User talk:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

User:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
User talk:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry
User:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry/Awards
User talk:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry/Archive

East London meetups[edit]

Hi,I am sitting in an almost empty Waitrose Café, Canary Wharf, on a Wednesday evening. I wandered around looking for a suitable place for a meet up: Unfortunately the Starbucks outside the library shuts at 7:00 pm. I think this place would be fine - almost empty, reasonable price with free coffee if you buy something (i.e. a cake?). After all the talk on WMUK list I thought it would be better to do something. What I would suggest is perhaps an East London meetup on the last Wednesday of the month, starting wed 24 June. What do you think? Leutha (talk) 19:44, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Wednesday is tricky, I'm at work! The Starbucks is nice but a bit corporate. Waitrose is nice too, but again... maybe there's somewhere with a more "community" feel? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (Message me) 19:53, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Well I was thinking about somewhere in the Canary Wharf area, which pretty much winds up being corporate - but easy to get to. Leutha (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation block arbitration proposed decision[edit]

Hi Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, in the open Sockpuppet investigation block arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you.  Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 21:00, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Have someone read this?--115ash→(☏) 10:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sockpuppet investigation block closed[edit]

An arbitration case regarding Sockpuppet investigations block has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. The CheckUser permissions of Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs) are revoked. He may seek to regain them only by the usual appointment methods.
  2. The oversight permissions of Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs) are revoked. He may seek to regain them only by the usual appointment methods.
  3. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk · contribs) is desysopped. He may regain the tools at any time through a successful request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 17:42, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sockpuppet investigation block closed
  • A great pity that it was decided not to determine this before the UK General Election. Giano (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Hi Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry, I have removed your adminship in accordance with the ArbCom decision. Good luck for the future. Acalamari 18:47, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
I am really disappointed by the decisions regarding the Shapps business. This seems to me an over-reaction and likely to discourage acts of courage to defend the integrity of Wikipedia.

You must be feeling miserable, and I know how proper and honourable you are in your Wikipedia roles and what an exemplary Wikipedian you are so this will be horrible for you. Please don't desert us! Wikipedia and its community needs you - this WILL be history quite soon and the respect people have for you will endure. YellowFratello (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I've told you elsewhere how I feel about this decision - I hope you'll stick around and do good work as you always have. Next time I'm in London, I'm buying. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 09:46, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
Just thought I'd drop you a message of support and frankly I don't agree with the censure they have put on you. It was a mistake and it wasn't deliberate. Personally I've never been as much of a contributor on here to even gain high status on here and frankly, considering how faceless and emotionless and egotistic most of those bureaucrats seem to be, I won't blame you for feeling bad about the outcome of the investigation. Anyway, I hope you can maybe find time to drop me a PM some time or if not I hope you can find some comfort in my expression of support.--Jacob Hellflames (talk) 10:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
I think you're wrong; it wasn't a mistake, and it was deliberate; and Chase-Me lying about it didn't help. I think its a big shame that Chase-Me didn't have the grace to do the inevitable unblock of Contribsx himself; it would have made his last admin act sensible William M. Connolley (talk) 11:17, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going to comment on the rights and wrongs of the case, or the decision made. That said, I hope you can stay strong and return to Wikipedia as a good editor, because that's what we're here for, isn't it? Writing new articles, improving existing ones, fighting vandalism - there's still plenty to do even without the extra tools that adminship brings. Mjroots (talk) 05:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I am very sorry to hear of your desysopping (is that even a proper English word?). I think it was over-punishment, even assuming all was true. You have my permission to contact me by email should you go back to RfA. Bearian (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Request to Correct User Page[edit]

This Month in GLAM: May 2015[edit]

This month in GLAM logo.png

Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 23:16, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ludovic Kennedy.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Ludovic Kennedy.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)