User talk:Ckatz: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Will Beback (talk | contribs)
Line 88: Line 88:
::Kohs is blocked, indefinitely, per the notice on his page - not banned. Indefinitely blocked editors may return, providing they are deemed to be able to be useful editors again. The page has was left in the state it was following the ArbCom decision, and it was the subsequent edit wars (an editor blanking it, being reverted) that lead me to protecting it. Of import, more than the unilateral(ish) decision to remove the content, was that your action was made through a protected page - where it is expected for there to be consensus before making a controversial action (although, per AGF, you may not have known it to be controversial action.) [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 19:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
::Kohs is blocked, indefinitely, per the notice on his page - not banned. Indefinitely blocked editors may return, providing they are deemed to be able to be useful editors again. The page has was left in the state it was following the ArbCom decision, and it was the subsequent edit wars (an editor blanking it, being reverted) that lead me to protecting it. Of import, more than the unilateral(ish) decision to remove the content, was that your action was made through a protected page - where it is expected for there to be consensus before making a controversial action (although, per AGF, you may not have known it to be controversial action.) [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 19:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:::Note that an indef user who no admin will unblock is effectively banned, especially when one factors in that Kohs was unblocked and then reblocked several times. There is also nothing out of the ordinary in blanking off-site links from the pages of such a user. After all, the external links and sites were a definite factor in the original blocks. --'''[[User:Ckatz|Ckatz]]'''''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Ckatz|<font color="green">chat</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ckatz|<font color="red">spy</font>]]</sub></small>'' 19:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:::Note that an indef user who no admin will unblock is effectively banned, especially when one factors in that Kohs was unblocked and then reblocked several times. There is also nothing out of the ordinary in blanking off-site links from the pages of such a user. After all, the external links and sites were a definite factor in the original blocks. --'''[[User:Ckatz|Ckatz]]'''''<small><sup>[[User_talk:Ckatz|<font color="green">chat</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ckatz|<font color="red">spy</font>]]</sub></small>'' 19:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:::::There are those admins who would unblock Kohs, if he were to undertake to comport himself according to Wikipedia practices... Kohs was blocked, indefinitely, again because after a trial he declared himself not bound by WP policy, practice and guidelines - some of the links he desired to be allowed were a symptom of that rejection, but it was his rejection of the conditions that allowed him to resume editing that was the primary reason for his editing privileges being withdrawn. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 21:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
::::Maybe an MFD would be appropriate. &nbsp; <b>[[User:Will Beback|<font color="#595454">Will Beback</font>]]&nbsp; [[User talk:Will Beback|<font color="#C0C0C0">talk</font>]]&nbsp; </b> 20:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
::::Maybe an MFD would be appropriate. &nbsp; <b>[[User:Will Beback|<font color="#595454">Will Beback</font>]]&nbsp; [[User talk:Will Beback|<font color="#C0C0C0">talk</font>]]&nbsp; </b> 20:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
:::::Probably, although my participation would be to question what leverage any community consensus would have on an ArbCom ruling. [[User:LessHeard vanU|LessHeard vanU]] ([[User talk:LessHeard vanU|talk]]) 21:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:11, 21 June 2011

Hello! Thanks for dropping by... please feel free to leave me a message below. I don't have a convention as to where I'll respond, be it here, your talk page, or the talk page of the subject we're discussing - but I'll do my best to keep things clear. Let me know if you have a preference... now, get typing! Ckatz
Archive

Archives


Index
Page One
Page Two
Page Three
Page Four
Page Five
Page Six
Page Seven
Page Eight
Page Nine
Page Ten





Frequently asked questions

  • Where can I learn more about editing Wikipedia?
  • Why was the link I added removed from an article?
    • Typically, links are removed because they fail the external links guideline. Although many links are deleted because they were placed by spammers, links to good sites are also removed on a regular basis. This is because Wikipedia isn't a directory service; the mere fact a site exists does not mean it warrants a link.
  • Why was my article deleted?
    • Pages can be deleted for many reasons; there are very specific criteria that govern the process. Please review this article for more information.
  • Why was information relating to my company or organization removed?
  • Why were my spelling changes reverted?
Wikipedia's Manual of Style recommends the use of regional varieties of English, based on the topic and the article's contribution history. Please avoid changing spellings unless they differ from the appropriate version. Most spell checking software can be configured to use British and American English; some extend this to include other varieties such as Canadian or Australian English.
Contents

Still trying to get a response

Re: Your undo of my Locations in Jericho edit

How is what I wrote any more speculative than speculation about St. Louis or any of the other cities with unconfirmed status? I used information from the show combined with factual statistics about the populations of those cities and arrived at a reasonable conclusion. Please respond to SethJL83@gmail.com.

Removal of Link

Ckatz,

You removed an external link I recently added to Wikipedia. This is not a promotional link. It is a unique link because it provides an ENTIRE list of Mahayana Buddhist Canon in English. Other sites may have some translations but not all texts not yet translated, which is an overwhelming majority. It should be clearly noted that some of the other links only contain a portion of the Mahayana sutras rather than a complete or comprehensive archive of Mahayana sutras.

I want English speakers to see the extensive list of titles in the Mahayana Buddhist Canon/Tripitaka/Sutras. If external links is not the best method, feel free to suggest other methods, but I believe this is a worthwhile contribution and link.

Thanks, Guo Cheen

Mail!

Hello, Ckatz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

June, 2011

Hello, Ckatz. You have new messages at Drmargi's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Suggestion

Hello! I noticed you contributed to Middlesex University entry on Wikipedia. If you studied at that University, please consider including this userbox on your userpage. Simply paste {{User:Invest in knowledge/mdx}} to your userpage. Thank you. Invest in knowledge (talk) 18:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Touch

Hello, I'm leaving this message in response to you're revert of my edition to the Heroes page. If you would have checked the discussion page, then you would have noticed that I asked the question of whether or not to of add the Touch link. Nobody responded. Therefore I added it myself.
Firstly, just to argue why it should be listed, is because it's created by Tim Kring. The format of the shows (ensemble cast) is the same, as well as themes (Somewhat speculative, but really likely if you read the synopsis). Also, in the Touch page, Heroes is listed as a related show. This conversation should continue in the discussion page.
I would also like to add that because of the way how this happened, I was quite a little frustrated, but I'm assuming good faith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgforbes (talkcontribs) 00:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ThunderCats External Links

Hi, I've been trying to cite information that I've been adding (albeit not while I was logged in) to the ThunderCats Wiki pages and you keep removing them. I don't understand how ThunderCatsNOW references are being removed while "fan sites" such as ThunderCats Lair (which I helped found) and http://www.thundercatsanimated.blogspot.com/ stay on as links? If you are going to remove the references I add, then please be fair, that's all I ask. Please see He-Man and remove the "DVD Reviews" links as well.

Thanks.

Emmanuel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eflorendo (talkcontribs) 19:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Virginian

Hello, Ckatz. I was wondering exactly why you re-posted the Copy-edit and Clean-up disclaimers to The Virginian (TV series) page? It doesn't really make sense to me. I went through and edited it out, made all the tone the same, took out unnecessary information, and several other things. You'll find that the page is actually quite smaller than either Gunsmoke or Bonanza, (neither of which contain disclaimers) and since it is of the same status, (well known, general favorite, western TV series ect...) I really don't think it should be as small as you seem to want it to be. I didn't remove the tags for no reason. I actually did what they were requesting. However, to take out even more information, I think would be a bit unnecessary. f you have a reason for this, could you please explain it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meltoncub (talkcontribs) 22:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dental Spa

Hi I write a post similar in wording to the 2009 dental spa update as I am the first dental spa in Australia as I am also one of the first dentists to be approved for the use of Botox & Dermal Filler. I would appreciate your help to correct this post so that I can submit it properly and factually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drsgupta (talkcontribs) 02:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simply put, it is not suitable content. The page is intended as an overview of the concept, not as a site to highlight specific businesses. (Wikipedia is not a promotional tool.) However, you are encouraged to contribute in areas where you do not have a direct conflict of interest. Please feel free to ask if you would like assistance in doing so. Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy 03:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re User:TheKohser userpage

The above editor is indefinitely blocked by ArbCom, who have made no comment on the preferred state of the Userpage. I suggest that you request guidance from that body before changing the page. I would also note that you edited through protection, where you should have found consensus before making non controversial edits. For the sake of clarity, I am the admin who placed this protection - to stop exactly this sort of edit warring - and have reverted your edit. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to revert, if you must. A few thoughts, though. One, it is most certainly not uncommon to blank or otherwise remove that sort of information from blocked or banned users. Two, the edit in question can in no possible way be defined as an "edit war". Alison changed the material, someone else reverted her good-faith change, it drew my attention (having had to block one of the user's socks) and I removed his contact information. I think a more appropriate question would be why it is necessary to keep a series of links for a banned user. --Ckatzchatspy 16:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Kohs is blocked, indefinitely, per the notice on his page - not banned. Indefinitely blocked editors may return, providing they are deemed to be able to be useful editors again. The page has was left in the state it was following the ArbCom decision, and it was the subsequent edit wars (an editor blanking it, being reverted) that lead me to protecting it. Of import, more than the unilateral(ish) decision to remove the content, was that your action was made through a protected page - where it is expected for there to be consensus before making a controversial action (although, per AGF, you may not have known it to be controversial action.) LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note that an indef user who no admin will unblock is effectively banned, especially when one factors in that Kohs was unblocked and then reblocked several times. There is also nothing out of the ordinary in blanking off-site links from the pages of such a user. After all, the external links and sites were a definite factor in the original blocks. --Ckatzchatspy 19:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are those admins who would unblock Kohs, if he were to undertake to comport himself according to Wikipedia practices... Kohs was blocked, indefinitely, again because after a trial he declared himself not bound by WP policy, practice and guidelines - some of the links he desired to be allowed were a symptom of that rejection, but it was his rejection of the conditions that allowed him to resume editing that was the primary reason for his editing privileges being withdrawn. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe an MFD would be appropriate.   Will Beback  talk  20:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Probably, although my participation would be to question what leverage any community consensus would have on an ArbCom ruling. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]