User talk:Bmedley Sutler

The Ministry of Truth

Hello and welcome to my talk page!

(please post below)

---

Block and protection

I am returning your block to the original one week duration. I reblocked you for a longer period because I made a mistake in looking at the history of your talk page and thought you had put the copyrighted song lyrics up again after they were removed. I have also restored the last version of your talk page and lifted the protection. Your photos of a bathroom and a Senator seem to fall within the scope of what users are allowed to put on their user and talk page. See for example this current discussion and also see what userspace is not. Certainly it would be a problem if you were making possibly libelous insinuations about a private person, or about a public person based on rumors or partisan sites, but that is not the case here, and poking a little fun seems to be within the latitude allowed. Thatcher131 00:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! •smedleyΔbutler• 04:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Thatcher131, I am glad to see that you did not use the passive voice, and that you admitted that you “made a mistake.” And yet, I searched your statement three times in vain for phrases such as, “I’m sorry,” “I apologize,” “Would you please accept my apology?” and “Yours with deepest regret and contrition.” ‘Bout time you cowboyed up, eh, pardner? 71.249.54.58 05:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Who are you? •smedleyΔbutler• 20:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

:^(

It is clear that you want to make a positive contribution but you are letting your knee-jerk desire to make smart-ass remarks interfere with the quality of your edits, draw attention to yourself, and give those who disagree ammunition against you. Please knock off the personal attacks and baiting. You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. ←Ben^B4 08:41, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Don't [remove trolling] Pablo Talk | Contributions 08:48, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm. Is this proven or speculation? ←Ben^B4 08:54, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

It's [remove trolling] Pablo Talk | Contributions 08:57, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked into it. While possible, I think such accusations should be confined to WP:SSP until a checkuser can be run. ←Ben^B4 09:41, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[remove trolling]. - Crockspot 13:04, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Pablo, NPA, calling someone another user is an attack. NPA1 You people have to get your stories together for your sockpuppet charges. I am supposed to be Seven of Diamonds! Your track record is 0 of 6? Not so good. The group is looking like conspircay theories. Thank you for the advice Ben. Why do RW like Morton Devoshire and Mongo get to make smart-ass comments but not leftists? •smedleyΔbutler• 19:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Because they carefully follow the rules and make smart-ass remarks about edits instead of people. If you did that, too, a lot of your problems would vanish. ←Ben^B4 20:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I see! That way there is no NPA. Ive been seeing that plan on the THF - Shankbone war. Very smart. •smedleyΔbutler• 20:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

For example:

he won't communicate about this issue

he lacks good faith intentions

his only object is to haunt me and get me to bite

Those comments aren't about edits. They may be true, but they aren't going to help you. ←Ben^B4 10:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:BLP

Hi, if you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons I will extend your block. BLP applies to any Wikipedia page, and quoting from the BLP page: An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. Biographies of living persons (BLP)s must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Again, if you keep adding this material I'll extend your block and post a suggestion to WP:AN/I that you be permanently blocked. RxS 20:04, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Administrator Thatcher131 said it was Okay. Read above. Post your issue to the official administrators complaint board and get a consensus. I think you are mistaken. In the mean-time I point you to Morton Devonshires user-page and make an official complaint that you deal to the dozens of BLP rules violations there. if you are neutral POV administrator I hope that you will proceed there and deal to the BLP's that are 100X more frequent that mine. This is an official request. Thank you. •smedleyΔbutler• 20:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong with his user page? Are there specific examples? Pablo Talk | Contributions 20:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Post a request on the BLP board if you can't tell. I would rather you not post here after calling me a sockpuppet and NPA. Will you honor my request?. •smedleyΔbutler• 20:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure. I will make an exception if I feel there is something that needs your attention, however. Pablo Talk | Contributions 20:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Pablo to answer your question, this is the addition I think is a problem: [1]. It's outside of what Thatcher131 was referring to and I think falls within the quoted text in my comments above. Bad taste wouldn't normally be a clear BLP issue, but I think this goes beyond bad taste and is sensationalist for no purpose. Beyond those concerns are general issues that have been ongoing for several weeks....taunting, disruption etc. RxS 21:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

If I wanted to argue about this harrassment (IMO) I could and win. Read the Cottaging article. It descibes perfectly what Larry Craig was alleged doing. There is no false light. Calling the Cottaging link a problem can be thought of (no offense and no attack) RW harrassment by some. I am taking down his picture to be nice. •smedleyΔbutler• 21:57, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

A request

Several users have indicated that they are concerned with the juxtaposition of Senator Craig's portrait and the other image and comments on this page. The consensus seems to have developed that this is a "borderline" use of userspace but after several days your point has been made and the material is still upsetting some other users. I am not going to take any administrator action but was wondering if you would voluntarily agree, in view of the concern it is arousing, to remove or tone down this material. Newyorkbrad 21:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

As I noted on my talk page in response to a query, since Sen. Craig pleaded guilty and the case is a matter of public record, it's not exactly a "BLP" or libel issue. It would be very different if the case was a rumor or an allegation or an arrest and a denial pending trial. Certainly Bmedley likes pushing people's buttons and testing limits, which is not exactly community-minded behavior. Thatcher131 21:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The main issue behind my warning above is calling him Larry'Wide Stance'Craig. I didn't have a problem with the rest of the content (besides thinking it's in pretty poor taste etc) but I think starting to call public figures sexually explicit and profane names runs counter not only BPL, but what Wikipedia is all about. RxS 22:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

RxS, So your edit is based on a false understanding! Have you not been following the case at all, to make such a mistake? Craig said the reason that he touched the foot of the vice cop in the next stall was not on purpose but because he uses a 'wide stance' when sitting on a toilet. All the commentators on TV and print thought this was a funny claim too. Thats why I put 'wide stance'. Have you not been following the case one bit to have not heard that? What is sexual about 'wide stance'? You claim that you removed that because its sexual so whats your understanding what that phrase means, RxS? You threatened a block too, so it must mean something pretty hard to you. Explain up, RxS. Thank you.•smedleyΔbutler• 23:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

What is sexual about 'wide stance? What did you link "wide stance" to? RxS 05:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

That is your answer? I think you should of tried better. You already claimed "call public figures sexually explicit and profane names" Did you forget that? I guess so. What is untrue about Cottaging? Nothing. Or the problem with linking 'wide stance' to it? Nothing. He was arrested for crusing gay sex in a public bathroom. That is Cottaging. I am sorry that you decided to harrass (IMO) and threaten me with a block with 0% reason, RxS, and for that I will be filing a complaint on your actions as soon as I am unblocked. •smedleyΔbutler• 06:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I am taking down Larry Craigs picture to be nice. What about Morton Devonshires page? Why does he get to make dozens of BLPs and insults? Is he 'special'? I am making an official complaint on the many BLPs there. I cant press the edit button to copy the links so you have to go there and look. •smedleyΔbutler• 22:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked at Morton's subpages after your email and everything I saw was copied from article talk pages (that is, its stuff that was written by other editors and would be kept elsewhere even if MD's pages were deleted). Also, his pages at least peripherally relate to the purpose of writing encyclopedia articles (on of the criteria mention on WP:UP#NOT whereas you are making a personal statement. Thatcher131 22:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Here are the issues (these quotes are copied off his page)

Take a look at Truth-Professor Steven E. Jones' solar funnel cooker. Is it just me, or does it look like an inverted you know what? I wonder, is this what Reptilian humanoids use to braise their dinner?

Great Liberal Backlash of 2003 -- POV-pushing at its finest, from one of the angriest journalists on the planet, Molly Ivins. Glad it's gone, but its loss will inflame this dude that keeps stalking me.

Re re-re-redirect of Paul Thompson (researcher) -- Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 December 29 -- oh yeah! Take that, you Infidel!

Pilots for 9/11 Truth -- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pilots for 9/11 Truth -- cracker-jack research? Yeah right. Thought it up in his underwear, now gone.

If you ever want to see the worst POV-pushing and failure to follow Wikipedia rules with respect to WP:RS and WP:OR you're likely to see on Wikipedia, go to Talk:State_terrorism_by_United_States_of_America.

Should be nominated for Afd

William Rodriguez -- WTC janitor with a conspiracy theory

Larry Silverstein's Comments On WTC Building 7 Collapse -- entirely original kook research, not one ounce of truth to anything said in the article that could be cited to an objective source. Mountain out of molehill at its finest. So much for 9/11 "research" -- pull it

Action Iran -- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Action Iran. This time, Iranians sitting around in their underwear in a living room dreaming of Socialist Utopia. G'bye

Information Clearing House -- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information Clearing House (second nomination) -- nn conspiracy "news" clearinghouse crackpot site.

The 9/11 REcommission Report -- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 9/11 REcommission Report -- ha, ha, we cannot be stopped!

Do these comments help build the project? •smedleyΔbutler• 22:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

RFC problem

It's appearing on Template:RFCpol list... MessedRocker (talk) 06:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I was looking at the top or the bottom of the list only! •smedleyΔbutler• 08:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

Would you consider adoption by a volunteer mentor? I get the impression that if you had someone to talk to when you're in a conflict that could help quite a bit. The worst that could happen is that it would slow things down and give people time to cool off. It's actually a very common choice for editors having trouble. Please think about it. ←Ben^B4 10:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I took the suggestion and asked User:Dev920 to be my mentor. •smedleyΔbutler• 22:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Newshounds

I'd be glad to help, although it won't be right away since I am tied up in this ArbCom dispute. --David Shankbone 15:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

reply

Hi, Thanks for your note. I'll take a look. — goethean ॐ 22:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

• These should be helpful: WP:WEB, WP:SELFPUB. - Crockspot 05:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Reply to message on my talkpage

Has he edited anywhere else than just the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation after you? One editing conflict + comment removal on the user talkpage isn't necessarily "stalking" per se. I don't see evidence that he is following you around when I'm looking at both of your edit histories, but if you send some diffs I'd be happy to look at them.--Isotope23 ^talk 15:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI

You're being discussed at ANI again. Pablo Talk | Contributions 05:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Bmedley, I just wanted to let you know that I commented on ANI regarding your promotion of pedophilia invitation to engage in gay sex on multiple users talk pages. You really need to restrain yourself when it comes to this kind of behavior. Dman727 05:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Bmedley. I was informed that I read your edit incorrectly. While you were discussing wives and children, it was not a promotion of pedophilia at all, but rather an invitation to participate in homosexual sex. I updated my comments at ANI appropriatly. Dman727 05:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

On the block

I have recently indefinitely blocked you for continued violations of wikipedia policy. I left a comment on AN/I elaborating on the reasoning for the block. [2] I just want to remind you that indefinite is not equal to infinite and I am more than willing to unblock you. However, it seems that past blocks have done little to change your conduct on wikipedia. I want an honest commitment from you to change your conduct for future use. I understand that you are, at this point angered. However, when you do come back to this page with a cooler head I hope you consider more seriously what it is I am saying.--Jersey Devil 06:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I want an unblock and a RFC. I will not tolerate tag-team harrasmment by the same small RW group who just drove Seven Of Diamond off Wiki, and harras and drive out any leftist with organized team tactics. Dheyward Wikistalked me. Here is what I last wrote but couldn't post on ANI

Neither of you talk to the troll edit Dheyward made, then when I asked to talk to him about it, he deleted my question on his talk page as 'trolling'. His edit was 100% POINT and trolling and hurt the article, not helped it. He knew the correct info, but would have rather made a POINT troll edit instead! (links coming) That is WP abuse and an attempt to bait me. I avoided EVERY SINGLE article that they edit after my block to avoid them. Dheyward Wikistalked me then did it again on Mongos page about my request for a LBGT mentor.•smedleyΔbutler• 06:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)