User talk:Seicer: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Badagnani: new section
Line 159: Line 159:
|}
|}
:<small>Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? &ndash; [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter|It's all here.]] —[[User:Rschen7754bot|Rschen7754bot]] ([[User talk:Rschen7754bot|talk]]) 20:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)</small>
:<small>Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? &ndash; [[Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter|It's all here.]] —[[User:Rschen7754bot|Rschen7754bot]] ([[User talk:Rschen7754bot|talk]]) 20:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)</small>

== Badagnani ==

I have opened an ANI discussion about this editor at [[WP:ANI#Wikistalking]]. Please feel free to look at this post and comment as you feel is necessary. --[[User:Jerem43|Jeremy]] (<small> [[User Talk:Jerem43|Blah blah...]]</small>) 00:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:16, 29 July 2008

Credit goes to East718.
Credit goes to East718.


This is my talk page! Heres a few tips:

  • Pissed about your page being deleted? Deletion review is where you want to be.
  • Rude or inflammatory messages will be removed without notice.
  • Lighten up people. If you are here to comment on any sarcasm or jokes that I have made, then take it elsewhere.
  • Feel free to leave any other comments, messages, critcisms or thanks below!

Archives: 2006 | 01 | 02 | 2007 | 03 | 04 | 2008 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10

"I think we really need to much more strongly insist on a pleasant work environment and ask people quite firmly not to engage in that kind of sniping and confrontational behavior. We also need to be very careful about the general mindset of "Yeah, he's a jerk but he does good work". The problem is when people act like that, they cause a lot of extra headache for a lot of people and drive away good people who don't feel like dealing with it. Those are the unseen consequences that we need to keep in mind." --Jimbo Wales (talk) 22:51 5 February 2008

Re:Your eye is needed

The Urban exploration article is now on my watch list. I do think more needs to be said about various risks and costs. But I think the red-link user is off on some personal crusade, for reasons known only to himself, along with apparently being unwilling to actually contribute any text. I bet everyone has done some "urban exploring" at one time or another. I used to sneak into abandoned ballparks from time to time. Not very dangerous, and theoretically subject to arrest (even though they left the gate open), but when you're young you think you can do anything, and nothing ever happened. I'll keep a watch on this article and see if I can help. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. There used to be a lot of activity at the article but it has died down in the past year. Hopefully we can get more eyes to take a look at it. I'd do a lot more, in terms of sourcing, but I don't have all that much time to dig through AccessNews right now. seicer | talk | contribs 13:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After that initial flurry, it seems to have died down again after the combatants kind of came to an accord. Do you think the issue is settled sufficiently? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:49, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator's noticeboard

For your reference, some of your recent protections are being discussed at the noticeboard. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 16:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, at least I was informed of this thread. seicer | talk | contribs 16:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing protected article while dispute is ongoing

I don't think you should have moved that template down while keeping the article protected. Can we please change this? Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the POV template? I was in belief that you were only interested in a perceived bias under the Popularity section, which deals with the various socio/economic issues regarding urban exploration, and not on the article as a whole. There was some confusion about this on the talk pages, and I moved it in hope that there can be a little easier understanding on the underlying issue. If I am in error, let me know and I'll move it back up. seicer | talk | contribs 16:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are. The POV issue is with the article, not the section. My view is that there needs to be a new section to discuss the legal issues (could be called "legal aspects" or "legal issues" or something, that seems to be a popular heading in other articles). Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is the first time I heard about the new section -- I thought you were wanting to lump this somehow into the lead or in one of the existing subsections. That said, I'm wholly in favor of this if you want to put up a draft on the talk page. seicer | talk | contribs 16:31, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, you and Brotherj jumped to that conclusion without any evidence on my part. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seicer, it does appear that you were fairly involved with editing the Urban exploration article, so using tools there is probably not a good idea. See WP:UNINVOLVED. The protection itself may have been good, it's just that you probably shouldn't have been the one to place it. In the future, feel free to contact me or some other uninvolved admin about it? --Elonka 18:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and that is what I planned to do after today's incident given my involvement since the article's infancy (or close to it); it was one of the first articles I improved upon after coming to WP, and one that holds a substantial interest to me. I was going to post something to that effect, but I've been in and out of meetings all day. Everyone makes mistakes. In the future, I would like to have this come to my talk page instead of two identical threads started elsewhere (one of which I was not informed of) to quiet down the drama -- especially since one of the entrants has been involved with me in the past. But I would like resolve at the article, and outside opinions seem to be far and few between. I may step this up to DR since at this point, we are only spinning our wheels in the mud. seicer | talk | contribs 18:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

Hey, just to give you a heads up. I posted a 3RR warning on PLW's talk page and figured this would be left at that. He has then reverted it a couple times and then turned it into some kind of vague threat from me. Here's the diff's: [1], [2], [3]. Personally I would not care less as long as he had taken the semi friendly warning on board and left it at that. Yet, he seems to be taking all this very personally and is trying to make me look like the bad guy? I even had recommended take a quick break to cool down. I'm going to back away from his page for a bit, but do you recommend anything more then that? Brothejr (talk) 22:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Location of person

I know the exact location of the person who made that "suicide threat". Sending info to you via email. Also telling you how I know. RgoodermoteNot an admin  06:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't get to follow up on it as I had hoped as I had to leave town a bit early (i.e. 3 AM) for a hasty photo shoot in another state. I did do a follow up call today and it was much the same, and I'm pretty sure that this is going to lead to a non-action given the history of the case. Thanks for the information and I'll keep it in mind on future cases! seicer | talk | contribs 00:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it probably will result in a non-action. By the way, that tool is not completely accurate. It is extremely close though. Happy editing. RgoodermoteNot an admin  01:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In other news...

The large smiling graphic you have on your userpages - what is it? The description on the image page doesn't seem to explain it. I've seen it in many places on the internet.TheKhakinator (talk) 15:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graphic created by User:east718. seicer | talk | contribs 15:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that a smiley that frequents an ever-so-popular image board that I dare not speak the name of? HeroThar. (talk) 08:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rampid Interactive, Outwar, Crowns of Power Deleted

Hello Seicer ~

My name is Mark LePine, General Manager of Rampid Interactive. I'm assuming you're the administrator who deleted all of the wikipages I created a few months ago. I guess I should start by apologizing for not implementing the proper formatting. I'm not trying to blatantly advertise any of the above, I'm just trying to get them on the wikimap. I'm probably not even formatting this correctly, but I didn't even realize there was an entire language associated with posting. I was just typing like it was a word document. I figured out that you need to sign everything with tildas... that's a start!
So what do I need to do with our pages to ensure that they stay?
Is there an easier way to talk with someone about this than through a wikipage? Like a phone or instant messenger?
Thanks for helping us learn the process!
~ Mark

--Rampid (talk) 16:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this? Landon1980 (talk) 15:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was quick. Thank you, Landon1980 (talk) 15:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Crossthets ANi

I think Crossthets may be an alt account. A "noob" as he claims to be wouldn't ignore that the map isn't provocative, and wouldn't ignore what admins like FutPer say. What do you think? Beam 02:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! In May, you had deleted an article about the Dollis Hill Synagogue due to copyright violations in the text. I wanted to alert you that I have rewritten the article and restored it to Wikipedia. The new article makes no textual reference to the source that was the core of the deletion -- it is merely cited as an external link. The new article has three different referenced sources and should not pose any CSD or AfD problems. I wanted to let you know this, in the event you were wondering why deleted material was suddenly back online. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 02:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USEDfan??

Another one? Special:Contributions/Mister_Muffin. Nouse4aname (talk) 10:19, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged topic ban

When you get confirmation from someone you can believe that I have never been topic banned, don't apologize. The history of this article indicates that whenever a false accusation is proven false, no apology is ever given. Kossack4Truth (talk) 15:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If your reading comprehension is up to par, I did not state you were currently under a topic ban. I asked the question if you were. seicer | talk | contribs 16:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 3RRN board

[4] - I believe that was uncalled for, mate. You went over my head and dismissed my decision when I plainly made the point about it being not a 3RR violation. By "Stale" I mean the diffs are plainly out of date. Please inform me if you're going to change a decision that I have made on the 3RRN board next time. Thank you. ScarianCall me Pat! 15:30, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned stale yet there is no clear violation of 3RR. Edit warring? Perhaps. But given who was reporting it, it should be dismissed as nothing more than piss in the wind. Hence why there was no violation. I didn't dismiss your earlier decision, but revised it to be more specific and correct. seicer | talk | contribs 16:52, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing can be "correct" in an apparently subjective argument so... Please see my guide for admins on the 3RRN board here just in case you're new to the 3RRN board. Thank you. (And remember to tell your fellow admins if you change any of their decisions. It's polite etiquette and it prevents wheel warring. Cheers.) ScarianCall me Pat! 17:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, not new but I just don't take care of a lot of cases. I'd call it stale _and_ a non-3RR violation, as stated, but I won't overwrite what's already been noted. Thanks, seicer | talk | contribs 17:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it strange how reverts within the past 48 hours are described as "stale," but conduct from a month ago produces a topic ban? Kossack4Truth (talk) 20:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Totally different thing Kossack, not the place to talk about it anyway. Feel free to bring it up at my talk page so you don't disturb Seicer.
Seicer: I wanted to apologise for earlier for getting defensive about that 3RRN report result. I just felt like I'd done an okay job on it. I'm sorry if you found my behaviour to be slightly aggressive. Sorry again. ScarianCall me Pat! 22:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comment to K4T on this and the section above.
You tried to evade the proposed topic ban (of several month) by "retiring" your account for 20 days. The topic ban still stands and you just freshened it up today. Also you shouldn't talk about other editors to "defend" yourself since it is about you, and pointing the finger to others behavior doesn't change anything since the ANI is (again to make it clear) about you so deal with it. --Floridianed (talk) 22:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USEDfan....

And another...Special:Contributions/Mr_Munchking. By the way, is it best to report these to you rather than suspected socks, as they aren't causing immediate disruption, or would you rather not be bothered by this? Nouse4aname (talk) 08:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind. I'll eventually step this up to ANI since the socks return on an almost daily basis, and every page can't be protected. seicer | talk | contribs 11:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Alcoholics Anonymous Edit Wars

I have added a some factual information to the article that has been well researched on the opening page of the History of Alcoholics Anonymous. When you locked the page down this information was left intact. The editing war continues with Mr. Miles who constantly deletes my contributions. The purpose of the Wiki is to provide factual information. Not to sell a program. I am tired of being set up as the bad guy . My editing skills have greatly improved and My research is well based and founded. You can check the references. --MisterAlbert (talk) 22:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Sorry My I forgot the bracket the Topic. --MisterAlbert (talk) 22:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We could definitely use your help again on the AA article Seicer. As you suggested myself and the other editors Kipoc and Scarpy have attempted to find consensus on the talk pages which we did easily. However the individual MisterAlbert, using that account and under cover of his other accounts Melville Sitter, Fred Woofy, 207.194.108.93 and 207.232.97.13 continues to ignore our agreement. This individual makes personal attacks on myself and Scarpy and continues to edit disruptively (bombarding the article with low quality edits and refusing to explain them on the talk page), see Talk:Alcoholics_Anonymous. Again, can you help. Thanks. Mr Miles (talk) 22:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USRD Newsletter, Issue 5

Apologies for the late delivery; here is the June edition of the newsletter.

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 5 • 21 June 2008About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here.Rschen7754bot (talk) 20:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Badagnani

I have opened an ANI discussion about this editor at WP:ANI#Wikistalking. Please feel free to look at this post and comment as you feel is necessary. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]