Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:17, 5 August 2008

User:Cailil/Status

User page

Talk page

Admin

Logs

Awards

Books

help needed 2

Please help. You didn't want to block someone so here's the reverse. I have looked at this person. They seem reasonable. They were blocked for 3RR but they are sorry and also claim a long record of good edits. Please unblock and reduce the punishment to time already served.

If you don't want to block, then please fulfil this UNblock request. The user is User:Wolfkeeper You have the tools, please use them. Chergles (talk) 22:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Chergles it is unnecessary for you, or anyone else, to advocate unblocking a user where an unblock request has been filed. Everyone can see all the users requesting unblock at Category:Requests for unblock. As regards Wolfkeeper's block I agree with Chillum's review and would consider an unblock in this situation "out of process".
Just FYI, there is no need to propose blocks or unblocks on sysops' pages. We already have categories listing these administrative tasks (ie Category:Requests for unblock, CAT:CSD, etc) and boards for reporting live problems (ie WP:ANI, WP:RFCU, WP:AFD, WP:RPP, WP:AVI and WP:AN3).
Don't take offense Chergles but please don't demand that I 'use the tools' as you have done twice this week. It is my responsibility to use my administrative privileges in accordance with site policy, community consensus and my best judgment - not "on-demand". I will review or investigate situations that anyone brings to my attention but I will not protect, delete, block, unblock, etc, on-request or on-demand. I will only use these privileges where I deem in accordance with site policy and standards; this is the way all sysops operate becuase our decisions are our responsibility.
I'm guessing that you are unfamiliar with the proper channels, forums and established site processes for this sort of request. You should consider reading and using WP:ANI, WP:RFCU, WP:AFD, WP:RPP, WP:AVI and WP:AN3 to get a feel for how the community handles 'situations'; how we go about protecting or deleting pages; and what rigours are involved in blocking and unblocking users. These forums are open to all users and as such have the benefit of transparency and community oversight--Cailil 23:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Requests for administrator attention gives a long list of all of the channels to request sysop action openly and in process--Cailil 23:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I want you to use the tools, that's why I asked. I want you to find a good reason to block or unblock a user, partly for experience and partly to put that RFA to good use. What I am perplexed is why you won't use your tools "on request". Other admins do this thousands of times a day. Regular editors complain (hopefully with valid complaints) and the admin either does something or concludes that nothing should be done. Are you saying that you refuse to take requests and only use the tools when you see a case that needs it? If that is the case, we need many more admins because each would just use the tools for the small part of WP that they inhabit and would not accept any requests from others.

What if other admin did the same thing as you (not take requests) in the Anacapa matter? If so, Anacapa would remain as 99% or more of admins do not edit the same articles as Anacapa. Chergles (talk) 18:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Chergles sysops use their tools after investigation and using their judgment - not the judgment of any one else. Telling me to unblock someone is what I mean by "acting on-demand" - the fact that we already have a process for unblocking makes that a problem. The reason we have noticeboards for admin requests is so that community oversight exists where there are errors of judgment by sysops. Again if you want to request my attention or have a question about policy/protocol etc feel free to post here. I may decide to take action in these situations if they warrant it. However, where, when and what tools I use is at my discretion. If you are in a dispute yourself you can ask me to review the situation. If you find a complex problem that my skill set is pertinent to post it here. If you want advice feel free to ask but again I will decide if sysop actions are required and if I am going to perform them. If you want a page protected you should use WP:RPP, if you want a page deleted use WP:AFD or WP:CSD. If you see a 3RR report it to WP:AN3 - all admins including myself are patrolling these pages and this is how everyone else operates. These are the protocols we all follow Chergles. I realize you are trying to be helpful but you need to follow site processes so that you can learn about them--Cailil 21:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Alleged topic ban

When you get confirmation from someone you can believe that I have never been topic banned, don't apologize. The history of this article indicates that whenever a false accusation is proven false, no apology is ever given. Kossack4Truth (talk) 15:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I've stricken the part of my comment at AN3 that said you were topic banned. But please do not disrupt the project to make a point. Your comment here is unconstructive - it is flamebait; and multi-posting your AN3 report to WP:ANI is a prima facea case of forum shopping. This behaviour is tendentious and is disruptive. Please reconsider making this type of contribution to the project--Cailil 15:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Kossack I was correct the first time--Cailil 17:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: question

It wasn't ever officially passed (unfortunately). It probably should've been though...this time I'll follow it more closely, particularly given that I'm looking for article probation to pass this time around. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know Ncmvocalist--Cailil 15:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, the topic ban was never in effect even there. Although myself and MastCell (and several others) at that point felt it was justified, there was still not a clear sort of consensus to implement it because he had retired. The current discussion has taken care of the issue this time though. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi, I saw you asking about where you could best help, now that you have admin tools. My own suggestion (which you are free to ignore <grin>), is to check Category:Administrative backlog. For example, there are several move requests at Misplaced Pages:Requested moves#Backlog which could benefit from administrator attention. Up to you though, to find your own niche.  :) There are also suggestions at the bottom of Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Dealing with disputes, such as to review the backlog at Category:NPOV disputes and see if any "disputed" tags can be removed from articles where the discussions have died down. And if not, the presence of a completely uninvolved administrator can often be really useful in getting things resolved. --Elonka 16:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks will look at these--Cailil 17:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

2000 Primary Group

I have another way to use your tools. I have formed the "2000 Primary Group". Initially it was to re-write a really bad section. 2 other editors agreed that it was a poorly written section and I re-wrote it. Because of the other editors neutral and fair judgment, we formed this informal group. Now we want to make the first edit of our group. We plan to consult each other first to see if there is a consensus. If our idea is too radical, the others in the group will caution us and the one with the idea won't pursue it as an edit (or do it with the black mark that the discussion group rejected it). In other words, we'll edit as individuals but we will seek a consensus/pre-approval first that our idea is a good idea.

We have decided that the "cultural and political image" is biased. Who is to choose what image/opinion to use? Only the postive (POV)? Only the negative (smear)? We plan to be very fair and make the suggestion to 2 articles, one of each major US politician from the 2 major parties. That way, we would not be picking on one party.

We plan to be polite and have good suggestions. Will you protect us as long as we follow our goals of good behavior? Others may call us socks in an effort to hurt us. The other two are: User talk:Floridianed and User talk:SMP0328. Wouldn't you agree that we are not each other's socks. That will diffuse at least that potential attack. Chergles (talk)

Chergles I'm really not sure what you are requesting here. But I must ask, have you ever joined a wikiproject or a task force? You should - they perform the same types of function that your group wants to. Have a look at WikiProject United States presidential elections and WikiProject Politics. I would strongly suggest you join such a wikiproject or create a task force for your group to avoid looking like a "cabal".
It is unclear to me exactly what your group's goals & intentions are but it sounds like something the people at WP:USPE would be very interested in and it might be of mutual benefit for both that project and you 3 editors to work with them.

Chergles I understand that you have suspicions about checkuser but you need to move on - if you 3 are accused of sock-puppetry an RFCU would come back negative - you need no "protection" from this.

On a side note, have you considered requesting a mentor - it's a good way to get to know other editors and to familiarize yourself with site policies and processes - I know a few good editors who might be happy to mentor someone with as much enthusiasm as you--Cailil 22:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I would be interested in a mentor. What I am afraid of is not a negative RFCU but one from a checkuser who doesn't like our pre-edit discussions (maybe disagrees with them) and then say "likely". Then I would have been called Anacapa and SMP0328 and then probably banned forever. If I then request unblock from the unblock board, they would say "trolling, request denied, checkuser can't be wrong." If you are willing to stick up and say "Chergles is a reasonable person based on the edits" then I feel more comfortable. Of course, my edits would be entirely reasonable. Also, if you know any possible mentors, let me know. Chergles (talk) 23:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Chergles don't worry about all the hypothetical & horrible things that could go wrong - they probably wont happen. You've been honest about user:hotpotatoes and we can all see you're a very enthusiastic and well intentioned editor - we don't throw the people like that out. And if something mad did happen you could contact me or any sysop via email (like you did Durova) and I will investigate it. If some such hypothetical block was bad the community would overturn it - you'll never have anything to worry about as long as you stick to site policy. And if anyone brings up the Anacapa block contact me and I will explain that it was an error. Additionally by being within a taskforce or wikiproject your group would be interacting with tens and maybe hundreds of users so you would not be isolated. Please consider my advice about joining a project or task force.

If you want to request a mentor follow this link and pick one of the free mentors (sometimes called "adopters")--Cailil 23:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Respect Thread Conversions

I'm looking for folks to help convert Respect Threads to wiki formatting on Project Fanboy: WikiFans. Respect Threads, showcase scans of feats performed by comic book characters and have gained an audience on several comic book message boards. A few other wiki editors and myself are trying to convert them from the unprofessional look of a bunch of posts on a message board to the formatting common with WikiMedia wiki's. To view an example of what we're doing, here is a link to Respect Silver Surfer.

I was wondering if you might have time to contribute your comic book knowledge and/or scans of comic book characters performing feats, and help us out with our Respect Articles project?Millennium Cowboy (talk) 02:28, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Trouble brewing

Could you watchlist Dan Crow (computer scientist) and Blurb.com? I've been dealing with a banned editor "JP" (who was allowed to vanish and had her WP:CSN banning thread blanked). More eyes may help. Jehochman 08:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

They're on my watch list now - will keep an eye on them--Cailil 10:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

You were right, even in your criticism of me. Unfortunately, Lisa and I have a long standing history of this. On the Glossary of Christian, Jewish, and Messianic terms her edit warring led to the complete disolution of the page. On the Shituf page her warring led me to just let her have the whole page, except for a single sentence I fought tooth and nail for to keep the entire article from contradicting itself. And here again her edit is the last one standing. Even worse, she FOLLOWS me from page to page, and opened an RfC on me demanding that I be barred from making ANY edits ANYWHERE on Jewish subjects (we're both Jewish).

I hope that you'll at least read that MedCab case (not RfC) so that you can see that Tim is misstating what I asked for. Of course I never asked that he be barred from editing articles on Jewish subjects. I asked that he be prevented from forcing Christian concepts into such articles. The Shituf article was a good example. Rather than accept that Judaism views worship of a trinity as non-monotheistic, he insisted that Judaism just doesn't understand Christianity, and that the Jewish concept of shituf needs to take the Christian theological categories of Trinitarianism, Arianism and Tritheism into account. I was not the only person trying to get him to stop, though I admit I was the most persistent. -LisaLiel (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

We're cluttering this person's talk page. The problem was a term and definition mismatch. Either the terms needed to match the definition, or a recognition of a mismatch should be made. I don't care either way. That's not forcing a Christian concept into a Jewish term. That's simply creating consistency of the normative meaning of words on an encyclopedia with a generic audience. The agenda isn't "Christianity." The agenda is "English."Tim (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't know what to do other than changing my name or obediently trying to find some obscure subject she isn't interested in -- but I'm starting to think I'm the primary subject, and not the articles. My apologies for going along even up to 3 edits, and my apologies for not learning how to deal with this kind of thing. It's quite unnerving. And it's been going on since December of 2007. Do you have any suggestions? Should I change my name and try to hide? Thanks. Really, I'm open for suggestions.Tim (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm preparing a post for AN/I where I will try to bring attention to this case. Can you show me any diffs of the issues you outline above with LisaLiel?--Cailil 21:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to. How do you go into the history of a page that doesn't exist any more? The first page completely disappeared. Is it still out there somewhere? Glossary of Christian, Jewish, and Messianic terms.Tim (talk) 22:13, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Sysops like myself can see pages that have been deleted. If you can give me a "red link" the page I will be able to look into its history--Cailil 22:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you referring to Glossary of Lisa's terms?--Cailil 22:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I just dug into the history of the link I gave you and it was still there -- just renamed. I'll go into the history, but it may be a day or two before I can get everything together. I haven't been keeping links to all of these and will have to step through an eight month old thread one edit at a time to follow it. But I'll give it priority. Shituf was the other page. I'll go through those too. Not sure I can find that RfC on me. Can you see if it's still around? The wording is a little eye opening.Tim (talk) 22:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No RFCs relating to the name Teclontz - was it under another name?--Cailil 22:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No, it was me. I'm kind of unimaginative with my teclontz handle... even for my yahoo and aol screen names. I'll try to find that. L'Aquatique might know where that is. It was a month or two ago.Tim (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't see any RFCs in LisaLiel's deleted contribs - if it was deleted for oversight reasons I wont be able to see it, nor will any normal admin. Was the deletion of that page discussed on ANI or elsewhere?--Cailil 22:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I may be using the wrong term. Is mediation a different thing? It had to do with the Shituf page. I know that much.Tim (talk) 23:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Gender of God?--Cailil 23:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

By Jove! I think you've found it!Tim (talk) 23:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

No actually it's this one Misplaced Pages:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2008-07-07_Shituf - which is not deleted yet and yes I can see where she demands you are prevented from editing anywhere in relation to Jewish concepts and Christianity--Cailil 23:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, that's not what I requested. And there's a context. Tim tried for months to force Christian ideology into an article about a Jewish concept called shituf. I asked only that he be prevented from doing so, because the effort of trying to prevent him myself was exhausting. -LisaLiel (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've read it. And the following quotes your proposed solution as of July 7th 2008:

I want Tim and Carlaude to be prevented from making edits to articles on Jewish concepts which insert Christian concepts into them, particularly when Judaism differs with Christianity on such concepts. -LisaLiel (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Now my terminology - "Anywhere in relation to Jewish concepts and Christianity" - may look different, however, to request such a topic ban would in effect mean preventing editors from working in any topics in relation to Jewish concepts and Christianity - no normal topic ban could be formulated otherwise. I'm not commenting on the ins and outs of this BTW, but I need evidence of what Teclontz refers to in his above posts--Cailil 19:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow! You're good! I think I need to take a look at it now that you're found it. But my wife it calling, so... I'll get back with you tomorrow. And thanks again.Tim (talk) 23:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Question: I'm going through all the old edits and categorizing edit wars, personal cracks, wikithreats, bad faith editing, etc. It's slow going, though. This has been going on since the beginning of December and there are dozens of instances I'm categorizing. It could take weeks to get through them all. How long do I have to get everything together? There's just so much of it. Or should I post it somewhere as I keep documenting? Thanks.Tim (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've started a User:Teclontz/Documentation_Page, but so far it's only through December 10th. I have a ways to go. Fortunately there are some breaks (I got a bit unnerved and had to stay offline for a few months to recover). A couple of things are in several categories (an edit war with a personal crack in the edit line, etc).Tim (talk) 17:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm up to mid day December 30, 2007 now. After this flurry the pace should speed up again. Also, I'd stand by at least 90% of these first impressions, but I'll give it a second pass when I'm finished to make sure it's solid. There is a long history of bullying here, and a lot of edit wars. It will take some time.Tim (talk) 17:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

template_talk:weasel

I hav written a form for decisions that I want you to render regarding that locked template. You do not need to inspect history and talk space to fill it out, because two versions are on the administrator's noticeboard. BrewJay (talk) 02:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:LisaLiel

Is now giving assurance she won't edit war again... --Stephen 02:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note Stephen - I've unblocked LisaLiel per her commitment not to edit-war--Cailil 11:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Feminism

My pleasure, thanks for the note! Cirt (talk) 11:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it just me?

Or does this seem a bit odd to you too? No Means No This has its own page: Make love not war And so does this: Power to the people

BillyTFried (talk) 01:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Gender of God

Hi, I am okay but in transit and with infrequent and undependable access to internet. I will check the article when I can, but assume that any act you take that is consistent with the notes I have added will be okay by me. It seems - based on a cursory look - that the main participants in the debate are Lisa and Tim. Lisa too often seems to be willing to edit-war, but she is clear about her point of view and it seems like she generally represents the Orthodox Jewish POV accurately. Tim on the other hand often makes big claims that he says are "obvious" and i have real concerns that he just does not "get" NPOV and NOR. I think it is key not to elide a Jewish 9or any religious) POV with the "Biblical" view - the Bible is a primary source and mainstream Judaisn has its interpretation of it, different Christian movements have their views, and critical scholars debate other views. I think it is essential that these distinctions be made clearly in the article. Slrubenstein | Talk 20:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)