User talk:Laszlo Panaflex

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

Reverting undiscussed moves[edit]

Re: Your recent comments at Talk:Siege of Constantinople (Rus' Siege of Constantinople) (860). If you wish to revert a recent undiscussed move (as was the case for this article), you do not need to go through the full RM process even if the move requires an admin (per WP:RMUM). You can propose the move in the Requesting technical moves section of the RM page. —  AjaxSmack  16:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for staying on top of this, Laszlo Panaflex. I've found that there have been so many seriously contentious moves, refactoring, and blanking of content on articles on anything surrounding Eastern European Slavs since the recent events in Ukraine that it's impossible to stay on top of the mess being made. There's been a tidal wave of new POV warriors, IP hoppers, and SPAs who've been unable to get a look-in on the current affairs articles who are using the opportunity to create havoc with established, consensus-based articles that I can't stay on top of the editing chaos. Sigh. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
It does get frustrating. I've been dealing with a wave of Mongolian editors/puppets that more or less put me off WP for a while. Most of them have been blocked over the past few days, thankfully. I should not have even gotten involved in this current KR dust up at all. Just that every time I see a newly created red-linked editor EW'ing without explanation I'm compelled to respond. Sigh, also (!) Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 00:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
2 steps forward, six steps back. I wish I didn't care... but, until dementia wipes my woes away, I am compelled to persevere despite common sense. Don't let the hordes get you down. Cheers! --Iryna Harpy (talk) 02:24, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Wow. Just learned that over 50 sock accounts leading back to one disruptive user were just blocked. Horde, indeed. No wonder I'm feeling so worn out. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 03:55, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
There have been a huge number reported that haven't even made it to CU due to the sheer volume. The Ukrainian crisis + Russophobes +Russophiles +Western Asian POVers +anti-US +anti-anti-anti have swollen into a veritable tidal wave. As Daggett would say, "This is nuts!" --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:10, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)