|
In regards to [ this], and similar boilerplate keep messages you've placed on Mr. O'Keeffe's AfDs: We don't stop a guy from having opinions, nor do we assume he's out to disruptively make a point. Whether or not you agree with Kevin does not determine whether or not he is doing what he believes is right, and in most other cases it appears that he is making good choices. Please stop using these boilerplate keeps, as they are actually disrupting the AfD process to make a point. Cheers, and thank you. lifebaka ++ 14:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
When you make arguments in an AfD that an article satisfies the general notability guidelines or entertainers guidelines, you should probably provide some evidence through reliable sources. For example, when you deprodded the Alex Devine article, I'm wondering where this significant coverage of hers is by reliable sources because trust me, I looked. I also wonder what aspect of ENTERTAINER the article satisfies and whether it can be verified by a reliable source. Morbidthoughts ( talk) 00:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello!!!!
Please note that people who nominate article for deletion generally know basic notability guidelines. So just saying a particular article meets
Wp:GNG or
Wp:ENT is not enough, make sure to indicate what part of guidelines does it actually meet. Rescuing an article is not as simple as that.
regards Hitro talk 17:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Please reply at above discussion. Just strolling around to vote keep without any point is not an accepted behavior. You are disrupting AfD discussion on Wikipedia. Most of your votes are dubious. Hitro talk 12:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Hitro talk 15:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion involving you at WP:ANI#User:Chuthya is not assuming good faith. If you are simply going from AFD to AFD and PROD to PROD blindly trying to cancel out a particular user's contributions, that is a violation of the WP:HOUND policy and is blockable disruption - so please stop. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 16:40, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to
Jon & Kate Plus 8, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use
the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the
welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Stop. The show will never, ever, ever be in past tense. Ever. Please see
WP:MOSTV. It will always be "J&K+8 is" never "J&K+8 was" so stop changing that. Further, saying that the show is over or production has halted is complete
original research. TLC has suspended filming the children, not producing the show, until they can talk to the parents. TLC has also never once said the show name "Kate Plus Eight" was no longer valid. They have said they are talking to the parents about the issue of filming. To remove it is also
original research.
13
2
12:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Please
assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on
Jon & Kate Plus 8. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. I'm upping this to a three. You are NOT assuming good faith in the least. I gave my reasons for changing your edit in the edit summary and CITED all of my information (something you did not do). You turned around and reverted it as vandalism with this edit summary "vandalism, removing cited information." I did no such thing. In fact, your revert removed multiple citations. Further, you slapped me with a 3RR warning when I haven't violated it yet. If you continue, I will bring this behavior to the administrators' attention. You have not bothered to discuss this with me once and that is completely unacceptable and makes it look as though you believe you
own the page. I suggest you take a step back, cool down, and discuss this with me.
13
2
12:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Ani. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Jon & Kate Plus 8. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 ( talk) 20:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Toddst1 ( talk) 13:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The Half Barnstar | ||
For cooperating with Thirteen squared on Jon & Kate Plus 8, I award you this left half of a barnstar; Thirteen squared will get the right half. Great work! Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D 20:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC) |
Edits such as this, this, and this are troubling. Is it your intent to use that biography of a living person to harass or attack the subject of that article? user:J aka justen ( talk) 16:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
(←) Per your suggestion, I've raised the issue here. You may wish to comment further there. user:J aka justen ( talk) 18:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Blocked for one day for WP:POINT and WP:BLP violations at article David Shankbone. Cirt ( talk) 19:22, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I feel that this block was out of process. My edits to the David Shankbone were completely within policy as were my attempts to resolve issues in talk. Chuthya ( talk) 19:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Edits were clearly disruptive and WP:POINTy. (On a side note, I'm not 100% certain how the word is transcribed into English, but your username looks very similar to a well-known Hindi curse word). OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:50, 23 October 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.
Response Edits? There was one edit to add the picture of the goat taken by Shankbone which was reverted. I did not edit war on this issue, and have not argued for that specific image's inclusion. In what way can this be construed as disruption to prove a point? Chuthya ( talk) 04:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Tick, tock, tick, tock, timed block.... Chuthya ( talk) 13:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below.
Bigtimepeace |
talk |
contribs
20:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I agree to discuss prior to any further edits to the David Shankbone article that involve adding images. Chuthya ( talk) 22:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You do not appear to understand the reason for your block, which is harrassment of a living person through disruptive edits to their biography. Should you make more disruptive edits to that page, expect to be blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Sandstein 12:31, 24 October 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.
Could someone (especially the blocking admin) please explain to me why adding images that the subject of the article contributed under a free use license to the subject's biography with the purpose of illustrating the subject's range of work is considered disruption to make a point? Thanks! Chuthya ( talk) 18:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The article in which I am alleged to have made disruptive edits has been deleted. Therefore, the preventive nature of my block is now moot. Chuthya ( talk) 01:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Nope. They don't let people out of jail because the store they robbed burns down, do they? — Daniel Case ( talk) 15:22, 26 October 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.
From WP:BLOCK: "Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, not to punish users." Jails are for punishment. If the article no longer exists, there's no longer a reason for the block. I'd like to participate in the discussion at WP:DRV if it gets posted there and the discussion at WP:BLP. Chuthya ( talk) 15:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Look, this is a relatively short block. I'm sure that it will expire in plenty of time for you to go contribute to the DRV and get blocked again if that's what you seem to want to do. Daniel Case ( talk) 03:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
Blueboy
96
20:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The blocking admin is unclear in his reasons for imposing this indefinite block. I do not see any discussion at WP:ANI or WP:AN. Blocking admin does not indicate what vandalism he's referring to. Chuthya ( talk) 5:54 pm, Today (UTC−4)
Decline reason:
OK. Unfortunately, blaming the admin doesn't really address your behavior. Right after your block expired, you went right back to disruptively editing material related to David Shankbone. TN X Man 22:51, 29 October 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.
Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I had already been blocked for 72 hours for the alleged vandalism. This block is punative and vindictive in nature. My contributions do not show a history of abuse. Chuthya ( talk) 01:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Per comment from blocking admin below and username violation. As I promised above, this show is over. I am protecting the page now. — Daniel Case ( talk) 15:17, 31 October 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.
A note from the blocking admin--the user was indefblocked for a general history of disruption, as well as the fact that his username is a violation of the username policy. I meant to leave a more detailed note earlier. Blueboy 96 21:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.
As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.
If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.
You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.
ssriram_mt ( talk) & AshLin ( talk) (Drive coordinators)
Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 01:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
|
In regards to [ this], and similar boilerplate keep messages you've placed on Mr. O'Keeffe's AfDs: We don't stop a guy from having opinions, nor do we assume he's out to disruptively make a point. Whether or not you agree with Kevin does not determine whether or not he is doing what he believes is right, and in most other cases it appears that he is making good choices. Please stop using these boilerplate keeps, as they are actually disrupting the AfD process to make a point. Cheers, and thank you. lifebaka ++ 14:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
When you make arguments in an AfD that an article satisfies the general notability guidelines or entertainers guidelines, you should probably provide some evidence through reliable sources. For example, when you deprodded the Alex Devine article, I'm wondering where this significant coverage of hers is by reliable sources because trust me, I looked. I also wonder what aspect of ENTERTAINER the article satisfies and whether it can be verified by a reliable source. Morbidthoughts ( talk) 00:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello!!!!
Please note that people who nominate article for deletion generally know basic notability guidelines. So just saying a particular article meets
Wp:GNG or
Wp:ENT is not enough, make sure to indicate what part of guidelines does it actually meet. Rescuing an article is not as simple as that.
regards Hitro talk 17:52, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Please reply at above discussion. Just strolling around to vote keep without any point is not an accepted behavior. You are disrupting AfD discussion on Wikipedia. Most of your votes are dubious. Hitro talk 12:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Hitro talk 15:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion involving you at WP:ANI#User:Chuthya is not assuming good faith. If you are simply going from AFD to AFD and PROD to PROD blindly trying to cancel out a particular user's contributions, that is a violation of the WP:HOUND policy and is blockable disruption - so please stop. Thank you. Wknight94 talk 16:40, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to
Jon & Kate Plus 8, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use
the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the
welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Stop. The show will never, ever, ever be in past tense. Ever. Please see
WP:MOSTV. It will always be "J&K+8 is" never "J&K+8 was" so stop changing that. Further, saying that the show is over or production has halted is complete
original research. TLC has suspended filming the children, not producing the show, until they can talk to the parents. TLC has also never once said the show name "Kate Plus Eight" was no longer valid. They have said they are talking to the parents about the issue of filming. To remove it is also
original research.
13
2
12:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Please
assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on
Jon & Kate Plus 8. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. I'm upping this to a three. You are NOT assuming good faith in the least. I gave my reasons for changing your edit in the edit summary and CITED all of my information (something you did not do). You turned around and reverted it as vandalism with this edit summary "vandalism, removing cited information." I did no such thing. In fact, your revert removed multiple citations. Further, you slapped me with a 3RR warning when I haven't violated it yet. If you continue, I will bring this behavior to the administrators' attention. You have not bothered to discuss this with me once and that is completely unacceptable and makes it look as though you believe you
own the page. I suggest you take a step back, cool down, and discuss this with me.
13
2
12:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Ani. Thank you. Toddst1 ( talk) 13:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Jon & Kate Plus 8. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 ( talk) 20:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Toddst1 ( talk) 13:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The Half Barnstar | ||
For cooperating with Thirteen squared on Jon & Kate Plus 8, I award you this left half of a barnstar; Thirteen squared will get the right half. Great work! Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D 20:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC) |
Edits such as this, this, and this are troubling. Is it your intent to use that biography of a living person to harass or attack the subject of that article? user:J aka justen ( talk) 16:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
(←) Per your suggestion, I've raised the issue here. You may wish to comment further there. user:J aka justen ( talk) 18:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Blocked for one day for WP:POINT and WP:BLP violations at article David Shankbone. Cirt ( talk) 19:22, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I feel that this block was out of process. My edits to the David Shankbone were completely within policy as were my attempts to resolve issues in talk. Chuthya ( talk) 19:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Edits were clearly disruptive and WP:POINTy. (On a side note, I'm not 100% certain how the word is transcribed into English, but your username looks very similar to a well-known Hindi curse word). OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:50, 23 October 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.
Response Edits? There was one edit to add the picture of the goat taken by Shankbone which was reverted. I did not edit war on this issue, and have not argued for that specific image's inclusion. In what way can this be construed as disruption to prove a point? Chuthya ( talk) 04:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Tick, tock, tick, tock, timed block.... Chuthya ( talk) 13:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below.
Bigtimepeace |
talk |
contribs
20:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I agree to discuss prior to any further edits to the David Shankbone article that involve adding images. Chuthya ( talk) 22:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You do not appear to understand the reason for your block, which is harrassment of a living person through disruptive edits to their biography. Should you make more disruptive edits to that page, expect to be blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. Sandstein 12:31, 24 October 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.
Could someone (especially the blocking admin) please explain to me why adding images that the subject of the article contributed under a free use license to the subject's biography with the purpose of illustrating the subject's range of work is considered disruption to make a point? Thanks! Chuthya ( talk) 18:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The article in which I am alleged to have made disruptive edits has been deleted. Therefore, the preventive nature of my block is now moot. Chuthya ( talk) 01:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Nope. They don't let people out of jail because the store they robbed burns down, do they? — Daniel Case ( talk) 15:22, 26 October 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.
From WP:BLOCK: "Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, not to punish users." Jails are for punishment. If the article no longer exists, there's no longer a reason for the block. I'd like to participate in the discussion at WP:DRV if it gets posted there and the discussion at WP:BLP. Chuthya ( talk) 15:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Look, this is a relatively short block. I'm sure that it will expire in plenty of time for you to go contribute to the DRV and get blocked again if that's what you seem to want to do. Daniel Case ( talk) 03:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
Blueboy
96
20:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The blocking admin is unclear in his reasons for imposing this indefinite block. I do not see any discussion at WP:ANI or WP:AN. Blocking admin does not indicate what vandalism he's referring to. Chuthya ( talk) 5:54 pm, Today (UTC−4)
Decline reason:
OK. Unfortunately, blaming the admin doesn't really address your behavior. Right after your block expired, you went right back to disruptively editing material related to David Shankbone. TN X Man 22:51, 29 October 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.
Chuthya ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I had already been blocked for 72 hours for the alleged vandalism. This block is punative and vindictive in nature. My contributions do not show a history of abuse. Chuthya ( talk) 01:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Per comment from blocking admin below and username violation. As I promised above, this show is over. I am protecting the page now. — Daniel Case ( talk) 15:17, 31 October 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.
A note from the blocking admin--the user was indefblocked for a general history of disruption, as well as the fact that his username is a violation of the username policy. I meant to leave a more detailed note earlier. Blueboy 96 21:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.
As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.
If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.
You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.
ssriram_mt ( talk) & AshLin ( talk) (Drive coordinators)
Delivered per request on Wikipedia:Bot requests. 01:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)