Felicitations to you, old friend, on this day, the glorious first anniversary of the most excellent troll comment there has ever been. You are likely celebrating by wrenching out a fake smile and telling yourself it's going to be okay, as is the custom.
We miss you around here. Not too much has changed. The GENSEX topic area is still messy, and the Cultural Marxism pages still get hit with waves of impenetrable content disputes. Both are suffering from a lack of people ready to propose compromise article language. Cornish Bronze Age is mostly as you left it.
I hope you're enjoying your horseless, chariotless, yurtless, Wikipedialess life. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 19:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
- I'll take striking Tewdar over absent Tewdar. Glad to see you around.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 16:41, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. 😊 Congratulations on the
super mushroom power-up. I'm looking forward to the next Cope and Seethe Day celebration.
Tewdar 17:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- eyy welcome (sort-of) back! Where can I donate to the strike fund? --
Licks-rocks (
talk) 21:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- I expect somebody would interpret that as paid editing, even though I am on strike. I would ask that you instead donate to your local donkey sanctuary, but I suspect that I would then have to declare a personal or professional connection to donkeys on my userpage, and I need the space to list all my ancestors and food I like to make. I suppose I should declare a conflict of interest for all of them, too... Tewdar 16:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- eyy welcome (sort-of) back! Where can I donate to the strike fund? --
Licks-rocks (
talk) 21:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. 😊 Congratulations on the
super mushroom power-up. I'm looking forward to the next Cope and Seethe Day celebration.
Tewdar 17:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
I honestly don't know how you do this, but I wanted to say meur ras. Gwikor Frank ( talk) 18:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- This place is difficult to deal with. Make sure you stick to one account, the admins here are very good at spotting people using multiple accounts. Not saying you are... just... don't be tempted. Gwari hweg yw gwari teg, hag oll...
Tewdar 18:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- What really hurts is that the other guy started with all the disruption and incivility and when I stood up for myself and for us, only I got blamed for being 'disruptive', etc., etc. It just hurts a lot.
Gwikor Frank (
talk) 20:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I can only say that I know how you feel. But I think the best way to cope around here is to try and relax, and don't get drawn into insult contests or edit wars or whatever. Personally I find this quite difficult. But there are a lot of admins here, and they will block people who they think are persistently disruptive or uncivil, and that's no good for anyone. Hopefully the upcoming RfC will bring some guidance for when it's appropriate to describe someone as Cornish, rather than something else. Oll an gwella. Tewdar 21:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- What really hurts is that the other guy started with all the disruption and incivility and when I stood up for myself and for us, only I got blamed for being 'disruptive', etc., etc. It just hurts a lot.
Gwikor Frank (
talk) 20:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Before I make a silly suggestion in the RfC draft discussion: will it make sense to state (as part of option 1) that preference should be given to "British" over "English" in cases when the identifier "Cornish" gets contested in indivdual cases for more than just "It must not be!"/"I don't like it!"-reasons? Or is it just plague vs. cholera? – Austronesier ( talk) 21:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- LOL 😂 First of all thank you for your always helpful input at the RfC drafting page. I'm glad you've been following the events so far. Secondly, I'm not sure whether human populations have any significant difference in immunity, but I think my instinct is that, given a choice between
plagueBritish andcholeraEnglish, the Kernowyon would probably choose British as the lesser evil. It would be a good suggestion to prefer British, if we're really not allowed to call everyone ever born in Cornwall from the Paleolithic to the present day 'Cornish'... Tewdar 21:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)- There once was an IP that wanted to add a paragraph about Java man to Javanese_people#History 😂. But really, image that WikiProject Guatemala decided to remove "K'iche'" from the leded sentence of Rigoberta Menchú, or WikiProject Belgia was unhappy about having "Romani" in Django Reinhardt...
- I do understand that remaining silent about ethnicity/nationality makes sense when there's a chauvinist tug of war between multiple parties claiming an important historcal figure as theirs, see e.g. Nicolaus Copernicus. But not when people simply don't understand the difference between a county demonym and an ethnonym.
- On a completely different note, I'm sure you have seen
this already. Another paper that's not about WHG according our ill-spirited friend from St. Louis.–
Austronesier (
talk) 20:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think
Loveday Jenkin will be happy when she finds out that Wikipedia says she isn't Cornish anymore. I really thought I was going to make a breakthrough with the Tortured Soul last time we interacted. Somehow I doubt that the linked paper would have convinced him either, he doesn't seem very open-minded, does he? Ah well. I tried my best. Perhaps we'll see him again one day.
Tewdar 20:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Anyway, in protest, I'm changing my signature colours back to old gold, admins with poor vision be damned.
Tewdar 20:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Poor vision is not an admin priviledge. Looking at your unreadable signature with my eyes that have reached US senior citizen discount-age (like the rest of the carcass around them), I have to take care not to call you "Tedwar" again. –
Austronesier (
talk) 21:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oh alright, I'll change it back again, just for you. An admin asked me to change it to a more readable colour once, is the reason I said that. I always think you sound rather youthful and energetic...😁
Tewdar 21:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Glad you changed it back. The protest colour reminded me of these guys. 🤢🤮
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 21:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah... looks good on tartan, not so good on a signature. Tewdar 21:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Glad you changed it back. The protest colour reminded me of these guys. 🤢🤮
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 21:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oh alright, I'll change it back again, just for you. An admin asked me to change it to a more readable colour once, is the reason I said that. I always think you sound rather youthful and energetic...😁
Tewdar 21:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Poor vision is not an admin priviledge. Looking at your unreadable signature with my eyes that have reached US senior citizen discount-age (like the rest of the carcass around them), I have to take care not to call you "Tedwar" again. –
Austronesier (
talk) 21:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Anyway, in protest, I'm changing my signature colours back to old gold, admins with poor vision be damned.
Tewdar 20:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think
Loveday Jenkin will be happy when she finds out that Wikipedia says she isn't Cornish anymore. I really thought I was going to make a breakthrough with the Tortured Soul last time we interacted. Somehow I doubt that the linked paper would have convinced him either, he doesn't seem very open-minded, does he? Ah well. I tried my best. Perhaps we'll see him again one day.
Tewdar 20:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Sandstein 07:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)This is in response to the personal attack you made on Pepperbeast here. It's not clear what you mean by "legacy admin", but it's clearly meant to be a term of disparagement. I'd have normally warned you first, but that would not have been helpful in your case since you write at the top of your talk page: "Do NOT post generic templated messages on this page! I won't read 'em anyway, and even if I did, I probably wouldn't give a ha'penny fuck about whatever it is you're complaining about! 😁👍". Sandstein 07:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand, and I could probably have been clearer but it was late... I was referring to an incident a few years back, when an admin suggested that Cornish exonyms was not worthy of an article because it was about specifically Cornish Exonyms. He went on and on and on even after I told thrm this was highly offensive. It was certainly not a personal attack on Pepperbeast, who isn't an admin and with whom I have no problem whatsoever. I did not know that the term 'legacy admin' was considered off-limits around here, but you are certainly correct that it was being used as a term of disparagement. Tewdar 08:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ping Sandstein Tewdar 08:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is a disparagement of a potential action also, ex officio as it were, a disparagement of the one who might do it?
—Tamfang (
talk) 02:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- But even 'the one who might do it' is not Pepperbeast! The linked comment is just me saying, "look, everybody I don't care if you delete them all or keep them all, just don't only delete the Cornish exonyms" article. I was not even talking to Pepperbeast specifically in that comment, it was a general comment. 😭😭😭 Tewdar 03:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely absurd, comically heavy-handed block. It was not obviously an insult directed at anyone, if it can even be called an insult. Is the amorphous honor of "legacy admins" in general so fragile that it requires such authoritarian measures against anyone who would dare besmirch it? Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Tewdar ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
There was no 'personal attack', and certainly not on user Pepperbeast. (2) A block for merely using the term 'legacy admin' seems disproportionate and unreasonable. But, I will be sure to avoid this term in the future if it is considered offensive. Tewdar 08:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As you admit you intended the term to be disparaging, it is a personal attack. 331dot ( talk) 08:57, 22 March 2024 (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.
This is well over the top. No other admin would have blocked for this, and the stupid jokey warning template (now removed) was obviously not directed at admins, who have to leave a blocking template anyway. Even the blocking admin seemed to think a warning was sufficient. I have already said I will not use the term again, so how is this not punitive? Tewdar 09:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
So all the admins seeing this agree that Anyway , my opinion on the 'X exonyms' articles: delete the fucking lot, or delete none of 'em. Just don't single out Cornish for deletion, like some [completely unspecified] legacy admin
is worth a 48 hour block? Really? I don't fucking believe you. This is a bad, punitive, disproportionately harsh, and POINTy block that seems to be mainly the result of a warning template that asked (two) USERS not to post any more fucking warning templates on my fucking user page. This is an egregious misuse of system tools, followed by hand waving post-hoc justification because nobody wants to overturn a shitty block.
Tewdar 13:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Looks like at least one person agrees this wasn't a personal attack. Obviously not one of the admins. Tewdar 13:18, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Oh good, that makes possibly two.#UNBLOCKTEWDAR 🙄 Tewdar 13:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- "Legacy admin" is such a commonly used term that I struggle to see it as a blockable personal attack. For example, it's splashed all over
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Preliminary statements, used by editors and administrators in good standing. I do mainly see it used in a way I would describe as "critically" as opposed to "disparagingly", but I wouldn't get hung up on the semantics. I would take Tewdar at his word that it won't be repeated. I am speaking with my "colleague of Tewdar's" hat on, not my admin hat. Given the ubiquity of the term, the promise of changed behavior, and the fact that the block was based on a misunderstanding, I'd urge an unblock.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 13:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- The block was purportedly for the
personal attack [I] made on Pepperbeast
, but I did not say anything at all about Pepperbeast. This block is unfair. The blocking admin has a reputation for harshness, but I don't think any block was justified at all. At the most, "don't use the term legacy admin" would have been sufficient. Again , this was a POINTY block because sandstein took issue with my (tongue in cheek) warning template (which I forgot about , since I'm usually on mobile and don't see it) Tewdar 13:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)- Well, maybe not 'forgot about', exactly, since I think I changed it to a warning template not so long ago. Anyway, I didn't think it was a problem, but I'll try very hard from now on to work on the assumption that Wikipedia admins (of all tenures) have absolutely no sense of humour. Tewdar 14:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- The block was purportedly for the
Tewdar, to respond to your various messages above, blocks are preventative, not punitive. To be unblocked, you must therefore convince me or another admin that you will not repeat your personal attacks. So far, you have not done so, but insisted that your personal attack was not one, and that I am somehow responsible for the block which you caused by your own actions. Also, you use many expletives, which does not make your contributions more convincing or make yourself appear more like a person to be taken seriously. You remain free to ask another admin for a review, taking into account the above and WP:GAB. Sandstein 16:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- I have said that I will not use the term 'legacy admin' again, regardless of whether the original usage was a personal attack or not (FFF above, who I greatly respect, seems to think that 'legacy admin' should not be considered a personal attack at all). Your block was ludicrously draconian, and would not have been made by any other admin I don't think. As far as I know, use of expletives is not prohibited yet, although who knows really. To be unblocked, I just have to wait another 36 hours or whatever, after which the result will be the same as if someone unblocks me before then: I will not use the term 'legacy admin' again. In fact, after I've finished complaining about this block, I think I'm done here. So do what you want. I don't care.
Tewdar 17:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- And look at your original block reason: the
personal attack you made on Pepperbeast
. This is completely false. In fact it is utter bullshit. Tewdar 18:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- And look at your original block reason: the
Tewdar, to respond to your various messages above, blocks are preventative, not punitive.
- And yet this is as manifestly a punitive block as can be! All the more reason to undo it, then. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
"Also, you use many expletives, which does not make your contributions more convincing or make yourself appear more like a person to be taken seriously."
Seriously? Usage of expletives is not indicative of "a person to be taken seriously"? Isn't it rather that in the real world (including WP), it's pooh-poohing the usage of expletives whichdoes not make one appear more like a person to be taken seriously
? I am all for a discussion style that doesn't drive off productive editors (including actual researchers/academics/scholars) who expect WP not to be like fucking Reddit etc., but in an unblock discussion which naturally can turn emotional (especially when the rationale for the block is quite wrong), admins should be able to deal with it and see the content, not the wrapping. – Austronesier ( talk) 12:07, 23 March 2024 (UTC)- As someone who is known to engage in a rhetorical flourish or two, I agree with Sandstein that some of Tewdar’s rhetoric may be putting some editors off. However, this particular ban based on that particular comment was heavy-handed. I urge both sides to de-escalate. I don’t think anything good or productive will come from bring this this to ANI. In the spirit of de-escalation, I urge @ Sandstein to show goodwill and reverse the ban (even though it’s almost over and this would be a symbolic, goodwill gesture). Both sides have expressed their message loud and clear, now please, let’s calm down and move on. XMcan ( talk) 13:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Firefangledfeathers: - is there some way to get this block reviewed some other way, without the unblock template? And, is there a procedure for removal of administrator tools? Tewdar 07:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- It does seem that Sandstein may have misunderstood the wording of that comment. It could have benefited from the addition of "did once" on the end for clarity (i.e. "like some legacy admin did once") but if I were sanctioned every time I wrote something unclear, I would be long gone from Wikipedia! But given the clear context here, it is quite apparent there was no personal attack. A personal attack has to be personal, and no person is identified here.
- Surely this doesn't need to go to AN to get this overturned?
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 08:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Please someone, take this to AN.
Tewdar 09:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I would probably have added 'did once' if I had been able to edit that page the next morning. Tewdar 09:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
-
Wikipedia:Administrative action review would seem to be the correct venue, no? I'd do it myself but, you know... I'm blocked 🙄
Tewdar 09:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- That page says I should try to resolve in the first instance with the performer of the action. I'll write to Sandstein's page now.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 11:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I believe the appropriate reply is "good luck with that". I'm going down guns a blazin' and taking it to AN or wherever as soon as the block is expired anyway.
Tewdar 11:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I have posted on Sandstein's page now. Hopefully it won't need to go to the drama boards. Considering going on strike until it is settled! But as I am busy all day today, there won't be much from me today anyway. Take care. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I believe the appropriate reply is "good luck with that". I'm going down guns a blazin' and taking it to AN or wherever as soon as the block is expired anyway.
Tewdar 11:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- That page says I should try to resolve in the first instance with the performer of the action. I'll write to Sandstein's page now.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 11:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Please someone, take this to AN.
Tewdar 09:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry T, I'm out and about today. Maybe someone else wants to take this to AN, but I'd suggest just waiting out the block so you can respond yourself instead of someone shuttling your responses over. XRV might be better suited, though it's relatively new and we're still figuring out the norms and culture and scope and tone, etc.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 14:57, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I will start the AN / XRV thread if you wish, or I will wait for you to do so. Until then, I'm taking a break.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- The block has expired. When, per FFF, you start the appropriate thread, I'll speak to that. This kind of thing makes me extremely cross. I'll not be editing Wikipedia until this is resolved. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 09:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I will start the AN / XRV thread if you wish, or I will wait for you to do so. Until then, I'm taking a break.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I'm gonna roll the dice one more time and then give up. The block reason says the block is for the "personal attack you made on Pepperbeast". This is completely false. I did not make any personal attack on Pepperbeast.
- Regretful procedural close because the block has expired by time. Had I seen the unblock request earlier, I would have granted it, for the reasons I've explained here. (P.S.: The fact that the template says I "declined" this request, which is hardly the spirit of what I wrote or meant, may be misleading. Should we have an "unblock request closed" template that is different from the "declined" template?) 08:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @
Newyorkbrad: Is it technically not possible to grant the request even when it can't be executed anymore since the block has expired? Apart from the block log entry, just the sight of the closure color looks like another blow in the face even when it's the farthest from what you've intended. –
Austronesier (
talk) 07:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @ Austronesier: I understand your point and have gotten rid of the "declined" template. Discussion of whether anything else should be done (here or more generally in similar cases) can take place at the XRV review. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 08:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I have raised my concerns re. the above at Wikipedia:Administrative action review#48 hour block of Tewdar by Sandstein Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 22:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- As we discussed, I've made the addition to your block log. I tried very hard to make sure this doesn't autoblock you, but I'm sometimes an idiot. If I screwed something up and you have any troubles, let me or another admin know.
Floquenbeam (
talk) 17:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Everything looks good, thanks for blocking me 😂👍 Tewdar 18:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Look at this users Fact Check Mongol Eena2u Dorjzav
And edits they make https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1218870559&oldid=1218870503&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1207107068&oldid=1207024679&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1219495811&oldid=1218930204&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1219706509&oldid=1219528671&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 Most likely they are the same person 7712Touch74396 ( talk) 12:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh yeah I'll get right on it 😂😂😂
Tewdar 13:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- hello again
- Dorjzav keep doing same things 7712Touch74396 ( talk) 11:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Felicitations to you, old friend, on this day, the glorious first anniversary of the most excellent troll comment there has ever been. You are likely celebrating by wrenching out a fake smile and telling yourself it's going to be okay, as is the custom.
We miss you around here. Not too much has changed. The GENSEX topic area is still messy, and the Cultural Marxism pages still get hit with waves of impenetrable content disputes. Both are suffering from a lack of people ready to propose compromise article language. Cornish Bronze Age is mostly as you left it.
I hope you're enjoying your horseless, chariotless, yurtless, Wikipedialess life. Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 19:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
- I'll take striking Tewdar over absent Tewdar. Glad to see you around.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 16:41, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. 😊 Congratulations on the
super mushroom power-up. I'm looking forward to the next Cope and Seethe Day celebration.
Tewdar 17:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- eyy welcome (sort-of) back! Where can I donate to the strike fund? --
Licks-rocks (
talk) 21:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- I expect somebody would interpret that as paid editing, even though I am on strike. I would ask that you instead donate to your local donkey sanctuary, but I suspect that I would then have to declare a personal or professional connection to donkeys on my userpage, and I need the space to list all my ancestors and food I like to make. I suppose I should declare a conflict of interest for all of them, too... Tewdar 16:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
- eyy welcome (sort-of) back! Where can I donate to the strike fund? --
Licks-rocks (
talk) 21:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. 😊 Congratulations on the
super mushroom power-up. I'm looking forward to the next Cope and Seethe Day celebration.
Tewdar 17:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
I honestly don't know how you do this, but I wanted to say meur ras. Gwikor Frank ( talk) 18:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- This place is difficult to deal with. Make sure you stick to one account, the admins here are very good at spotting people using multiple accounts. Not saying you are... just... don't be tempted. Gwari hweg yw gwari teg, hag oll...
Tewdar 18:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- What really hurts is that the other guy started with all the disruption and incivility and when I stood up for myself and for us, only I got blamed for being 'disruptive', etc., etc. It just hurts a lot.
Gwikor Frank (
talk) 20:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I can only say that I know how you feel. But I think the best way to cope around here is to try and relax, and don't get drawn into insult contests or edit wars or whatever. Personally I find this quite difficult. But there are a lot of admins here, and they will block people who they think are persistently disruptive or uncivil, and that's no good for anyone. Hopefully the upcoming RfC will bring some guidance for when it's appropriate to describe someone as Cornish, rather than something else. Oll an gwella. Tewdar 21:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
- What really hurts is that the other guy started with all the disruption and incivility and when I stood up for myself and for us, only I got blamed for being 'disruptive', etc., etc. It just hurts a lot.
Gwikor Frank (
talk) 20:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Before I make a silly suggestion in the RfC draft discussion: will it make sense to state (as part of option 1) that preference should be given to "British" over "English" in cases when the identifier "Cornish" gets contested in indivdual cases for more than just "It must not be!"/"I don't like it!"-reasons? Or is it just plague vs. cholera? – Austronesier ( talk) 21:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- LOL 😂 First of all thank you for your always helpful input at the RfC drafting page. I'm glad you've been following the events so far. Secondly, I'm not sure whether human populations have any significant difference in immunity, but I think my instinct is that, given a choice between
plagueBritish andcholeraEnglish, the Kernowyon would probably choose British as the lesser evil. It would be a good suggestion to prefer British, if we're really not allowed to call everyone ever born in Cornwall from the Paleolithic to the present day 'Cornish'... Tewdar 21:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)- There once was an IP that wanted to add a paragraph about Java man to Javanese_people#History 😂. But really, image that WikiProject Guatemala decided to remove "K'iche'" from the leded sentence of Rigoberta Menchú, or WikiProject Belgia was unhappy about having "Romani" in Django Reinhardt...
- I do understand that remaining silent about ethnicity/nationality makes sense when there's a chauvinist tug of war between multiple parties claiming an important historcal figure as theirs, see e.g. Nicolaus Copernicus. But not when people simply don't understand the difference between a county demonym and an ethnonym.
- On a completely different note, I'm sure you have seen
this already. Another paper that's not about WHG according our ill-spirited friend from St. Louis.–
Austronesier (
talk) 20:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think
Loveday Jenkin will be happy when she finds out that Wikipedia says she isn't Cornish anymore. I really thought I was going to make a breakthrough with the Tortured Soul last time we interacted. Somehow I doubt that the linked paper would have convinced him either, he doesn't seem very open-minded, does he? Ah well. I tried my best. Perhaps we'll see him again one day.
Tewdar 20:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Anyway, in protest, I'm changing my signature colours back to old gold, admins with poor vision be damned.
Tewdar 20:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Poor vision is not an admin priviledge. Looking at your unreadable signature with my eyes that have reached US senior citizen discount-age (like the rest of the carcass around them), I have to take care not to call you "Tedwar" again. –
Austronesier (
talk) 21:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oh alright, I'll change it back again, just for you. An admin asked me to change it to a more readable colour once, is the reason I said that. I always think you sound rather youthful and energetic...😁
Tewdar 21:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Glad you changed it back. The protest colour reminded me of these guys. 🤢🤮
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 21:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah... looks good on tartan, not so good on a signature. Tewdar 21:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Glad you changed it back. The protest colour reminded me of these guys. 🤢🤮
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 21:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oh alright, I'll change it back again, just for you. An admin asked me to change it to a more readable colour once, is the reason I said that. I always think you sound rather youthful and energetic...😁
Tewdar 21:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Poor vision is not an admin priviledge. Looking at your unreadable signature with my eyes that have reached US senior citizen discount-age (like the rest of the carcass around them), I have to take care not to call you "Tedwar" again. –
Austronesier (
talk) 21:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Anyway, in protest, I'm changing my signature colours back to old gold, admins with poor vision be damned.
Tewdar 20:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think
Loveday Jenkin will be happy when she finds out that Wikipedia says she isn't Cornish anymore. I really thought I was going to make a breakthrough with the Tortured Soul last time we interacted. Somehow I doubt that the linked paper would have convinced him either, he doesn't seem very open-minded, does he? Ah well. I tried my best. Perhaps we'll see him again one day.
Tewdar 20:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Sandstein 07:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)This is in response to the personal attack you made on Pepperbeast here. It's not clear what you mean by "legacy admin", but it's clearly meant to be a term of disparagement. I'd have normally warned you first, but that would not have been helpful in your case since you write at the top of your talk page: "Do NOT post generic templated messages on this page! I won't read 'em anyway, and even if I did, I probably wouldn't give a ha'penny fuck about whatever it is you're complaining about! 😁👍". Sandstein 07:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand, and I could probably have been clearer but it was late... I was referring to an incident a few years back, when an admin suggested that Cornish exonyms was not worthy of an article because it was about specifically Cornish Exonyms. He went on and on and on even after I told thrm this was highly offensive. It was certainly not a personal attack on Pepperbeast, who isn't an admin and with whom I have no problem whatsoever. I did not know that the term 'legacy admin' was considered off-limits around here, but you are certainly correct that it was being used as a term of disparagement. Tewdar 08:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ping Sandstein Tewdar 08:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is a disparagement of a potential action also, ex officio as it were, a disparagement of the one who might do it?
—Tamfang (
talk) 02:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- But even 'the one who might do it' is not Pepperbeast! The linked comment is just me saying, "look, everybody I don't care if you delete them all or keep them all, just don't only delete the Cornish exonyms" article. I was not even talking to Pepperbeast specifically in that comment, it was a general comment. 😭😭😭 Tewdar 03:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely absurd, comically heavy-handed block. It was not obviously an insult directed at anyone, if it can even be called an insult. Is the amorphous honor of "legacy admins" in general so fragile that it requires such authoritarian measures against anyone who would dare besmirch it? Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Tewdar ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
There was no 'personal attack', and certainly not on user Pepperbeast. (2) A block for merely using the term 'legacy admin' seems disproportionate and unreasonable. But, I will be sure to avoid this term in the future if it is considered offensive. Tewdar 08:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
As you admit you intended the term to be disparaging, it is a personal attack. 331dot ( talk) 08:57, 22 March 2024 (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.
This is well over the top. No other admin would have blocked for this, and the stupid jokey warning template (now removed) was obviously not directed at admins, who have to leave a blocking template anyway. Even the blocking admin seemed to think a warning was sufficient. I have already said I will not use the term again, so how is this not punitive? Tewdar 09:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
So all the admins seeing this agree that Anyway , my opinion on the 'X exonyms' articles: delete the fucking lot, or delete none of 'em. Just don't single out Cornish for deletion, like some [completely unspecified] legacy admin
is worth a 48 hour block? Really? I don't fucking believe you. This is a bad, punitive, disproportionately harsh, and POINTy block that seems to be mainly the result of a warning template that asked (two) USERS not to post any more fucking warning templates on my fucking user page. This is an egregious misuse of system tools, followed by hand waving post-hoc justification because nobody wants to overturn a shitty block.
Tewdar 13:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Looks like at least one person agrees this wasn't a personal attack. Obviously not one of the admins. Tewdar 13:18, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Oh good, that makes possibly two.#UNBLOCKTEWDAR 🙄 Tewdar 13:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- "Legacy admin" is such a commonly used term that I struggle to see it as a blockable personal attack. For example, it's splashed all over
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Preliminary statements, used by editors and administrators in good standing. I do mainly see it used in a way I would describe as "critically" as opposed to "disparagingly", but I wouldn't get hung up on the semantics. I would take Tewdar at his word that it won't be repeated. I am speaking with my "colleague of Tewdar's" hat on, not my admin hat. Given the ubiquity of the term, the promise of changed behavior, and the fact that the block was based on a misunderstanding, I'd urge an unblock.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 13:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- The block was purportedly for the
personal attack [I] made on Pepperbeast
, but I did not say anything at all about Pepperbeast. This block is unfair. The blocking admin has a reputation for harshness, but I don't think any block was justified at all. At the most, "don't use the term legacy admin" would have been sufficient. Again , this was a POINTY block because sandstein took issue with my (tongue in cheek) warning template (which I forgot about , since I'm usually on mobile and don't see it) Tewdar 13:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)- Well, maybe not 'forgot about', exactly, since I think I changed it to a warning template not so long ago. Anyway, I didn't think it was a problem, but I'll try very hard from now on to work on the assumption that Wikipedia admins (of all tenures) have absolutely no sense of humour. Tewdar 14:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- The block was purportedly for the
Tewdar, to respond to your various messages above, blocks are preventative, not punitive. To be unblocked, you must therefore convince me or another admin that you will not repeat your personal attacks. So far, you have not done so, but insisted that your personal attack was not one, and that I am somehow responsible for the block which you caused by your own actions. Also, you use many expletives, which does not make your contributions more convincing or make yourself appear more like a person to be taken seriously. You remain free to ask another admin for a review, taking into account the above and WP:GAB. Sandstein 16:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- I have said that I will not use the term 'legacy admin' again, regardless of whether the original usage was a personal attack or not (FFF above, who I greatly respect, seems to think that 'legacy admin' should not be considered a personal attack at all). Your block was ludicrously draconian, and would not have been made by any other admin I don't think. As far as I know, use of expletives is not prohibited yet, although who knows really. To be unblocked, I just have to wait another 36 hours or whatever, after which the result will be the same as if someone unblocks me before then: I will not use the term 'legacy admin' again. In fact, after I've finished complaining about this block, I think I'm done here. So do what you want. I don't care.
Tewdar 17:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- And look at your original block reason: the
personal attack you made on Pepperbeast
. This is completely false. In fact it is utter bullshit. Tewdar 18:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- And look at your original block reason: the
Tewdar, to respond to your various messages above, blocks are preventative, not punitive.
- And yet this is as manifestly a punitive block as can be! All the more reason to undo it, then. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
"Also, you use many expletives, which does not make your contributions more convincing or make yourself appear more like a person to be taken seriously."
Seriously? Usage of expletives is not indicative of "a person to be taken seriously"? Isn't it rather that in the real world (including WP), it's pooh-poohing the usage of expletives whichdoes not make one appear more like a person to be taken seriously
? I am all for a discussion style that doesn't drive off productive editors (including actual researchers/academics/scholars) who expect WP not to be like fucking Reddit etc., but in an unblock discussion which naturally can turn emotional (especially when the rationale for the block is quite wrong), admins should be able to deal with it and see the content, not the wrapping. – Austronesier ( talk) 12:07, 23 March 2024 (UTC)- As someone who is known to engage in a rhetorical flourish or two, I agree with Sandstein that some of Tewdar’s rhetoric may be putting some editors off. However, this particular ban based on that particular comment was heavy-handed. I urge both sides to de-escalate. I don’t think anything good or productive will come from bring this this to ANI. In the spirit of de-escalation, I urge @ Sandstein to show goodwill and reverse the ban (even though it’s almost over and this would be a symbolic, goodwill gesture). Both sides have expressed their message loud and clear, now please, let’s calm down and move on. XMcan ( talk) 13:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Firefangledfeathers: - is there some way to get this block reviewed some other way, without the unblock template? And, is there a procedure for removal of administrator tools? Tewdar 07:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- It does seem that Sandstein may have misunderstood the wording of that comment. It could have benefited from the addition of "did once" on the end for clarity (i.e. "like some legacy admin did once") but if I were sanctioned every time I wrote something unclear, I would be long gone from Wikipedia! But given the clear context here, it is quite apparent there was no personal attack. A personal attack has to be personal, and no person is identified here.
- Surely this doesn't need to go to AN to get this overturned?
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 08:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Please someone, take this to AN.
Tewdar 09:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I would probably have added 'did once' if I had been able to edit that page the next morning. Tewdar 09:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
-
Wikipedia:Administrative action review would seem to be the correct venue, no? I'd do it myself but, you know... I'm blocked 🙄
Tewdar 09:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- That page says I should try to resolve in the first instance with the performer of the action. I'll write to Sandstein's page now.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 11:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I believe the appropriate reply is "good luck with that". I'm going down guns a blazin' and taking it to AN or wherever as soon as the block is expired anyway.
Tewdar 11:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I have posted on Sandstein's page now. Hopefully it won't need to go to the drama boards. Considering going on strike until it is settled! But as I am busy all day today, there won't be much from me today anyway. Take care. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 11:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I believe the appropriate reply is "good luck with that". I'm going down guns a blazin' and taking it to AN or wherever as soon as the block is expired anyway.
Tewdar 11:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- That page says I should try to resolve in the first instance with the performer of the action. I'll write to Sandstein's page now.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 11:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Please someone, take this to AN.
Tewdar 09:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry T, I'm out and about today. Maybe someone else wants to take this to AN, but I'd suggest just waiting out the block so you can respond yourself instead of someone shuttling your responses over. XRV might be better suited, though it's relatively new and we're still figuring out the norms and culture and scope and tone, etc.
Firefangledfeathers (
talk /
contribs) 14:57, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- I will start the AN / XRV thread if you wish, or I will wait for you to do so. Until then, I'm taking a break.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- The block has expired. When, per FFF, you start the appropriate thread, I'll speak to that. This kind of thing makes me extremely cross. I'll not be editing Wikipedia until this is resolved. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 09:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I will start the AN / XRV thread if you wish, or I will wait for you to do so. Until then, I'm taking a break.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I'm gonna roll the dice one more time and then give up. The block reason says the block is for the "personal attack you made on Pepperbeast". This is completely false. I did not make any personal attack on Pepperbeast.
- Regretful procedural close because the block has expired by time. Had I seen the unblock request earlier, I would have granted it, for the reasons I've explained here. (P.S.: The fact that the template says I "declined" this request, which is hardly the spirit of what I wrote or meant, may be misleading. Should we have an "unblock request closed" template that is different from the "declined" template?) 08:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @
Newyorkbrad: Is it technically not possible to grant the request even when it can't be executed anymore since the block has expired? Apart from the block log entry, just the sight of the closure color looks like another blow in the face even when it's the farthest from what you've intended. –
Austronesier (
talk) 07:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @ Austronesier: I understand your point and have gotten rid of the "declined" template. Discussion of whether anything else should be done (here or more generally in similar cases) can take place at the XRV review. Newyorkbrad ( talk) 08:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I have raised my concerns re. the above at Wikipedia:Administrative action review#48 hour block of Tewdar by Sandstein Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 22:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- As we discussed, I've made the addition to your block log. I tried very hard to make sure this doesn't autoblock you, but I'm sometimes an idiot. If I screwed something up and you have any troubles, let me or another admin know.
Floquenbeam (
talk) 17:47, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Everything looks good, thanks for blocking me 😂👍 Tewdar 18:04, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Look at this users Fact Check Mongol Eena2u Dorjzav
And edits they make https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1218870559&oldid=1218870503&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1207107068&oldid=1207024679&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1219495811&oldid=1218930204&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?diff=1219706509&oldid=1219528671&title=Slab-grave_culture&diffonly=1 Most likely they are the same person 7712Touch74396 ( talk) 12:24, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oh yeah I'll get right on it 😂😂😂
Tewdar 13:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- hello again
- Dorjzav keep doing same things 7712Touch74396 ( talk) 11:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC)