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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Hello amigo, yes I have enough now or I will need to create a separate page to store them, how are you doing? I have been keeping my eye out but you have appeared a bit quiet, which can be good. I created my first article tonight or I think I did I saved it really as it was deleted the mass deletion of blp's in the last couple of days, have you seen all the going on? Gabriel Mar Gregorios looks like a nice guy and seems a shame to delete him so I have for the time being at least saved him..Heres a list of some of the mass deleted blp articles if you want to have a look and see any worthy of saving. I was happy for Raymond, he made it in the end for perseverance. As usual, keep in touch, best regards. Off2riorob ( talk) 02:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi HiaB, the source was as below. I searched before deleting but could find little on this particular Markar Melkonian, as opposed to Professor Markar Melkonian (California State University) - Peripitus (Talk) 11:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Since you withdrew your nomination at Grundle's talk page in regards of this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chimpcam AFD I closed it as keep. If you change your mind feel free to re-nominate. Best, -- The Magnificent Clean-keeper ( talk) 19:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
BTW. I've responded to your post at my talk page. Usually I try to keep things together but in this case they've become two different thinks anyways, at least from my point of view. Cheers to the bucket and to the grateful, -- The Magnificent Clean-keeper ( talk) 21:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Listening to it now. I SAW that concert. lol (I'm old, very very old.) Oberonfitch ( talk) 17:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
The link you sent only said it was discouraged. Similar to the long usernames with long html coding. I'll worry about taking it down if I ever run for admin. Until then do not remove things from my userpage again. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 17:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
This may seem like a minor issue, but the fundamental issue is that if you're not willing to abide by the standards expected by the community, then I don't believe you should be allowed to edit here. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 20:15, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
A man sat down at a bar and told the bartender, "I bet you three hundred dollars that I can piss into the cup all the way over there on the other side of the bar and not miss a single drop." The bartender said, "There is no way you can do that. Sure, I'll bet you three hundred dollars." The man then begins to undo his pants and begins pissing. He starts pissing all over the bar, spraying on the bottles and the bartender, not making a single drop in the cup. The bartender starts smiling and laughing and says, "That's it, you owe me three hundred dollars." The man then gets up and walks over to the pool table and starts laughing and shaking hands with the men standing there. He walks back to bar, sits down and starts laughing at the bartender and hands him the money. The bartender asks, "Why are you laughing? You just lost the bet." The man said, "I'm laughing because I bet those guys over there one thousand dollars that I could piss all over you and your bar and you would still be laughing when I was done." Off2riorob ( talk) 22:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
A young brunette goes into the doctor's office and says that her body hurts wherever she touches it. "Impossible," says the doctor. "Show me." She takes her finger and pushes her elbow and screams in agony. She pushes her knee and screams, pushes her ankle and screams and so on it goes. The doctor says, "You're not really a brunette are you?" She says, "No, I'm really a blonde."
"I thought so," he says. "Your finger is broken."
That "noob" you accused me of biting turned out to be a sock, as I implied, and was indef blocked. Maybe you should try some WP:AGF toward me.— Finell 00:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
(Yeah, very funny practical joke, I fell for it... anyways....)
The Snyder-stuff... I gave it a writer-stub, and writer-category.... but it appears to me that's not right now... right now, the emphasis seems more on "criminal" or whatnot... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Hell in a Bucket, Can you correct me, please : In February 2010, her family filed a new claim for murder. The Bretnacher family lawyer is William Bourdon, (another great grand son of Edouard Michelin), and the lawyer of Transparency International.[16] [17] Thank you very much best regards -- Raymondnivet ( talk) 22:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
The Article Rescue Barnstar | ||
For saving Ophélie Bretnacher disappearance, which was by all counts dead to rights. -- King Öomie 19:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC) |
Impressive work on that. -- King Öomie 19:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Jake, there's something in Wikipedia about extreme theories, fringe theories. Do you know the link for that, a few of the things on the JW page I feel fall into that category. Thanks.-- Natural ( talk) 01:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks much. -- Natural ( talk) 13:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks (belatedly!) for your response in good faith to this.
FWIW I do think it's more likely than not that the Vatican fudged the details of JPs death, though in the manner of, and for the reasons, given by Bp Magee.
(I generally tend to the view that when shit happens, not to ascribe bad-mindedness when the answer could well be incompetence).
As for the
Sr Vincenza page, I’d suggest, but haven’t carried out, a couple of changes.
I thought I'd check these with you first. Happy typing! Moonraker12 ( talk) 16:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
The block was increased a bit much, from 48hrs to indef, but there may be little support for a reduction, *uc*. Off2riorob ( talk) 22:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Please see WP:SMI with respect to the "you have new messages" banner. Thanks. Rodhull andemu 01:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
...for reversing the vandalism on my user page. ttonyb ( talk) 02:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
There was really no need to file an ArbCom case. If Proofreader77 wants to try to file one upon the block's expiration that's their prerogative, but there are really no outstanding issues beyond some disagreement in the ANI thread, which is par for the course. It might save time to just withdraw the request, but of course it's up to you. -- Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your participation on amending my sanctions. Your eminently practical suggestion to "give me enough rope to hang myself" was ignored, possibly because the estimation was made that I would behave myself, and then no reason would exist to gag me.
I am quite sure that when sanctions expire, immediate action will be taken to re-institute them, because there is no reason involved here, just pique and petulance. Brews ohare ( talk) 18:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I think it is up to Proofreader77 to chart his own journey back to regaining editing privileges - should that be his intent. A definition of disruption is to keep doing the same things that annoy people - even when none of them are specifically fairly bad - when various people request that you don't, and disruption is a blockable offence. I understand that you feel that the sanctions are driven as much by personal pique as by policy, but in a community based collaborative editing environment other peoples perceptions - and unperturbed enjoyment of the site - are as important as removing the truly offensive remarks of vandals.
Anyhoo, if you wish to keep arguing P77's case then please tone down the rhetoric/language. I will do my best to ensure that there is no collateral damage to your account as regards P77's case, but you need to ensure you don't start tripping up of your own accord. Cheers, (Mark)
LessHeard vanU (
talk)
20:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
While I have been involved in disputes with Finell, I consider it a waste of time to think about the individual people here and their motives. I try to focus only on content. I appreciate your good intentions, but I think personal comments, even if they aren't attacks, aren't interesting. Likebox ( talk) 16:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi -
If you are still up, would you look at Sea Shepherd Conservation Society which is being repeatedly vandalized? Thanks Oberonfitch ( talk) 09:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
You are just repeating the same incorrect argument from another page. The political leanings of these media organisations is irrelevant. We are not discussing a political viewpoint but reports of a criminal act being filed in a police station. Politics doesn't come into it. Qattusu ( talk) 20:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
You have declared that three of the main media organisations in Malta are "not reliable" without any basis or evidence whatsoever and you say that you are not saying anything about my sources? Being an American certainly has a lot to do with it. The marital problems of the golfer Tiger Woods - pure gossip, no criminal reports were made and no charges were filed - is allowed several paragraphs on wikipedia but more serious issues, involving the most prominent Maltese journalist and a serving magistrate are deleted because they are Maltese. This is cultural imperialism and racism at its very worst. Qattusu ( talk) 07:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Where did I declare anything of the sort? You are new here why don't you take advice from somemore experienced editors or try writing the article in the maltese wiki first., then transplant it here. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
You declared that just above: you said some of the sources were "not reliable". I have bolded it. I just don't know how you are in a position to question the reliability of these organisations. Qattusu ( talk) 17:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Your claim that the journalists at The Times of Malta are "connected" to the subject of the article is potentially libellous. That newspaper has been in the business of reporting accurate, objective, factual news reporting for 85 years. Which means it was reporting way back in the day when white Americans were lynching black men for whistling at white women. Here is another reference from The Times of Malta, including a statement about the case from George Abela, the President of Malta. [1] The President of the country is moved to comment on the actions of this prominent figure who you so badly want mention of kept off wikipedia. I guess I should add it to the article but what`s the point? An American will just come on and remove it. You Americans are just so arrogant. You think that everything you do is important and that whatever goes on in other countries is irrelevant. Why not change the site name to call it ameripedia? I thought wikipedia was a place which could bring down some of the boundaries and barriers between people but now I can see what a joke it has become. At least Hell in a Bucket has been constructive even though he has directed several insults at me. The rest of you are just arrogant losers trying to make decisions on things you know nothing about. The rest of you are just arrogant white American racists to force their agenda through, deleting anything from countries they think beneath them. Qattusu ( talk) 10:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
IMO it is not really much of an issue, hell, the article looks like its going to be deleted and he will vanish with the article, more attention is not required..imo. I would remove the section and enjoy sunday as I don't think there is a specific issue worthy of wider community action? Off2riorob ( talk) 14:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
i am not shure why you added the outloud article for delete, can you plz explane why and how i can backup the article more. -- Firewindwik ( talk) 15:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I've added a few refs try again, and if it is still not good enought let me know. -- Firewindwik ( talk) 16:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Man i just tried to help outloud get there word out there but delete it i will kook up a better version when they are better known and have there second album out. -- Firewindwik ( talk) 16:34, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the beautiful barnstar. It was an honour. Take care and keep up the great work. Dr.K. λogos πraxis 02:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi H in a B: Ignoratio elenchi, eh? That's a new one for me. If you think there is anything I might do with profit, let me know. Brews ohare ( talk) 06:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
RE: this
Technically speaking, isn't the admins' job to determine where admin action is needed? Jus' sayin'. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I sent a message to David Tombe here, but it's really to you all. Thank you for your support, not because I give a rip about being punished by a bunch of bottom-feeding wannabe politicians, but because you all see and recognize something that was totally wrong and against the spirit of Wikipedia, and you rose up and stated such long before I even thought about it. Trusilver 18:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
This is a very nice statement. It should begin with Trusilver acknowledging the problem of their own actions. Next we can look at Sandstein's block, which might have been an over-reaction, and thus we can unpeel the onion layers. Brews could also help matters greatly by ceasing to battle. Be more like Gandhi than Che. Jehochman Brrr 02:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
If it is, indeed, him, the account cannot be blocked for a username violation, since we always let people use their real names (like I do). It does, however, remain wide open for a COI-based block. Perhaps I should have recommended relocating the report there.
In any event, the article's getting deleted and I doubt he'll edit again. Daniel Case ( talk) 05:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Please note this. Brews ohare ( talk) 20:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Hell in a Bucket. I am writing to ask you why you reverted my changes to article Operation Repo. I like this show, it's entertaining. I do agree that for most part, the show definitely indicates fakeness, but the section of that article with the claim of the show being scripted and ficticuous offered no sources, proof or evidence. I added a citation needed within the text and ultimately changed the text. You quickly reverted my change back to how it was previously. So, my question now is, does not WP work by providing sources? If I ask for sources, why am I being bit? If you are an experienced editor, why do you simply revert changes without so much as a note to the other party? I sure hope you have no admin desires, because actions like this will not get you there. Please, if I am wrong, do explain to me why my changes are wrong and yours right, and why it is ok for you to revert changes and not have the decency to inform the other party of this. Cheers. WildHorsesPulled ( talk) 16:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
WildHorsesPulled has eaten your {{
cookie}}! The cookie made them
happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{
cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{ subst:munch}}!
Hope you had a great time in the mountains. You might want to pull my email addy sometime, so you can call when you come through Denver. The big weekend story here was being able to move the rabbits out of the bathtub. I'm pretty sure you had more fun. Oberonfitch ( talk) 02:45, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
NerdyScienceDude :) ( ✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 02:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I've expanded it and referenced it. If you feel that it is now notable, can you withdraw you AfD nomination? I would like to submit the article to DYK. :3 Silver seren C 02:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Done Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 02:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Union Avenue Historic Commercial District at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! JohnBlackburne words deeds 15:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello Hell in a Bucket,
Do you know that ? http://bumpshack.com/2010/03/20/natalee-holloway-body-possibly-found-by-the-muldowneys-pictures/
O Bretnacher is in DYK on simple, 10 march 2010 : http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know/Archives
Best regards -- Raymondnivet ( talk) 12:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Hell in a Bucket, this is to let you know that I have proposed a restriction on you commenting or advocating for Brews ohare, amongst other things. You may find the motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Motions regarding Speed of Light and Brews ohare. SirFozzie ( talk) 00:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Your statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions is combative, attacking and uncivil. As a clerk of the Arbitration Committee, I've gone ahead and remove it. Feel free to replace it with a more civil statement, but if you simply replace the statement, or replace it with a very similar one it will once again be removed and you will be blocked. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
As per the warning above, I've gone ahead and blocked you for 12 hours for making personal attack and your incivility on the motions page. The final straw was this diff, specifically; "Can you seriously spout non sensical drivel and expect it to fix your failings." - not acceptable. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Unbroken Chain ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Asking a question at a Arbcom hearing is not a blockable offense. I refactored my comment to remove swear words but seriously a block over "Can you seriously spout non sensical drivel and expect it to fix your failings" I do not apolagize for asking this. There was even a review ordered by Wales in this case. I've tried to comment calmly [ [3]]. This was shortly removed. I posted again with a litte more angst, it was refactored, without a by your leave or even a courtesy note. I reverted, I was threatened with a block if I reposted so I posted a toned down version. This resulted in a block. No attempts at contact were made other then threats. Where in Wikipedia does it give anyone the right to remove or refactor my comments? I call it nonsense and drivel because it is exactly that, you get a consensus by removing the editors that disagree. It's a very disturbing trend.
Decline reason:
Blocks are meant to prevent further disruption, and that is what you were doing, more than protesting apparent misconduct by others. While blocks are not meant to impose a cool-down period, the effect is identical, and I strongly suggest that you take this time to think about what you want to say, and type from your brain and not your emotions. Stop worrying and getting offended by others' (perceived) misdeeds and violations, and focus on your own contributions, and how you will benefit the project. This sort of behavior brings others down, and makes them not want to be here. And you'll never convince anyone of anything with that sort of emotional tirade. Seriously, has it ever worked? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:57, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
<outdent>
@Brews: I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
@Bucket: Wikipedia operates by consensus, and consensus is achieved by civil discourse. Anything outside of that is too disruptive. -
CobaltBlueTony™
talk
18:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I predict my trek down this rabbit hole will find more and more evidence against you. Seriously, if you want to fight any perceived impropriety, don't give "them" obvious tools to exclude you from the process. Become a Vulcan if you insist on this path. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 18:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)1) User:Count Iblis, User:David Tombe, User:Likebox, and User:Hell in a Bucket are indefinitely restricted from advocacy for or commenting on User:Brews ohare, broadly construed. Should one of these editors violate this restriction, they can be blocked for up to 24 hours by any uninvolved administrator. After five blocks, the maximum length rises to one week.
This was the first comment [ [5]] Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 18:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
CobaltBlueTony™: No, a complaint about an organization is not directed at individuals in that organization, but at the actions of the organization as an organization. Consequently, this statement of H in a B is not actionable. We all know the story of a camel being a horse designed by a committee. Speaking somewhat disingenuously, the failures of the committee could be due to its organization, the limitations of its charter, or whatever, and not attributable to the members per se. Brews ohare ( talk) 20:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
CobaltBlueTony™: When you return, here are the arguments to consider:
No argument advanced supports this block or addresses these points. The block should be lifted. Brews ohare ( talk) 21:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
If you can't read the thread you're commenting on this does make you negligent. For example one of my comments say "My behavior isn't spotless in this, most of the people who know me knows I get hot headed." If you only read the entitre thread you may have caught that. As it is this was right under our nose and you choose to gloss over it. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 14:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Hell in a Bucket: For example, here is what Cobalt Blue Tony considers to be "respecful", "mature" "decorum". Just use “good metaphor”. Brews ohare ( talk) 17:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey dude, I am also in need of getting back to wiki work, I can get cantankerous and short tempered when I have little productive work to do, if your are interested I have a small-ish task that is in need of completion, together in a couple of days we can clean it up. I will go get the details for you to see if your interested to help on it, I also could do with a little encouragement to get back to it.. Off2riorob ( talk) 14:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Here it is Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster , I have done a fair bit just needs a final push, it's quite easy work, just check the editors additions against the citations to make sure there is no copyright violations, very valued work. If there are any violations then a small rewrite or removal of the copy vio. Usual rewards for this valued wiki work, a colored barn-star and a couple of net-positive respected wiki-credits. Off2riorob ( talk) 14:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I'll check it out. So basically just reading through the sources making sure it isn't copyrighted and when found rewrite or remove offending piece? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
As you seem unable to use Twinkle correctly, I've revoked your access. It's completely inappropriate to be warning regular editors with templated messages when they haven't even done anything wrong [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. You've also used it to revert edits without explanation (i.e. edit war) [11] [12]. You can do things manually for a while and hopefully you'll take more care. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
But I've no intention in getting dragged down; I've given my opinion, and those receptive to it will listen, and those not receptive to it won't. I doubt I'll post to that thread again. Still, even without treats of blocking, I think the idea of backing away from using templates so much is a good one for you to consider; it seldom helps, and it's only true effect is to piss the person off. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 15:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Set Sail For The Seven Seas 263° 24' 45" NET 17:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Per a motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:
- Brews ohare's topic ban is modified to expire in 90 days from the date that this motion passes. The supplementary restrictions of Brews ohare (namely, restrictions from posting on physics related disputes or the Wikipedia/Wikipedia talk namespaces) will also expire 90 days from the date that this motion passes. Brews ohare is instructed that continued violations of his existing restrictions will lead to the 90 day timer being reset in additional to any discretionary enforcement action taken.
- Count Iblis, David Tombe, Likebox, and Hell in a Bucket are indefinitely restricted from advocacy for or commenting on Brews ohare, broadly construed. Should any of these editors violate this restriction, they may be blocked for up to 24 hours by any uninvolved administrator. After three blocks, the maximum block length shall rise to one week.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Ha ha, at least I am not being arbitrated, it never rains but it pours, ha ha, HIAB, good to see this issue resolved, move on, take those guys off your watchlist. This place is not perfect but we are all trying and that is what is the point, don't say..ow your not perfect, say, ow your trying, ha ha.. excuse me for frivolity, good your OK , I know we are here to write and work on the wiki articles but meeting people from around the world like you is worth any of the stress. Off2riorob ( talk) 23:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hell, please don't skirt around the fringes of your topic ban, it has been applied for a good reason and if you skirt around it you will be restricted, if that is what you want carry on, if you don't I suggest moving on and dropping the stick. Off2riorob ( talk) 13:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Did you put this in the right section? [13]. The unblock discussion was a couple sections above, the section you put that in was on a set of restrictions.-- Crossmr ( talk) 01:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
{{ helpme}} Why is my archive bot not working? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 14:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
An AFD you participated in 6 months ago, is being done again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Boba_Phat_(2nd_nomination) Dream Focus 08:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Biting, assumptions of bad faith, and other assorted nonsense at AfD. Thank you. — Farix ( t | c) 21:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
So now you're calling me a communist? — Rlevse • Talk • 22:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Sweet god, I just pointed out that the arguement was weak. I didn't call anyone communist just noted the thought process and philosphy sure is similar. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 22:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
So, "Hell," are you saying that it's okay for "seb" to laugh rudely at me and say, rudely sarcastically, "It gets better every time" (referring to something that I said to or/and about him in the admin. board), but it's somehow "not okay" for me to respond with a similar rudeness back? How is that "fair"? Did you go to him with a similar kind of warning? If not, then why not?
MaxxFordham ( talk) 18:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Did he call you a power hungry person or anything like that? Right now I'd suggest reading WP:STICK. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 23:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Appeals_to_Jimbo its miscellaneous not article, regards. Off2riorob ( talk) 15:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your nice note on the photo. I will look through pre 1923 magazines on books.google.com because they are copyright free and if a photo there can be helpful I add it to the article. Best to you! pmcyclist ( talk) 15:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
J.. I want to find out how do you know, if something is added to the page, who did it? So it can be undone? Thanks. Natural ( talk) 21:52, 24 May 2010 (UTC)Natural
Wikipedia:Appeals_to_Jimbo Shall I close that discussion? it is looking pretty clear Off2riorob ( talk) 22:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Closed as keep Off2riorob ( talk) 22:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Rob, not the desired option but it does appear to be snowing in common-senseville. Either way no biggie the note from Jimbo pretty much defeats it's purpose anyways. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 00:50, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
After reverting my work with the comment "take it to the talk page" you continue to revert without bothering to discuss. If you feel so strongly about the wording of the article that you make such changes, please show the courtesy of explaining your actions like everyone else does. BlackCab ( talk) 09:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Unbroken Chain. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User:Hell in a Bucket. Thank you. BlackCab ( talk) 05:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Dude, what does it mean, seriously? I want to know. Is it something about a long term pattern of abuse? I think it's funny you pasted that on my talk page without any investigation... You honestly made my day, man. Hilarious! Professor Chaos ( talk) 06:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
Sandstein
19:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)In the future, please use civil and polite language at all times, especially when others tells you that your use of expletives bothers them. Directing profanities towards others and calling them incompetents is not compatible with Wikipedia's collaborative environment. Thanks, Sandstein 19:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Can't really say I'm going to stop using the word fuck. Would you point out how mentioning [[ incompetant]] is a violation of NPA? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 23:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Really, would you care to point out where I was wrong with the timeline? You started with a no edit reversion, then a summary this is a wrong scripture, then accused me of not responding to the talkpage. Either way I really don't give a fuck, you can twist it as much as you want but it's only 24 hours and I can assure you this isn't going to magically change my vocabulary. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 02:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
When you say mature do you mean not answering the original very civil request to take his unexplained reversion to the talkpage? Maybe it's the twisting of events that have taken us to our current situation, I presented him with diffs that had his name on them and this resulted only in denials. I was then accused of doing the same thing I was asking him to do by him and denied he hadn't made the reversions. This account has a conflict of interest and has a de facto hate speech on his user page about the religion. The person he reverted is the exact opposite. This naturally makes for conflict. Hence the initial reference to the incompetance article. I couldn't find the stupid link on the first posting so I corrected on the second. At that point the word fuckbecame a issue. I have no qualms in admitting I have a temper but there are underlying issues beyond my own behavior. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 06:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Answer my question, I've been waiting for a day now. Question number one....Why was this nec? [ [18]], Question number two.... Where was this addressed or explained? [ [19]] Next maybe even confusing I'm accused of not putting my rationale on the talkpage although the user is removing sourced material. So I said the word fuck and I alluded to incompetance by conflict of interest. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 06:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Unbroken Chain ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The log says 24 hours block as of 13:05, June 3, 2010 Sandstein with an expiry time of 24 hours and the note on my page says a different time. Can someone clarify which time is correct?
Decline reason:
The user notes below that he doesn't wish to be unblocked and was merely asking a question. Accounting4Taste: talk 17:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The block log is correct; 24 hours as of as of 13:05, June 3, 2010. Block messages are usually added after the fact. You don't seem to have provided a reason to consider unblocking you, so I'm assuming that the purpose of the unblock request was to ask that question. Should that not be the case, you can certainly provide more information and various administrators will continue to monitor this page while the unblock request remains open. Accounting4Taste: talk 17:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
You are a participant in the AFD for the article Title 15 Code of Federal Regulations. After you expressed your opinion on the article, a new article, Title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, has been created. Please review the new article and, if you would like to change your opinion on the AFD in light of the article, revisit the discussion. Thanks. TJRC ( talk) 23:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, it's not the point that you didn't say you were blocked by BlackCab. The point is that the editor who did block you, blocked you because they agreed that you breached the policy. You were blocked because of your actions, not because another editor is 'overly sensitive'.-- Jeffro77 ( talk) 07:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I consider being told my edits are "crap" to be offensive, but I suppose you are correct in that they are not technically vandalism. I will attempt to modify my behavior in the future. As for you, if you want us to stop speaking to you, and want the issue to be dropped, stop bringing it up. Also, please do not use the word "fuck" in my talk page edit summaries. -- Pstanton ( talk) 18:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
TFOWR 21:28, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
So, "Hell," are you saying that it's okay for "seb" to laugh rudely at me and say, rudely sarcastically, "It gets better every time" (referring to something that I said to or/and about him in the admin. board), but it's somehow "not okay" for me to respond with a similar rudeness back? How is that "fair"? Did you go to him with a similar kind of warning? If not, then why not?
MaxxFordham ( talk) 18:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Did he call you a power hungry person or anything like that? Right now I'd suggest reading WP:STICK. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 23:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I already told you what he said. You go take your own "medicine" now and read that reference yourself.
MaxxFordham (
talk)
22:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Apparently you did NOT "drop your stick" at that time, because if you had, then you wouldn't have written your lame response that you did just now. No, you're the one who missed the point, because look--you just responded again. The only thing I was doing before was noticing that I had not completed a discussion that got left undone in May because I hadn't visited here for so long (I actually have a life outside the Wikiworld, unlike you).
MaxxFordham ( talk) 22:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The changes I have made to the Everbread page have been made to make the page factually correct. I hope that is ok. Putting a unverified list of only some of the directors would seem to be somewhat misleading
My name is Ian Swycher and I am a director and Chairman. I would like to ensure that what is on the page is factually correct. The question I would ask - is for the key people - where is this sourced from? I feel that if there is going to be a list of key people then this should be objective and nor a subjective list. the current list unfortunately falls into the latter category — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.238.126 ( talk) 11:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I have never edited a Wikipedia before and so I appreciate your comments and input. Apologies if I have caused you any inconvenience or extra work. Amy further hinst or tips you can give me on what I am allowed and not allowed to do would be much appreciatd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.238.126 ( talk) 11:43, 6 November 2013 (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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Hello amigo, yes I have enough now or I will need to create a separate page to store them, how are you doing? I have been keeping my eye out but you have appeared a bit quiet, which can be good. I created my first article tonight or I think I did I saved it really as it was deleted the mass deletion of blp's in the last couple of days, have you seen all the going on? Gabriel Mar Gregorios looks like a nice guy and seems a shame to delete him so I have for the time being at least saved him..Heres a list of some of the mass deleted blp articles if you want to have a look and see any worthy of saving. I was happy for Raymond, he made it in the end for perseverance. As usual, keep in touch, best regards. Off2riorob ( talk) 02:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi HiaB, the source was as below. I searched before deleting but could find little on this particular Markar Melkonian, as opposed to Professor Markar Melkonian (California State University) - Peripitus (Talk) 11:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Since you withdrew your nomination at Grundle's talk page in regards of this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chimpcam AFD I closed it as keep. If you change your mind feel free to re-nominate. Best, -- The Magnificent Clean-keeper ( talk) 19:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
BTW. I've responded to your post at my talk page. Usually I try to keep things together but in this case they've become two different thinks anyways, at least from my point of view. Cheers to the bucket and to the grateful, -- The Magnificent Clean-keeper ( talk) 21:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Listening to it now. I SAW that concert. lol (I'm old, very very old.) Oberonfitch ( talk) 17:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
The link you sent only said it was discouraged. Similar to the long usernames with long html coding. I'll worry about taking it down if I ever run for admin. Until then do not remove things from my userpage again. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 17:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
This may seem like a minor issue, but the fundamental issue is that if you're not willing to abide by the standards expected by the community, then I don't believe you should be allowed to edit here. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 20:15, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
A man sat down at a bar and told the bartender, "I bet you three hundred dollars that I can piss into the cup all the way over there on the other side of the bar and not miss a single drop." The bartender said, "There is no way you can do that. Sure, I'll bet you three hundred dollars." The man then begins to undo his pants and begins pissing. He starts pissing all over the bar, spraying on the bottles and the bartender, not making a single drop in the cup. The bartender starts smiling and laughing and says, "That's it, you owe me three hundred dollars." The man then gets up and walks over to the pool table and starts laughing and shaking hands with the men standing there. He walks back to bar, sits down and starts laughing at the bartender and hands him the money. The bartender asks, "Why are you laughing? You just lost the bet." The man said, "I'm laughing because I bet those guys over there one thousand dollars that I could piss all over you and your bar and you would still be laughing when I was done." Off2riorob ( talk) 22:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
A young brunette goes into the doctor's office and says that her body hurts wherever she touches it. "Impossible," says the doctor. "Show me." She takes her finger and pushes her elbow and screams in agony. She pushes her knee and screams, pushes her ankle and screams and so on it goes. The doctor says, "You're not really a brunette are you?" She says, "No, I'm really a blonde."
"I thought so," he says. "Your finger is broken."
That "noob" you accused me of biting turned out to be a sock, as I implied, and was indef blocked. Maybe you should try some WP:AGF toward me.— Finell 00:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
(Yeah, very funny practical joke, I fell for it... anyways....)
The Snyder-stuff... I gave it a writer-stub, and writer-category.... but it appears to me that's not right now... right now, the emphasis seems more on "criminal" or whatnot... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 06:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Hell in a Bucket, Can you correct me, please : In February 2010, her family filed a new claim for murder. The Bretnacher family lawyer is William Bourdon, (another great grand son of Edouard Michelin), and the lawyer of Transparency International.[16] [17] Thank you very much best regards -- Raymondnivet ( talk) 22:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
The Article Rescue Barnstar | ||
For saving Ophélie Bretnacher disappearance, which was by all counts dead to rights. -- King Öomie 19:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC) |
Impressive work on that. -- King Öomie 19:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Jake, there's something in Wikipedia about extreme theories, fringe theories. Do you know the link for that, a few of the things on the JW page I feel fall into that category. Thanks.-- Natural ( talk) 01:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks much. -- Natural ( talk) 13:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks (belatedly!) for your response in good faith to this.
FWIW I do think it's more likely than not that the Vatican fudged the details of JPs death, though in the manner of, and for the reasons, given by Bp Magee.
(I generally tend to the view that when shit happens, not to ascribe bad-mindedness when the answer could well be incompetence).
As for the
Sr Vincenza page, I’d suggest, but haven’t carried out, a couple of changes.
I thought I'd check these with you first. Happy typing! Moonraker12 ( talk) 16:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
The block was increased a bit much, from 48hrs to indef, but there may be little support for a reduction, *uc*. Off2riorob ( talk) 22:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Please see WP:SMI with respect to the "you have new messages" banner. Thanks. Rodhull andemu 01:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
...for reversing the vandalism on my user page. ttonyb ( talk) 02:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
There was really no need to file an ArbCom case. If Proofreader77 wants to try to file one upon the block's expiration that's their prerogative, but there are really no outstanding issues beyond some disagreement in the ANI thread, which is par for the course. It might save time to just withdraw the request, but of course it's up to you. -- Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 03:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your participation on amending my sanctions. Your eminently practical suggestion to "give me enough rope to hang myself" was ignored, possibly because the estimation was made that I would behave myself, and then no reason would exist to gag me.
I am quite sure that when sanctions expire, immediate action will be taken to re-institute them, because there is no reason involved here, just pique and petulance. Brews ohare ( talk) 18:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I think it is up to Proofreader77 to chart his own journey back to regaining editing privileges - should that be his intent. A definition of disruption is to keep doing the same things that annoy people - even when none of them are specifically fairly bad - when various people request that you don't, and disruption is a blockable offence. I understand that you feel that the sanctions are driven as much by personal pique as by policy, but in a community based collaborative editing environment other peoples perceptions - and unperturbed enjoyment of the site - are as important as removing the truly offensive remarks of vandals.
Anyhoo, if you wish to keep arguing P77's case then please tone down the rhetoric/language. I will do my best to ensure that there is no collateral damage to your account as regards P77's case, but you need to ensure you don't start tripping up of your own accord. Cheers, (Mark)
LessHeard vanU (
talk)
20:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
While I have been involved in disputes with Finell, I consider it a waste of time to think about the individual people here and their motives. I try to focus only on content. I appreciate your good intentions, but I think personal comments, even if they aren't attacks, aren't interesting. Likebox ( talk) 16:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi -
If you are still up, would you look at Sea Shepherd Conservation Society which is being repeatedly vandalized? Thanks Oberonfitch ( talk) 09:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
You are just repeating the same incorrect argument from another page. The political leanings of these media organisations is irrelevant. We are not discussing a political viewpoint but reports of a criminal act being filed in a police station. Politics doesn't come into it. Qattusu ( talk) 20:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
You have declared that three of the main media organisations in Malta are "not reliable" without any basis or evidence whatsoever and you say that you are not saying anything about my sources? Being an American certainly has a lot to do with it. The marital problems of the golfer Tiger Woods - pure gossip, no criminal reports were made and no charges were filed - is allowed several paragraphs on wikipedia but more serious issues, involving the most prominent Maltese journalist and a serving magistrate are deleted because they are Maltese. This is cultural imperialism and racism at its very worst. Qattusu ( talk) 07:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Where did I declare anything of the sort? You are new here why don't you take advice from somemore experienced editors or try writing the article in the maltese wiki first., then transplant it here. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
You declared that just above: you said some of the sources were "not reliable". I have bolded it. I just don't know how you are in a position to question the reliability of these organisations. Qattusu ( talk) 17:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Your claim that the journalists at The Times of Malta are "connected" to the subject of the article is potentially libellous. That newspaper has been in the business of reporting accurate, objective, factual news reporting for 85 years. Which means it was reporting way back in the day when white Americans were lynching black men for whistling at white women. Here is another reference from The Times of Malta, including a statement about the case from George Abela, the President of Malta. [1] The President of the country is moved to comment on the actions of this prominent figure who you so badly want mention of kept off wikipedia. I guess I should add it to the article but what`s the point? An American will just come on and remove it. You Americans are just so arrogant. You think that everything you do is important and that whatever goes on in other countries is irrelevant. Why not change the site name to call it ameripedia? I thought wikipedia was a place which could bring down some of the boundaries and barriers between people but now I can see what a joke it has become. At least Hell in a Bucket has been constructive even though he has directed several insults at me. The rest of you are just arrogant losers trying to make decisions on things you know nothing about. The rest of you are just arrogant white American racists to force their agenda through, deleting anything from countries they think beneath them. Qattusu ( talk) 10:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
IMO it is not really much of an issue, hell, the article looks like its going to be deleted and he will vanish with the article, more attention is not required..imo. I would remove the section and enjoy sunday as I don't think there is a specific issue worthy of wider community action? Off2riorob ( talk) 14:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
i am not shure why you added the outloud article for delete, can you plz explane why and how i can backup the article more. -- Firewindwik ( talk) 15:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I've added a few refs try again, and if it is still not good enought let me know. -- Firewindwik ( talk) 16:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Man i just tried to help outloud get there word out there but delete it i will kook up a better version when they are better known and have there second album out. -- Firewindwik ( talk) 16:34, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the beautiful barnstar. It was an honour. Take care and keep up the great work. Dr.K. λogos πraxis 02:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi H in a B: Ignoratio elenchi, eh? That's a new one for me. If you think there is anything I might do with profit, let me know. Brews ohare ( talk) 06:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
RE: this
Technically speaking, isn't the admins' job to determine where admin action is needed? Jus' sayin'. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
I sent a message to David Tombe here, but it's really to you all. Thank you for your support, not because I give a rip about being punished by a bunch of bottom-feeding wannabe politicians, but because you all see and recognize something that was totally wrong and against the spirit of Wikipedia, and you rose up and stated such long before I even thought about it. Trusilver 18:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
This is a very nice statement. It should begin with Trusilver acknowledging the problem of their own actions. Next we can look at Sandstein's block, which might have been an over-reaction, and thus we can unpeel the onion layers. Brews could also help matters greatly by ceasing to battle. Be more like Gandhi than Che. Jehochman Brrr 02:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
If it is, indeed, him, the account cannot be blocked for a username violation, since we always let people use their real names (like I do). It does, however, remain wide open for a COI-based block. Perhaps I should have recommended relocating the report there.
In any event, the article's getting deleted and I doubt he'll edit again. Daniel Case ( talk) 05:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Please note this. Brews ohare ( talk) 20:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Hell in a Bucket. I am writing to ask you why you reverted my changes to article Operation Repo. I like this show, it's entertaining. I do agree that for most part, the show definitely indicates fakeness, but the section of that article with the claim of the show being scripted and ficticuous offered no sources, proof or evidence. I added a citation needed within the text and ultimately changed the text. You quickly reverted my change back to how it was previously. So, my question now is, does not WP work by providing sources? If I ask for sources, why am I being bit? If you are an experienced editor, why do you simply revert changes without so much as a note to the other party? I sure hope you have no admin desires, because actions like this will not get you there. Please, if I am wrong, do explain to me why my changes are wrong and yours right, and why it is ok for you to revert changes and not have the decency to inform the other party of this. Cheers. WildHorsesPulled ( talk) 16:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
WildHorsesPulled has eaten your {{
cookie}}! The cookie made them
happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{
cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{ subst:munch}}!
Hope you had a great time in the mountains. You might want to pull my email addy sometime, so you can call when you come through Denver. The big weekend story here was being able to move the rabbits out of the bathtub. I'm pretty sure you had more fun. Oberonfitch ( talk) 02:45, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
NerdyScienceDude :) ( ✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 02:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
I've expanded it and referenced it. If you feel that it is now notable, can you withdraw you AfD nomination? I would like to submit the article to DYK. :3 Silver seren C 02:48, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Done Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 02:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Union Avenue Historic Commercial District at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! JohnBlackburne words deeds 15:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello Hell in a Bucket,
Do you know that ? http://bumpshack.com/2010/03/20/natalee-holloway-body-possibly-found-by-the-muldowneys-pictures/
O Bretnacher is in DYK on simple, 10 march 2010 : http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know/Archives
Best regards -- Raymondnivet ( talk) 12:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi Hell in a Bucket, this is to let you know that I have proposed a restriction on you commenting or advocating for Brews ohare, amongst other things. You may find the motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Motions regarding Speed of Light and Brews ohare. SirFozzie ( talk) 00:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Your statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions is combative, attacking and uncivil. As a clerk of the Arbitration Committee, I've gone ahead and remove it. Feel free to replace it with a more civil statement, but if you simply replace the statement, or replace it with a very similar one it will once again be removed and you will be blocked. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
As per the warning above, I've gone ahead and blocked you for 12 hours for making personal attack and your incivility on the motions page. The final straw was this diff, specifically; "Can you seriously spout non sensical drivel and expect it to fix your failings." - not acceptable. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Unbroken Chain ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Asking a question at a Arbcom hearing is not a blockable offense. I refactored my comment to remove swear words but seriously a block over "Can you seriously spout non sensical drivel and expect it to fix your failings" I do not apolagize for asking this. There was even a review ordered by Wales in this case. I've tried to comment calmly [ [3]]. This was shortly removed. I posted again with a litte more angst, it was refactored, without a by your leave or even a courtesy note. I reverted, I was threatened with a block if I reposted so I posted a toned down version. This resulted in a block. No attempts at contact were made other then threats. Where in Wikipedia does it give anyone the right to remove or refactor my comments? I call it nonsense and drivel because it is exactly that, you get a consensus by removing the editors that disagree. It's a very disturbing trend.
Decline reason:
Blocks are meant to prevent further disruption, and that is what you were doing, more than protesting apparent misconduct by others. While blocks are not meant to impose a cool-down period, the effect is identical, and I strongly suggest that you take this time to think about what you want to say, and type from your brain and not your emotions. Stop worrying and getting offended by others' (perceived) misdeeds and violations, and focus on your own contributions, and how you will benefit the project. This sort of behavior brings others down, and makes them not want to be here. And you'll never convince anyone of anything with that sort of emotional tirade. Seriously, has it ever worked? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 15:57, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
<outdent>
@Brews: I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
@Bucket: Wikipedia operates by consensus, and consensus is achieved by civil discourse. Anything outside of that is too disruptive. -
CobaltBlueTony™
talk
18:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I predict my trek down this rabbit hole will find more and more evidence against you. Seriously, if you want to fight any perceived impropriety, don't give "them" obvious tools to exclude you from the process. Become a Vulcan if you insist on this path. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 18:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)1) User:Count Iblis, User:David Tombe, User:Likebox, and User:Hell in a Bucket are indefinitely restricted from advocacy for or commenting on User:Brews ohare, broadly construed. Should one of these editors violate this restriction, they can be blocked for up to 24 hours by any uninvolved administrator. After five blocks, the maximum length rises to one week.
This was the first comment [ [5]] Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 18:45, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
CobaltBlueTony™: No, a complaint about an organization is not directed at individuals in that organization, but at the actions of the organization as an organization. Consequently, this statement of H in a B is not actionable. We all know the story of a camel being a horse designed by a committee. Speaking somewhat disingenuously, the failures of the committee could be due to its organization, the limitations of its charter, or whatever, and not attributable to the members per se. Brews ohare ( talk) 20:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
CobaltBlueTony™: When you return, here are the arguments to consider:
No argument advanced supports this block or addresses these points. The block should be lifted. Brews ohare ( talk) 21:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
If you can't read the thread you're commenting on this does make you negligent. For example one of my comments say "My behavior isn't spotless in this, most of the people who know me knows I get hot headed." If you only read the entitre thread you may have caught that. As it is this was right under our nose and you choose to gloss over it. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 14:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Hell in a Bucket: For example, here is what Cobalt Blue Tony considers to be "respecful", "mature" "decorum". Just use “good metaphor”. Brews ohare ( talk) 17:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey dude, I am also in need of getting back to wiki work, I can get cantankerous and short tempered when I have little productive work to do, if your are interested I have a small-ish task that is in need of completion, together in a couple of days we can clean it up. I will go get the details for you to see if your interested to help on it, I also could do with a little encouragement to get back to it.. Off2riorob ( talk) 14:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Here it is Contributor copyright investigations/FlyingToaster , I have done a fair bit just needs a final push, it's quite easy work, just check the editors additions against the citations to make sure there is no copyright violations, very valued work. If there are any violations then a small rewrite or removal of the copy vio. Usual rewards for this valued wiki work, a colored barn-star and a couple of net-positive respected wiki-credits. Off2riorob ( talk) 14:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
I'll check it out. So basically just reading through the sources making sure it isn't copyrighted and when found rewrite or remove offending piece? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 15:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
As you seem unable to use Twinkle correctly, I've revoked your access. It's completely inappropriate to be warning regular editors with templated messages when they haven't even done anything wrong [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. You've also used it to revert edits without explanation (i.e. edit war) [11] [12]. You can do things manually for a while and hopefully you'll take more care. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 14:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
But I've no intention in getting dragged down; I've given my opinion, and those receptive to it will listen, and those not receptive to it won't. I doubt I'll post to that thread again. Still, even without treats of blocking, I think the idea of backing away from using templates so much is a good one for you to consider; it seldom helps, and it's only true effect is to piss the person off. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 15:37, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Set Sail For The Seven Seas 263° 24' 45" NET 17:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Per a motion at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment:
- Brews ohare's topic ban is modified to expire in 90 days from the date that this motion passes. The supplementary restrictions of Brews ohare (namely, restrictions from posting on physics related disputes or the Wikipedia/Wikipedia talk namespaces) will also expire 90 days from the date that this motion passes. Brews ohare is instructed that continued violations of his existing restrictions will lead to the 90 day timer being reset in additional to any discretionary enforcement action taken.
- Count Iblis, David Tombe, Likebox, and Hell in a Bucket are indefinitely restricted from advocacy for or commenting on Brews ohare, broadly construed. Should any of these editors violate this restriction, they may be blocked for up to 24 hours by any uninvolved administrator. After three blocks, the maximum block length shall rise to one week.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Ha ha, at least I am not being arbitrated, it never rains but it pours, ha ha, HIAB, good to see this issue resolved, move on, take those guys off your watchlist. This place is not perfect but we are all trying and that is what is the point, don't say..ow your not perfect, say, ow your trying, ha ha.. excuse me for frivolity, good your OK , I know we are here to write and work on the wiki articles but meeting people from around the world like you is worth any of the stress. Off2riorob ( talk) 23:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hell, please don't skirt around the fringes of your topic ban, it has been applied for a good reason and if you skirt around it you will be restricted, if that is what you want carry on, if you don't I suggest moving on and dropping the stick. Off2riorob ( talk) 13:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Did you put this in the right section? [13]. The unblock discussion was a couple sections above, the section you put that in was on a set of restrictions.-- Crossmr ( talk) 01:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
{{ helpme}} Why is my archive bot not working? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 14:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
An AFD you participated in 6 months ago, is being done again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Boba_Phat_(2nd_nomination) Dream Focus 08:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Biting, assumptions of bad faith, and other assorted nonsense at AfD. Thank you. — Farix ( t | c) 21:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
So now you're calling me a communist? — Rlevse • Talk • 22:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Sweet god, I just pointed out that the arguement was weak. I didn't call anyone communist just noted the thought process and philosphy sure is similar. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 22:59, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
So, "Hell," are you saying that it's okay for "seb" to laugh rudely at me and say, rudely sarcastically, "It gets better every time" (referring to something that I said to or/and about him in the admin. board), but it's somehow "not okay" for me to respond with a similar rudeness back? How is that "fair"? Did you go to him with a similar kind of warning? If not, then why not?
MaxxFordham ( talk) 18:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Did he call you a power hungry person or anything like that? Right now I'd suggest reading WP:STICK. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 23:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Appeals_to_Jimbo its miscellaneous not article, regards. Off2riorob ( talk) 15:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your nice note on the photo. I will look through pre 1923 magazines on books.google.com because they are copyright free and if a photo there can be helpful I add it to the article. Best to you! pmcyclist ( talk) 15:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
J.. I want to find out how do you know, if something is added to the page, who did it? So it can be undone? Thanks. Natural ( talk) 21:52, 24 May 2010 (UTC)Natural
Wikipedia:Appeals_to_Jimbo Shall I close that discussion? it is looking pretty clear Off2riorob ( talk) 22:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Closed as keep Off2riorob ( talk) 22:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Rob, not the desired option but it does appear to be snowing in common-senseville. Either way no biggie the note from Jimbo pretty much defeats it's purpose anyways. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 00:50, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
After reverting my work with the comment "take it to the talk page" you continue to revert without bothering to discuss. If you feel so strongly about the wording of the article that you make such changes, please show the courtesy of explaining your actions like everyone else does. BlackCab ( talk) 09:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Unbroken Chain. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User:Hell in a Bucket. Thank you. BlackCab ( talk) 05:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Dude, what does it mean, seriously? I want to know. Is it something about a long term pattern of abuse? I think it's funny you pasted that on my talk page without any investigation... You honestly made my day, man. Hilarious! Professor Chaos ( talk) 06:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|Your reason here}}
below, but you should read our
guide to appealing blocks first.
Sandstein
19:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)In the future, please use civil and polite language at all times, especially when others tells you that your use of expletives bothers them. Directing profanities towards others and calling them incompetents is not compatible with Wikipedia's collaborative environment. Thanks, Sandstein 19:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Can't really say I'm going to stop using the word fuck. Would you point out how mentioning [[ incompetant]] is a violation of NPA? Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 23:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Really, would you care to point out where I was wrong with the timeline? You started with a no edit reversion, then a summary this is a wrong scripture, then accused me of not responding to the talkpage. Either way I really don't give a fuck, you can twist it as much as you want but it's only 24 hours and I can assure you this isn't going to magically change my vocabulary. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 02:23, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
When you say mature do you mean not answering the original very civil request to take his unexplained reversion to the talkpage? Maybe it's the twisting of events that have taken us to our current situation, I presented him with diffs that had his name on them and this resulted only in denials. I was then accused of doing the same thing I was asking him to do by him and denied he hadn't made the reversions. This account has a conflict of interest and has a de facto hate speech on his user page about the religion. The person he reverted is the exact opposite. This naturally makes for conflict. Hence the initial reference to the incompetance article. I couldn't find the stupid link on the first posting so I corrected on the second. At that point the word fuckbecame a issue. I have no qualms in admitting I have a temper but there are underlying issues beyond my own behavior. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 06:30, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Answer my question, I've been waiting for a day now. Question number one....Why was this nec? [ [18]], Question number two.... Where was this addressed or explained? [ [19]] Next maybe even confusing I'm accused of not putting my rationale on the talkpage although the user is removing sourced material. So I said the word fuck and I alluded to incompetance by conflict of interest. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 06:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Unbroken Chain ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
The log says 24 hours block as of 13:05, June 3, 2010 Sandstein with an expiry time of 24 hours and the note on my page says a different time. Can someone clarify which time is correct?
Decline reason:
The user notes below that he doesn't wish to be unblocked and was merely asking a question. Accounting4Taste: talk 17:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The block log is correct; 24 hours as of as of 13:05, June 3, 2010. Block messages are usually added after the fact. You don't seem to have provided a reason to consider unblocking you, so I'm assuming that the purpose of the unblock request was to ask that question. Should that not be the case, you can certainly provide more information and various administrators will continue to monitor this page while the unblock request remains open. Accounting4Taste: talk 17:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
You are a participant in the AFD for the article Title 15 Code of Federal Regulations. After you expressed your opinion on the article, a new article, Title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, has been created. Please review the new article and, if you would like to change your opinion on the AFD in light of the article, revisit the discussion. Thanks. TJRC ( talk) 23:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, it's not the point that you didn't say you were blocked by BlackCab. The point is that the editor who did block you, blocked you because they agreed that you breached the policy. You were blocked because of your actions, not because another editor is 'overly sensitive'.-- Jeffro77 ( talk) 07:39, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I consider being told my edits are "crap" to be offensive, but I suppose you are correct in that they are not technically vandalism. I will attempt to modify my behavior in the future. As for you, if you want us to stop speaking to you, and want the issue to be dropped, stop bringing it up. Also, please do not use the word "fuck" in my talk page edit summaries. -- Pstanton ( talk) 18:54, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
TFOWR 21:28, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
So, "Hell," are you saying that it's okay for "seb" to laugh rudely at me and say, rudely sarcastically, "It gets better every time" (referring to something that I said to or/and about him in the admin. board), but it's somehow "not okay" for me to respond with a similar rudeness back? How is that "fair"? Did you go to him with a similar kind of warning? If not, then why not?
MaxxFordham ( talk) 18:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Did he call you a power hungry person or anything like that? Right now I'd suggest reading WP:STICK. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 23:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I already told you what he said. You go take your own "medicine" now and read that reference yourself.
MaxxFordham (
talk)
22:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Apparently you did NOT "drop your stick" at that time, because if you had, then you wouldn't have written your lame response that you did just now. No, you're the one who missed the point, because look--you just responded again. The only thing I was doing before was noticing that I had not completed a discussion that got left undone in May because I hadn't visited here for so long (I actually have a life outside the Wikiworld, unlike you).
MaxxFordham ( talk) 22:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The changes I have made to the Everbread page have been made to make the page factually correct. I hope that is ok. Putting a unverified list of only some of the directors would seem to be somewhat misleading
My name is Ian Swycher and I am a director and Chairman. I would like to ensure that what is on the page is factually correct. The question I would ask - is for the key people - where is this sourced from? I feel that if there is going to be a list of key people then this should be objective and nor a subjective list. the current list unfortunately falls into the latter category — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.238.126 ( talk) 11:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. I have never edited a Wikipedia before and so I appreciate your comments and input. Apologies if I have caused you any inconvenience or extra work. Amy further hinst or tips you can give me on what I am allowed and not allowed to do would be much appreciatd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.237.238.126 ( talk) 11:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)