User talk:Tournesol

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


Problem IP user on Swedish animation films & related actors[edit]

I see you reverting recently; do you happen to know whether this is a banned user or not? Yngvadottir (talk) 12:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC) ... RHaworth has now blocked the IP since is obviously the same person and is globally blocked. I'd still appreciate any information you have on the case. Someone came to my talk page a long time ago regarding this person and for all I know it was you. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Yngvadottir:The IP-jumping person behind the edits is a autistic Swedish man in his lower twenties. He is obsessed with a few series of animated films (e.g. Peter-No-Tail, Frog Ball) and with their creators (e.g. Thomas Funck) and voice actors, and he has been quite a nuisance for several years since he adds nonsensical texts written in a babbling almost-Swedish and similar lists of voice actors. I'm not sure about what to do about him. Talk to his parents and ask them not to give him access to a computer? - Tournesol (talk) 08:56, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Since he edits with IPs, a number of editors have rescued his new articles by moving them from talk pages to mainspace, and I have now watchlisted Frog Ball to remind me that it is another very poor article that I need to fix up if no one else has. Is there a long-term abuse page anywhere? Since IPs he is using are being globally blocked? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:44, 28 January 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) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Tournesol. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Attempted WP:OUTING?[edit]

Please explain what you mean here - that I am "blatantly trying to market" myself. I'm giving you this chance to explain yourself before reporting you for attempted outing. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

That's not outing - I haven't got access to any unpublished information about you, in fact no information except what is easily obtainable by just observing your edit pattern. You have never told us who you are and you have declined (nay, refused) to state your relationship to the bunch of cabaret dudes that you've been promoting so heavily for so many years at Swedish Wikipedia before you were permanently banned from editing there.
I don't care who you are, I care about the edits you do, and sneaking in stuff about your activities (or your friends' activities, or perhaps both since I recall that you've stated that several people are sharing the same Wikpedia account) in articles about extremely famous article subjets isn't improving the encyclopedia, it's parasitic piggybacking, making Wikpedia a less useful encyclopedia in order to promote something you have a strong conflict of intrerest in. - Tournesol (talk) 15:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Whatever happened to me at Swedish Wikipedia, after my being subjected to many years of WP:Harassment and an almost total lack of WP:Good faith toward me in the huge amount of work I did there, is irrelevant here.
You used the word “self-promotion” about me, and that’s the only reason I wrote to you and asked for an explanation of ‘’’that’’’, nothing else. That’s what this section on your talk page is intended to be about.
In writing “blatant self-promotion by Serge Woodzing”, you can only reasonably have meant one of two things:
  1. I have ‘’blatantly’’ promoted User:SergeWoodzing or a person named Serge Woodzing, a name which is unknown outside of Wikimedia projects. (Seems ridiculous, unless you mean I’m promoting myself as a user of exceptional merit – and such behavior on my part would certainly be weird, but hardly prohibited.)
  2. You are definitely inferring that somebody among the living people whose articles I have worked on, or whom I have mentioned in sourced text, or provided images of or by, is known to you as ‘’the real me’’, and that I have ‘’blatantly’’ promoted that real person. (Attempted outing, as I see it.)
I have contributed hundreds of images to Commons and to a few Wikipedia language projects for many years (including Swedish Wikipedia, where it’s worth noting that almost none of them have been removed since I was thrown out last September). I have also contributed a lot of text to articles, rarely making any sourcing errors in recent years.
Many of those images are of a large amount of more or less famous persons, as some of the text also is about. Some of those people are personal acquaintances of mine in real life, a few of them are friends of mine and of people I know, such as of the main photographers, owners and donors of all those images. Many of them, however, have no personal connection to me of any kind (you’ll never know which are which, I suppose).
To many constructive Wikipedians, who sincerely believe in the basic good-faith principle, the vast majority of my contributions of image and text would be, and have been, considered valuable, especially, I might venture to claim, when they have concerned the most famous individuals. I’m very pleased about that, of course.
Some day, I can only hope, perhaps you, and all your many friends and cohorts at Swedish Wikipedia who have given me such a hard time for so long, assumably for sticking out, might find it in the goodness of your hearts to begin to appreciate most of my work, rather than being so negative about it and trying to trash and bash me at every turn.
I’m always grateful to be helped in correcting my errors (as we all should be), when the help is constructive and given without sarcasm, innuendo, insults, obvious ill will and unfounded, belligerent accusations like “blatant self-promotion by Serge Woodzing”.
You probably deserve better than having to read something like this. I’m sure I deserve better than having to write it. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:22, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
It is well established that the user SergeWoodzing has a WP:Conflict of interest when it comes to Lars Jacob. It was one of the reasons for his permanent ban from Swedish WP. To point that out is in not an outing. /Elzo 90 (talk) 20:31, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
It is not well established, except among a certain cabal at svWP. Try to be nice, will you please? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
I respectfully repeat: this is about the phrase "blatant self-promotion by Serge Woodzing" (self-promotion), and what that's supposed to mean. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:35, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Please put your complaints where they belong[edit]

I have answered you just like your boss (Yger/Wapne) at Swedish Wiki answers me. By erasing. But fair enough, as you are a contributor here as well. Which article do you refer to ? Please put your complaints there, so I can see what you mean. But why take up this 6-7 old matter here and now ? Cheers Boeing720 (talk) 04:50, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

By the way, if you are able to (technically), please go to , "historia" (history) and go far back, May or June 2008 or 2009, about "Eftermäle" (Aftermath) and you will find the root to all sad things which happened thereafter. Out of the blue came Wapne or something like that (Yger today, I guess) and told me "to stop discuss the matter - or I will block you". (In very nice put English, by me here and now) Now I know for certain that I used the talk-page just as intended. As we do here. But your boss doesn't like to talk about anything. In all Swedish Wiki has grown huge, by article count. But mainly due to semi-automatic translation of leads from this and some other Wikis. I guess. Please do not take this personally, I hope and trust you can do good things in English. Boeing720 (talk) 05:10, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
By beginning your jeremiad by claiming that Yger is my "boss" (and then repeating this preposterous claim) you make it more than obvious that you aren't interested in the truth, just in rationalizing your block from SVWP. The net worth of your contributions was negative, you didn't change your behaviour despite many many attempts to explain what you were doing wrong and - as far as I could tell - you didn't acknowledge that what you did was a problem. When you realized that you were going to be blocked you explicitly asked to have your account deleted and since you couldn't cope with being the problem, you invented a conspiracy and now Yger is to blame. Fine. I think anyone who reads your talk page (and its archives) here at ENWP will be able to draw their own conclusions. - Tournesol (talk) 08:22, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
I brought Wapne/Yger up solely because you had complaints which had to do with old matters at sw wiki, many years ago now. I most certainly do not think that the Swedish admin mentioned is your boss here at this Wikipedia. If you really are interested in how I was blocked and eventually "resign" , is the only way to go back through the entire history (and the history files at sw wiki). From where it all began. The Second World War didn't begin by the Operation Barbarossa, even though some might think so, still. If I had began here at English Wiki around 2008 or 2009 instead, would nothing of what happened to me at SW Wiki never occurred. And I'm far from alone of having had such experiences there. But this is not the time nor the place to discuss Swedish Wiki a long time ago. Cheers and continue to work for the "World Wide Wikipedia" ! Boeing720 (talk) 19:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)