Jump to content

User talk:Promethean/Archives2009/May

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


AIV

Hi Promethean, while I agree that the 3 edits so far are all vandalism, I'm inclined to see if the warnings issued have effect before escalating to a level 3 warning, let alone going straight to a block. ϢereSpielChequers 07:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Whilst we (more specifically, I) should assume good faith in this situation, I have my doubts that the user concerned will head any warning thrown his way judging by his vandalism (he is not a newbie to wikipedia, as his attempts at refferencing to avoid detection indicates). Ill keep an eye on him however.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 07:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
You will of course probably be proved right. I've watchlisted the article, it would be interesting to see some research as to how many accounts stop vandalism after each level of warning. But until that's done I'm only going straight to blocks when I spot indications of sockpuppetry or rather grosser vandalism than in that case. ϢereSpielChequers 07:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XV

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 08:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Filter

It is actually not my filter. I only changed its name to a more descriptive one. As to regular expressions, this filter has none. It only checks if some word is present in the edit summary. The filter is actually very simple. I can send you by e-mail the code of it if you are still interested. Ruslik (talk) 13:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Userpage Barnstar

The Excellent User Page Award
Even though you pilfered the design, I enjoy it immensely (and I saw yours first), so I offer you this userpage barnstar. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 04:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

ACC- JR

I was under the impresion (From the emails on the mailing list) that John Reeves was not to be demoted because he is a mailing list admin, has explained his absence and will be back within a month?   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't read any mailing lists and was not aware that he will be back within a month. As I mentioned, it is purely a security measure and he can be repromoted on request, but if you think it's appropriate, I can repromote him now. Stifle (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

User pages are not supposed to be categorized but ....

... your user page User:Promethean/Sandbox includes a template of some sort (I'm not very knowledgeable about templates) for Proxy server, that seems (weasel word) to result in that user page being categorized the same as Proxy server. 69.106.231.38 (talk) 07:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVI

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 09:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009

I have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the 3 Har Har rule at..... uh...I forgot where...but i did!. I need to be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution (or just count how many times I revert) rather than engaging in a holy crusade. If I believe this block is unjustified (which I do), I may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|UNBLOCK ME AND ILL BE YOUR BEST FRIEND :D}} below, I should probably read the guide to appealing blocks first, but I'm an expert anyways.}}

Note: This is Promethean's and is not an altered talkpage comment. The original block notice was removed per WP:BLANKING and can be found in the page history

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Promethean/Archives2009 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not violated 3RR at all, [1][2] was reverting one edit where I wanted further review by another administrator (and got it), a perfectly reasonable request. [3] and [4] was a completely different reversion edit where I was reverting the alteration of an archived section which is against our community norms (and possibly a guideline, not sure) and it is well known that you do not edit archived sections, surely like vandalism reverting alteration of an archive and asking for a second admins opinion should not put one over 3RR.

Decline reason:

You were warring, and you broke WP:3RR. As Deskana, this is a valid block. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Only "simple vandalism" is exempted. Adding comments into archives is not "simple vandalism". This is a valid block. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 23:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Fine, So i just have to wait a day before I can continue reverting that addition which is agaisnt the most basic of community norms.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 00:34, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I suggest discussing the situation with the other editor, rather than planning to edit war. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Its not edit warring, He should not have altered an archive and I'll revert accordingly. However, since you have told him not to do it i doubt there will be an edit war. I also note that the person who most recently had altered teh archive implied he would have not done so had he seen DreamGuy's talk page, Which implies that after a revert (by me) he wont revert back.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 10:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I also see that you seem to be keeping and eye on DreamGuy, I appreciate this and hope that your guidance has some impact on his behaviour. However, Another edit like this from DreamGuy and I wont be able to turn a blind eye (IE It will have to go to WP:AE and given that he just narrowly missed sanctions yesterday, it wont look pretty). Best of luck   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't see anything in that edit worth getting worked up about. Generally I've found treating others as you'd wish to be treated works well here, assuming good faith, and accepting that people use more colourful language or are blunter than we would sometimes like ourselves. Verbal chat 11:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I really, really strongly suggest you not edit war there. Leave it alone. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Concur, please do not redo the edit that caused you to be blocked. You went beyond 4 reverts, after being warned at 2, and were correctly blocked. Quickly looking at your history seems to show that you're generally a good editor. My advice would be to drop this dispute with DG and simply move on, and return to being a productive editor. We're not here to fight but to improve the project. A small edit to an archived section, moments after it had been closed, is not very controversial and not worth getting (repeatedly) blocked over. Verbal chat 11:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I have no intention to edit war, as I've already sunk to that low once within the last couple of days and once is enough. But I will attempt enforce what KillerChihuahua said on DreamGuys talk page on a matter of moral principals.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 11:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
All I can do is advise, and ask, you not to. Thanks, Verbal chat 12:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Of course you don't want me to do it, cause its your edit I'll be reverting in less than 9 hours lol, so please don't pretend to be giving me advice out of concern for me.. But again, even KC said the alteration should not have been made.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 12:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I also said you should not revert the addition. Odd how you citing me on one half, and ignoring me on the other half. Please note also your "please don't pretend" to Verbbal is rude. KillerChihuahua?!? 12:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Striked, Yes I agree perhaps I was a bit rude and I have no doubt that Verbal is a good editor, Please accept my apologies.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 12:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:AE is on my watchlist. Should you continue to editwar there after the block expires, I will block you indefinitely.  Sandstein  13:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

We'll just see about that.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 13:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Promethean, you need to stop and think about what you are saying/doing. You are upset; I get that. So am I. KC is being - and I will be extraordinarily charitable here - a bit more heavy-handed than usual, but Verbal is right. DreamGuy's revert of an archive was stupid, petty and ultimately, superfluous, but after he reverted you the first time, you were to take it to a neutral admin (of course, we know who that isn't) and let them deal with it. Edit-warring is useless, as the other person clearly isn't convinced by your edit summaries. Be the smarter of the two and learn that lesson now. If you get indef blocked, that will be one less person who knows the correct history of what happens here. That will be one less person editing positively, and that will hurt the Project.
If you still feel the edit to the archive is inappropriate, take it to AN; most of them know what's what, and will either fix the problem, or chalk it up to yet another near miss, to be remembered the next time. Don't let your justifiable frustration trip you up. Go edit an article that has no connection to DG whatsoever, some happy article where the only thing you have to wade through is poor grammar, spelling and citation templates. Take some time to refocus. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVII

Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 20:06, 23 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.

WP:DRAMA

Please do not contravene the consensus established here. Mike R (talk) 13:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

That is not a consensus given the number of participants compared to the two previous RFDs that indicated keeping it to ANI. Most people who use that redirect probably know it for ANI, not some essay that no one has time to read. Also, To be quite blunt, nothing cheeses me off more than users who continually RFD a redirect until they get a result they like, this would indeed seem to be the case.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 13:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Your word alone is insufficient to demonstrate that that RfD did not reflect community consensus. The redirect has sat undisturbed since then, until your revert today. The earlier RfDs were in 2007 and 2008, while the later on was in 2009. Consensus can change, else we would still have a Gay Nigger Association of America article today. I'm not sure where the best place to seek further input is, so I have posted to ANI (moved to Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard). If I have misrepresented your arguments there, please correct. Please do not revert further until it is apparent that the RfD was wrong and that community consensus really is to redirect to ANI. Mike R (talk) 14:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Functionaries

FYI, I mentioned a change you made at Wikipedia_talk:Bot_Approvals_Group#Functionaries.3F. – Quadell (talk) 14:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: ACC

The similar account had more than 10 edits and that is part of the criteria, correct? --T3chl0v3r (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

yes but common sense applies. the user had around 15 edits with most being to a talk page. It would have still been acceptable to make the account   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 14:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Your advice got me suspended. See Request #30103. Do you have any idea when I might get unsuspended? T3chl0v3r (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
No, your own stupidity got you suspended. You made an account that was similar to one made in the last couple of months, which wasn't my advice at all. This shows you did not read the ACC guide as my notice had requested or YOU misinterpreted what I did and did not say. Chances are the suspension is is for a few days.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 22:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I guess I misinterpreted your information. Yes, I've read the guide. Also, who can I talk to to apologize for my stupidity, as you so bluntly put it? T3chl0v3r (talk) 23:04, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
You may be interested in this user box I've created for people with the Account Creator user flag: {{User accountcreator}} This was created to reflect the one for rollback, I know you Already have a user box for this, but you may consider using this one. T3chl0v3r (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Talk to stawalkerster (On WP:IRC)   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 23:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I suspended you because you created an account which was too similar to an active account, with an edit two days before you created the account. Two days is a long way away from a year. Read the guide, like you were asked to when you created your tool account, and when asked to by Promethean. Then I might consider unsuspending you. Although given your apparent failure to follow instructions, I'm cautious about even considering that. Stwalkerster [ talk ] 00:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 06:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Heads Up

Your edit history with DremGuy are mentioned as part of the discussion at WP:ANI#User:DreamGuy and User:174.0.39.30 68.146.162.11 (talk) 00:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup newsletter XVII.V

This is just a quick reminder that the round ends this Friday, May 29, 2009. I wanted to let you guys know the current standings. If you are very close, but not close enough, work as hard as possible these next two days. Pool leaders are listed as usual, and under the 10 wildcards, are competitors that are still fighting for a spot. Also, if you currently have any un-reviewed GAN's up and you'd like them to be reviewed and counted for this round, you must place them on the appropriate thread of the WikiCup talk page.

Pool A
  1. Wales Shoemaker's Holiday (647)
Pool B
  1. Colombia ThinkBlue (247)
Pool C
  1. Sweden Theleftorium (455)
Pool D
  1. Denmark Candlewicke (539)
Pool E
  1. Mexico Durova (479)
Pool F
  1. Switzerland Sasata (961)
Current Wildcards
  1. United States Useight (393)
  2. Iceland Scorpion0422 (372)
  3. Thailand Rlevse (329)
  4. Japan Wrestlinglover (307)
  5. Cambodia Paxse (285)
  6. Maryland Ottava Rima (248)
  7. Mitchazenia (226)
  8. Republic of Ireland Juliancolton (181)
  9. Michigan the_ed17 (179)
  10. Isle of Man J Milburn (168)
  11. Confederate States of America Bedford (156)
  12. Toronto Gary King (147)
  13. New South Wales 97198 (142)
  14. Luxembourg Ceranthor (111)
  15. India Tinucherian (106)
  16. Vanuatu Matthewedwards (98)

 GARDEN ,  iMatthew :  Chat  , and The Helpful One The Helpful Bot 00:52, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom

Hi. I think it should actually be a a request for amendment. My bad, sorry about that. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy Notice

Thanks for the heads up. If anymore comments are needed, I would be happy to give my thoughts on the matter. Is there an open discussion going on or is it limited to a few select parties? --Nacl11 (talk) 16:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to comment here and here   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 16:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Can you think of no other solution to your problem but edit warring? Hipocrite (talk) 17:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

You know, I said to Deskana that i was probably wasting my time on WP:AE and despite laying out all the damming proof, he still is going to be flarring other editors. And what do you know? I was right yet again...   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I think if you came with clean hands you would have fared better. But that's just my uninformed opinion. Hipocrite (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I actually came with clean hands, but what do you know, It only takes one person for the gloves to come off.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Er, whadja do?

Re this? Where did you move the matter to? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request_to_Amend_Prior_Case:_DreamGuy_2 - Its now a request for amendment, not clarification   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

What's the difference? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Btw, you should let DG know of the new locale. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Basically, Clarification only will give an interpretation of whats already on the case page. Amendment allows whats on the case page (IE the remedies and enforcement) to be changed. An amendment needs to be done to make an AFD ban a method of enforcement.   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 15:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I see you have withdrawn the AE Amendment section,. Care to explain what's going on? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

eh

Hey Xeno, How you been man? Long time no see, Its funny i was just looking at your userpage when you rocked up, kinda like the sixth sence eh? :)   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 12:54, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Not to bad, you? Sixth sense indeed! You know I'll never take you off my watchlist ;> –xenotalk 14:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

- (talk) 08:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVIII

Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 14:40, 31 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Promethean/Archives2009/May&oldid=1252115916"