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. |
A couple of weeks ago you blocked SuzanneOlsson ( talk · contribs) for a week. Since returning she has continued her poor behaviour, including badgering and insulting other editors on talk pages. Perhaps you could take a look at her recent edit history and see if another block is appropriate, or whether we should consider taking her to ANI for a proposed topic ban. Thanks. -- Biker Biker ( talk) 03:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I did have two accounts. I had set up one, then later, another with a name I preferred, but with no malicious intentions. The purpose was not ever that one account would manufacture support for the other. I was not doing it to provide support for one account under another account name. The posting on the talk page using the other user name was by accident (as you can see by the use of first person pronouns in that comment) My purposes were not any of the ones listed as "innappropriate uses of alternative accounts." The appearance of such a misuse was an accident, where I believed I was writing under the appropriate account, but was accidently signed in under the other. My wish to maintain honesty was shown by the fact that after I realised I was signed in on the otehr account, I exited and signed in under the other to sign the post with the actual more honest name. The whole thing was a mistake, but I truly did not do it with bad intentions.
It should have been obvious that if I created a second account this could easily happen. I should have thought it through.
I offer sincere apologies and emphasize that I will not repeat anything like this in the future.
I do wish to add that the edits about the American Psychological Association, and the UK Royal College were in order to correct the factual innaccuracy that was and is present on those pages. If you would folllow the links I had read, and read the actual statements by those two organizations, you would see that is the case. This is not ideology, this is about the accurate description of what those two associations actually said. The APA said that there are so many different experiences, that a global statement may be misleading. http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/mental-health.pdf The Royal College explicitly said that the data is inconclusive. http://www.nccmh.org.uk/publications_SR_abortion_in_MH.html The current paragraphs on Wilkipedia are innaccurate. I trust, that you are a person of integrity who will take the time to go to the actual statements and reports by those two organizations and see that is the case. I hope that someone other than me will edit the page for greater acuracy. Rivka3 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Look, you socked, then you lied about it. I sincerely do hope you don't do it again; but if you do someone is likely to block not only this account but all your accounts. Have one account and be done. And don't lie; next time there is a question people will be far less likely to believe you. Puppy has spoken. Killer Chihuahua 20:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KillerChihuahua. Dougweller ( talk) 10:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Killer. I have been accused of tendentious editing at Tea Party Movement. I was wondering if you would mind taking a look at my edits and telling me if I am in violation of Wikipedia behavioral policies. Thanks. — goethean 21:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, you "angry barking puppy,"
You recently put a notice on my talk page. I wanted to ask you here why it supposedly had to be you posting that, instead of just the supposed admin. who had already been talking to me. When and why did it supposedly become "your business"?
(But the one thing I'm grateful for about that is that the warning was present, rather than just taking action without one. So for that one thing, thanks.)
But then I saw that you wanted us to post replies to the place where the original message was posted. Well, obviously you get a notification that someone has put a message on your talk page, and I get a notification that someone has put one on my page. But how would you get a notification that someone has responded to something you wrote on my page? You wouldn't just keep checking it and checking it every day for a long time, even if some time went without seeing a response there, would you? So that's my concern about keeping the messages lined up on the same page. Yes, it's definitely easier to follow. But the notification system isn't very good. Right? What's your remedy for that, and how do I get it too?
MaxxFordham ( talk) 05:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
"Meatpuppet" thing. Does this mean we can now refer to you as "Mrs. Weller"? baahaahaa. <Newspaper across the rump, and puppy-Ched yelps and looks for a table to hide under> — Ched : ? 14:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, hey. :) I responded, but i didnt want to be too broad about this, as it is mostly unrelated to the request in question. Anyway, all best... -- WhiteWriter speaks 19:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, the close clearly states "article edits" i.e. talk pages are OK. If they become disruptive then we can re-raise at ANI and look to spread the topic ban further. Regards, Giant Snowman 20:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Killer, please wait. Please see also my opinion (and please read my all my comments above and check it). I think that I not deserve such hard punishment. Regards-- Nado158 ( talk) 14:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Killer Chihuahua 14:33, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I already left a message to Bishonen, asking if the correct word was the one Bishonen applied, Bishonen said yes. The problem is solved. ( Slurpy121 ( talk) 18:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC))
With regard to the exact parameters of the proposed topic ban, please see my comment at User talk:DeltaQuad#AE Nado158. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 15:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Please, i wrote about 98% Serbian sport, especially about football, but also basketball etc., I never had a problem with nobody. I improved a lot of articles, wrote about players and stadiums etc. I create also a lot of articles about sport. I get even a barn star. You can all see this on my Wikipedia edit history etc. Please allow me to write about Serbian sports. This have nothing to do with politics and is not a controvers topics. I'm only come because of sports to wikipedia, only the last months I am moved a little bit to other topics. But my main topic, my beloved topic is sport, this is a topic which interrested me 120%. Please allow me to write about sports in Serbia, why so a hard punishment. I made mistakes in politic topics, but I never hat a problem with sports. You banned me because of my mistakes about controvers politic topics, but why i banned also for sport, although i never made mistakes there and although I was never prosecuted there?I think its right to punish for things who someone done wrong, but I never made mistakes there and i was never prosecuted there. Please allow me to write about sports in Serbia.-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
By all my respect, but I have not done with deliberate errors. I was not aware of the consequences of my error. Others get a warning or a ban on certain topics, and I get a ban on everything. That's not fair. In any civil legal system you will be punished for what you have really done and here? There was never porbleme on Wikipedia relating to sports, or business, agriculture, Serbian food or brands, nature etc. I've created stadium sites, player dates updated (goals, transfers, etc.), updated data, where is this controversy? I understand what you mean, but I do not edit the Albanian League or sports. Why do all my work will not be considered positive? Why all this is overlooked? I can not at all in conflict with Albania, because it has nothing to do with Serbian Sports. There is no Serbian-Albanian Football League, etc. Why is it bad if I edit about a Serbian dog, or football data (statistics), or write about a food stamp, or national parks in Serbia? about nature. This is absolutely not about those things for which I was punished. What's bad about it when I add Nemanja Vidić as a remarkable person in Užice because he was born there? Look please here i create for example this small article about Metalac Stadium, improved and create 80% of the Partizan Belgrade article till the section Club records, improved every article about almost evry club and their stadiums in the first and second league (you can ask the users there). I create a article about the Mlekara Subotica dairy. Here, nothing is bad KillerChihuahua. Please, Serbian sport, agriculture, Serbian food or brands, nature etc. have nothing to do with controversial topics with Albania etc. Please allow me, if anything were to arise, I would not take to it and report it to you immediately if you wish, but it will not happen because I think Nature etc. is not controversial. Topics like Organization for Respect and Care for Animals (which is from Serbia), Serbian Spruce, or the dog Šarplaninac and stadiums are not controversial. Please i have good faith intentions. Besied this, what you mean with not stubs? Thank you!-- Nado158 ( talk) 12:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
KC, I'd like to appeal to you once again to take two factors into account: we already have one Serbian user, User:FkpCascais, who was topic-banned similarly, but after several incidents (three previous smaller blocks over several years), and for only six months rather than a year. I agree that it's easy for them to cross the line, and indeed I was personally involved in a situation where FkpCascais at one point did exactly that, but User:WGFinley was still patient with them and I think the topic-banned user did not transgress further. As I recall, Nado158's behavior was not worse than FkpCascais', so I think it would be best to follow the same standard and at least make the two sanctions match, in order to avoid the impression he's getting treated in a manner that is less fair than someone else in a similar situation. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 18:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
I did not ignore the offer, but sorry, I didn't quite understand it, so I asked before what you mean with your statement ACTUAL ARTICLE, NOT STUBS? STUBS? Thank you!-- Nado158 ( talk) 20:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
No problem. All right, I agree with your proposal. Thank you!-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
I have a question please. It must just be exactly these from you proposed redlinks, or it can also be used redlinks from the last or coming week? Besides this, may I write an own articles (in consultation with you, of course)?For example an animal variety, airplane model, a machine etc? May I suggest two articles?-- Nado158 ( talk) 16:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
(I started a new thread because the old one was getting way too long. Killer Chihuahua 21:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC))
Well, an article about Transfermarkt.de, one of the largest websites for sports with a focus on football, and the most visited German Sports Page in 2013, International also well known, and the EuroTier, the world's largest exhibition for animal husbandry and management, with over 100,000 visitors from 100 countries. Are you agree?-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! If I'm done I will inform you! Regards!-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
[2]
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 04:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
What about this? A bit of a tautology, perhaps. Bishonen | talk 21:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
Regarding your comments here, I would like to invite you to consider RFCC as an alternative. — C M B J 02:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
No, that's fine with me. In the future, though, don't remove someone else's post. You can simply reply to it, saying "I have changed the verbiage to match your suggestions" or "I have edited the Rfc to reflect your criticism" and leave their post in place. Removing someone else's post, unless it is a personal attack, is almost never a good idea. Killer Chihuahua 00:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
NE Ent 02:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
I understood what you were doing when you added Collect, Rubin et al to the list. Others may not have. I threw my hands up in the air you were added as well. This isn't even drama. It's Jerry Springer.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 04:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
benign, forgiving creature with a bite
Thank you for continuous quality contributions not only to articles, but mediation, editor retention, help to
ignore incivility,
allow human editors to believe they are in charge, and to
begin something new, - repeating: you are an
awesome Wikipedian (2 June 2007, 17 May 2009, 25 November 2009)!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
ps: typically I call it my PumpkinSky Prize, but for you it's the Puppy of Dog The Teddy Bear Prize, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Waiting for your return... | |
I'm sorry to hear that you are not feeling well. Hope you are feeling better soon. — goethean 19:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC) |
I love it! It is even a chihuahua! Thank you! Puppy ( talk) 23:14, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Proposal for RfA conduct clarification (amendments to editnotice and addition to Template:RfA). -- Trevj ( talk) 21:06, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
The user has placed a personal attack by threating in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Medical_uses_of_silver. "This would be helpful with the likely upcoming WP:ANI discussion about Ryan's tendentious editing. Zad68" I have removed it as a personal attack by threatening. However the original editor has restored it. I also think even if there is a doubt as if its a personal attack per content, being placed on the DRN talk it looks like a personal attack even more. It just came out of nowhere, irrelevant to the current DRN discussion. Thank you.
And despite that editor TransporterMan has said: "This DRN talk page is not the venue to further argue the dispute." and my comments that it's not the venue, he continues to engage in the DRN discussion regarding the article context and other editors. Thank you. Ryanspir ( talk) 16:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Ryan felt my statement about taking this to ANI was a "threat" and edited my comment, I restored my comment and pointed Ryan to
WP:TPO for the list of conditions where it's acceptable edit someone else's comment (this isn't one of them), he disagreed, but we then both agreed that an admin should handle it from here, full discussion
here. I think Ryan's request is for you to review what's happened and take any action you deem necessary. It would have been nice if he had notified me he was contacting you about this. It's unclear to me why Ryan came to you in particular with this request, maybe you've helped him out with something before? Anyway, sorry to hear you're one sick pup, hopefully the trip to vet did you good. Take care...
Zad
68
17:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm contacting you because you have recently contributed as a reviewing administrator to WP:AE. I've made a suggestion relating to the management of that page at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests#Structural improvements to AE threads, and would appreciate your input. Thanks, Sandstein 22:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
An edit war has once again broken out on this article. I think we need to upgrade the protection level. The controversial nature of the topic makes it a magnet for people with agendas. Evildoer187 ( talk) 09:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey I know you're busy with the TPM article but some of the same people are causing problems in the Single-payer healthcare article. In the talk page there was a consensus for a particular edit and 3 users (North8000, Thargor Orlando and Arzel) have been edit-warring against it. If you could take a look it would be much appreciated. CartoonDiablo ( talk) 18:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
"Forgive one more post, but.."(my italics). KC asks you to please not reply here and you post three more times? This when you know she's trying to deal with a lot of hassle while unwell? Don't post here again, under any excuse, or you'll be blocked for harassment. Bishonen | talk 11:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC).
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks for all your constructive edits. You are one of our most logical admins and i appreciate your all-round work! Keep it up! Pass a Method talk 22:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC) |
This is Mr. Chihuahua. KC is in the hospital for testing... she may have had a heart attack. She said to tell everyone she will be back as soon as she can. She apologizes for the bad timing. 71.43.28.155 ( talk) 18:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Hope you enjoy "Baby does faceplants": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS3dHKWVP7Y Malke 2010 ( talk) 05:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Very best wishes to you, KC, and I'm glad to know Mr. Chihuahua is staying out of the doghouse and fetching your tablet and so on. Yopienso ( talk) 08:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Get well soon! Tom Harrison Talk 13:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Hope you are feeling better. Get well soon! Syrthiss ( talk) 14:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
At home, on meds, will be going to more tests and lots of follow up visits for a while. Thanks again to everyone who was so kind as to leave well wishes on this page, it means a lot to me. I'm still sick and will be irregular in my editing but at least I'm off the little tablet. Killer Chihuahua 15:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks much. They have me on meds that have the symptoms tamped down while they do the testing/diag/treatment of the causal issues. I am glad to be out of the hospital and back home and back on a real screen instead of the tiny screen of the tablet. Once you open the keyboard on one of those things, you can barely see where you're editing, and navigation was a pain (my touchscreen is a bit wonky.) I'll be off an on, but will muddle along until they get it fixed. Killer Chihuahua 16:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
It is not strictly necessary to list every party. If somebody's name comes up in the arbitration evidence and they are given notice, they can be subject to findings and remedies. For good order sake you may want just add them to the list of parties now, and leave them a notification. Jehochman Talk 15:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 23:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you are set to be mentioned in this week's Arbitration Report ( link). The report aims to inform readers of The Signpost about the proceedings of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the draft article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them on the talkpage (transcluded in the Comments section directly below the main body of text), where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievous factual errors (making sure to note such changes in the comments section). Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot ( talk) 00:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Test came back, not a heart attack. There is a mass on my thyroid, and my levels are waaay off. They're doing more tests, I'm going to be in the hospital at least another day. Puppy ( talk) 16:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Dunno about heart healthy, they're doing a stress test in the morning. But not a heart attack. El D, I probably wouldn't be except I did just file an rfar. Malke, GMTA, butthey won't let me. And the soup I had the first night was the last good food I've had. :-( But I hope to be out of here soon. Puppy ( talk) 19:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Unsolicted advice Get Mr. C to bring in your comfortable walking shoes, and stretch your calves an hour before.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 21:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Here? In reviewing the user's contributions (less than 50, exclusive focus on the MRM article), I can see that they are deeply problematic. But to add an unreliable source that mentions the MRM only once, make something up and attribute it to that source, and then change content that is supported by academic references, so that the text no longer matches the references, is an entirely new level of unhelpful. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 03:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
participants @ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Yours was the first name I recognized so I came here. I just updated the article Active shooter. I wonder if you have time to take alook and update the rating. It is currently @ Start. Thanks in advance. ADD: Just noticed your health issue. Hope ypou are well. If you want to send me elsewhere, I won't mind.``` Buster Seven Talk 20:58, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, could you take a look at User:Timotheus Canens/GS draft and leave comments on the talk page? Thanks a lot. T. Canens ( talk) 09:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KC. Sorry to bother you but if you get a chance take a look at this. The recent intemperate threads on talk:men's rights movement aren't helpful. I tried to cool things off by closing off topic discussions but it's gone beyond what I can do as an involved editor-- Cailil talk 13:47, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
that you warned me about being mean to, here is their latest posting, footnoted, of course. " We have forgotten that before we called this date rape and date fraud, we called it exciting.” [71] Pretty neat huh? Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 03:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Conflict Resolution.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 09:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KC, you put this diff [5] under my name but I don't see where I'm involved there. Maybe you had another diff in mind, or am I not seeing the forest for the trees? Malke 2010 ( talk) 23:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Due to our conversation at Dave Souza's page I mentioned your name here. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 19:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KC, a few days ago Yhwhsks ( talk · contribs) added new information which had considerable WP:SYNTH and WP:UNDUE issues and was subsequently removed by three editors [6] [7] [8]. There seems to a consensus on the article talk page that the information should not be included, see Talk:Men's rights movement#Inappropriate edit warring and Talk:Men's rights movement#The paragraph re: Fiamengo talk. Yhwhsks is currently blocked for edit warring. Today, Memills ( talk · contribs) reinserted the disputed content. Memills knows that the article is on article probation, he was topic banned from the men's rights movement article and then blocked for violating the terms of his topic ban. This is yet another violation of the terms of the article probation. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 19:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
KC, I know B.Wilkins made a comment, I just can't find it. Maybe it's on a user's talk page? Or maybe I didn't take enough Ginko this morning. Malke 2010 ( talk) 22:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
KC, I posted on the evidence page. I hope it's not too long. Malke 2010 ( talk) 01:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Do you object to me taking that username? Or were you just letting me know? I would be happy to note on my userpage informing we aren't the same person. If you have objections I will think of a different name. Thanks! TempName1 ( talk) 08:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
I am so distressed as I have only just been told of your ill health. As though I don't have enough to worry about already, I now have you too. Have you thought of changing your diet and lifestyle? I have a very healthy routine. Never drink anything other than dry sherry before lunch, no more than three glasses of wine with your lunch and only a small cointreau after. In the evening two small Martinis, and then red wine which is extremely good for the heart - the more red wine you drink the healthier you become. Before retiring to be bed, a glass of champagne is very good for the digestion and keeps things moving during the night. If you are overweight (not that I am) try slimline tonic water with your gin - that's very slimming too, try to drink as much of it as possible to have the full benefit. My doctor insists that it's important to drink plenty of fluids - so I do. I hope to hear of a speedy recovery. The Lady Catherine de Burgh ( talk) 15:51, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to inform you that from what I understand IP 87.232.1.48, 134.226.254.178 and 87.232.101.49 have been confirmed to have been used by one person and has been blocked for three months each. With IP87.232.1.48 being the main one used. Perhaps a second look at Maxxfordham is needed as the IP87.232.1.48 had possible connection to that one. Thanks.-- BabbaQ ( talk) 16:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
I was looking for a diff for 24 February at around 18:18 but the history doesn't seem to go that far. Did something get lost in the page move? Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 22:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Just a heads up: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies#Problematic_editor; I'm not really into dealing with this sort of thing, and I best thought I'd contact the few admins who I can remember by name. If you wish to deal with this. Thank you. -- Scientiom ( talk) 09:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind some constructive advice, but in regards to this particular subsection, [13]Arthur Rubin isn't (as far as I know) being accused of abusing his admin tools, so this evidence isn't relevant to the issues at hand. Bringing up unrelated deeds of past misconduct can be considered bad form. I suggest you remove the section. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 00:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, is this edit summary in line with policy? Pass a Method talk 22:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, KillerChihuahua, I know you've been involved in many religion-related discussions in the past, so I was hoping that you might be convinced to comment in the RfC at WT:WikiProject Religion#RfC on weight given to religions. (It's partially related to the dispute mentioned in the post above.) ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 15:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
I ran across your name while corresponding with someone else. I'm still chuckling at the mental image I got from it. I figured the least I could do was say "thank you"; it's been a long day on this side of the pond.
I do hope you feel better soon. Take care! — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 00:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
I saw your note at Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#TempName1_.E2.86.92_KC and was wondering if you objected to the rename on the grounds that he will be confused with you or if you were just warning him that he would be. MBisanz talk 21:10, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the parting gift Carptrash has left me here [14]. It is repugnant. CSDarrow ( talk) 21:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Lol, you guys aren't even making a pretense of being even handed anymore. I've got the idea now, and won't waste time in trying to contribute to these areas of Wikipedia anymore. Wikipedia needs better quality people. CSDarrow ( talk) 01:12, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
A penny for your thoughts: User talk:TParis#Topic ban. It's quite astounding, really. Looks like they got what they've been angling for for days. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 02:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Thought you'd get a kick out of this KC. [15]. Malke 2010 ( talk) 17:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
A bit late stepping in there, surely? The comments by Sluffs - on his talk page and elsewhere - were made several days ago. Yes, they were inappropriate, but so far as I'm aware no-one complained, other than in responding directly to him - I certainly didn't - and on most matters Sluffs is a very positive and productive contributor. Allegations of racist behaviour by editors need to be taken seriously across Wikipedia, and I sincerely hope that your action in templating him doesn't lead to further outbursts. If it does, I'll quite likely be defending and supporting Sluffs, rather than objecting to his comments. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 07:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
<
I am getting a little tired of your accusations against me like this. "You're part of the problem here, you and Arzel and Arthur Rubin". Xeno jumped all over me for my resposne and you defend him. Your non-bias bias is getting harder and harder to contain. Arzel ( talk) 18:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
I have reported you at AE regarding your conduct in the Race and Intelligence topic area.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 22:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Look, the problem is that no one else should have to comb through a revert of over 100 edits to fix the obvious problems it created and then be forced to re-hash multiple different disputes when you aren't even taking the time to check all that you are reverting or even meaningfully identifying your concerns. It is pure disruption and it is really quite astonishing to me that you act like it isn't a big deal. That is the problem here. You seriously need to recognize why that revert is a problem and commit to not doing it again.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 20:57, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Puppy darling, I see your name is being sullied on one of the Arb boards [16] and I am here to defend you, send me an email with the details and I will get you off, and only charge a fraction of my normal fee. It's going to be hard; you've not helped yourself "As far as KillerChihuahua is concerned, TDA could be nursing a grudge since he was dismissive when she gave him an official warning about calling Sandstein an "officious little jerk", but we can plead insanity, drugs and alcohol combined. Lady Catherine is currently holidaying at Passages Malibu (with a bottle of gin in her handbag), book yourself in for a fortnight and keep her company, and I will advise you there. Giano 17:39, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Have you seen this, specifically this? Bishonen | talk 11:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC).
I warned him at 3RR. [18] A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 02:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Integrity. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:15, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/April Fools'. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 03:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Please take a look at Project Appleseed, and let me know if you feel there are still any issues with this article. Hope you are feeling/doing better. Apologies if I offended you previously. Thanks! Miguel Escopeta ( talk) 20:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Please take a look at Project Appleseed, and let me know if you feel there are still any issues with this article. Hope you are feeling/doing better. Apologies if I offended you previously. Thanks! Miguel Escopeta ( talk) 20:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
It's been quite a while since you edited. Worrying! You might be interested in this, if you were well. But I'm afraid you're not. :-( Bishonen | talk 17:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC).
hi. i've been following the arbcom proceedings since the ani dispute started, and i thought i might point out something which i think deserves a response (but i choose at this time not to officially be counted, as it were, at the arbcomm level)... In his prelim statement, Arzel said "I fail to see how questioning whether the actual movement should have first say in their agenda is problematic." This elevation of primary source/voice seems to be a pro-TPM advocacy position which adds fuel to the fire of talkpage incivility. An example of his specific contribution to the latter is his "juvenile" comment on the workshop page, which you rightly addressed but unfortunately has been set aside as 'extended content.' Moreover, the agenda pushing is clearly a root cause of entrenchment and ownership issues. For more of the same I would suggest looking at the Fox News talkpage archives, and compare those disputes to incongruous arguments at oppositional subjects like Media Matters -- I can offer specific thread links later, if time permits. Personally I believe experienced editors like Arzel encourage others like North8000 to be the frontline defenders. Perhaps I will return to the issue if/when an RFCU on Arzel is conducted, as suggested by SilkTork. Also of some concern: North8000's proposal to de-sysop you is not mentioned in his section of Silktork's workshop drafting.. and it seems like it should be, especially as it contradicts North's apparently newfound efforts at congeniality and reconciliation, which come off as disingenuous at best. El duderino ( abides) 10:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ferenc Szaniszló. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
You took part in a discussion that dealt with user:Arzel, which took place here. Based on that discussion, I started a WP:RFC/U, here. Casprings ( talk) 02:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Thought you'd like this [19]. Malke 2010 ( talk) 00:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words about the arb report on my talk page. I am always surprised that anyone reads it. Hope you are well after your hospital adventures. — Neotarf ( talk) 16:21, 16 May 2013 (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. |
A couple of weeks ago you blocked SuzanneOlsson ( talk · contribs) for a week. Since returning she has continued her poor behaviour, including badgering and insulting other editors on talk pages. Perhaps you could take a look at her recent edit history and see if another block is appropriate, or whether we should consider taking her to ANI for a proposed topic ban. Thanks. -- Biker Biker ( talk) 03:30, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I did have two accounts. I had set up one, then later, another with a name I preferred, but with no malicious intentions. The purpose was not ever that one account would manufacture support for the other. I was not doing it to provide support for one account under another account name. The posting on the talk page using the other user name was by accident (as you can see by the use of first person pronouns in that comment) My purposes were not any of the ones listed as "innappropriate uses of alternative accounts." The appearance of such a misuse was an accident, where I believed I was writing under the appropriate account, but was accidently signed in under the other. My wish to maintain honesty was shown by the fact that after I realised I was signed in on the otehr account, I exited and signed in under the other to sign the post with the actual more honest name. The whole thing was a mistake, but I truly did not do it with bad intentions.
It should have been obvious that if I created a second account this could easily happen. I should have thought it through.
I offer sincere apologies and emphasize that I will not repeat anything like this in the future.
I do wish to add that the edits about the American Psychological Association, and the UK Royal College were in order to correct the factual innaccuracy that was and is present on those pages. If you would folllow the links I had read, and read the actual statements by those two organizations, you would see that is the case. This is not ideology, this is about the accurate description of what those two associations actually said. The APA said that there are so many different experiences, that a global statement may be misleading. http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/mental-health.pdf The Royal College explicitly said that the data is inconclusive. http://www.nccmh.org.uk/publications_SR_abortion_in_MH.html The current paragraphs on Wilkipedia are innaccurate. I trust, that you are a person of integrity who will take the time to go to the actual statements and reports by those two organizations and see that is the case. I hope that someone other than me will edit the page for greater acuracy. Rivka3 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:59, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Look, you socked, then you lied about it. I sincerely do hope you don't do it again; but if you do someone is likely to block not only this account but all your accounts. Have one account and be done. And don't lie; next time there is a question people will be far less likely to believe you. Puppy has spoken. Killer Chihuahua 20:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KillerChihuahua. Dougweller ( talk) 10:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Killer. I have been accused of tendentious editing at Tea Party Movement. I was wondering if you would mind taking a look at my edits and telling me if I am in violation of Wikipedia behavioral policies. Thanks. — goethean 21:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, you "angry barking puppy,"
You recently put a notice on my talk page. I wanted to ask you here why it supposedly had to be you posting that, instead of just the supposed admin. who had already been talking to me. When and why did it supposedly become "your business"?
(But the one thing I'm grateful for about that is that the warning was present, rather than just taking action without one. So for that one thing, thanks.)
But then I saw that you wanted us to post replies to the place where the original message was posted. Well, obviously you get a notification that someone has put a message on your talk page, and I get a notification that someone has put one on my page. But how would you get a notification that someone has responded to something you wrote on my page? You wouldn't just keep checking it and checking it every day for a long time, even if some time went without seeing a response there, would you? So that's my concern about keeping the messages lined up on the same page. Yes, it's definitely easier to follow. But the notification system isn't very good. Right? What's your remedy for that, and how do I get it too?
MaxxFordham ( talk) 05:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
"Meatpuppet" thing. Does this mean we can now refer to you as "Mrs. Weller"? baahaahaa. <Newspaper across the rump, and puppy-Ched yelps and looks for a table to hide under> — Ched : ? 14:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, hey. :) I responded, but i didnt want to be too broad about this, as it is mostly unrelated to the request in question. Anyway, all best... -- WhiteWriter speaks 19:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, the close clearly states "article edits" i.e. talk pages are OK. If they become disruptive then we can re-raise at ANI and look to spread the topic ban further. Regards, Giant Snowman 20:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Killer, please wait. Please see also my opinion (and please read my all my comments above and check it). I think that I not deserve such hard punishment. Regards-- Nado158 ( talk) 14:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Killer Chihuahua 14:33, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I already left a message to Bishonen, asking if the correct word was the one Bishonen applied, Bishonen said yes. The problem is solved. ( Slurpy121 ( talk) 18:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC))
With regard to the exact parameters of the proposed topic ban, please see my comment at User talk:DeltaQuad#AE Nado158. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 15:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Please, i wrote about 98% Serbian sport, especially about football, but also basketball etc., I never had a problem with nobody. I improved a lot of articles, wrote about players and stadiums etc. I create also a lot of articles about sport. I get even a barn star. You can all see this on my Wikipedia edit history etc. Please allow me to write about Serbian sports. This have nothing to do with politics and is not a controvers topics. I'm only come because of sports to wikipedia, only the last months I am moved a little bit to other topics. But my main topic, my beloved topic is sport, this is a topic which interrested me 120%. Please allow me to write about sports in Serbia, why so a hard punishment. I made mistakes in politic topics, but I never hat a problem with sports. You banned me because of my mistakes about controvers politic topics, but why i banned also for sport, although i never made mistakes there and although I was never prosecuted there?I think its right to punish for things who someone done wrong, but I never made mistakes there and i was never prosecuted there. Please allow me to write about sports in Serbia.-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
By all my respect, but I have not done with deliberate errors. I was not aware of the consequences of my error. Others get a warning or a ban on certain topics, and I get a ban on everything. That's not fair. In any civil legal system you will be punished for what you have really done and here? There was never porbleme on Wikipedia relating to sports, or business, agriculture, Serbian food or brands, nature etc. I've created stadium sites, player dates updated (goals, transfers, etc.), updated data, where is this controversy? I understand what you mean, but I do not edit the Albanian League or sports. Why do all my work will not be considered positive? Why all this is overlooked? I can not at all in conflict with Albania, because it has nothing to do with Serbian Sports. There is no Serbian-Albanian Football League, etc. Why is it bad if I edit about a Serbian dog, or football data (statistics), or write about a food stamp, or national parks in Serbia? about nature. This is absolutely not about those things for which I was punished. What's bad about it when I add Nemanja Vidić as a remarkable person in Užice because he was born there? Look please here i create for example this small article about Metalac Stadium, improved and create 80% of the Partizan Belgrade article till the section Club records, improved every article about almost evry club and their stadiums in the first and second league (you can ask the users there). I create a article about the Mlekara Subotica dairy. Here, nothing is bad KillerChihuahua. Please, Serbian sport, agriculture, Serbian food or brands, nature etc. have nothing to do with controversial topics with Albania etc. Please allow me, if anything were to arise, I would not take to it and report it to you immediately if you wish, but it will not happen because I think Nature etc. is not controversial. Topics like Organization for Respect and Care for Animals (which is from Serbia), Serbian Spruce, or the dog Šarplaninac and stadiums are not controversial. Please i have good faith intentions. Besied this, what you mean with not stubs? Thank you!-- Nado158 ( talk) 12:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
KC, I'd like to appeal to you once again to take two factors into account: we already have one Serbian user, User:FkpCascais, who was topic-banned similarly, but after several incidents (three previous smaller blocks over several years), and for only six months rather than a year. I agree that it's easy for them to cross the line, and indeed I was personally involved in a situation where FkpCascais at one point did exactly that, but User:WGFinley was still patient with them and I think the topic-banned user did not transgress further. As I recall, Nado158's behavior was not worse than FkpCascais', so I think it would be best to follow the same standard and at least make the two sanctions match, in order to avoid the impression he's getting treated in a manner that is less fair than someone else in a similar situation. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 18:42, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
I did not ignore the offer, but sorry, I didn't quite understand it, so I asked before what you mean with your statement ACTUAL ARTICLE, NOT STUBS? STUBS? Thank you!-- Nado158 ( talk) 20:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
No problem. All right, I agree with your proposal. Thank you!-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
I have a question please. It must just be exactly these from you proposed redlinks, or it can also be used redlinks from the last or coming week? Besides this, may I write an own articles (in consultation with you, of course)?For example an animal variety, airplane model, a machine etc? May I suggest two articles?-- Nado158 ( talk) 16:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
(I started a new thread because the old one was getting way too long. Killer Chihuahua 21:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC))
Well, an article about Transfermarkt.de, one of the largest websites for sports with a focus on football, and the most visited German Sports Page in 2013, International also well known, and the EuroTier, the world's largest exhibition for animal husbandry and management, with over 100,000 visitors from 100 countries. Are you agree?-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! If I'm done I will inform you! Regards!-- Nado158 ( talk) 21:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
[2]
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 04:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
What about this? A bit of a tautology, perhaps. Bishonen | talk 21:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC).
Regarding your comments here, I would like to invite you to consider RFCC as an alternative. — C M B J 02:34, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
No, that's fine with me. In the future, though, don't remove someone else's post. You can simply reply to it, saying "I have changed the verbiage to match your suggestions" or "I have edited the Rfc to reflect your criticism" and leave their post in place. Removing someone else's post, unless it is a personal attack, is almost never a good idea. Killer Chihuahua 00:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
NE Ent 02:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
I understood what you were doing when you added Collect, Rubin et al to the list. Others may not have. I threw my hands up in the air you were added as well. This isn't even drama. It's Jerry Springer.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 04:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
benign, forgiving creature with a bite
Thank you for continuous quality contributions not only to articles, but mediation, editor retention, help to
ignore incivility,
allow human editors to believe they are in charge, and to
begin something new, - repeating: you are an
awesome Wikipedian (2 June 2007, 17 May 2009, 25 November 2009)!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
ps: typically I call it my PumpkinSky Prize, but for you it's the Puppy of Dog The Teddy Bear Prize, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 11:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Waiting for your return... | |
I'm sorry to hear that you are not feeling well. Hope you are feeling better soon. — goethean 19:27, 26 February 2013 (UTC) |
I love it! It is even a chihuahua! Thank you! Puppy ( talk) 23:14, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Proposal for RfA conduct clarification (amendments to editnotice and addition to Template:RfA). -- Trevj ( talk) 21:06, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
The user has placed a personal attack by threating in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Medical_uses_of_silver. "This would be helpful with the likely upcoming WP:ANI discussion about Ryan's tendentious editing. Zad68" I have removed it as a personal attack by threatening. However the original editor has restored it. I also think even if there is a doubt as if its a personal attack per content, being placed on the DRN talk it looks like a personal attack even more. It just came out of nowhere, irrelevant to the current DRN discussion. Thank you.
And despite that editor TransporterMan has said: "This DRN talk page is not the venue to further argue the dispute." and my comments that it's not the venue, he continues to engage in the DRN discussion regarding the article context and other editors. Thank you. Ryanspir ( talk) 16:37, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Ryan felt my statement about taking this to ANI was a "threat" and edited my comment, I restored my comment and pointed Ryan to
WP:TPO for the list of conditions where it's acceptable edit someone else's comment (this isn't one of them), he disagreed, but we then both agreed that an admin should handle it from here, full discussion
here. I think Ryan's request is for you to review what's happened and take any action you deem necessary. It would have been nice if he had notified me he was contacting you about this. It's unclear to me why Ryan came to you in particular with this request, maybe you've helped him out with something before? Anyway, sorry to hear you're one sick pup, hopefully the trip to vet did you good. Take care...
Zad
68
17:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm contacting you because you have recently contributed as a reviewing administrator to WP:AE. I've made a suggestion relating to the management of that page at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests#Structural improvements to AE threads, and would appreciate your input. Thanks, Sandstein 22:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
An edit war has once again broken out on this article. I think we need to upgrade the protection level. The controversial nature of the topic makes it a magnet for people with agendas. Evildoer187 ( talk) 09:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey I know you're busy with the TPM article but some of the same people are causing problems in the Single-payer healthcare article. In the talk page there was a consensus for a particular edit and 3 users (North8000, Thargor Orlando and Arzel) have been edit-warring against it. If you could take a look it would be much appreciated. CartoonDiablo ( talk) 18:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
"Forgive one more post, but.."(my italics). KC asks you to please not reply here and you post three more times? This when you know she's trying to deal with a lot of hassle while unwell? Don't post here again, under any excuse, or you'll be blocked for harassment. Bishonen | talk 11:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC).
The Admin's Barnstar | |
Thanks for all your constructive edits. You are one of our most logical admins and i appreciate your all-round work! Keep it up! Pass a Method talk 22:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC) |
This is Mr. Chihuahua. KC is in the hospital for testing... she may have had a heart attack. She said to tell everyone she will be back as soon as she can. She apologizes for the bad timing. 71.43.28.155 ( talk) 18:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Hope you enjoy "Baby does faceplants": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS3dHKWVP7Y Malke 2010 ( talk) 05:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Very best wishes to you, KC, and I'm glad to know Mr. Chihuahua is staying out of the doghouse and fetching your tablet and so on. Yopienso ( talk) 08:39, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Get well soon! Tom Harrison Talk 13:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Hope you are feeling better. Get well soon! Syrthiss ( talk) 14:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
At home, on meds, will be going to more tests and lots of follow up visits for a while. Thanks again to everyone who was so kind as to leave well wishes on this page, it means a lot to me. I'm still sick and will be irregular in my editing but at least I'm off the little tablet. Killer Chihuahua 15:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks much. They have me on meds that have the symptoms tamped down while they do the testing/diag/treatment of the causal issues. I am glad to be out of the hospital and back home and back on a real screen instead of the tiny screen of the tablet. Once you open the keyboard on one of those things, you can barely see where you're editing, and navigation was a pain (my touchscreen is a bit wonky.) I'll be off an on, but will muddle along until they get it fixed. Killer Chihuahua 16:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
It is not strictly necessary to list every party. If somebody's name comes up in the arbitration evidence and they are given notice, they can be subject to findings and remedies. For good order sake you may want just add them to the list of parties now, and leave them a notification. Jehochman Talk 15:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 23:38, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This is an automated message to tell you that, as it stands, you are set to be mentioned in this week's Arbitration Report ( link). The report aims to inform readers of The Signpost about the proceedings of the Arbitration Committee in a non-partisan manner. Please review the draft article, and, if you have any concerns, feel free to leave them on the talkpage (transcluded in the Comments section directly below the main body of text), where they will be read by a member of the editorial team. Please only edit the article yourself in the case of grievous factual errors (making sure to note such changes in the comments section). Thank you. On behalf of The Signpost's editorial team, LivingBot ( talk) 00:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Test came back, not a heart attack. There is a mass on my thyroid, and my levels are waaay off. They're doing more tests, I'm going to be in the hospital at least another day. Puppy ( talk) 16:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Dunno about heart healthy, they're doing a stress test in the morning. But not a heart attack. El D, I probably wouldn't be except I did just file an rfar. Malke, GMTA, butthey won't let me. And the soup I had the first night was the last good food I've had. :-( But I hope to be out of here soon. Puppy ( talk) 19:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Unsolicted advice Get Mr. C to bring in your comfortable walking shoes, and stretch your calves an hour before.
little green rosetta
(talk)
central scrutinizer 21:46, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Here? In reviewing the user's contributions (less than 50, exclusive focus on the MRM article), I can see that they are deeply problematic. But to add an unreliable source that mentions the MRM only once, make something up and attribute it to that source, and then change content that is supported by academic references, so that the text no longer matches the references, is an entirely new level of unhelpful. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 03:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
participants @ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Yours was the first name I recognized so I came here. I just updated the article Active shooter. I wonder if you have time to take alook and update the rating. It is currently @ Start. Thanks in advance. ADD: Just noticed your health issue. Hope ypou are well. If you want to send me elsewhere, I won't mind.``` Buster Seven Talk 20:58, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, could you take a look at User:Timotheus Canens/GS draft and leave comments on the talk page? Thanks a lot. T. Canens ( talk) 09:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KC. Sorry to bother you but if you get a chance take a look at this. The recent intemperate threads on talk:men's rights movement aren't helpful. I tried to cool things off by closing off topic discussions but it's gone beyond what I can do as an involved editor-- Cailil talk 13:47, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
that you warned me about being mean to, here is their latest posting, footnoted, of course. " We have forgotten that before we called this date rape and date fraud, we called it exciting.” [71] Pretty neat huh? Einar aka Carptrash ( talk) 03:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Conflict Resolution.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 09:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KC, you put this diff [5] under my name but I don't see where I'm involved there. Maybe you had another diff in mind, or am I not seeing the forest for the trees? Malke 2010 ( talk) 23:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Due to our conversation at Dave Souza's page I mentioned your name here. NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 19:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi KC, a few days ago Yhwhsks ( talk · contribs) added new information which had considerable WP:SYNTH and WP:UNDUE issues and was subsequently removed by three editors [6] [7] [8]. There seems to a consensus on the article talk page that the information should not be included, see Talk:Men's rights movement#Inappropriate edit warring and Talk:Men's rights movement#The paragraph re: Fiamengo talk. Yhwhsks is currently blocked for edit warring. Today, Memills ( talk · contribs) reinserted the disputed content. Memills knows that the article is on article probation, he was topic banned from the men's rights movement article and then blocked for violating the terms of his topic ban. This is yet another violation of the terms of the article probation. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 19:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
KC, I know B.Wilkins made a comment, I just can't find it. Maybe it's on a user's talk page? Or maybe I didn't take enough Ginko this morning. Malke 2010 ( talk) 22:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
KC, I posted on the evidence page. I hope it's not too long. Malke 2010 ( talk) 01:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Do you object to me taking that username? Or were you just letting me know? I would be happy to note on my userpage informing we aren't the same person. If you have objections I will think of a different name. Thanks! TempName1 ( talk) 08:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
I am so distressed as I have only just been told of your ill health. As though I don't have enough to worry about already, I now have you too. Have you thought of changing your diet and lifestyle? I have a very healthy routine. Never drink anything other than dry sherry before lunch, no more than three glasses of wine with your lunch and only a small cointreau after. In the evening two small Martinis, and then red wine which is extremely good for the heart - the more red wine you drink the healthier you become. Before retiring to be bed, a glass of champagne is very good for the digestion and keeps things moving during the night. If you are overweight (not that I am) try slimline tonic water with your gin - that's very slimming too, try to drink as much of it as possible to have the full benefit. My doctor insists that it's important to drink plenty of fluids - so I do. I hope to hear of a speedy recovery. The Lady Catherine de Burgh ( talk) 15:51, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to inform you that from what I understand IP 87.232.1.48, 134.226.254.178 and 87.232.101.49 have been confirmed to have been used by one person and has been blocked for three months each. With IP87.232.1.48 being the main one used. Perhaps a second look at Maxxfordham is needed as the IP87.232.1.48 had possible connection to that one. Thanks.-- BabbaQ ( talk) 16:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
I was looking for a diff for 24 February at around 18:18 but the history doesn't seem to go that far. Did something get lost in the page move? Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 22:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Just a heads up: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies#Problematic_editor; I'm not really into dealing with this sort of thing, and I best thought I'd contact the few admins who I can remember by name. If you wish to deal with this. Thank you. -- Scientiom ( talk) 09:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind some constructive advice, but in regards to this particular subsection, [13]Arthur Rubin isn't (as far as I know) being accused of abusing his admin tools, so this evidence isn't relevant to the issues at hand. Bringing up unrelated deeds of past misconduct can be considered bad form. I suggest you remove the section. A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 00:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, is this edit summary in line with policy? Pass a Method talk 22:16, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, KillerChihuahua, I know you've been involved in many religion-related discussions in the past, so I was hoping that you might be convinced to comment in the RfC at WT:WikiProject Religion#RfC on weight given to religions. (It's partially related to the dispute mentioned in the post above.) ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 15:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
I ran across your name while corresponding with someone else. I'm still chuckling at the mental image I got from it. I figured the least I could do was say "thank you"; it's been a long day on this side of the pond.
I do hope you feel better soon. Take care! — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 00:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
I saw your note at Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#TempName1_.E2.86.92_KC and was wondering if you objected to the rename on the grounds that he will be confused with you or if you were just warning him that he would be. MBisanz talk 21:10, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the parting gift Carptrash has left me here [14]. It is repugnant. CSDarrow ( talk) 21:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Lol, you guys aren't even making a pretense of being even handed anymore. I've got the idea now, and won't waste time in trying to contribute to these areas of Wikipedia anymore. Wikipedia needs better quality people. CSDarrow ( talk) 01:12, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
A penny for your thoughts: User talk:TParis#Topic ban. It's quite astounding, really. Looks like they got what they've been angling for for days. -- Sonicyouth86 ( talk) 02:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Thought you'd get a kick out of this KC. [15]. Malke 2010 ( talk) 17:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
A bit late stepping in there, surely? The comments by Sluffs - on his talk page and elsewhere - were made several days ago. Yes, they were inappropriate, but so far as I'm aware no-one complained, other than in responding directly to him - I certainly didn't - and on most matters Sluffs is a very positive and productive contributor. Allegations of racist behaviour by editors need to be taken seriously across Wikipedia, and I sincerely hope that your action in templating him doesn't lead to further outbursts. If it does, I'll quite likely be defending and supporting Sluffs, rather than objecting to his comments. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 07:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
<
I am getting a little tired of your accusations against me like this. "You're part of the problem here, you and Arzel and Arthur Rubin". Xeno jumped all over me for my resposne and you defend him. Your non-bias bias is getting harder and harder to contain. Arzel ( talk) 18:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
I have reported you at AE regarding your conduct in the Race and Intelligence topic area.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 22:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Look, the problem is that no one else should have to comb through a revert of over 100 edits to fix the obvious problems it created and then be forced to re-hash multiple different disputes when you aren't even taking the time to check all that you are reverting or even meaningfully identifying your concerns. It is pure disruption and it is really quite astonishing to me that you act like it isn't a big deal. That is the problem here. You seriously need to recognize why that revert is a problem and commit to not doing it again.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 20:57, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Puppy darling, I see your name is being sullied on one of the Arb boards [16] and I am here to defend you, send me an email with the details and I will get you off, and only charge a fraction of my normal fee. It's going to be hard; you've not helped yourself "As far as KillerChihuahua is concerned, TDA could be nursing a grudge since he was dismissive when she gave him an official warning about calling Sandstein an "officious little jerk", but we can plead insanity, drugs and alcohol combined. Lady Catherine is currently holidaying at Passages Malibu (with a bottle of gin in her handbag), book yourself in for a fortnight and keep her company, and I will advise you there. Giano 17:39, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Have you seen this, specifically this? Bishonen | talk 11:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC).
I warned him at 3RR. [18] A Quest For Knowledge ( talk) 02:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Integrity. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 02:15, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/April Fools'. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 03:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Please take a look at Project Appleseed, and let me know if you feel there are still any issues with this article. Hope you are feeling/doing better. Apologies if I offended you previously. Thanks! Miguel Escopeta ( talk) 20:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Please take a look at Project Appleseed, and let me know if you feel there are still any issues with this article. Hope you are feeling/doing better. Apologies if I offended you previously. Thanks! Miguel Escopeta ( talk) 20:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
It's been quite a while since you edited. Worrying! You might be interested in this, if you were well. But I'm afraid you're not. :-( Bishonen | talk 17:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC).
hi. i've been following the arbcom proceedings since the ani dispute started, and i thought i might point out something which i think deserves a response (but i choose at this time not to officially be counted, as it were, at the arbcomm level)... In his prelim statement, Arzel said "I fail to see how questioning whether the actual movement should have first say in their agenda is problematic." This elevation of primary source/voice seems to be a pro-TPM advocacy position which adds fuel to the fire of talkpage incivility. An example of his specific contribution to the latter is his "juvenile" comment on the workshop page, which you rightly addressed but unfortunately has been set aside as 'extended content.' Moreover, the agenda pushing is clearly a root cause of entrenchment and ownership issues. For more of the same I would suggest looking at the Fox News talkpage archives, and compare those disputes to incongruous arguments at oppositional subjects like Media Matters -- I can offer specific thread links later, if time permits. Personally I believe experienced editors like Arzel encourage others like North8000 to be the frontline defenders. Perhaps I will return to the issue if/when an RFCU on Arzel is conducted, as suggested by SilkTork. Also of some concern: North8000's proposal to de-sysop you is not mentioned in his section of Silktork's workshop drafting.. and it seems like it should be, especially as it contradicts North's apparently newfound efforts at congeniality and reconciliation, which come off as disingenuous at best. El duderino ( abides) 10:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ferenc Szaniszló. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot ( talk) 16:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
You took part in a discussion that dealt with user:Arzel, which took place here. Based on that discussion, I started a WP:RFC/U, here. Casprings ( talk) 02:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Thought you'd like this [19]. Malke 2010 ( talk) 00:15, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words about the arb report on my talk page. I am always surprised that anyone reads it. Hope you are well after your hospital adventures. — Neotarf ( talk) 16:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)