User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise

Archives

Note: If you leave a message here I will most often respond here

User:Bertport

Hi, Future Perfect at Sunrise. Since you blocked twice my access to English wiki, I have no choice but contact you anonymously. Firstly, I want to express my deepest regret and disaffection for the two blockages. How could people jump to a judgement only by listening to one side's words? Don't you know the villain always sues his victim before he himself is prosecuted. It's User:Bertport who made the very first revert [1] at 00:19, 19 February 2010 while I, mainly with User:Clemensmarabu, had been contributing days to the article Tibet. I never see he does any constructive edit but only undoes others' contributions or stealthily stuffs his biased words.

I waited one week to finally edit the article, if you please have a look at what content is restored [2], you'll tell at once good from bad. Both sides' opinions are presented and historical events are scholarly argued, thus I wonder where come from the courage of Bertport to revert such an edit and his boldness to accuse others anticipately. Regards. -- LaGrandefr

Watch out

See this. Not another interest party flood. Just a heads up ;) Michi

Talkback

Hello, Future Perfect at Sunrise. You have new messages at Jéské Couriano's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The latest from Shuppi

[3]. The guy is relentless. Athenean (talk) 04:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Filed a formal SPI here: [4]. Athenean (talk) 22:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

'Hot' spa summer

I'd recently a conversation with User:Balkanians' Word, after he returned in our community [[5]]. It seems that this spa story is repeating, promising the most possible detailed descriptions of his favourite wiki-topic the Cham issue and especially everything about massacres. I've also noticed that the specific user is obsessed to create wp:battle situations like [[6]] and [[7]]. By the way the specific article is listed for deletion.Alexikoua (talk) 19:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, there was nothing of battle in my comments. I was asked by the contributor 'whats going on/difficut situations', and I answered to him saying yeah, take a look on those thinks. Nevertheless, I have not created until now any page about massacres (e.g.) except of the Catastrophe of Zalongo which I guess is totally NPOV. Have a nice day, Balkanian`s word (talk) 20:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Holon

Hey, again, Fut. Perf! I accidentally (and completely) screwed up the article Holon (long story). I was wondering if you could spread the word around and maybe see what you can do to fix it? Thanks!--RM (Be my friend) 05:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Stupidus

Since you dealt with the situation, there is a (new) case in wp:ani. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Sock_of_banned_user_disrupting_wikipedia_while_record-breaking_SPI_is_still_open.Alexikoua (talk) 08:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I have some hopes we may yet hear some more from J.delanoy about this. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:59, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the situation in Massacre of Kodra turns very hot, with Zjarri. making partial 'reverts' [[8]] effectively leaving the word 'Albanophil' out, and restoring all this snippet abuse concert, in a last attempt to keep the article, with this obviously wrong exaplanation [[9]]. I believe the article should be full protected.Alexikoua (talk) 09:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Removing 2k of text without consensus isn't constructive so I reverted him to without reverting Aigest's edit. The use of the word Albanophile is editorializing.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 09:22, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually you removed it because you dont like that he is mentioned as pro-Albanian. Same weird situation about this so-called 'official report' [[10]] although you have been told that's nothing like that.Alexikoua (talk) 10:25, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Your assistance please

My memory is playing tricks on me. I should have acknowledged your quick response to my query right away. I should have acknowledged that you made excellent points -- one that even though I had been working on those articles for over five years, I had not been aware of. I should have thanked you for drawing it to my attention.

Your point about redirecting "Uighur house" was absolutely correct, and very tactfully phrased. Thanks.

But you made another, much more important point "...the reason you had the need for so many links appears to have been that you were routinely linking to things from inside literal quotes, often in cases where your link constituted an explanation not of the meaning of a term, but an "easter-egg link" trying to explain what the expression referred to in the specific context. Please check WP:MOSLINK to see why we usually don't do such links."

I don't remember reviewing WP:MOSLINK before. If I did I overlooked that I was making links that didn't comply with it. And I thank you for drawing it to my attention, and for doing so in a tactful way.

A day or two after your note I returned to the discussion fora, and IIRC, I did acknowledge that you convinced me that my redirection of the general term "Uighur house", and some other similar redirects I had created, were a mistake, and that I should have used piped links. I got a convincing comment via email at around the same time that made the same point.

I'd like to ask for more comments/opinions/assistance.

A year or so ago I started to rewrite the sections of these articles that contained the long quotes. I started to replace them with a briefer summary of what the quoted material had contained, stripping out redundancies, and written for a general audience, not a military reader. I'd generally try to create a document on wikisource, containing the original memo, and put a {{wikisource}} link in that section of the document.

After you drew my attention to the possibility my use of links within quoted material might lapse from WP:MOSLINK I decided that I should up the priority I placed on this particular initiative of mine. If I understood your easter-egg comment, then replacing those quotes with summaries of the allegations, and having the summaries include wikilinks to articles on topics mentioned in the allegations is policy-compliant?

Another contributor has challenged me on replacing the quoted material with summaries, asserting that the quoted documents are somehow "unique", and thus can't be fairly or neutrally summarized.

I am not aware of any wikipolicy which supports the premise that some WP:RS are "unique" in a way that means they can't be summarized. Neutrally written and properly referenced summaries of WP:RS are the kind of contributions we are supposed to offer, I thought. Are you aware of a wikipolicy that supports the premise some WP:RS can't be summarized?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 12:43, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

MOSMAC3

I'm going through old proposals. User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/MOSMAC3 doesn't seem active; is the plan still to have this as an active proposal or has it been superseded by Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia)? Fences&Windows 15:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I had quite forgotten this was still tagged as "proposed" and all that. It was basically just a working draft and has long been superceded by WP:NCMAC, just as you said. I've blanked it now. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Spi Guild, S.Maxim.

I added one more in this large list. If you remember this article: [[11]] was initially listed for afd, but finally was speedy deleted due to copy-vio. Suppose this is the reason why I can't find the 'afd' discussion.Alexikoua (talk) 14:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It seems that with this afd in 'Massacre of Kodra', Stupidus Maximus 'virtually declared' that he is Guildenrich. He even copy-pasted one of his sources from his past userpage in both the article and the afd.Alexikoua (talk) 21:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Uh, it's over at last. Which leaves us with the question: Who is "KengaJone"? Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure that if KengaJone messes around too much, will be reported as well. Btw, I still fail to see why Guildenrich=S.M, just because Delanoy saw that they had edited "at one point" from the same Internet Cafe. If I happen to be in that cafe, I know that I too I'm screwed in Wikipedia. WILL NEVER EDIT FROM INTERNET CAFES. --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 14:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

TPG

Could you please enforce talk page guidelines (not a forum and all that) on Talk:The Soviet Story to avoid unnecessary confrontation? Colchicum (talk) 11:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha

Thanks for removing the enforcer, well, at least you understand my inability to stay away from here. A clear addiction case. --_Sulmues ^{Let's talk} 14:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Rewriting an article

[12] So far the only advice I managed to get is to rewrite it emphasizing on the falseness of the allegations, but you know how Balkans articles are so I think that without more uninvolved opinions any changes would be reverted by the usual circus.--— ZjarriRrethues — ^talk 14:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Deja vu

[13] bah Finn Rindahl (talk) 21:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Or rather Luxo SMITHEGREC, this ip as well [14]. I've requested global lock of the account, but I don't have the time right now to clean up Xwiki - if you or some of your talk page watchers familiar with this would like to do an effort that would be grand. Best regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 21:46, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Looks like someone is accusing you of sockpuppetry at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Future Perfect at Sunrise. I'm almost certain the filer is a sock though, but I don't have much to work with. Care to comment? Elockid ^(Talk) 21:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No need to, already CU'd bagged, and tagged the obvious sock that filed it. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the update Rlevse. Closing the case. Elockid ^(Talk) 22:09, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I knew by the way it was filed it was a sock. Glad to help here. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol, this seems to become a kind of tradition ;-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The disruptors don't like those of us who make them behave! ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 22:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Kengajon

Since you were interested to check his past, it appears that User:Dan of sq:wiki isn't active some 13 months now [[15]].Alexikoua (talk) 11:00, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it really couldn't be him anyway, for various reasons. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:59, 31 May 2010 (UTC)