This page 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. |
Hi - I believe you added a reference to the talk page on fan service at some point that went like this:
Firstly, google books has conked out, so I can't see the page any more. Secondly, looking at the book, I'm not sure that it counts as a RS, as it has no author, and the publisher is not academic? Could you please shed any light on this? -- Malkinann ( talk) 03:35, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Need your views and comments. One should also go through [ 'no consensus' discussion]. 210.89.52.81 ( talk) 11:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
For fighting the good fight about Commons the past few days =) SarahStierch ( talk) 20:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Thought you might like to take a wander through this chap's blogspot [2]. Quite an exceptional linguist with a piercing eye for poetry, both good and bogus. Cheers. Rumiton ( talk) 12:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Also corrected for perspective.
Rich
Farmbrough, 18:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC).
Six months ago I said you were WP:WIKIHOUNDING Cirt. Since then it's only gotten worse. This latest charge that he is engaged in advocacy of a miscellaneous set of topics, following your forum-shopping campaign against the Santorum article, makes it look like you have a serious obsession with him. He has written dozens of featured articles on a variety of topics, but you act towards him as if he were the worst problem user on Wikipedia. Your behavior is disruptive and anti-social. If you continue to go after him, following his editing, and trying to foment opposition to him on and off wiki then the next step may be for the community to ban you from interacting with him. Please just take his articles off your watchlist and ignore him. If what he's doing is so bad then other editors can take care of it. Will Beback talk 06:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you, Sadads ( talk) 22:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Jayen — Thank you for your apology to me at ANI about your posts on external forums offsite about me, and thank you for your pledge to reduce that behavior. I appreciate the wise words in the post by SlimVirgin diff. Though you and I disagree about the nature of your wikihounding of me for the past three years — we both agree that legitimate concerns have been raised. And I wish to work to address those concerns. But that is IFF those concerns are raised in a good faith manner on-Wikipedia, and not saved up in some sort of one-fell-swoop. I hope you do realize that any communication coming from you, because you have followed me for three years, is heard with a degree of me being disturbed and emotionally upset that you have followed me around for so long and posted about me on at least three different websites including this one. I am sorry if that has made my reactions different, than, say, to criticism posted from a neutral-third-party-admin (as Sadads suggested) — but it cannot hurt for you to at least attempt to implement Sadads' recommendation, and in the future try to go through an intermediary in order to lessen the degree of impropriety that may be seen from focusing on me so much in the future.
I wish to be more responsive to concerns raised on-Wikipedia. And I appreciate very much your statement to stop posting in websites offsite in the same manner you have about me and with the same degree of focus. But due to the nature of our previous interactions over the past three years, perhaps SlimVirgin is right and Sadads is right. Perhaps what is needed now is a break, for both of us to step back from future interactions and back away from all the heat generated, assume a little more good faith, and try to communicate involving a neutral-third-party-admin. -- Cirt ( talk) 23:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Hi - I believe you added a reference to the talk page on fan service at some point that went like this:
Firstly, google books has conked out, so I can't see the page any more. Secondly, looking at the book, I'm not sure that it counts as a RS, as it has no author, and the publisher is not academic? Could you please shed any light on this? -- Malkinann ( talk) 03:35, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Need your views and comments. One should also go through [ 'no consensus' discussion]. 210.89.52.81 ( talk) 11:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
For fighting the good fight about Commons the past few days =) SarahStierch ( talk) 20:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Thought you might like to take a wander through this chap's blogspot [2]. Quite an exceptional linguist with a piercing eye for poetry, both good and bogus. Cheers. Rumiton ( talk) 12:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Also corrected for perspective.
Rich
Farmbrough, 18:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC).
Six months ago I said you were WP:WIKIHOUNDING Cirt. Since then it's only gotten worse. This latest charge that he is engaged in advocacy of a miscellaneous set of topics, following your forum-shopping campaign against the Santorum article, makes it look like you have a serious obsession with him. He has written dozens of featured articles on a variety of topics, but you act towards him as if he were the worst problem user on Wikipedia. Your behavior is disruptive and anti-social. If you continue to go after him, following his editing, and trying to foment opposition to him on and off wiki then the next step may be for the community to ban you from interacting with him. Please just take his articles off your watchlist and ignore him. If what he's doing is so bad then other editors can take care of it. Will Beback talk 06:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you, Sadads ( talk) 22:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Jayen — Thank you for your apology to me at ANI about your posts on external forums offsite about me, and thank you for your pledge to reduce that behavior. I appreciate the wise words in the post by SlimVirgin diff. Though you and I disagree about the nature of your wikihounding of me for the past three years — we both agree that legitimate concerns have been raised. And I wish to work to address those concerns. But that is IFF those concerns are raised in a good faith manner on-Wikipedia, and not saved up in some sort of one-fell-swoop. I hope you do realize that any communication coming from you, because you have followed me for three years, is heard with a degree of me being disturbed and emotionally upset that you have followed me around for so long and posted about me on at least three different websites including this one. I am sorry if that has made my reactions different, than, say, to criticism posted from a neutral-third-party-admin (as Sadads suggested) — but it cannot hurt for you to at least attempt to implement Sadads' recommendation, and in the future try to go through an intermediary in order to lessen the degree of impropriety that may be seen from focusing on me so much in the future.
I wish to be more responsive to concerns raised on-Wikipedia. And I appreciate very much your statement to stop posting in websites offsite in the same manner you have about me and with the same degree of focus. But due to the nature of our previous interactions over the past three years, perhaps SlimVirgin is right and Sadads is right. Perhaps what is needed now is a break, for both of us to step back from future interactions and back away from all the heat generated, assume a little more good faith, and try to communicate involving a neutral-third-party-admin. -- Cirt ( talk) 23:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)