recall, you didn't like the idea, though I can't remember any good reason why.

I'm not sure under what authority Worm would be able to offer you RTV while you were still community banned, but either way, any such offer made by him had nothing to do with me, and it seems unlikely he would have discussed it with me. (Not that it would have been impossible for him to do so, but I have no memory of it happening.) If Worm did make such an offer, I have no idea whether it came before or after the diff I link above; perhaps you could enlighten us on that point.

So, yes, you're wrong on two points here, although I imagine we will only see an apology for one. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:29, 21 September 2014 (UTC)