![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Since you blocked TEoATW at SPI, I thought I'd give you a heads up: he's back, telling everyone what to do, and playing pseudo-problem solver in the guise of one Glacialfrost. There's a new filing at SPI if you were inclined to take a look. The behavioral evidence is pretty strong, and the new sock is from California, as are TEoATW and his already identified sock. He's also back in Cityside189's orbit, and giving him some difficulty, I gather from this discussion. Thanks! -- Drmargi ( talk) 19:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
for having some common sense. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 23:55, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Floquenbeam, thank you for this: [4]. As problematic as his recent dispute interactions have been, an indefinite block strikes me as a relatively unfair outcome that was driven by several editors with whom Alakzi has been in recent heated disputes. Even if checkuser shows actual sock-puppetry -- and I hope it doesn't -- there is still a missing element of wrong-doing required for an indefinite block. As I said on the SPI talk page, I really want to help this guy, but I don't know how to do so given the limitations of interacting through Wikipedia talk pages. He is a genuine talent, and I would be saddened if the project lost him. *sigh* Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 23:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC) And, yes, I am mindful of the last time you and I stuck out our necks in the interest of giving a blocked editor the benefit of the doubt. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 23:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Here is a kitten. If you need more let me know.
Chillum 21:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
|
I hope all this isn't getting you down. Have this, if it keeps your spirits up! ceradon ( talk • edits) 21:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for the thought, Ceradon. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry I helped make this a rough day for you. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 22:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I would appreciate a private candid coversation with you too Floq when you feel up to it, please email me I would still like your opinion. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 22:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Floq, YGM. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 23:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Oops, did I say that out loud? What I meant was... take some time off, recharge your batteries, and come back rested and ready to once again partake in this wonderful, rational, grounded Wikipedia community.
MastCell
Talk 08:03, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
OK. So:
More importantly,
I saw (and still see) a lot of technical area overlap, and one or two other things that led me in one direction. But the human part of this - people I trust implicitly, and people who are smarter than me, saying it probably isn't Jack, or even flat out that it isn't - convinces me that I've probably made a big mistake, and one that caused a lot of distress to Alakzi. So, I'm:
Once again, sorry Alakzi, and sorry everyone. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:00, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Hatting off-topic, this does not belong on my talk page. Or anywhere, really. Gerda, you're collaterally being hatted too, sorry. --
Floquenbeam (
talk) 12:26, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
|
---|
|
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thanks Floq, for unblocking Malik. Guess I'm too chickenshit to do it. Really, why didn't I. Drmies ( talk) 17:31, 18 August 2015 (UTC) |
You have no idea how much I hate saying this, but, if the ArbCom does take the case on Malik, it might make some sense to allow the Dyer person to edit so as to comment in the case, if his sockpuppetry hasn't been really conclusively proven. Maybe. I dunno. John Carter ( talk) 22:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
If you're not currently in police custody, you deserve this morning-after beer. If you are, you can bribe the jailer with it for cigarette privileges. And get rid of your expired toothpaste. Drmies ( talk) 14:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC) |
I survived. Police custody was never a real risk, but sitting in a corner, slowly rocking back and forth, muttering "they'll be gone in the morning. they'll be gone in the mornng." over and over, was. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 19:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for so quickly taking care of the Rauschenberg vandal... which kind of sounds like Marvel comic character... Anyway Rauschenberg has been dead for awhile so wasn't sure if you knew that when you cited BLP violations. The name is so familiar many don't realize he is no longer with us.( Littleolive oil ( talk) 17:43, 19 August 2015 (UTC))
Thank you for being an administrator that finally saw Nonamesleft for the reason why he was truly here. I noted his "edits" and article creation appeared to be both hoax and vandalism. Filed an AIV based on what looked like vandalism to me as well as WP:NOTHERE (see here). The admin who took care of it concluded none of the above applied (see here). I'm not the "I told you so" type, but... I called it days ago. And knew I was right when I saw this (saying I'm hounding and harassing) and then this on my talk page (saying I must have an arrest record for stalking) in addition to this (when the mental illness garbage started) at the AfD for the Vatican airports "article". Oh, and then there was the incidence of him copying and pasting the user space of an administrator and not removing the permission and administrator top-icons after being told he needed to. All of that said WP:NOTHERE to me, but... apparently not to at least one other (even though more than one admin was aware of what was happening). I know it's not the end of the world when people behave like this in Wikipedia, but it is pretty annoying to be called a criminal with mental illness and it's essentially ignored for days. Thanks for taking care of it. Appreciated. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
The OP at AE is a clear and undeniable Sock - (the only edits whatsoever are the complaint) and I would ask that it be treated as harassment by a sock, and looked into as such per policy. Thanks. Collect ( talk) 12:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Its just an essay, an opinion. I have closed cmts with best wishes even when I disagree with someone which means to me at least that while I disagree with what may be a Wikipedia issue, it does not mean I am judging the person. I do not intend snark. However, WP has its own strange culture so hard to say how such cmts are taken. Best wishes :O)(
Littleolive oil (
talk) 15:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC))
Do I get a kitten? -- Dweller ( talk) 22:07, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Floq! Over at the Frankfurt School talk page we've decided to change the heading for the Cultural Marxism section, from Conspiracy Theory - to Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory. So we were just wondering if you might lower the protection to the redirect page (we're asking you first as per WP:RFP) [7] alternatively you could update it yourself we just need it to redirect to the new section title "Frankfurt School#Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory" thanks muchly! -- Jobrot ( talk) 14:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
As far as this: [8]. If the hounding and harassment and poking by the other editor doesn't stop? It would have been nice to get some kind of assurance from him that it would before you closed it out. Because, frankly, considering his past behavior and previous indef for the same kind of thing, I'm not confident that he won't continue in the same vein as he has been for the last six days. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Jesus Christ you are both obnoxious. Both of you go away. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 20:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Floq, thanks for your help with that issue I posted. Strange situation. You quick assistance was much appreciated! Montanabw (talk) 22:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm not allowed to respond? Rusted AutoParts 19:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
JMHamo (
talk) 22:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Please advise me what you are talking about; "posted to user page." I am dealing with an administrator who refuses to accept my version of the events that led to two totally different pictures being said to be of the same person. I am posting to the user page of the administrator as seems to be the way of Wikipedia Jagtig ( talk) 23:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Just so you know, an IP that is very obviously Jagtig filed another DRN request in spite of being turned down before. BLUSTER⌉⌊ BLASTER 16:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I noted this block of Unframboise. You might be interested in User talk:SMcCandlish#The Fall. It's dense, so here's the precis: I deleted a seemingly irrelevant line at The Fall (TV series), a non sequitur statement that Gillian Anderson's character "is extremely comfortable with her own sexuality", in a one-liner character description, which seemed WP:UNDUE prurience stated like that (and made some WP:PEACOCK correction tweaks) [9]. Unframboise reverted the lot, on the insistence that it was relevant. I worked in good faith with the editor to preserve the statement (my response to the assertion that the sexuality of the character is important to the entire plot line is that we should "say so"), but clarify it so its relevance would be clear to the reader and not come off as fanwanky (and I reinstated the PEACOCK fixing) [10]. Other editors have since worked with those changes (and reinforced that we should not be using peacock terms like "extremely"), yet Unframboise has taken personal offense at all of this (warping all commentary about content into a perceived insult to him personally), and has been playing an amazingly long-winded, quote-everything-you-said-back-at-you, WP:BATTLEGROUND game on my talk page, about what is an already resolved and moved-past dispute from about two days ago, and seems unwilling to just drop the matter, as well as engaging in a constant pattern of nearly unbelievable levels of WP:IDHT, on every single point raised in the discussion.
The relevance to the recent block:
I don't think this incident requires any immediate action (this is not a request for a new block), but the nature of the incident as both "anti-PC" attitude-pushing involving how WP writes about women and their sexuality, and a confrontational, fight-to-the-death-over-moot-points pattern, closely relate to why this editor was previously blocked, and it may help establish that the pattern is habitual, should such incidents arise again later with other editors. (I don't edit TV articles much, so don't anticipate running into this editor again any time soon). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 01:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Why did you change User Talk:SimonTrew. I put it under WP:CSD#G7, blanked as author requests deletion. I put in the edit summary that I shall continue to edit wikipedia, but it is a matter of privacy, and I want it blanked. I edit under my real name and thus in real life I get a bit of abuse sometimes, Flo, so I want it blanked. Si Trew ( talk) 17:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
( edit conflict), sorry. I have absolute respect for you, and your contributions to Wikipedia. Sorry that that hill is So far away (one more song about moving along the highway). It's no big deal, but my talk page was just getting rather cluttered, so I emptied it. I do that fairly regularly because I know it is there in the history, so it doesn't have to be at the talk page. I know WP:CHEAP but it gets hard for others to read it if it's too long, or if It's too late. Your sincere friend, Si Trew ( talk) 18:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam, can you join me in the article talk page? Thanks. ( N0n3up ( talk) 19:57, 6 September 2015 (UTC))
re: Partial mistake? Yes. I lost my cool. -- Golbez ( talk) 18:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Gamergate was exactly the article I was trying to edit the talk page of. How do I appeal it so I can edit the talk page? It is very strange that I can't even edit the talk page. The other articles I read almost always have sources in the ledes. This one strangely does not for some very strong claims. Saigo no Yume ( talk) 19:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
(moving this back a bit) Ok, I'm reading through this and it looks like this was a request against TheRedPenofDoom for essentially calling other people stupid and crazy. I looked him up in the search engine and found that he is now topic banned from the Gamergate article - presumably for being disruptive. However, in this instance, instead of punishing TheRedPenofDoom, the people in charge decided to implement this 30-day minimum/500 edit thing.
This course of action does not seem to follow.
I went back to looking at the Gamergate Arbcom page and it sets out a very specific set of remedies that are available ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate#Remedies ).
"(vii) Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning."
The 500 edit/30 day account action is not in the list of available remedies.
Furthermore, "Discretionary sanctions" were also referenced ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions ), but the relevant section does not allow the action taken by Zad68:
"Page restrictions7.5
Any uninvolved administrator may impose on any page or set of pages relating to the area of conflict semi-protection, full protection, move protection, revert restrictions, and prohibitions on the addition or removal of certain content (except when consensus for the edit exists). Editors ignoring page restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator. The enforcing administrator must log page restrictions they place.
Best practice is to add editnotices to restricted pages where appropriate, using the standard template ({{ ds/editnotice}})."
Also, reading the discretionary sanctions page makes it clear that new people should not be assumed to be bad editors, but this policy makes that assumption by default.
Am I overlooking something or is my logic and understanding sound? Saigo no Yume ( talk) 20:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm... equating a prohibition on new editors to a prohibition based on religion or gender seems like the kind of hyperbole that we are trying to keep off of that page. So maybe, in its own small way, it is working. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 21:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
On another note, I'm glad the page is free of hyperbole:
The Gamergate controversy began in August 2014 and concerns sexism in video game culture. It is most notable for a harassment campaign that sought to drive several feminists from the video game industry, including game developers Zoë Quinn and Brianna Wu, and cultural critic Anita Sarkeesian. The campaign of harassment was coordinated in IRC channels and online forums such as Reddit, 4chan, and 8chan by an anonymous and amorphous group that ultimately came to be represented by the Twitter hashtag #gamergate. The harassment included doxing, threats of rape, death threats and was related to a mass shooting threat at a university speaking event. Saigo no Yume ( talk) 21:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Try this, there's nothing like it! Bishonen | talk 18:17, 8 September 2015 (UTC).
I was trying to see what difference it made for looking at the user name..Your threat speaks volumes about you.. Void burn ( talk) 23:59, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I noticed you have blocked this IP for disruptive editing and personal attacks against HkCaGu. Can you revoke access to this IP's talk page as he blanked his talk page including his block notice (referred to as "nonsense"). Thanks! Citydude1017 ( talk) 18:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that editor (who is otherwise a productive editor, but who basically stalks me - although I've never bothered to put together the evidence for it) does put my back up, and when that happens I behave like an idiot . My apologies. BMK ( talk) 20:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Would you please respond: why do you assume these nominations were made in bad faith? The rationales are totally valid. If you were really that concerned about my supposed "bad faith", you should have better warned me, rather than have gone out there to close perfectly reasonable nominations. -- Diego Grez-Cañete ( talk) 18:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC) PS. This is why people get so pissed off about Wikipedia, you guys are champions in making real content creators get off. Keep up with your drama-whoring (and this is not a personal message, this is directed to whoever feels touched) -- Diego Grez-Cañete ( talk) 18:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Your little clique of Administrators has gotten the message across. I guess you must wield what little pathetic power you have. Funny how the first article I created is scheduled for deletion IMMEDIATELY after I file a complaint against an Administrator. ( Personal attack removed) I am done here. Lady.de.Clare ( talk) 9:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
... do you have time to weep over the state of RfA? - " the Alakzi cantata" - the one about spirit and soul becoming confused - is on the German Main page, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:41, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
[13] — Ched : ? 01:22, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Floq, many of the support !votes I had at my RfA had relatively little content or discussion, but yours was one that did. I valued your statement, "The question in my mind is whether I trust her to never involve her admin tools, directly or indirectly, when a friend is in conflict with someone else. I'm not positive she will, but I'm reasonably confident she will. I wouldn't be willing to take the risk for everyone, but in this case the benefits of having a smart, active, serious content contributor who has a ton of experience and cluefulness leads me to want to take that risk. " Because the potential for abuse of the tools did seem to be the crux of it for many people, I am curious as to how you got there with me and how I can continue to convince more people that this is true. Seems a Catch-22: If you have the kind of personality that is not afraid of conflict and sticking to your guns, crucial to a good admin, you have also had conflicts, so it is labeled a "battlefield mentality" that disqualifies you for getting the mop. How did you resolve that dilemma? As far as things I'm looking at in terms of what the oppose !votes said, some of that needs a little more time to let the bruises heal up a bit to think clearly Montanabw (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, just wanted to point you to this, in case you hadn't seen it. At this point, we're either in the middle of an intra-family dispute between son and step-mother, or we're being whipsawed, I'm not sure which. I don't plan to respond to it. BMK ( talk) 20:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
That term can refer to the touristic area of Quito, or, indeed, any touristic area in a Hispanic country. As such, it probably should redirect to a more general article. I trust your judgment. (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 14:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
My first reaction was "NOOOOOOOO!". Now that I think about it I 100% see where you are coming from. The community has a long standing pattern of failing to protect users from abusive individuals. I am also sick of Wikipedia constantly giving 1 more chance to people who engage in nasty attacks on other editors. I do hope you return, but I get it. I am one step closer to walking away myself. HighInBC 15:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
So long, and thanks for all the fish! Youi'll be missed. Please reconsider and turn this into a brief hiatus or wikibreak. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 16:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The best revenge |
Illegitimi non carborundum Honing only makes you sharper. Surviving and thriving will make your point. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 16:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
realize that the terms of Reg's unblock specifically include a restriction on interacting with admins, and could certainly be specifically extended to include a broader i-ban with you. I know Reg too, and I know that his more-than-occasional self-absorbtion can be at bast irritating. And, honestly, given the nature of some of his comments on his own talk page, although I in no way want to be seen as making anything like a hard prediction here, I can honestly say that I would not myself necessarily bet that the current situation will remain unchanged for long. John Carter ( talk) 17:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Hope you enjoy your (temporary) retirement, it's always good to get some headspace and regenerate (like Doctor Who), coming back fitter and fightier than before. And usually younger, but I don't know how to make that work. Regardless of all the "flaming arrows" (as my boss refers to the pesky interruptions of those trying to burn your rope bridge while you're en route to Nirvana), there are many of us who already miss you. I'm not into the patronising stuff, but seriously, we're a "man down" now. We'll limp on, but your insight is mandatory here so don't leave it too long before you get back to it. You have my highest regards, take good care, The Rambling Man ( talk) 19:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I understand why, but this is a horrific shame. If you want to earbash me, you know my email. I will miss you. WormTT( talk) 19:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
It has been suggested that you provide input to this discussion. We would greatly appreciate your insight in whatever form you deem fit. Hasteur ( talk) 20:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Au revoir |
I hope the sailing gets smoother and that you come back. Shearonink ( talk) 20:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Special Barnstar |
Live long and prosper, Floq. BethNaught ( talk) 20:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
... all the obvious things that you'd expect me to say here. Hope to see you again soon. Regards, Newyorkbrad ( talk) 21:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't really feel like talking to anyone right now, hope that's OK. All well wishes are appreciated, all emails or requests for an email will be followed up some point. Right now this place makes me nauseous. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 21:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
... so to the extent this means anything, it is incredibly sad and demoralizing to see you leave, especially under these circumstances. You will be missed. Crow Caw 22:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;" Okay, a bit dramatic, but just another note from a regular grunt who's always appreciated your assistance, advice and thoughtfulness. Hope you'll feel like coming back at some point, but you'd done some heavy lifting over the years. Toss off the weights and soar into the sky! Ravensfire ( talk) 22:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thank you very much, and good luck with your life in the future. Rubbish computer 22:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for your service to The Project, Floq... —Tim /// Carrite ( talk) 00:32, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
That didn't even take 24 hours. Reguyla has already said, fuck it, forget about it, he's not coming back. So please, Floq: un-retire, tell the crats never mind, and let's get back to normal here. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Wild horses award |
If wild horses can drag you back to wikipedia, I'm sending you some! Hop on and enjoy the ride! Montanabw (talk) 01:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC) |
...that you return after you've had a break sufficient to recharge your batteries. What you contribute to the project is too valuable for us to lose. Best, BMK ( talk) 05:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
... and thanks for all the play. De profundis -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam. A decision has been proposed in the Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case, for which you are on the notification list. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 20:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC) (via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk))
FYI, a troll tried impersonating you on the IRC, I have then registered your nickname with a 60 char random pw, poke me if you want me to release it to you. -- Vituzzu ( talk) 23:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 4, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 18:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
You indicated at your retirement that you didn't want to edit at a site where a certain person was free to edit. I thought you might like to know that the discussion of possibly allowing that account to have its ban lifted has resulted in that individual being indefinitely banned from the site. Just FYI. John Carter ( talk) 18:55, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
I was surprised to find you retired and finally noticed it today. Best wishes for where ever you go!
![]() |
Sorry if semi-back sounds like a type of ballroom frock, but you know what I mean. Bishonen | talk 20:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC).
I won't trouble you with questions, observations or anything else, and I do hope all is going well for you. I just wanted to note that it's always good to see you pop in for a visit. Best always. — Ched : ? 16:58, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
You may have become frustrated. Calm down and listen, please don't threaten me again. Thanks - Supdiop ( T🔹 C) 23:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Floq, given the circumstances of the user's block, I'd block them for even longer for calling you a "vile human being". However, you're not an ordinary attackee, so I'll refrain if you'd prefer that I not do it. BTW, welcome back to the admin corps. Not sure how happy you are about it, but it's easier for my brain to think of you as an admin.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
...that you got the bit back. Well done. BMK ( talk) 02:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Will you be the one to end the drama thread about RO on ANI? It is clear to me that things are heated from a days long discussion. RO is indef blocked right now so couldn't someone close the thread, and revisit the issue about community sanctions at a later date when cooler heads are around? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 00:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Remember this? Do you recall where the template editor discussion occurred? -- NeilN talk to me 19:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
You don't got mail -- no email link? I'll send you the ace2105 if email (or turn your email pref on). NE Ent 11:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhh
This guy seems intent on ridicule and uncivil behavior [ [15]] Viriditus. I am wondering if he could be blocked or warned for incivility. Please look at the Drexler citation section toward the bottom of the page on the talk page of the Post scarcity article. I am asking here since you seem familiar with similar situations in regard to this person. Earl King Jr. ( talk) 08:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
O.k. Floquenbeam I get the message and will try to reform. I don't want to be a Randy. Thanks for the thoughtful overview. Earl King Jr. ( talk) 04:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Collapsing. Go away: my talk page is not where you two are going to start bickering with each other
|
---|
|
Just flagging this to spare an unnecessary followup ANI next week if the user decides to play it by the book and go back to announcing January 2016 wikibreaks every day - you closed this ANI discussion saying that "MVBW has kindly agreed to not use the retired or long wikibreak templates", but they only mentioned the former. (They actually took a luxurious two-hour "long wikibreak" in the time between their two comments on the ANI.) -- McGeddon ( talk) 20:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Are you going to do one this year? Yngvadottir ( talk) 20:38, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
I thought about it for a few minutes, and no, I'm not going to do a guide per se. But here's a list, FWIW:
Everyone else is in the grey hazy middle, again for various reasons (including "I don't know anything about them" and "I like them but I suspect they'd suck at being an Arb" and "I don't like them, but it could be me and not them" and "negatives tend to cancel out positives"). I don't even want to add "lean support" or "lean oppose" to anyone; if I decide on someone currently in the grey area, I'll add them to one of the lists. If not, I'll probably choose neutral, and let others decide on them. I doubt I'll end up supporting more than 5 or 6 in total, though. I tend to hope we don't fill all 9 positions this year. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 23:41, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
re: {{Red|Also, I'm not an admin anymore.}} [16]. As technically inaccurate, could this be "in theory"? "in practice"?, "in hopes of"? - or perhaps as "in - oops"? Not that it matters to me in any way, but there are various OCD types which may have twinges at such. — Ched : ? 16:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
For returning to the mop and bucket brigade. I fully understand why you gave them up but your return is much appreciated. Cheers. MarnetteD| Talk 21:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Ahem, User:Floquenbeam, since you have decided to take up your old habits, perhaps soon we will see you filing a statement here, WP:ACE2015/C, seeking the sweet ambrosia of arb-ness? Well, maybe not, since that violates "complicated, stressful, depressing, AND time consuming". :-) But in any case, my real question is, who ought to be running? There are some good names already on the list as self-noms, but can any other folks perhaps be armtwisted into a last-day-surprise-arbcom-run? Nine open seats is a lot, and at present only two of the arbs up for re-election have re-nominated themselves for another term. There are plenty of long-haul wikipedians: who has the temperment and the time and the reputation, that is not yet announced as a candidate? 75.108.94.227 ( talk) 04:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
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) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam,
For some reason "near [the] Syrian border" isn't showing up on the Main Page display yet. Sca ( talk) 18:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
My comment was not a personal attack -- as I already explained. It should not be marked as a personal attack as it was NOT a personal attack. Doing so is wrong, and essentially a personal attack in and of itself. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
[18], [19], [20]. Also this is the source of the accusation [21] Legacypac ( talk) 03:11, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
If there is some consensus somewhere for that "edit-vandalism ratio" rule you are talking about then please cite it. Otherwise you seem to be reverting edits based on a rule you made up, when my edit was justified based on consensus. Thank you. THEowner of a l l 23:48, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Looks like I'm an admin now -- if a sockpuppet says it, it must be true! GAB Hello! 22:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC) |
Thank you. It was obvious to me from his first edit he was a troll. I hard-blocked the account based on the ridiculous username, but he was allowed to rename. He continued to troll, of course. I wanted to block him, but after my initial block, I was reluctant.
A weird thing, btw. When I clicked on either your username or Talk page link in the sig of your block notice. It would go to this silly Jimbo graphic. It didn't do that on any of the other sigs on the page, as far as I know, just yours. I have no idea why, although I'm sure there's a technical explanation for it. Anyway, I removed the link to the graphic at the top of his Talk page, and the links in your sig work properly. Made me feel better.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
BlackPenus_Jesus ( talk · contribs)
I am a bit lost as to lame being a reason for blocking someone? I assume it was name? I do agree that it is lame though.
Jab843 ( talk) 22:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Just following up
this talk thread from a couple of weeks ago, where a user was disingenuously using {{
retired}} and {{long wikibreak}}
templates in order to "relax and minimize my involvement in contentious disputes". You said that the user "seems to acknowledge the confusion it caused", but taking a look it seems they're still doing it: several times since then (eg.
here) they've posted a vacation wikibreak template with a little graphic of a plane, obliquely wishing visitors a "Happy New Year!", only to take it down and continue some controversial talk page threads a few hours later.
A user talk page falsely implying that the user is on vacation until the new year does not seem significantly different from putting up a fake {{ long wikibreak}}. -- McGeddon ( talk) 16:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Many thanks for removing vandalism from my talk page. Enjoy!! Denisarona ( talk) 07:33, 4 December 2015 (UTC) |
You're quite welcome. Thanks for the note. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 17:51, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
This [22] really needs to go. Caden cool 20:59, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
They may very well be blocked, but somebody is going to be banned from here eventually if he doesn't just drop it, and it aint going to be Tim or Schro.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Template:Uw-dttr4im has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Krett12 (
talk) 22:09, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Good to see you're back! :)
Rubbish computer (
HALP!:
I dropped the bass?) 01:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Regarding "why is being an ArbCom candidate reason to recuse?", I'd consider it legitimate grounds in this particular and unusual set of circumstances. Imagine Kevin finishes 9th and GW 10th, and GW then votes to take action against Kevin and he resigns in disgust, meaning she gets bumped up into the newly-vacant slot; it would cause a huge stink. Thus, it puts huge pressure on her not to support any sanctions against Kevin, as support from her for something potentially disqualifying him will look like corruption regardless of intent. (Pinging GorillaWarfare in case she wants to correct that, although I'm fairly certain my interpretation of her decision is correct.) ‑ Iridescent 10:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Would you consider easing your 0RR rule to 1RR, for N0n3up? I don't want to see any editor getting booted off of Wikipedia, unless that editor's vandalizing, threatening or socking. GoodDay ( talk) 03:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
How old are you Lmnodogsuphomie101 ( talk) 21:06, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
So how old — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmnodogsuphomie101 ( talk • contribs) 21:10, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
It looks like you were the last admin to block this guy and thought maybe a review of his recent contributions was in order. The changes made have been purely vandalism.
Thanks for your time. Briscut ( talk) 23:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
I bet you mixed up DHeyward with RHaworth on the edit warring notice board. I think that is cognitively very likely. Funny the tricks the mind plays.-- ℕ ℱ 07:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
"The block is only for 12 hours, because I'm assuming whatever you're on will wear off by then. If I'm wrong, and you keep this up tomorrow, then you'll be reblocked indefinitely." I don't think I'd have dared, but quite agree. Peridon ( talk) 18:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm not on drugs, nothing like that. I was just having a little fun. You see, I recently got accepted into three different colleges that are very good colleges ( Rutgers University, Pace University and Seton Hall University) and just decided to have a little fun on here, as I haven't edited in a while, being busy with my school studies and whatnot. I see that my fellow denizens of Wikipedia were askance with my humor and pointedly rebuffed it, so I won't be making any more attempts at facetious humor on here if the end result is my fellow Wikipedians getting stressed out. SuperCarnivore591 ( talk) 19:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 03:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
MarnetteD|
Talk is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.
Admins have no more say then other editors. Your persistent efforts to frustrate my work are not helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 02:21, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
|
Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!
|
I haven't edited since you requested other admin review and treated it as a block. I apologize for the confusion. I was indeed aware of 1RR (and disagreed that it was a violation). I was not aware, however, of the ISIL case sanctions or of that particular arbcom case (or even how it was decided that article is under that umbrella) prior to the report. Indeed, after reading it, the 1RR remedy doesn't even require warning of sanctions. The person requesting sanctions kept adding "in violation of ISIL sanctions" which seemed to imply more than what 1RR is and if that was the case, I wanted it known that I was not aware of anything beyond simple 1RR rules and punishments (the 3RR board was the second place he asked for sanctions). I wasn't gaming the system in claiming that I didn't know it was 1RR and defended the edits I made as not even being 1RR violation. I take your analysis to heart, though and your (paraphrased) perception that it was 1 revert was charitable, 3 reverts was harsh so probably fair to say more than 1 and less than 3 my understanding is the 2nd revert is a 1RR violation. I would have preferred the benefit of the doubt, calling it 1, but I understand that reasons for such things as 1RR is "benefit of doubt" is used up. I personally find that noticeboard drama to be largely time consuming and wasteful so I checked out until it was resolved one way or another and I appreciate the warning. I will try to tack away from those that seek dramaboard participation (you addressed one). I apologize if it appeared I was gaming the sanction and really only needed to know that it was a standard 1RR restriction and not some special discretionary sanction dreamed up for ISIL 1RR's. -- DHeyward ( talk) 22:28, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
you're saying you were aware of 1RR but thought others might have been trying to sanction you further?Yes, I was aware of 1RR and there are many articles on 1RR that aren't ArbCom sanctions. That wasn't rocket science to figure out that for "reasons" that article was on 1RR. I didn't even bother trying to figure out why or when it was on 1RR and 1RR restrictions usually don't bother me since I normally don't ever purely revert (which is why it's always fuzzy - take that as good or bad but usually editors that are working towards a solution deal with "fuzzy" as incremental improvements/wordsmithing/sourcing rather than noticeboard material that a bit of a sentence or paragraph was removed or re-added). I got templated for two different noticeboards regarding violating sanctions (I was surprised one wasn't AE since they kept mentioning ArbCom decisions in the violation.) It doesn't take long to find a rather mundane discretionary sanctions that were met with very harsh AE type sanction. I didn't want to be a test case for whether a single 1RR violation could lead to an arbitrary AE enforcement action. Anyone that's been around long enough knows AE is a crapshoot at best and with AE actions favoring "first mover", I didn't want to deal with that. 1RR (or 3RR) would have, in a regular article, been a 24 hour block and a regular admin action, not AE action. The tedious edit counters/clock watchers seem to drill into counting rather than look at bigger picture of "Is this edit warring? Is this disruptive?" and more words were spilled on noticeboards than the article. -- DHeyward ( talk) 00:51, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Merry Yuletide to you! (And a happy new year!)
Rhoark ( talk) 00:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄 |
Best wishes for your Christmas Is all you get from me 'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus Don't own no Christmas tree. But if wishes was health and money I'd fill your buck-skin poke Your doctor would go hungry An' you never would be broke." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914. Montanabw (talk) |
Denisarona ( talk) 11:16, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Rubbish computer (
Merry Christmas!:
...And a Happy New Year!) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- Rubbish computer ( Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 16:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! |
Best wishes for a wonderful 2016!---- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC) |
![]() | |
peace bell |
---|
Thank you for inspiration and support, and for being one of three to return, to my joy, - thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Have a great new year Floquenbeam, I can't add the template here without messing up the others. Thanks, -- Rubbish computer ( Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 02:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Floquenbeam,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –
Davey2010
Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11:12, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I have two questions, the first pertains to the IP address below. This user has made changes which aren't blatant vandalism but there hasn't been a single edit that I noticed that hasn't been reverted. They'll throw an 'x' into the game score(example: 28x-21), change the format of a sport team's record(example: 9/3(0) instead of 9–3) or change random times to 24 hours as opposed to the standard a.m./p.m. format.
I assumed good faith when I saw the time changes and partly for the team record's but it didn't make sense that only or two of the scores/records/times were being changed when there's over a hundred on a page.
I'll let you be the judge if you care to look: 189.202.65.105
The second question I had in my mind was whether there's there a group of admins here on Wikipedia to report vandalism to? I feel like I'm going about the process wrong.
Thanks again for your time and have a good new year.
Briscut (
talk) 20:00, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Oh, yes I will if I do something similar again absolutely add a notice about that. Regards,-- BabbaQ ( talk) 22:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I've been catching up on my Wikipedia reading tonight. Is there a 2 minute version somewhere that explains what is actually going on with Doc James and WMF? Too many conflicting comments to parse on Jimbo's talk page; some are by people who might know something, but they're drowned out by dozens of comments by idiots who don't know anything. There are threads at WO, evidently official blog posts, unofficial blog posts, mailing lists, all of them full of so much guessing, I can't find any actual useful information buried in them. I'm lost. I just want some clue what is going on, even if it is only the best educated guess available. Like the most recent or fullest explanation (if it exists) from Doc James, and the most recent or fullest explanation (if it exists) from WMF. And the most recent or fullest explanation (if it exists) by a smart and clueful and trustworthy editor. By which I mean, someone with enough wisdom to have my talk page watchlisted.
<slightly off topic rant>
To tie this into my other Wikipedia reading tonight... While there are people on ArbCom who I do not trust, there are also people on ArbCom I do trust. While they may not even be a majority anymore, they still exist, and if things really got unethical, I would trust them to not keep silent, even if it meant their wiki "career". It would only take one, out of a half dozen people I trust, to blow the whistle. Other people probably don't trust those particular people, but I would really think that almost everyone has at least one person on ArbCom that they trust.
There are no such people on the WMF board. I either don't trust them (because most of them have been appointed and have interests that do not correspond to the interests of the community, and have demonstrated it in the past), or don't know enough about them to trust them (because although they were elected, I've never heard of them). About the only person I felt that I could trust was Doc James, and they got rid of that one person.
So when ArbCom says "we are banning this person, and aren't going to tell you why", I don't "like" it, but I understand how that can be necessary, and still believe if it was actually underhanded, then if nothing else, one of the four people I voted for this election would say something. When the WMF board says "we are dismissing this board member, and aren't going to tell you why", I have no reason to think it's not underhanded, and have their past decisions to make me think it could very easily be underhanded. Maybe that's unfair - maybe they want to explain but feel constrained, maybe I'd agree with them if I knew - but it's what happens when you have a board organized in a less transparent way than the legislature if Myanmar. Unlike a transparently elected ArbCom, there is literally no reason to trust anything the WMF says.
</slightly off topic rant>
So anyway, if someone without an axe to grind knows what's going on, a note or an email or a pointer to an actually useful post online somewhere would be great. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 03:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I think I'm as up to speed as I want to be. Thanks all. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you sir. But I am not doing any Spam or vandalism on the wikipedia. Kindly do not block me. I have not done anything like a spam. Sir, please I request you to allow my edits.
Thanks and Regards, -- Peterwoodwilson ( talk) 20:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll shut up now. My point(s) have been made. And what with the arrival of a well known troll, I'm out. Please don't self-block. Cassianto Talk 21:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Heh. shame that ain't freely-licensed. also NSFW (language) Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 17:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
It appears that this very nice gentleman could use his talk page editing rights revoked - see this :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 03:14, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
As usual, you make a lot of sense, but until FPAS admits he's gone too far, your generosity of spirit is somewhat wasted. If the unblock was correct, the block was wrong. Simple as that. The Rambling Man ( talk) 16:26, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Could I ask you to look at the "block evasion" issue which I mistakenly posted on the SoftL Talk page (it was archived there just before your own edit there) which you corrected, dealing with a user with dynamically changing accounts. It appears as an akwardly long list of user names unless it is read in context. Can you tell if it is a "block evasion" issue by that account? Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris ( talk) 16:41, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello Floq, from your user page and the one edit I have seen from you, I believe that you are a good person, so I want life advice from you. Can you give any such advice to me? Zaostao ( talk) 07:05, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
...I didnt know he was socking that recently or I would have shut it down myself. Last time I noticed him was in 2014. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 16:01, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I was beginning to think I was the insane one. -- Dweller ( talk) 17:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
Thank you, Floq, for your impact | |
---|---|
in wording the sane and short sentence "no foul, play on", as an arb! |
I wanted to leave this link [23] for you a while back in response to some discussion, but I didn't get around to it then. Anyway, there it is. In case there's confusion, I'm not connected with the author. 173.228.123.101 ( talk) 08:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
who are u ppl and how do u have authority over me. i just don't understand. u are all mysterious unidentified ppl that make me angry by deleting articles about ppl who have fanbases of over 500,000 ppl, or deleting sections which i know are true bc the person i am writing about has said it themselves. but the only proof of this is a youtube video which is viewed here as a "non-reliable" source. if tHE PERSON I AM WRITING ABOUT SAID IT ABOUT HIMSELF HOW IS IT NOT TRUE??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcmartenslol ( talk • contribs)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Just sending this barnstar your way to thank you for your help with my IP unblock request. You are one of the friendliest, most helpful admins I've encountered on Wikipedia! Maestroso simplo ( talk) 03:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hey, thanks Maestroso simplo, glad I could help. - Floquenbeam ( talk) 16:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Please see the noticeboard, and the confidentiality agreement. The Oversight flag can't be given to you until your name is on the noticeboard list. Thanks. Courcelles ( talk) 00:28, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
The instructions were a nightmare. I ploughed my way through for my OS hat. When they asked me to do it again for OTRS access, I just refused. I'd rather lose the access. It made absolutely no sense to have to sign the same thing twice. -- Dweller ( talk) 17:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
excellent summary of the situation. DGG ( talk ) 18:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to ask your opinion. Should I be restoring and taking to MFD pages like Draft:The Assasins Clan? It was deleted under G2 but I can almost guarantee that no one would have found it if I hadn't added the AFC banner tag. I feel like I'm crossing the line into WP:POINTiness with that but I want to resolve this as soon as practicable and move on to more productive things than asking MFD to re-delete pages that already weren't edited for 18 months. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 05:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
I hadn't even checked their earlier edits [24]. Very much appreciated, 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
A motion has been posted at Arbitration requests/motions that Floquenbeam ( talk · contribs), who resigned from the Arbitration Committee and voluntarily gave up the Oversight permission in July 2014, is re-appointed an Oversighter following a request to the Committee for the permission to be restored.
Comment from the community is encouraged either at the above linked page or via e-mail to the Arbitration Committee.
For the Arbitration Committee. Amortias ( T)( C) 00:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 27 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Julia Kronlid, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Swedish politician Julia Kronlid has worked as a volunteer at a hospital clinic in Papua New Guinea? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julia Kronlid. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:03, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks very much for that. I really appreciate the help. Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 01:49, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I allowed my frustration with that editor's continual attacks on the Crats to morph into a bit of sarcasm at the cratchat talkpage. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) ( My talkpage) 18:22, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Why did you revert this Krett12 ( talk) 19:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix. DGG ( talk ) 23:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
-- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 02:13, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the input; it especially helps to have you responding to Drmies. He's uncomfortable participating in the other request ("Gaming at MOS"), so any input you have there would also help. Nyttend ( talk) 20:44, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Ches (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, you said it. Kinda nice to get it right, isn't it? Risker ( talk) 03:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
You (the royal you) finally did it. Congrats! Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 03:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I have put forward an unblock proposal for you at User talk:Winkelvi#January 2016 2. Have a read and see what you think. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
[25]. I hope you won some money... MastCell Talk 20:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I would, just for the sake of curiousity, like to know what I should have done with the references on the page that don't match up with the links given for them. I have asked three admins (you are three) and posted on the article talk page, but I haven't received any answer on this. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not commenting at AN/EW since the discussion is closed and I didn't want to reopen it, but as the reporting editor I just wanted to say I agree entirely with your closing actions/logic; I think the warning is definitely more appropriate than a block given the circumstances. Thank you for taking the time to look through it all.
FWIW, and to an extent echoing the comments above, if (having now reviewed all the back-and-forth) you think I could have handled any of this better in any way, that's feedback I'd be very interested to hear. Obviously no obligation etc etc.
— me_ and 22:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Regarding this: was I out of line at the AN3 noticeboard? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
"this is not an invitation for you to tell me in great detail how their battleground mentality is worse than your battleground mentality."I would not have considered doing that, regardless of the circumstances. As far as despising LP: I don't despise him. I don't despise Wikipedia editors, any of them. Behavior is another matter and it's certainly possible to be completely against despicable behavior but not the person committing the behavior. Despising another is not my personality. In regard to the "battleground mentality" statement you made above about my own behavior, I guess I never would have considered it as such until you just pointed it out. I appreciate being straightened out on that. Seriously. Thanks,-- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Are we defining 3rr differently or have I missed something? Each edit I provided showing the editor deleting material, eg [26]. Doug Weller talk 06:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello Floq,
I looked up your name as the last admin to have blocked winkelvi. I only started here less than one month ago.
Please see these three diffs for and explanation of winkelvis detailed campaign of harassment and hounding toward me.
She seems to be really upset about the failing of the GA nom for Billy the Kid. Her harassment campaign has increased since then. Now she has filled a bogus SPI and included me in it. Just for everyones information I have edited before at another site for children's articles that uses this same wiki software. This is just the next step in her campaign of harassment and hounding against me. Please see the harassment and hounding that winkelvi by starting with these three diffs. [27] [28] [29] I have asked her repeatedly to leave me alone and to stop her harassment of me. Thanks. Something should be done to stop all winkelvi's disruption to Wikipedia. Please look it over and see if you might help assess the situation and get winkelvi to stop harassing me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jilllyjo ( talk • contribs) 05:36, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Could you please tell him to stop removing every edit I make to an article? He removes reliable sources from articles just because i added them. I'm fed up with Synthwave. Caden cool 03:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
You shouldn't have done that. Everyone would've been better off if we just let the incident fade into memory rather than appease the editor acting like a screaming child. 142.105.159.60 ( talk) 04:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
|
Reward for the cutting of a Gordian knot |
Thank you for this edit. Remember that bacon heals all wounds. And while I have your ear, kindly remind Kelapstick that it's been nine years. Drmies ( talk) 03:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC) |
That was all that was needed, and admonition duly accepted, even though as a grammarian I refuse to accept that inverted commas must everywhere be taken as 'scare quotes'. Perhaps today readers think that way. People raised on the old system of English grammar and parsing don't think that way. Still, your judgment was fair to all concerned parties. Thanks. Nishidani ( talk) 08:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi
I wanted to have myself blocked until August 31, 2016 since I felt my edits are being too boring and I wanted to relax from the English Wikipedia. 135.23.144.92 ( talk) 19:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for throwing the protection on there. I've gone ahead and rangeblocked. -- Kinu t/ c 22:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
For doing the right thing regarding Jilllyjo. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) ( My talkpage) 18:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Racial equality (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racial equality (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ibadibam ( talk) 00:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
I was, and am, paying attention to the warnings I place. The user was reverting multiple editors, hence the warnings. Please be courteous (admin or not) about removing others talk page comments on another users talk page - WP:UP#OWN. Garchy ( talk) 20:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Can you tell me why you lifted the " Money (That's What I Want)" topic ban for User:Synthwave who's now free to edit as seen here [32] and here [33] but you never bothered to lift the topic ban for me? Why is he free to edit and I'm not? Explain to me Flo because I am not happy at all with the way you have handled this. Caden cool 22:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
This post is cross posted to both of your talk pages, my talk page, and to the article talk page.
I'm trying to figure out a way to (a) not have to personally monitor this article 24/7; (b) allow two editors who have 11 years and 47,000 edits between them - and who should thus both know better - to edit this article collaboratively; and (c) not have to write 6 paragraphs of instructions. I've come up with this:
The article topic ban is rescinded for both of you. However, you are both limited to strict WP:BRD; if either one of you changes any portion of the article from the way it is at the time of this post (22:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)), and anyone (including the other editor, but also anyone else) reverts you, then you may not edit this portion of the article further, and must instead discuss the issue on the talk page. Hopefully other editors will join in, and an uninvolved editor (not one of you two) will implement consensus. This "enforced BRD" will last for 1 month from right now. If problems develop again between you two, on this article or any other article, then I anticipate going to ANI and get one or both of you sanctioned more severely, including one or more of: expanding this "enforced BRD" to include the entire encyclopedia; topic bans; interaction bans; or blocking. If you actually want an ANI thread because you think you'll be vindicated and your enemy will be cast down, I advise you to rethink; I strongly suspect both of you would get sanctioned equally. This is not a case where one of you is right and the other is wrong. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
On Feb 28, you made this edit to my talkpage. That is a threat with abusing admin powers. I note that you did not engage in the [34]] to argue any point. I propose you withdraw that out of line threat in wording (I already removed it from my page). - DePiep ( talk) 07:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I have to admit that it was stupid of me. But anyway, will do my best to add as many tags as possible and to future articles as well of course. Do you have any other suggestions or helpful tips when it comes to doing articles that are at least at times translations? If you have any personal experience from that. Regards, BabbaQ ( talk) 23:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
AWB rights. Thank you. —/
Mendaliv/
2¢/
Δ's/ 08:29, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
- his birthday, DYK? (Old calendar, but still.) Music for you. Same image on my talk ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:27, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Per [35] I wonder if it might also be a good thing to do to full-protect that user page as well? Just wondering. Your call. Montanabw (talk) 22:07, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
As you're obviously way too active [36] to be considered "semi-around," I've opened a pointless drama thread at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Floquenbeam misuse of semi-around banner. NE Ent 22:19, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
You forgot something... that's like the third time I've invited someone to block me and nobody has! Okay, so I don't actually have time right now to write an article on my talk page or anywhere else, but that's beside the point. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 22:58, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
... beat 'em (or say "Nyah, nyah, nyah" at them). Softlavender ( talk) 07:15, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up after the other user!, Maybe I'm being a grumpy sod but after seeing the same shit get done year upon year it begins to get boring and rather tiresome!, Ah well thanks for cleaning up anyway, Happy editing, – Davey2010 Talk 02:16, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that. For some reason I didn't think the merge request would not post a notice in the target article. - Mr X 18:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
AusLondonder (
talk) 22:44, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The clerk's barnstar: more paperwork |
What, you thought the compensation for good clerking would be anything else? Opabinia regalis ( talk) 23:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Floq, Sorry I was completely busy, Anyway I wouldn't of minded being your guinea pig ... infact I don't see much point to the new "rights" so had you removed it I probably wouldn't of bothered asking for it back anyway!, Ah well thanks for asking anyway I guess :), Happy editing, – Davey2010 Talk 02:43, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
You may wish to take Magnolia's suggestion and block him for 3-12 hours. He blanked the talk page at Carnage (DJ). That being said, Magnolia may have been a bit reactive too. I don't see a downright bad nom, but a couple were marginal. Getting a handful of articles AfDd all at once might piss me off too. John from Idegon ( talk) 01:36, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
explain to me how you came to fathom your edit summary? I don't have a feud with anyone, for the record. And I often redirect articles that FAIL WP:NSONGS. I do hope that I see you leave a comment on MaranoFan's user talk about the glaring WP:OWN issue. — Calvin999 19:51, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
− Excuse me, but it's not any editor's article, it's a Wikipedia article that appears to not yet be ready for primetime. The AfD says clearly: delete or redirect, the reasons are sound. Was I wrong to start the AfD? It's a viable, relevant article that should stay as is? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Look, I seriously saw nothing wrong with doing what I thought was the right thing by opening the AfD. If it will make you all feel better, I will withdraw it - if that's possible at this point. The thought of being site banned over things I'm still not clear about (other than inconveniencing administrators), is literally making me physically ill. I had no intention to cause or be part of disruption. If leaving everything involving MF alone (where I haven't been first) is an answer, I will gladly do it. I'm not a jerk, I'm not a bad editor, I'm not an intentionally disruptive person. I will do whatever it takes to not be taken to Arbcom or get a site ban (even though I think sitebanning is uncalled for and overkill). -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:35, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Re your prior status [38]:
Your lights are on, but you're online Your mind is not your own Your heart sweats, your body shakes Another edit is what it takes You can't sleep, you can't eat There's no doubt, you're in deep Your throat is tight, you can't breathe Another edit is all you need Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to wik'i You see the pings, and you must read You're typing at a different speed Your heart beats in double time Another edit and you'll be ours, a one track mind You can't log out One more post is all you crave If there's some left for you You don't mind if you do Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Your lights are on, but you're online Your mind is not your own Your heart sweats, your body shakes Another edit is what it takes Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i
NE Ent 20:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's to the rules of Wikipedia
Where breach of "just a guideline" results in an instant block
And "edits in a similar way" means "obviously a sock"
Where "flexible policies" are as immovable as rocks
For they'll always be defended by a mindless admin flock
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Policies, go find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the forums of Wikipedia
Where children sit in judgement over experts in their field
And accuracy is sacrificed for populist appeal
Where editors are blocked as the result of secret deals
And it's still as far as ever from the WMF ideal
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Forums, go and find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the government of Wikipedia
Where despite "no formal power" the founder ought to wear a crown
Directing all the policies right from the top straight down
Where editors all quiver every time an admin frowns
And "policy discussions" are the ravings of a clown
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Bureaucrats, go find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the admins of Wikipedia
Where academic knowledge is a thing to be despised
If it's not in their school library, it's suspect in their eyes
And if anyone's an expert, it's an "obvious COI"
For if you've your own opinion, you're just a troll in disguise
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Admins, go and find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the Arbcom of Wikipedia
Who rubberstamp decisions that are made on IRC
And fight against every step towards increased transparency
Who defend their own decisions, no matter how arbitrary
For disagreement with them is a "breach of policy"
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Arbcom, go and find yourselves another project to be part of.
And here's to the critics of Wikipedia
Who can always spot a problem, but never find a cure
And all their proposed solutions make the simplest task a chore
Where every crank with an agenda finds themselves at home
And legitimate critics are drowned out by trolling drones
Your blogs with pretensions are nothing to speak of
Critics, go find something more worthwhile to go and write critiques of.
I "demanded" the cat below also. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:00, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Hoping you come through with that one-month block. Check his contribs.-- MaranoFan ( talk) 10:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
This is the uncle of the guy with the disability you dealt with yesterday. I'm very disturbed with how. He was treated. You don't ever do that to people like him. Thanks be to you I have to take him to counseling today. You need to think twice about who u deal with on Wikipedia you should be ashamed of yourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.150.232 ( talk) 14:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Listen bozo my disabled nephew is 29 and I'm. 50 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.87.151.54 (
talk) 15:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Floq, I think you need a nice calming cup of tea. You have wound up in the middle of this never-ending dogfight, and they don't take your hint (or even your outright saying so) that you are sick of it. I think you are right about the only solution to this mess. Meanwhile, put your feet up and have some tea. MelanieN ( talk) 00:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC) |
Edit summaries such as this [39] make it hard to believe any longer that this is just a confused new user. E Eng 15:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Your 66.87.xx friend has so far only posted from quite a small range, 66.87.150.0/23. I've blocked it. Bishonen | talk 15:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC).
{{User:Writ Keeper/userpage.js}}
". Then you indef full-protect the userpage and put your real userpage's content in the .js subpage.The reason it works is that everyone's .js subpages are automatically protected from editing by anyone but admins *and* the user themself, even if that user isn't an admin; this is in order to protect people's scripts and widgets from being tampered with, while still allowing non-admins to write scripts. So, by transcluding such a page onto one's userpage, and protecting the transclusion itself with a full-protect, one gets a userpage that only the user themself, regardless of their admin status, and admins can edit. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 16:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I didn't invent that code. It was suggested by another user, MusikAnimal, who is also the author of the bot that removes the plain "pp" template when protection expires. He assured me this approach should work, and take away the need to manually add it when a page is protected. Should make Duncan Hill happy too. :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:51, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Re your comment, there is a bot which removes the template from unprotected pages, but it sometimes takes a while to get around to it. There isn't a bot to add it to pages which are protected, this needs to be done manually. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice. I'm just feeling bothered by this user who insisted that I violate the 3RR rules, for which I didn't! I have proof that my 'fourth edit' (which is made by another user) is not within 24 hours and I'm not even reverting into my own edit. It was someone else's edits. Thank you again for listening to me. Sorry for bothering you with this. ( SquidHomme) —Preceding undated comment added 18:59, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not getting used to this. This is the first time I engage in a dispute. Thank you again for your advice sir, have a good day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SquidHomme ( talk • contribs) 23:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
If you're online, would you mind taking a look at this 3RR report about me? The reporter seems to have just gone off the deep end [40] and I'm really exhausted at having to have just put hours into defending my edits only to find out it was all a big joke. Thanks. LavaBaron ( talk) 05:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Another fine example of arguing & convincing you delivered. How bright your understanding of the thread it shows! One question: why only one month? Have you grown a sense? Next time, just start with a year no less. To keep your standing, as it were. - DePiep ( talk) 09:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam. First of all, I completely understand your reasoning for the blocks of Calvin and MaranoFan and based on the former's behaviour, I agree with it 100%. I don't know if you've noticed, but I recently adopted MaranoFan so that I'll be ensuring that this fiasco and pointless feud with Calvin doesn't happen again. To be fair, she did get drawn into that ANI thread (which everyone admitted was pointless) by Calvin, so I'm not advocating anybody's behaviour. I've been talking to MF a lot lately and I've made her aware that I'll be guiding her and keeping an eye on her to make sure that nothing like this happens again. We both agreed that she wants an interaction ban with Calvin and she has promised that she won't get drawn into to any more arguments. To enforce this, I will monitor her closely and I can vouch for her. I'm going to cut to the chase; would you be open to unblocking her now or would she have to make another unblock request so that a neutral party can review it? I know how you might feel about this, but she's been doing good work lately. She has potential, and I'll make sure nothing like that happens to her again. JAG UAR 19:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
@ Jaguar: On reflection, I don't personally want to unblock early, due to neither person acknowledging any responsibility for this long-running timesink in their unblock requests. The longer-than-you-might-expect duration was intentional, and if anything, so far the message seems to have been received more clearly by the other people feuding than by these two. If MF wants to resubmit an unblock request, or Liz wants to consider an unblock after 2 weeks, I will likely not comment further on their page; I've said my piece there, and am more than willing to defer to another admin's take on it. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I worry about you. Softlavender ( talk) 17:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Did you know that I nominated this (meaning: released, freed, liberated) in February, with certain hopes? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:53, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
ps: in case you'd like more background to what you have to deal with: please... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:49, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
If you are interested, the IBM cards were also known as Hollerith cards, in early days. I not only punched programs for college courses, but received paychecks which were Hollerith-punched. (My spelling may be incorrect.) Rags ( talk) 18:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Very kind, many thanks. Best wishes, you-know-who or 82.36.105.25 ( talk) 00:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm about to create User:Floq's newbie account. Have no fear, it's not a troll or imposter. Just want to see what the whole VE crisis is about. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:32, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that- I was just temporarilly deranged (!!!) with banging my head against what seemed to be a brick wall., and of course, when it's one's own TP, it seems a helluvva lot like vandalism! Thanks for all your help though. Again, apologies. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
It is a lie to say that I had not been disruptive. It is true that I had vandalized pages. I have done this a lot, and this is my worst yet.
P.S. Forgive me for my being excited, but do you believe that I have been disruptive? The reason why I have reported myself is because I am angry with myself. One side of me tells "the truth" that I have vandalized Wikipedia, and I believe in the statement, but how about you? Do you believe that I have vandalized an article on purpose? I hope that I had not. The thing is that, when I make little mistakes, I try to have myself blocked because no one would take action, and it may be better that I be blocked for now. Would you like to do that?
Gamingforfun365
(talk) 22:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Floquenbeam, would you like to take the lead on dealing with the unblock request? Newyorkbrad ( talk) 15:23, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam. Thank you for your comment on my AN post. I created those accounts as I was dealing with a sock a while back and I didn't want to be impersonated. I do not intend to make any more of such accounts. However, I would like to ask if you could help me review the aforementioned account, as I have lost access to that account completely and I don't want to be construed as owning that account maliciously.
Please understand I'm doing all this so that I will not be faulted for any sock related matters in future. I hope that you would understand, and I would appreciate your patience. Regards, Optakeover (U) (T) (C) 19:49, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
@ Optakeover: I hope you did not mind my closure of your request. It was a procedural matter for me and not personal. You are always welcome on my talk page if you need a simple admin action. HighInBC 20:10, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I think you should take a look at this edit closely. His edit is causing the malformation of the header. I am right in reverting it.
Optakeover
(U)
(T)
(C) 14:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
I didn't realize there was a typo in Shotgun surgery. I read User:Optakeover's message as "replacing superfluous uppercase by lowercase is unconstructive". This is not polite. Saying "you inserted a Greek letter" would have been polite. Also the Swoosh smack is unpolite.
Please unblock User talk:167.107.191.217. It is not an open proxy. HaŋaRoa ( talk) 14:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For protecting Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/AustralianRupert, very much appreciated. Omni Flames let's talk about it 08:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks, OF, we'll see if it had its intended effect when the protection expires... -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Seems " Template:Life timeline", transcluded on 160 pages, has been recently vandalized - and may require some protection? - perhaps similar to that performed on the " Template:Nature timeline" somewhat recently? - in any case - Thanks, at least, for considering the issue - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 02:56, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I see you have cleaned up this article. Please check my edit and let me know if I have correctly added the info that someone was looking for on the Flotilla issue. Thank you. Gabs Blue Labs ( talk) 21:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but does an RFA need to be closed as either successful or unsuccessful, rather than archive closed, as you have done? Due to the archive close, the RFA has not appeared in the history. Let me know how it's done either way - I am interested, and I look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience. -- PatientZero talk 17:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
To address bullet one; thirty five more years of history in Europe is roughly the same as 350 years of history in the North American Colonies (the US I believe you touchingly like to call them). Have a fantastic trip sir - the itinerary looks wonderful. Enjoy. Pedro : Chat 20:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Any chance to meet you in Germany? My infobox tells you where to find me, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:57, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the IP vandal!
ThePlatypusofDoom
(Talk) 19:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
You're quite welcome. Though vandal blocking strikes me as more of a dog or cat type thing (a terrier or cat catching a mouse) than a kitten type thing. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
[44] if you wouldn't mind taking a look. 142.105.159.60 ( talk) 21:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
polite, courteous, and friendly | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 157 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:48, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Enjoy your vacation!
About a month ago, you blocked Winkelvi for a month. He is back following me around and causing trouble, along with his friend, Soflavender. I wish Winkelvi would not be so disruptive. I thought that someone who has been blocked 10 times before would behave better but he didn't learn from your block. I give up. That is why disruptive users win. Whiskeymouth ( talk) 02:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Just letting you know I "borrowed" your comments for the close. Didn't seem a point to restate in this case when you did so well : ) - jc37 08:27, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Just now noticed that I reverted you earlier today; wasn't my intention, just following the link you left on my talk page while on my phone and evidently hit rollback. Still not really around so will self-revert and reply on my talk page in a day or two, when I'm really back. But why are you closing discussions that were archived several months ago? -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 00:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
10 July |
---|
Took only 300 years to restore a good name. - "play on" -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
May I request to be temporarily blocked for one day on Wikimedia Commons? I seem to be throwing a fit
here and just want to stop it. I am trying my best not to fight over it and lose it again, but I think that I can calm down on Commons if I happen to be blocked there.
Gamingforfun365
(talk) 16:42, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
If it all turns to dust, then you will be to blame. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 14:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm back, but still have that feeling you get when you've been away for a while (long enough to regain some perspective) and then can't help yourself and look at a random noticeboard, and are horrified by how depressing this place is. I'm sure I'll get sucked back in during the coming week(s) - I always do - but for today I think I'll go watch birds fly around outside.
But anyway, I'm paying attention to my talk page again, and messages left here will no longer go unanswered for a week. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 15:18, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
16 July 2016 |
---|
... on a centenary of a performance, - don't give up on this place, there's still content, daily! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I incorrectly listed it. Can you help me post it in the technically correct manner? Also, I appreciate your feedback saying I wouldn't have a chance of getting approved. However, I think that may not be the case, if I have the chance to respond directly to objections, and explain why I would be the best candidate in terms of my fairness, balance, and knowledge about the project, I think I could win. JoeM ( talk) 17:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Simple. 1 I am a deeply flawed human being ;-) 2 Harry's brother, Albert, has long been a bit of a hero of mine. Mainly because of this: "In 1899 ... Trott's penchant for the spectacular did not fail him: having already landed the ball on the pavilion balcony at Lord's in the match, he became the first (and to this day the only) batsman to hit a ball over the current Lord's pavilion, bludgeoning Monty Noble out of the ground on 31 July 1899. The ball hit a chimney and fell into the garden outside the house of Philip Need, the Lord's dressing room attendant." -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 07:10, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Amen (pretend this is some sort of barnstar) -- NeilN talk to me 18:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Can you please restore the article too? I saw you did the AFD. Thanks. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:01, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Do I have a target on my back? I've had two spurious SPIs in as many months. p b p 01:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Just noticed this. It turns out a few months ago I had written this. You're welcome. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 03:45, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Regarding Vape Shoreditch, just be aware of this sockpuppet investigation. This is part of the reason I tagged it with WP:G3. You make a valid point about it already having a WP:AfD going but just wanted to explain my motives. Hope you are well! -- Zackmann08 ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 18:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Since you blocked TEoATW at SPI, I thought I'd give you a heads up: he's back, telling everyone what to do, and playing pseudo-problem solver in the guise of one Glacialfrost. There's a new filing at SPI if you were inclined to take a look. The behavioral evidence is pretty strong, and the new sock is from California, as are TEoATW and his already identified sock. He's also back in Cityside189's orbit, and giving him some difficulty, I gather from this discussion. Thanks! -- Drmargi ( talk) 19:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
for having some common sense. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 23:55, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Floquenbeam, thank you for this: [4]. As problematic as his recent dispute interactions have been, an indefinite block strikes me as a relatively unfair outcome that was driven by several editors with whom Alakzi has been in recent heated disputes. Even if checkuser shows actual sock-puppetry -- and I hope it doesn't -- there is still a missing element of wrong-doing required for an indefinite block. As I said on the SPI talk page, I really want to help this guy, but I don't know how to do so given the limitations of interacting through Wikipedia talk pages. He is a genuine talent, and I would be saddened if the project lost him. *sigh* Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 23:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC) And, yes, I am mindful of the last time you and I stuck out our necks in the interest of giving a blocked editor the benefit of the doubt. Dirtlawyer1 ( talk) 23:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Here is a kitten. If you need more let me know.
Chillum 21:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
|
I hope all this isn't getting you down. Have this, if it keeps your spirits up! ceradon ( talk • edits) 21:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for the thought, Ceradon. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry I helped make this a rough day for you. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 22:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I would appreciate a private candid coversation with you too Floq when you feel up to it, please email me I would still like your opinion. Hell in a Bucket ( talk) 22:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Floq, YGM. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 23:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Oops, did I say that out loud? What I meant was... take some time off, recharge your batteries, and come back rested and ready to once again partake in this wonderful, rational, grounded Wikipedia community.
MastCell
Talk 08:03, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
OK. So:
More importantly,
I saw (and still see) a lot of technical area overlap, and one or two other things that led me in one direction. But the human part of this - people I trust implicitly, and people who are smarter than me, saying it probably isn't Jack, or even flat out that it isn't - convinces me that I've probably made a big mistake, and one that caused a lot of distress to Alakzi. So, I'm:
Once again, sorry Alakzi, and sorry everyone. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:00, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Hatting off-topic, this does not belong on my talk page. Or anywhere, really. Gerda, you're collaterally being hatted too, sorry. --
Floquenbeam (
talk) 12:26, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
|
---|
|
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thanks Floq, for unblocking Malik. Guess I'm too chickenshit to do it. Really, why didn't I. Drmies ( talk) 17:31, 18 August 2015 (UTC) |
You have no idea how much I hate saying this, but, if the ArbCom does take the case on Malik, it might make some sense to allow the Dyer person to edit so as to comment in the case, if his sockpuppetry hasn't been really conclusively proven. Maybe. I dunno. John Carter ( talk) 22:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
If you're not currently in police custody, you deserve this morning-after beer. If you are, you can bribe the jailer with it for cigarette privileges. And get rid of your expired toothpaste. Drmies ( talk) 14:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC) |
I survived. Police custody was never a real risk, but sitting in a corner, slowly rocking back and forth, muttering "they'll be gone in the morning. they'll be gone in the mornng." over and over, was. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 19:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for so quickly taking care of the Rauschenberg vandal... which kind of sounds like Marvel comic character... Anyway Rauschenberg has been dead for awhile so wasn't sure if you knew that when you cited BLP violations. The name is so familiar many don't realize he is no longer with us.( Littleolive oil ( talk) 17:43, 19 August 2015 (UTC))
Thank you for being an administrator that finally saw Nonamesleft for the reason why he was truly here. I noted his "edits" and article creation appeared to be both hoax and vandalism. Filed an AIV based on what looked like vandalism to me as well as WP:NOTHERE (see here). The admin who took care of it concluded none of the above applied (see here). I'm not the "I told you so" type, but... I called it days ago. And knew I was right when I saw this (saying I'm hounding and harassing) and then this on my talk page (saying I must have an arrest record for stalking) in addition to this (when the mental illness garbage started) at the AfD for the Vatican airports "article". Oh, and then there was the incidence of him copying and pasting the user space of an administrator and not removing the permission and administrator top-icons after being told he needed to. All of that said WP:NOTHERE to me, but... apparently not to at least one other (even though more than one admin was aware of what was happening). I know it's not the end of the world when people behave like this in Wikipedia, but it is pretty annoying to be called a criminal with mental illness and it's essentially ignored for days. Thanks for taking care of it. Appreciated. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
The OP at AE is a clear and undeniable Sock - (the only edits whatsoever are the complaint) and I would ask that it be treated as harassment by a sock, and looked into as such per policy. Thanks. Collect ( talk) 12:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Its just an essay, an opinion. I have closed cmts with best wishes even when I disagree with someone which means to me at least that while I disagree with what may be a Wikipedia issue, it does not mean I am judging the person. I do not intend snark. However, WP has its own strange culture so hard to say how such cmts are taken. Best wishes :O)(
Littleolive oil (
talk) 15:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC))
Do I get a kitten? -- Dweller ( talk) 22:07, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Floq! Over at the Frankfurt School talk page we've decided to change the heading for the Cultural Marxism section, from Conspiracy Theory - to Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory. So we were just wondering if you might lower the protection to the redirect page (we're asking you first as per WP:RFP) [7] alternatively you could update it yourself we just need it to redirect to the new section title "Frankfurt School#Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory" thanks muchly! -- Jobrot ( talk) 14:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
As far as this: [8]. If the hounding and harassment and poking by the other editor doesn't stop? It would have been nice to get some kind of assurance from him that it would before you closed it out. Because, frankly, considering his past behavior and previous indef for the same kind of thing, I'm not confident that he won't continue in the same vein as he has been for the last six days. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Jesus Christ you are both obnoxious. Both of you go away. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 20:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey Floq, thanks for your help with that issue I posted. Strange situation. You quick assistance was much appreciated! Montanabw (talk) 22:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm not allowed to respond? Rusted AutoParts 19:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
JMHamo (
talk) 22:35, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Please advise me what you are talking about; "posted to user page." I am dealing with an administrator who refuses to accept my version of the events that led to two totally different pictures being said to be of the same person. I am posting to the user page of the administrator as seems to be the way of Wikipedia Jagtig ( talk) 23:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Just so you know, an IP that is very obviously Jagtig filed another DRN request in spite of being turned down before. BLUSTER⌉⌊ BLASTER 16:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I noted this block of Unframboise. You might be interested in User talk:SMcCandlish#The Fall. It's dense, so here's the precis: I deleted a seemingly irrelevant line at The Fall (TV series), a non sequitur statement that Gillian Anderson's character "is extremely comfortable with her own sexuality", in a one-liner character description, which seemed WP:UNDUE prurience stated like that (and made some WP:PEACOCK correction tweaks) [9]. Unframboise reverted the lot, on the insistence that it was relevant. I worked in good faith with the editor to preserve the statement (my response to the assertion that the sexuality of the character is important to the entire plot line is that we should "say so"), but clarify it so its relevance would be clear to the reader and not come off as fanwanky (and I reinstated the PEACOCK fixing) [10]. Other editors have since worked with those changes (and reinforced that we should not be using peacock terms like "extremely"), yet Unframboise has taken personal offense at all of this (warping all commentary about content into a perceived insult to him personally), and has been playing an amazingly long-winded, quote-everything-you-said-back-at-you, WP:BATTLEGROUND game on my talk page, about what is an already resolved and moved-past dispute from about two days ago, and seems unwilling to just drop the matter, as well as engaging in a constant pattern of nearly unbelievable levels of WP:IDHT, on every single point raised in the discussion.
The relevance to the recent block:
I don't think this incident requires any immediate action (this is not a request for a new block), but the nature of the incident as both "anti-PC" attitude-pushing involving how WP writes about women and their sexuality, and a confrontational, fight-to-the-death-over-moot-points pattern, closely relate to why this editor was previously blocked, and it may help establish that the pattern is habitual, should such incidents arise again later with other editors. (I don't edit TV articles much, so don't anticipate running into this editor again any time soon). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 01:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Why did you change User Talk:SimonTrew. I put it under WP:CSD#G7, blanked as author requests deletion. I put in the edit summary that I shall continue to edit wikipedia, but it is a matter of privacy, and I want it blanked. I edit under my real name and thus in real life I get a bit of abuse sometimes, Flo, so I want it blanked. Si Trew ( talk) 17:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
( edit conflict), sorry. I have absolute respect for you, and your contributions to Wikipedia. Sorry that that hill is So far away (one more song about moving along the highway). It's no big deal, but my talk page was just getting rather cluttered, so I emptied it. I do that fairly regularly because I know it is there in the history, so it doesn't have to be at the talk page. I know WP:CHEAP but it gets hard for others to read it if it's too long, or if It's too late. Your sincere friend, Si Trew ( talk) 18:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam, can you join me in the article talk page? Thanks. ( N0n3up ( talk) 19:57, 6 September 2015 (UTC))
re: Partial mistake? Yes. I lost my cool. -- Golbez ( talk) 18:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Gamergate was exactly the article I was trying to edit the talk page of. How do I appeal it so I can edit the talk page? It is very strange that I can't even edit the talk page. The other articles I read almost always have sources in the ledes. This one strangely does not for some very strong claims. Saigo no Yume ( talk) 19:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
(moving this back a bit) Ok, I'm reading through this and it looks like this was a request against TheRedPenofDoom for essentially calling other people stupid and crazy. I looked him up in the search engine and found that he is now topic banned from the Gamergate article - presumably for being disruptive. However, in this instance, instead of punishing TheRedPenofDoom, the people in charge decided to implement this 30-day minimum/500 edit thing.
This course of action does not seem to follow.
I went back to looking at the Gamergate Arbcom page and it sets out a very specific set of remedies that are available ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate#Remedies ).
"(vii) Discretionary sanctions permit full and semi-page protections, including use of pending changes where warranted, and – once an editor has become aware of sanctions for the topic – any other appropriate remedy may be issued without further warning."
The 500 edit/30 day account action is not in the list of available remedies.
Furthermore, "Discretionary sanctions" were also referenced ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions ), but the relevant section does not allow the action taken by Zad68:
"Page restrictions7.5
Any uninvolved administrator may impose on any page or set of pages relating to the area of conflict semi-protection, full protection, move protection, revert restrictions, and prohibitions on the addition or removal of certain content (except when consensus for the edit exists). Editors ignoring page restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator. The enforcing administrator must log page restrictions they place.
Best practice is to add editnotices to restricted pages where appropriate, using the standard template ({{ ds/editnotice}})."
Also, reading the discretionary sanctions page makes it clear that new people should not be assumed to be bad editors, but this policy makes that assumption by default.
Am I overlooking something or is my logic and understanding sound? Saigo no Yume ( talk) 20:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm... equating a prohibition on new editors to a prohibition based on religion or gender seems like the kind of hyperbole that we are trying to keep off of that page. So maybe, in its own small way, it is working. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 21:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
On another note, I'm glad the page is free of hyperbole:
The Gamergate controversy began in August 2014 and concerns sexism in video game culture. It is most notable for a harassment campaign that sought to drive several feminists from the video game industry, including game developers Zoë Quinn and Brianna Wu, and cultural critic Anita Sarkeesian. The campaign of harassment was coordinated in IRC channels and online forums such as Reddit, 4chan, and 8chan by an anonymous and amorphous group that ultimately came to be represented by the Twitter hashtag #gamergate. The harassment included doxing, threats of rape, death threats and was related to a mass shooting threat at a university speaking event. Saigo no Yume ( talk) 21:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Try this, there's nothing like it! Bishonen | talk 18:17, 8 September 2015 (UTC).
I was trying to see what difference it made for looking at the user name..Your threat speaks volumes about you.. Void burn ( talk) 23:59, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I noticed you have blocked this IP for disruptive editing and personal attacks against HkCaGu. Can you revoke access to this IP's talk page as he blanked his talk page including his block notice (referred to as "nonsense"). Thanks! Citydude1017 ( talk) 18:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that editor (who is otherwise a productive editor, but who basically stalks me - although I've never bothered to put together the evidence for it) does put my back up, and when that happens I behave like an idiot . My apologies. BMK ( talk) 20:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Would you please respond: why do you assume these nominations were made in bad faith? The rationales are totally valid. If you were really that concerned about my supposed "bad faith", you should have better warned me, rather than have gone out there to close perfectly reasonable nominations. -- Diego Grez-Cañete ( talk) 18:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC) PS. This is why people get so pissed off about Wikipedia, you guys are champions in making real content creators get off. Keep up with your drama-whoring (and this is not a personal message, this is directed to whoever feels touched) -- Diego Grez-Cañete ( talk) 18:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Your little clique of Administrators has gotten the message across. I guess you must wield what little pathetic power you have. Funny how the first article I created is scheduled for deletion IMMEDIATELY after I file a complaint against an Administrator. ( Personal attack removed) I am done here. Lady.de.Clare ( talk) 9:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
... do you have time to weep over the state of RfA? - " the Alakzi cantata" - the one about spirit and soul becoming confused - is on the German Main page, DYK? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:41, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
[13] — Ched : ? 01:22, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Floq, many of the support !votes I had at my RfA had relatively little content or discussion, but yours was one that did. I valued your statement, "The question in my mind is whether I trust her to never involve her admin tools, directly or indirectly, when a friend is in conflict with someone else. I'm not positive she will, but I'm reasonably confident she will. I wouldn't be willing to take the risk for everyone, but in this case the benefits of having a smart, active, serious content contributor who has a ton of experience and cluefulness leads me to want to take that risk. " Because the potential for abuse of the tools did seem to be the crux of it for many people, I am curious as to how you got there with me and how I can continue to convince more people that this is true. Seems a Catch-22: If you have the kind of personality that is not afraid of conflict and sticking to your guns, crucial to a good admin, you have also had conflicts, so it is labeled a "battlefield mentality" that disqualifies you for getting the mop. How did you resolve that dilemma? As far as things I'm looking at in terms of what the oppose !votes said, some of that needs a little more time to let the bruises heal up a bit to think clearly Montanabw (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, just wanted to point you to this, in case you hadn't seen it. At this point, we're either in the middle of an intra-family dispute between son and step-mother, or we're being whipsawed, I'm not sure which. I don't plan to respond to it. BMK ( talk) 20:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
That term can refer to the touristic area of Quito, or, indeed, any touristic area in a Hispanic country. As such, it probably should redirect to a more general article. I trust your judgment. (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 14:53, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
My first reaction was "NOOOOOOOO!". Now that I think about it I 100% see where you are coming from. The community has a long standing pattern of failing to protect users from abusive individuals. I am also sick of Wikipedia constantly giving 1 more chance to people who engage in nasty attacks on other editors. I do hope you return, but I get it. I am one step closer to walking away myself. HighInBC 15:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
So long, and thanks for all the fish! Youi'll be missed. Please reconsider and turn this into a brief hiatus or wikibreak. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 16:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The best revenge |
Illegitimi non carborundum Honing only makes you sharper. Surviving and thriving will make your point. 7&6=thirteen ( ☎) 16:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
realize that the terms of Reg's unblock specifically include a restriction on interacting with admins, and could certainly be specifically extended to include a broader i-ban with you. I know Reg too, and I know that his more-than-occasional self-absorbtion can be at bast irritating. And, honestly, given the nature of some of his comments on his own talk page, although I in no way want to be seen as making anything like a hard prediction here, I can honestly say that I would not myself necessarily bet that the current situation will remain unchanged for long. John Carter ( talk) 17:27, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Hope you enjoy your (temporary) retirement, it's always good to get some headspace and regenerate (like Doctor Who), coming back fitter and fightier than before. And usually younger, but I don't know how to make that work. Regardless of all the "flaming arrows" (as my boss refers to the pesky interruptions of those trying to burn your rope bridge while you're en route to Nirvana), there are many of us who already miss you. I'm not into the patronising stuff, but seriously, we're a "man down" now. We'll limp on, but your insight is mandatory here so don't leave it too long before you get back to it. You have my highest regards, take good care, The Rambling Man ( talk) 19:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I understand why, but this is a horrific shame. If you want to earbash me, you know my email. I will miss you. WormTT( talk) 19:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
It has been suggested that you provide input to this discussion. We would greatly appreciate your insight in whatever form you deem fit. Hasteur ( talk) 20:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Au revoir |
I hope the sailing gets smoother and that you come back. Shearonink ( talk) 20:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Special Barnstar |
Live long and prosper, Floq. BethNaught ( talk) 20:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
... all the obvious things that you'd expect me to say here. Hope to see you again soon. Regards, Newyorkbrad ( talk) 21:16, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I don't really feel like talking to anyone right now, hope that's OK. All well wishes are appreciated, all emails or requests for an email will be followed up some point. Right now this place makes me nauseous. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 21:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
... so to the extent this means anything, it is incredibly sad and demoralizing to see you leave, especially under these circumstances. You will be missed. Crow Caw 22:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;" Okay, a bit dramatic, but just another note from a regular grunt who's always appreciated your assistance, advice and thoughtfulness. Hope you'll feel like coming back at some point, but you'd done some heavy lifting over the years. Toss off the weights and soar into the sky! Ravensfire ( talk) 22:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
Thank you very much, and good luck with your life in the future. Rubbish computer 22:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
Thanks for your service to The Project, Floq... —Tim /// Carrite ( talk) 00:32, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
That didn't even take 24 hours. Reguyla has already said, fuck it, forget about it, he's not coming back. So please, Floq: un-retire, tell the crats never mind, and let's get back to normal here. -- MelanieN ( talk) 00:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Wild horses award |
If wild horses can drag you back to wikipedia, I'm sending you some! Hop on and enjoy the ride! Montanabw (talk) 01:34, 6 October 2015 (UTC) |
...that you return after you've had a break sufficient to recharge your batteries. What you contribute to the project is too valuable for us to lose. Best, BMK ( talk) 05:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
... and thanks for all the play. De profundis -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam. A decision has been proposed in the Palestine-Israel articles 3 arbitration case, for which you are on the notification list. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, L235 ( t / c / ping in reply) 20:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC) (via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk))
FYI, a troll tried impersonating you on the IRC, I have then registered your nickname with a 60 char random pw, poke me if you want me to release it to you. -- Vituzzu ( talk) 23:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 4, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Catflap08 and Hijiri88/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 18:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
You indicated at your retirement that you didn't want to edit at a site where a certain person was free to edit. I thought you might like to know that the discussion of possibly allowing that account to have its ban lifted has resulted in that individual being indefinitely banned from the site. Just FYI. John Carter ( talk) 18:55, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
I was surprised to find you retired and finally noticed it today. Best wishes for where ever you go!
![]() |
Sorry if semi-back sounds like a type of ballroom frock, but you know what I mean. Bishonen | talk 20:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC).
I won't trouble you with questions, observations or anything else, and I do hope all is going well for you. I just wanted to note that it's always good to see you pop in for a visit. Best always. — Ched : ? 16:58, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
You may have become frustrated. Calm down and listen, please don't threaten me again. Thanks - Supdiop ( T🔹 C) 23:49, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Floq, given the circumstances of the user's block, I'd block them for even longer for calling you a "vile human being". However, you're not an ordinary attackee, so I'll refrain if you'd prefer that I not do it. BTW, welcome back to the admin corps. Not sure how happy you are about it, but it's easier for my brain to think of you as an admin.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
...that you got the bit back. Well done. BMK ( talk) 02:07, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Will you be the one to end the drama thread about RO on ANI? It is clear to me that things are heated from a days long discussion. RO is indef blocked right now so couldn't someone close the thread, and revisit the issue about community sanctions at a later date when cooler heads are around? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 00:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Remember this? Do you recall where the template editor discussion occurred? -- NeilN talk to me 19:13, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
You don't got mail -- no email link? I'll send you the ace2105 if email (or turn your email pref on). NE Ent 11:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhh
This guy seems intent on ridicule and uncivil behavior [ [15]] Viriditus. I am wondering if he could be blocked or warned for incivility. Please look at the Drexler citation section toward the bottom of the page on the talk page of the Post scarcity article. I am asking here since you seem familiar with similar situations in regard to this person. Earl King Jr. ( talk) 08:15, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
O.k. Floquenbeam I get the message and will try to reform. I don't want to be a Randy. Thanks for the thoughtful overview. Earl King Jr. ( talk) 04:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Collapsing. Go away: my talk page is not where you two are going to start bickering with each other
|
---|
|
Just flagging this to spare an unnecessary followup ANI next week if the user decides to play it by the book and go back to announcing January 2016 wikibreaks every day - you closed this ANI discussion saying that "MVBW has kindly agreed to not use the retired or long wikibreak templates", but they only mentioned the former. (They actually took a luxurious two-hour "long wikibreak" in the time between their two comments on the ANI.) -- McGeddon ( talk) 20:19, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Are you going to do one this year? Yngvadottir ( talk) 20:38, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
I thought about it for a few minutes, and no, I'm not going to do a guide per se. But here's a list, FWIW:
Everyone else is in the grey hazy middle, again for various reasons (including "I don't know anything about them" and "I like them but I suspect they'd suck at being an Arb" and "I don't like them, but it could be me and not them" and "negatives tend to cancel out positives"). I don't even want to add "lean support" or "lean oppose" to anyone; if I decide on someone currently in the grey area, I'll add them to one of the lists. If not, I'll probably choose neutral, and let others decide on them. I doubt I'll end up supporting more than 5 or 6 in total, though. I tend to hope we don't fill all 9 positions this year. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 23:41, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
re: {{Red|Also, I'm not an admin anymore.}} [16]. As technically inaccurate, could this be "in theory"? "in practice"?, "in hopes of"? - or perhaps as "in - oops"? Not that it matters to me in any way, but there are various OCD types which may have twinges at such. — Ched : ? 16:36, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
For returning to the mop and bucket brigade. I fully understand why you gave them up but your return is much appreciated. Cheers. MarnetteD| Talk 21:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Ahem, User:Floquenbeam, since you have decided to take up your old habits, perhaps soon we will see you filing a statement here, WP:ACE2015/C, seeking the sweet ambrosia of arb-ness? Well, maybe not, since that violates "complicated, stressful, depressing, AND time consuming". :-) But in any case, my real question is, who ought to be running? There are some good names already on the list as self-noms, but can any other folks perhaps be armtwisted into a last-day-surprise-arbcom-run? Nine open seats is a lot, and at present only two of the arbs up for re-election have re-nominated themselves for another term. There are plenty of long-haul wikipedians: who has the temperment and the time and the reputation, that is not yet announced as a candidate? 75.108.94.227 ( talk) 04:35, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
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) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam,
For some reason "near [the] Syrian border" isn't showing up on the Main Page display yet. Sca ( talk) 18:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
My comment was not a personal attack -- as I already explained. It should not be marked as a personal attack as it was NOT a personal attack. Doing so is wrong, and essentially a personal attack in and of itself. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 03:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
[18], [19], [20]. Also this is the source of the accusation [21] Legacypac ( talk) 03:11, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
If there is some consensus somewhere for that "edit-vandalism ratio" rule you are talking about then please cite it. Otherwise you seem to be reverting edits based on a rule you made up, when my edit was justified based on consensus. Thank you. THEowner of a l l 23:48, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Looks like I'm an admin now -- if a sockpuppet says it, it must be true! GAB Hello! 22:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC) |
Thank you. It was obvious to me from his first edit he was a troll. I hard-blocked the account based on the ridiculous username, but he was allowed to rename. He continued to troll, of course. I wanted to block him, but after my initial block, I was reluctant.
A weird thing, btw. When I clicked on either your username or Talk page link in the sig of your block notice. It would go to this silly Jimbo graphic. It didn't do that on any of the other sigs on the page, as far as I know, just yours. I have no idea why, although I'm sure there's a technical explanation for it. Anyway, I removed the link to the graphic at the top of his Talk page, and the links in your sig work properly. Made me feel better.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:39, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
BlackPenus_Jesus ( talk · contribs)
I am a bit lost as to lame being a reason for blocking someone? I assume it was name? I do agree that it is lame though.
Jab843 ( talk) 22:45, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Just following up
this talk thread from a couple of weeks ago, where a user was disingenuously using {{
retired}} and {{long wikibreak}}
templates in order to "relax and minimize my involvement in contentious disputes". You said that the user "seems to acknowledge the confusion it caused", but taking a look it seems they're still doing it: several times since then (eg.
here) they've posted a vacation wikibreak template with a little graphic of a plane, obliquely wishing visitors a "Happy New Year!", only to take it down and continue some controversial talk page threads a few hours later.
A user talk page falsely implying that the user is on vacation until the new year does not seem significantly different from putting up a fake {{ long wikibreak}}. -- McGeddon ( talk) 16:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Many thanks for removing vandalism from my talk page. Enjoy!! Denisarona ( talk) 07:33, 4 December 2015 (UTC) |
You're quite welcome. Thanks for the note. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 17:51, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
This [22] really needs to go. Caden cool 20:59, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
They may very well be blocked, but somebody is going to be banned from here eventually if he doesn't just drop it, and it aint going to be Tim or Schro.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Template:Uw-dttr4im has been
nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.
Krett12 (
talk) 22:09, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
Good to see you're back! :)
Rubbish computer (
HALP!:
I dropped the bass?) 01:56, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Regarding "why is being an ArbCom candidate reason to recuse?", I'd consider it legitimate grounds in this particular and unusual set of circumstances. Imagine Kevin finishes 9th and GW 10th, and GW then votes to take action against Kevin and he resigns in disgust, meaning she gets bumped up into the newly-vacant slot; it would cause a huge stink. Thus, it puts huge pressure on her not to support any sanctions against Kevin, as support from her for something potentially disqualifying him will look like corruption regardless of intent. (Pinging GorillaWarfare in case she wants to correct that, although I'm fairly certain my interpretation of her decision is correct.) ‑ Iridescent 10:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Would you consider easing your 0RR rule to 1RR, for N0n3up? I don't want to see any editor getting booted off of Wikipedia, unless that editor's vandalizing, threatening or socking. GoodDay ( talk) 03:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
How old are you Lmnodogsuphomie101 ( talk) 21:06, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
So how old — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmnodogsuphomie101 ( talk • contribs) 21:10, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
It looks like you were the last admin to block this guy and thought maybe a review of his recent contributions was in order. The changes made have been purely vandalism.
Thanks for your time. Briscut ( talk) 23:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
I bet you mixed up DHeyward with RHaworth on the edit warring notice board. I think that is cognitively very likely. Funny the tricks the mind plays.-- ℕ ℱ 07:53, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
"The block is only for 12 hours, because I'm assuming whatever you're on will wear off by then. If I'm wrong, and you keep this up tomorrow, then you'll be reblocked indefinitely." I don't think I'd have dared, but quite agree. Peridon ( talk) 18:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I'm not on drugs, nothing like that. I was just having a little fun. You see, I recently got accepted into three different colleges that are very good colleges ( Rutgers University, Pace University and Seton Hall University) and just decided to have a little fun on here, as I haven't edited in a while, being busy with my school studies and whatnot. I see that my fellow denizens of Wikipedia were askance with my humor and pointedly rebuffed it, so I won't be making any more attempts at facetious humor on here if the end result is my fellow Wikipedians getting stressed out. SuperCarnivore591 ( talk) 19:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 03:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
MarnetteD|
Talk is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec15b}} to your friends' talk pages.
Admins have no more say then other editors. Your persistent efforts to frustrate my work are not helpful. Legacypac ( talk) 02:21, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
|
Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!
|
I haven't edited since you requested other admin review and treated it as a block. I apologize for the confusion. I was indeed aware of 1RR (and disagreed that it was a violation). I was not aware, however, of the ISIL case sanctions or of that particular arbcom case (or even how it was decided that article is under that umbrella) prior to the report. Indeed, after reading it, the 1RR remedy doesn't even require warning of sanctions. The person requesting sanctions kept adding "in violation of ISIL sanctions" which seemed to imply more than what 1RR is and if that was the case, I wanted it known that I was not aware of anything beyond simple 1RR rules and punishments (the 3RR board was the second place he asked for sanctions). I wasn't gaming the system in claiming that I didn't know it was 1RR and defended the edits I made as not even being 1RR violation. I take your analysis to heart, though and your (paraphrased) perception that it was 1 revert was charitable, 3 reverts was harsh so probably fair to say more than 1 and less than 3 my understanding is the 2nd revert is a 1RR violation. I would have preferred the benefit of the doubt, calling it 1, but I understand that reasons for such things as 1RR is "benefit of doubt" is used up. I personally find that noticeboard drama to be largely time consuming and wasteful so I checked out until it was resolved one way or another and I appreciate the warning. I will try to tack away from those that seek dramaboard participation (you addressed one). I apologize if it appeared I was gaming the sanction and really only needed to know that it was a standard 1RR restriction and not some special discretionary sanction dreamed up for ISIL 1RR's. -- DHeyward ( talk) 22:28, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
you're saying you were aware of 1RR but thought others might have been trying to sanction you further?Yes, I was aware of 1RR and there are many articles on 1RR that aren't ArbCom sanctions. That wasn't rocket science to figure out that for "reasons" that article was on 1RR. I didn't even bother trying to figure out why or when it was on 1RR and 1RR restrictions usually don't bother me since I normally don't ever purely revert (which is why it's always fuzzy - take that as good or bad but usually editors that are working towards a solution deal with "fuzzy" as incremental improvements/wordsmithing/sourcing rather than noticeboard material that a bit of a sentence or paragraph was removed or re-added). I got templated for two different noticeboards regarding violating sanctions (I was surprised one wasn't AE since they kept mentioning ArbCom decisions in the violation.) It doesn't take long to find a rather mundane discretionary sanctions that were met with very harsh AE type sanction. I didn't want to be a test case for whether a single 1RR violation could lead to an arbitrary AE enforcement action. Anyone that's been around long enough knows AE is a crapshoot at best and with AE actions favoring "first mover", I didn't want to deal with that. 1RR (or 3RR) would have, in a regular article, been a 24 hour block and a regular admin action, not AE action. The tedious edit counters/clock watchers seem to drill into counting rather than look at bigger picture of "Is this edit warring? Is this disruptive?" and more words were spilled on noticeboards than the article. -- DHeyward ( talk) 00:51, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Merry Yuletide to you! (And a happy new year!)
Rhoark ( talk) 00:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas! 🎄 |
Best wishes for your Christmas Is all you get from me 'Cause I ain't no Santa Claus Don't own no Christmas tree. But if wishes was health and money I'd fill your buck-skin poke Your doctor would go hungry An' you never would be broke." —C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1914. Montanabw (talk) |
Denisarona ( talk) 11:16, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Rubbish computer (
Merry Christmas!:
...And a Happy New Year!) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- Rubbish computer ( Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 16:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! |
Best wishes for a wonderful 2016!---- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC) |
![]() | |
peace bell |
---|
Thank you for inspiration and support, and for being one of three to return, to my joy, - thanks with my review, and the peace bell by Yunshui! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Have a great new year Floquenbeam, I can't add the template here without messing up the others. Thanks, -- Rubbish computer ( Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 02:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
Floquenbeam,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –
Davey2010
Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11:12, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
I have two questions, the first pertains to the IP address below. This user has made changes which aren't blatant vandalism but there hasn't been a single edit that I noticed that hasn't been reverted. They'll throw an 'x' into the game score(example: 28x-21), change the format of a sport team's record(example: 9/3(0) instead of 9–3) or change random times to 24 hours as opposed to the standard a.m./p.m. format.
I assumed good faith when I saw the time changes and partly for the team record's but it didn't make sense that only or two of the scores/records/times were being changed when there's over a hundred on a page.
I'll let you be the judge if you care to look: 189.202.65.105
The second question I had in my mind was whether there's there a group of admins here on Wikipedia to report vandalism to? I feel like I'm going about the process wrong.
Thanks again for your time and have a good new year.
Briscut (
talk) 20:00, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Oh, yes I will if I do something similar again absolutely add a notice about that. Regards,-- BabbaQ ( talk) 22:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I've been catching up on my Wikipedia reading tonight. Is there a 2 minute version somewhere that explains what is actually going on with Doc James and WMF? Too many conflicting comments to parse on Jimbo's talk page; some are by people who might know something, but they're drowned out by dozens of comments by idiots who don't know anything. There are threads at WO, evidently official blog posts, unofficial blog posts, mailing lists, all of them full of so much guessing, I can't find any actual useful information buried in them. I'm lost. I just want some clue what is going on, even if it is only the best educated guess available. Like the most recent or fullest explanation (if it exists) from Doc James, and the most recent or fullest explanation (if it exists) from WMF. And the most recent or fullest explanation (if it exists) by a smart and clueful and trustworthy editor. By which I mean, someone with enough wisdom to have my talk page watchlisted.
<slightly off topic rant>
To tie this into my other Wikipedia reading tonight... While there are people on ArbCom who I do not trust, there are also people on ArbCom I do trust. While they may not even be a majority anymore, they still exist, and if things really got unethical, I would trust them to not keep silent, even if it meant their wiki "career". It would only take one, out of a half dozen people I trust, to blow the whistle. Other people probably don't trust those particular people, but I would really think that almost everyone has at least one person on ArbCom that they trust.
There are no such people on the WMF board. I either don't trust them (because most of them have been appointed and have interests that do not correspond to the interests of the community, and have demonstrated it in the past), or don't know enough about them to trust them (because although they were elected, I've never heard of them). About the only person I felt that I could trust was Doc James, and they got rid of that one person.
So when ArbCom says "we are banning this person, and aren't going to tell you why", I don't "like" it, but I understand how that can be necessary, and still believe if it was actually underhanded, then if nothing else, one of the four people I voted for this election would say something. When the WMF board says "we are dismissing this board member, and aren't going to tell you why", I have no reason to think it's not underhanded, and have their past decisions to make me think it could very easily be underhanded. Maybe that's unfair - maybe they want to explain but feel constrained, maybe I'd agree with them if I knew - but it's what happens when you have a board organized in a less transparent way than the legislature if Myanmar. Unlike a transparently elected ArbCom, there is literally no reason to trust anything the WMF says.
</slightly off topic rant>
So anyway, if someone without an axe to grind knows what's going on, a note or an email or a pointer to an actually useful post online somewhere would be great. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 03:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
I think I'm as up to speed as I want to be. Thanks all. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you sir. But I am not doing any Spam or vandalism on the wikipedia. Kindly do not block me. I have not done anything like a spam. Sir, please I request you to allow my edits.
Thanks and Regards, -- Peterwoodwilson ( talk) 20:46, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll shut up now. My point(s) have been made. And what with the arrival of a well known troll, I'm out. Please don't self-block. Cassianto Talk 21:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Heh. shame that ain't freely-licensed. also NSFW (language) Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 17:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
It appears that this very nice gentleman could use his talk page editing rights revoked - see this :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 03:14, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
As usual, you make a lot of sense, but until FPAS admits he's gone too far, your generosity of spirit is somewhat wasted. If the unblock was correct, the block was wrong. Simple as that. The Rambling Man ( talk) 16:26, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Could I ask you to look at the "block evasion" issue which I mistakenly posted on the SoftL Talk page (it was archived there just before your own edit there) which you corrected, dealing with a user with dynamically changing accounts. It appears as an akwardly long list of user names unless it is read in context. Can you tell if it is a "block evasion" issue by that account? Cheers. Fountains-of-Paris ( talk) 16:41, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello Floq, from your user page and the one edit I have seen from you, I believe that you are a good person, so I want life advice from you. Can you give any such advice to me? Zaostao ( talk) 07:05, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
...I didnt know he was socking that recently or I would have shut it down myself. Last time I noticed him was in 2014. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 16:01, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
I was beginning to think I was the insane one. -- Dweller ( talk) 17:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
Thank you, Floq, for your impact | |
---|---|
in wording the sane and short sentence "no foul, play on", as an arb! |
I wanted to leave this link [23] for you a while back in response to some discussion, but I didn't get around to it then. Anyway, there it is. In case there's confusion, I'm not connected with the author. 173.228.123.101 ( talk) 08:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
who are u ppl and how do u have authority over me. i just don't understand. u are all mysterious unidentified ppl that make me angry by deleting articles about ppl who have fanbases of over 500,000 ppl, or deleting sections which i know are true bc the person i am writing about has said it themselves. but the only proof of this is a youtube video which is viewed here as a "non-reliable" source. if tHE PERSON I AM WRITING ABOUT SAID IT ABOUT HIMSELF HOW IS IT NOT TRUE??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcmartenslol ( talk • contribs)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Just sending this barnstar your way to thank you for your help with my IP unblock request. You are one of the friendliest, most helpful admins I've encountered on Wikipedia! Maestroso simplo ( talk) 03:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC) |
Hey, thanks Maestroso simplo, glad I could help. - Floquenbeam ( talk) 16:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Please see the noticeboard, and the confidentiality agreement. The Oversight flag can't be given to you until your name is on the noticeboard list. Thanks. Courcelles ( talk) 00:28, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
The instructions were a nightmare. I ploughed my way through for my OS hat. When they asked me to do it again for OTRS access, I just refused. I'd rather lose the access. It made absolutely no sense to have to sign the same thing twice. -- Dweller ( talk) 17:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
excellent summary of the situation. DGG ( talk ) 18:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to ask your opinion. Should I be restoring and taking to MFD pages like Draft:The Assasins Clan? It was deleted under G2 but I can almost guarantee that no one would have found it if I hadn't added the AFC banner tag. I feel like I'm crossing the line into WP:POINTiness with that but I want to resolve this as soon as practicable and move on to more productive things than asking MFD to re-delete pages that already weren't edited for 18 months. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 05:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
I hadn't even checked their earlier edits [24]. Very much appreciated, 2601:188:0:ABE6:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
A motion has been posted at Arbitration requests/motions that Floquenbeam ( talk · contribs), who resigned from the Arbitration Committee and voluntarily gave up the Oversight permission in July 2014, is re-appointed an Oversighter following a request to the Committee for the permission to be restored.
Comment from the community is encouraged either at the above linked page or via e-mail to the Arbitration Committee.
For the Arbitration Committee. Amortias ( T)( C) 00:04, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
![]() | On 27 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Julia Kronlid, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Swedish politician Julia Kronlid has worked as a volunteer at a hospital clinic in Papua New Guinea? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julia Kronlid. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:03, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks very much for that. I really appreciate the help. Best wishes DBaK ( talk) 01:49, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I allowed my frustration with that editor's continual attacks on the Crats to morph into a bit of sarcasm at the cratchat talkpage. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) ( My talkpage) 18:22, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Why did you revert this Krett12 ( talk) 19:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the fix. DGG ( talk ) 23:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
-- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 02:13, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the input; it especially helps to have you responding to Drmies. He's uncomfortable participating in the other request ("Gaming at MOS"), so any input you have there would also help. Nyttend ( talk) 20:44, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Ches (talk) 14:54, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, you said it. Kinda nice to get it right, isn't it? Risker ( talk) 03:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
You (the royal you) finally did it. Congrats! Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 03:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I have put forward an unblock proposal for you at User talk:Winkelvi#January 2016 2. Have a read and see what you think. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
[25]. I hope you won some money... MastCell Talk 20:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I would, just for the sake of curiousity, like to know what I should have done with the references on the page that don't match up with the links given for them. I have asked three admins (you are three) and posted on the article talk page, but I haven't received any answer on this. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 21:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not commenting at AN/EW since the discussion is closed and I didn't want to reopen it, but as the reporting editor I just wanted to say I agree entirely with your closing actions/logic; I think the warning is definitely more appropriate than a block given the circumstances. Thank you for taking the time to look through it all.
FWIW, and to an extent echoing the comments above, if (having now reviewed all the back-and-forth) you think I could have handled any of this better in any way, that's feedback I'd be very interested to hear. Obviously no obligation etc etc.
— me_ and 22:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Regarding this: was I out of line at the AN3 noticeboard? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
"this is not an invitation for you to tell me in great detail how their battleground mentality is worse than your battleground mentality."I would not have considered doing that, regardless of the circumstances. As far as despising LP: I don't despise him. I don't despise Wikipedia editors, any of them. Behavior is another matter and it's certainly possible to be completely against despicable behavior but not the person committing the behavior. Despising another is not my personality. In regard to the "battleground mentality" statement you made above about my own behavior, I guess I never would have considered it as such until you just pointed it out. I appreciate being straightened out on that. Seriously. Thanks,-- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Are we defining 3rr differently or have I missed something? Each edit I provided showing the editor deleting material, eg [26]. Doug Weller talk 06:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello Floq,
I looked up your name as the last admin to have blocked winkelvi. I only started here less than one month ago.
Please see these three diffs for and explanation of winkelvis detailed campaign of harassment and hounding toward me.
She seems to be really upset about the failing of the GA nom for Billy the Kid. Her harassment campaign has increased since then. Now she has filled a bogus SPI and included me in it. Just for everyones information I have edited before at another site for children's articles that uses this same wiki software. This is just the next step in her campaign of harassment and hounding against me. Please see the harassment and hounding that winkelvi by starting with these three diffs. [27] [28] [29] I have asked her repeatedly to leave me alone and to stop her harassment of me. Thanks. Something should be done to stop all winkelvi's disruption to Wikipedia. Please look it over and see if you might help assess the situation and get winkelvi to stop harassing me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jilllyjo ( talk • contribs) 05:36, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Could you please tell him to stop removing every edit I make to an article? He removes reliable sources from articles just because i added them. I'm fed up with Synthwave. Caden cool 03:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
You shouldn't have done that. Everyone would've been better off if we just let the incident fade into memory rather than appease the editor acting like a screaming child. 142.105.159.60 ( talk) 04:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
|
Reward for the cutting of a Gordian knot |
Thank you for this edit. Remember that bacon heals all wounds. And while I have your ear, kindly remind Kelapstick that it's been nine years. Drmies ( talk) 03:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC) |
That was all that was needed, and admonition duly accepted, even though as a grammarian I refuse to accept that inverted commas must everywhere be taken as 'scare quotes'. Perhaps today readers think that way. People raised on the old system of English grammar and parsing don't think that way. Still, your judgment was fair to all concerned parties. Thanks. Nishidani ( talk) 08:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi
I wanted to have myself blocked until August 31, 2016 since I felt my edits are being too boring and I wanted to relax from the English Wikipedia. 135.23.144.92 ( talk) 19:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for throwing the protection on there. I've gone ahead and rangeblocked. -- Kinu t/ c 22:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
For doing the right thing regarding Jilllyjo. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) ( My talkpage) 18:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Racial equality (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racial equality (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ibadibam ( talk) 00:44, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
I was, and am, paying attention to the warnings I place. The user was reverting multiple editors, hence the warnings. Please be courteous (admin or not) about removing others talk page comments on another users talk page - WP:UP#OWN. Garchy ( talk) 20:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Can you tell me why you lifted the " Money (That's What I Want)" topic ban for User:Synthwave who's now free to edit as seen here [32] and here [33] but you never bothered to lift the topic ban for me? Why is he free to edit and I'm not? Explain to me Flo because I am not happy at all with the way you have handled this. Caden cool 22:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
This post is cross posted to both of your talk pages, my talk page, and to the article talk page.
I'm trying to figure out a way to (a) not have to personally monitor this article 24/7; (b) allow two editors who have 11 years and 47,000 edits between them - and who should thus both know better - to edit this article collaboratively; and (c) not have to write 6 paragraphs of instructions. I've come up with this:
The article topic ban is rescinded for both of you. However, you are both limited to strict WP:BRD; if either one of you changes any portion of the article from the way it is at the time of this post (22:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)), and anyone (including the other editor, but also anyone else) reverts you, then you may not edit this portion of the article further, and must instead discuss the issue on the talk page. Hopefully other editors will join in, and an uninvolved editor (not one of you two) will implement consensus. This "enforced BRD" will last for 1 month from right now. If problems develop again between you two, on this article or any other article, then I anticipate going to ANI and get one or both of you sanctioned more severely, including one or more of: expanding this "enforced BRD" to include the entire encyclopedia; topic bans; interaction bans; or blocking. If you actually want an ANI thread because you think you'll be vindicated and your enemy will be cast down, I advise you to rethink; I strongly suspect both of you would get sanctioned equally. This is not a case where one of you is right and the other is wrong. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
On Feb 28, you made this edit to my talkpage. That is a threat with abusing admin powers. I note that you did not engage in the [34]] to argue any point. I propose you withdraw that out of line threat in wording (I already removed it from my page). - DePiep ( talk) 07:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I have to admit that it was stupid of me. But anyway, will do my best to add as many tags as possible and to future articles as well of course. Do you have any other suggestions or helpful tips when it comes to doing articles that are at least at times translations? If you have any personal experience from that. Regards, BabbaQ ( talk) 23:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
AWB rights. Thank you. —/
Mendaliv/
2¢/
Δ's/ 08:29, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
- his birthday, DYK? (Old calendar, but still.) Music for you. Same image on my talk ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:27, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Per [35] I wonder if it might also be a good thing to do to full-protect that user page as well? Just wondering. Your call. Montanabw (talk) 22:07, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
As you're obviously way too active [36] to be considered "semi-around," I've opened a pointless drama thread at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Floquenbeam misuse of semi-around banner. NE Ent 22:19, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
You forgot something... that's like the third time I've invited someone to block me and nobody has! Okay, so I don't actually have time right now to write an article on my talk page or anywhere else, but that's beside the point. Opabinia regalis ( talk) 22:58, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
... beat 'em (or say "Nyah, nyah, nyah" at them). Softlavender ( talk) 07:15, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up after the other user!, Maybe I'm being a grumpy sod but after seeing the same shit get done year upon year it begins to get boring and rather tiresome!, Ah well thanks for cleaning up anyway, Happy editing, – Davey2010 Talk 02:16, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that. For some reason I didn't think the merge request would not post a notice in the target article. - Mr X 18:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
AusLondonder (
talk) 22:44, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The clerk's barnstar: more paperwork |
What, you thought the compensation for good clerking would be anything else? Opabinia regalis ( talk) 23:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi Floq, Sorry I was completely busy, Anyway I wouldn't of minded being your guinea pig ... infact I don't see much point to the new "rights" so had you removed it I probably wouldn't of bothered asking for it back anyway!, Ah well thanks for asking anyway I guess :), Happy editing, – Davey2010 Talk 02:43, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
You may wish to take Magnolia's suggestion and block him for 3-12 hours. He blanked the talk page at Carnage (DJ). That being said, Magnolia may have been a bit reactive too. I don't see a downright bad nom, but a couple were marginal. Getting a handful of articles AfDd all at once might piss me off too. John from Idegon ( talk) 01:36, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
explain to me how you came to fathom your edit summary? I don't have a feud with anyone, for the record. And I often redirect articles that FAIL WP:NSONGS. I do hope that I see you leave a comment on MaranoFan's user talk about the glaring WP:OWN issue. — Calvin999 19:51, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
− Excuse me, but it's not any editor's article, it's a Wikipedia article that appears to not yet be ready for primetime. The AfD says clearly: delete or redirect, the reasons are sound. Was I wrong to start the AfD? It's a viable, relevant article that should stay as is? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 21:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Look, I seriously saw nothing wrong with doing what I thought was the right thing by opening the AfD. If it will make you all feel better, I will withdraw it - if that's possible at this point. The thought of being site banned over things I'm still not clear about (other than inconveniencing administrators), is literally making me physically ill. I had no intention to cause or be part of disruption. If leaving everything involving MF alone (where I haven't been first) is an answer, I will gladly do it. I'm not a jerk, I'm not a bad editor, I'm not an intentionally disruptive person. I will do whatever it takes to not be taken to Arbcom or get a site ban (even though I think sitebanning is uncalled for and overkill). -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:35, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Re your prior status [38]:
Your lights are on, but you're online Your mind is not your own Your heart sweats, your body shakes Another edit is what it takes You can't sleep, you can't eat There's no doubt, you're in deep Your throat is tight, you can't breathe Another edit is all you need Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to wik'i You see the pings, and you must read You're typing at a different speed Your heart beats in double time Another edit and you'll be ours, a one track mind You can't log out One more post is all you crave If there's some left for you You don't mind if you do Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Your lights are on, but you're online Your mind is not your own Your heart sweats, your body shakes Another edit is what it takes Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i Might as well face it, you're addicted to wik'i
NE Ent 20:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Here's to the rules of Wikipedia
Where breach of "just a guideline" results in an instant block
And "edits in a similar way" means "obviously a sock"
Where "flexible policies" are as immovable as rocks
For they'll always be defended by a mindless admin flock
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Policies, go find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the forums of Wikipedia
Where children sit in judgement over experts in their field
And accuracy is sacrificed for populist appeal
Where editors are blocked as the result of secret deals
And it's still as far as ever from the WMF ideal
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Forums, go and find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the government of Wikipedia
Where despite "no formal power" the founder ought to wear a crown
Directing all the policies right from the top straight down
Where editors all quiver every time an admin frowns
And "policy discussions" are the ravings of a clown
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Bureaucrats, go find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the admins of Wikipedia
Where academic knowledge is a thing to be despised
If it's not in their school library, it's suspect in their eyes
And if anyone's an expert, it's an "obvious COI"
For if you've your own opinion, you're just a troll in disguise
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Admins, go and find yourselves another project to be part of.
Here's to the Arbcom of Wikipedia
Who rubberstamp decisions that are made on IRC
And fight against every step towards increased transparency
Who defend their own decisions, no matter how arbitrary
For disagreement with them is a "breach of policy"
Here on this site you've torn out the heart of
Arbcom, go and find yourselves another project to be part of.
And here's to the critics of Wikipedia
Who can always spot a problem, but never find a cure
And all their proposed solutions make the simplest task a chore
Where every crank with an agenda finds themselves at home
And legitimate critics are drowned out by trolling drones
Your blogs with pretensions are nothing to speak of
Critics, go find something more worthwhile to go and write critiques of.
I "demanded" the cat below also. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:00, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Hoping you come through with that one-month block. Check his contribs.-- MaranoFan ( talk) 10:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
This is the uncle of the guy with the disability you dealt with yesterday. I'm very disturbed with how. He was treated. You don't ever do that to people like him. Thanks be to you I have to take him to counseling today. You need to think twice about who u deal with on Wikipedia you should be ashamed of yourselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.150.232 ( talk) 14:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Listen bozo my disabled nephew is 29 and I'm. 50 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
66.87.151.54 (
talk) 15:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
Floq, I think you need a nice calming cup of tea. You have wound up in the middle of this never-ending dogfight, and they don't take your hint (or even your outright saying so) that you are sick of it. I think you are right about the only solution to this mess. Meanwhile, put your feet up and have some tea. MelanieN ( talk) 00:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC) |
Edit summaries such as this [39] make it hard to believe any longer that this is just a confused new user. E Eng 15:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Your 66.87.xx friend has so far only posted from quite a small range, 66.87.150.0/23. I've blocked it. Bishonen | talk 15:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC).
{{User:Writ Keeper/userpage.js}}
". Then you indef full-protect the userpage and put your real userpage's content in the .js subpage.The reason it works is that everyone's .js subpages are automatically protected from editing by anyone but admins *and* the user themself, even if that user isn't an admin; this is in order to protect people's scripts and widgets from being tampered with, while still allowing non-admins to write scripts. So, by transcluding such a page onto one's userpage, and protecting the transclusion itself with a full-protect, one gets a userpage that only the user themself, regardless of their admin status, and admins can edit. Writ Keeper ⚇ ♔ 16:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I didn't invent that code. It was suggested by another user, MusikAnimal, who is also the author of the bot that removes the plain "pp" template when protection expires. He assured me this approach should work, and take away the need to manually add it when a page is protected. Should make Duncan Hill happy too. :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:51, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Re your comment, there is a bot which removes the template from unprotected pages, but it sometimes takes a while to get around to it. There isn't a bot to add it to pages which are protected, this needs to be done manually. DuncanHill ( talk) 13:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice. I'm just feeling bothered by this user who insisted that I violate the 3RR rules, for which I didn't! I have proof that my 'fourth edit' (which is made by another user) is not within 24 hours and I'm not even reverting into my own edit. It was someone else's edits. Thank you again for listening to me. Sorry for bothering you with this. ( SquidHomme) —Preceding undated comment added 18:59, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not getting used to this. This is the first time I engage in a dispute. Thank you again for your advice sir, have a good day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SquidHomme ( talk • contribs) 23:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
If you're online, would you mind taking a look at this 3RR report about me? The reporter seems to have just gone off the deep end [40] and I'm really exhausted at having to have just put hours into defending my edits only to find out it was all a big joke. Thanks. LavaBaron ( talk) 05:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Another fine example of arguing & convincing you delivered. How bright your understanding of the thread it shows! One question: why only one month? Have you grown a sense? Next time, just start with a year no less. To keep your standing, as it were. - DePiep ( talk) 09:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam. First of all, I completely understand your reasoning for the blocks of Calvin and MaranoFan and based on the former's behaviour, I agree with it 100%. I don't know if you've noticed, but I recently adopted MaranoFan so that I'll be ensuring that this fiasco and pointless feud with Calvin doesn't happen again. To be fair, she did get drawn into that ANI thread (which everyone admitted was pointless) by Calvin, so I'm not advocating anybody's behaviour. I've been talking to MF a lot lately and I've made her aware that I'll be guiding her and keeping an eye on her to make sure that nothing like this happens again. We both agreed that she wants an interaction ban with Calvin and she has promised that she won't get drawn into to any more arguments. To enforce this, I will monitor her closely and I can vouch for her. I'm going to cut to the chase; would you be open to unblocking her now or would she have to make another unblock request so that a neutral party can review it? I know how you might feel about this, but she's been doing good work lately. She has potential, and I'll make sure nothing like that happens to her again. JAG UAR 19:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
@ Jaguar: On reflection, I don't personally want to unblock early, due to neither person acknowledging any responsibility for this long-running timesink in their unblock requests. The longer-than-you-might-expect duration was intentional, and if anything, so far the message seems to have been received more clearly by the other people feuding than by these two. If MF wants to resubmit an unblock request, or Liz wants to consider an unblock after 2 weeks, I will likely not comment further on their page; I've said my piece there, and am more than willing to defer to another admin's take on it. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I worry about you. Softlavender ( talk) 17:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Did you know that I nominated this (meaning: released, freed, liberated) in February, with certain hopes? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:53, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
ps: in case you'd like more background to what you have to deal with: please... -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:49, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
If you are interested, the IBM cards were also known as Hollerith cards, in early days. I not only punched programs for college courses, but received paychecks which were Hollerith-punched. (My spelling may be incorrect.) Rags ( talk) 18:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Very kind, many thanks. Best wishes, you-know-who or 82.36.105.25 ( talk) 00:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm about to create User:Floq's newbie account. Have no fear, it's not a troll or imposter. Just want to see what the whole VE crisis is about. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:32, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that- I was just temporarilly deranged (!!!) with banging my head against what seemed to be a brick wall., and of course, when it's one's own TP, it seems a helluvva lot like vandalism! Thanks for all your help though. Again, apologies. Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 19:44, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
It is a lie to say that I had not been disruptive. It is true that I had vandalized pages. I have done this a lot, and this is my worst yet.
P.S. Forgive me for my being excited, but do you believe that I have been disruptive? The reason why I have reported myself is because I am angry with myself. One side of me tells "the truth" that I have vandalized Wikipedia, and I believe in the statement, but how about you? Do you believe that I have vandalized an article on purpose? I hope that I had not. The thing is that, when I make little mistakes, I try to have myself blocked because no one would take action, and it may be better that I be blocked for now. Would you like to do that?
Gamingforfun365
(talk) 22:31, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Floquenbeam, would you like to take the lead on dealing with the unblock request? Newyorkbrad ( talk) 15:23, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Floquenbeam. Thank you for your comment on my AN post. I created those accounts as I was dealing with a sock a while back and I didn't want to be impersonated. I do not intend to make any more of such accounts. However, I would like to ask if you could help me review the aforementioned account, as I have lost access to that account completely and I don't want to be construed as owning that account maliciously.
Please understand I'm doing all this so that I will not be faulted for any sock related matters in future. I hope that you would understand, and I would appreciate your patience. Regards, Optakeover (U) (T) (C) 19:49, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
@ Optakeover: I hope you did not mind my closure of your request. It was a procedural matter for me and not personal. You are always welcome on my talk page if you need a simple admin action. HighInBC 20:10, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
I think you should take a look at this edit closely. His edit is causing the malformation of the header. I am right in reverting it.
Optakeover
(U)
(T)
(C) 14:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
I didn't realize there was a typo in Shotgun surgery. I read User:Optakeover's message as "replacing superfluous uppercase by lowercase is unconstructive". This is not polite. Saying "you inserted a Greek letter" would have been polite. Also the Swoosh smack is unpolite.
Please unblock User talk:167.107.191.217. It is not an open proxy. HaŋaRoa ( talk) 14:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For protecting Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/AustralianRupert, very much appreciated. Omni Flames let's talk about it 08:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks, OF, we'll see if it had its intended effect when the protection expires... -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Seems " Template:Life timeline", transcluded on 160 pages, has been recently vandalized - and may require some protection? - perhaps similar to that performed on the " Template:Nature timeline" somewhat recently? - in any case - Thanks, at least, for considering the issue - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 02:56, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I see you have cleaned up this article. Please check my edit and let me know if I have correctly added the info that someone was looking for on the Flotilla issue. Thank you. Gabs Blue Labs ( talk) 21:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but does an RFA need to be closed as either successful or unsuccessful, rather than archive closed, as you have done? Due to the archive close, the RFA has not appeared in the history. Let me know how it's done either way - I am interested, and I look forward to your reply at your earliest convenience. -- PatientZero talk 17:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
To address bullet one; thirty five more years of history in Europe is roughly the same as 350 years of history in the North American Colonies (the US I believe you touchingly like to call them). Have a fantastic trip sir - the itinerary looks wonderful. Enjoy. Pedro : Chat 20:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Any chance to meet you in Germany? My infobox tells you where to find me, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:57, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for blocking the IP vandal!
ThePlatypusofDoom
(Talk) 19:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
You're quite welcome. Though vandal blocking strikes me as more of a dog or cat type thing (a terrier or cat catching a mouse) than a kitten type thing. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 14:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
[44] if you wouldn't mind taking a look. 142.105.159.60 ( talk) 21:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
polite, courteous, and friendly | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 157 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:48, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Enjoy your vacation!
About a month ago, you blocked Winkelvi for a month. He is back following me around and causing trouble, along with his friend, Soflavender. I wish Winkelvi would not be so disruptive. I thought that someone who has been blocked 10 times before would behave better but he didn't learn from your block. I give up. That is why disruptive users win. Whiskeymouth ( talk) 02:44, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Just letting you know I "borrowed" your comments for the close. Didn't seem a point to restate in this case when you did so well : ) - jc37 08:27, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Just now noticed that I reverted you earlier today; wasn't my intention, just following the link you left on my talk page while on my phone and evidently hit rollback. Still not really around so will self-revert and reply on my talk page in a day or two, when I'm really back. But why are you closing discussions that were archived several months ago? -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 00:57, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
10 July |
---|
Took only 300 years to restore a good name. - "play on" -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
May I request to be temporarily blocked for one day on Wikimedia Commons? I seem to be throwing a fit
here and just want to stop it. I am trying my best not to fight over it and lose it again, but I think that I can calm down on Commons if I happen to be blocked there.
Gamingforfun365
(talk) 16:42, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
If it all turns to dust, then you will be to blame. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 14:40, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm back, but still have that feeling you get when you've been away for a while (long enough to regain some perspective) and then can't help yourself and look at a random noticeboard, and are horrified by how depressing this place is. I'm sure I'll get sucked back in during the coming week(s) - I always do - but for today I think I'll go watch birds fly around outside.
But anyway, I'm paying attention to my talk page again, and messages left here will no longer go unanswered for a week. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 15:18, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
16 July 2016 |
---|
... on a centenary of a performance, - don't give up on this place, there's still content, daily! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:13, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I incorrectly listed it. Can you help me post it in the technically correct manner? Also, I appreciate your feedback saying I wouldn't have a chance of getting approved. However, I think that may not be the case, if I have the chance to respond directly to objections, and explain why I would be the best candidate in terms of my fairness, balance, and knowledge about the project, I think I could win. JoeM ( talk) 17:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Simple. 1 I am a deeply flawed human being ;-) 2 Harry's brother, Albert, has long been a bit of a hero of mine. Mainly because of this: "In 1899 ... Trott's penchant for the spectacular did not fail him: having already landed the ball on the pavilion balcony at Lord's in the match, he became the first (and to this day the only) batsman to hit a ball over the current Lord's pavilion, bludgeoning Monty Noble out of the ground on 31 July 1899. The ball hit a chimney and fell into the garden outside the house of Philip Need, the Lord's dressing room attendant." -- Dweller ( talk) Become old fashioned! 07:10, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Amen (pretend this is some sort of barnstar) -- NeilN talk to me 18:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Can you please restore the article too? I saw you did the AFD. Thanks. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:01, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Do I have a target on my back? I've had two spurious SPIs in as many months. p b p 01:34, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Just noticed this. It turns out a few months ago I had written this. You're welcome. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 03:45, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Regarding Vape Shoreditch, just be aware of this sockpuppet investigation. This is part of the reason I tagged it with WP:G3. You make a valid point about it already having a WP:AfD going but just wanted to explain my motives. Hope you are well! -- Zackmann08 ( Talk to me/ What I been doing) 18:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)