User talk:Horologium/December 2011

Thanks

Thank you. I am now unblocked and can edit now. Please see my talk page, here. This may well have been the work of someone hacking into an admin’s account. Please advise if an investigation shows that to be the case; I might be able to shed more light on it. Greg L (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I've responded at your page; I don't think that there is any indication that the account was compromised. 2/0 had a very anodyne boilerplate message on his userpage, regarding edits after six months of inactivity. It's been only two weeks, and it's a single questionable action. If there are subsequent actions, it may be revisited, but until then, I am not convinced that it's anything other than a bad block. Horologium (talk) 01:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Discussion?

Hi, Horologium, and thank you for your work on the unblock lists. I generally consider you sensible and forward-thinking, and was disappointed that you did not seek discussion when you found that you did not see why I blocked Greg L. Regards, - 2/0 (cont.) 07:18, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I unblocked him because it appeared that your block was not warranted or discussed, and came from nowhere. Your only contributions over the last two weeks have been to block him (without warning) and the above comment on my page. There is a thread on AN/I about this block; you have not yet addressed the discussion there, which I think would be a good idea. You blocked an editor in good standing for "disruptive editing", and nobody else sees any merit in the accusation, much less the block. Talk:Yogurt is currently on my (very short) watchlist, and while there have been some flareups during the move discussion, there was nothing that rose to the level of disruptive editing, and the editor whose edits which were closest to borderline behavior was not Greg L, so your block, as your only contribution after two weeks of inactivity, was baffling. After seeing the AN/I thread (which noted your absence), I made the decision to unblock Greg. If you had been active, I would not have unblocked without discussion. Horologium (talk) 12:37, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I support your unblock. Wheel-warring is serious, but given the lack of input from User:2over0, and the virtual unanimity of puzzlement over the decision, it was understandable to question whether it was intentional, an accident or worse. I don't see it as wheel-warring if there is a legitimate question regarding whether the action was truly intended. I hope User:2over0 will weigh in at ANI to help us understand what happened.--SPhilbrickT 14:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It is not wheel warring for an admin to undo another admin's actions, btw. It would only be wheel warring if 2/0 or another admin reblocked. Syrthiss (talk) 16:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. WHEEL states, " Wheel warring is when an administrator's action is reversed by another admin…" however, you have to read on to see that this opening phrase is potentially misleading. --SPhilbrickT 18:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

It's also arguably not wheel warring because of the ANI thread, which 2/0 had been notified of. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 23:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Barony of Caux

I've declined your A7 speedy deletion tag of Barony of Caux. While I understand the reasoning, and would fully support a PROD/AfD, I don't believe that micronations qualify for A7 speedy deletion.--Slon02 (talk) 17:29, 31 December 2011 (UTC)