Revision as of 06:56, 8 August 2006 editLar (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators29,174 edits →To the rescue! Oops, I should have taken a left at Albuquerque: no sniffing allowed← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:12, 8 August 2006 edit undoBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,403 edits →To the rescue! Oops, I should have taken a left at AlbuquerqueNext edit → | ||
Line 197: | Line 197: | ||
:/Bishzilla picks up the little Phaedriel and smells her experimentally, looks pleased. ] | ] 06:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC). | :/Bishzilla picks up the little Phaedriel and smells her experimentally, looks pleased. ] | ] 06:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC). | ||
::Ahem. There is to be NO smelling of my (co)nominee here. You wanna sniff an admin? Go sniff one of your OWN nominees. I do not care HOW good you think she smells. Thank you. ++]: ]/] 06:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC) | ::Ahem. There is to be NO smelling of my (co)nominee here. You wanna sniff an admin? Go sniff one of your OWN nominees. I do not care HOW good you think she smells. Thank you. ++]: ]/] 06:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
:I really can't be held held responsible for what that scary dinosaur does, even if I ''do'' turn into her from time to time. ] | ] 07:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC). |
Revision as of 07:12, 8 August 2006
Wikiquote of the Week:
"The problem had already been solved by other admins. Bishonen unsolved it."
Please post at the foot of the page!
Talk archives |
- Wikimood
Lingeron
I see some interatction with this user by you... See this ANI entry... I have warned this user as well. Do you know how to ask for a checkuser? I've never done that before. ++Lar: t/c 11:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
- Go to WP:RFCU and follow the instructions, if you think that's the way to go. However, CheckUser requests us to handle obvious socks without bothering them. This is an obvious sock, though I don't have a chance to list the coincidences right now--connection failing...failing.... Bishonen | talk 17:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC).
- A precis to update you... Geogre looked into it, and based on the evidence in contribs and style, blocked as an obvious sock. Deckiller protested, unblocked, discussion on AN/I ensued, Essjay popped in, ran the checkuser without being formally asked, and officially confirmed sockhood and I reblocked. This time for good hopefully. Amazing how much time of the community this user wastes. Now I can get back to pimping for comments on Phaedriel's RfA so she can break 200... :) ++Lar: t/c 11:41, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, being the unoficial scold of AN/I, I have to say that I agree with the questions, the checkuser, and the reinstatement. It's all cool, and folks should get cookies for being thorough. Still, it was a rather obvious reincarnation. <shrug> This head of the hydra has been lopped off, a new one to appear soon, no doubt. Geogre 12:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- As I told Deckiller, that's part of the process and good. I was however somewhat annoyed with User:GT, who I guess just took Lingeron's word that Thewolfstar was a Democrat! Actually, Lingeron didn't even say *that*, just that Thewolfstar mostly edited Democratic politic party articles, and GT picked up the implication and ran with it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks guys. (I'm a little baffled by the way the people don't seem to have taken on board my own ANI post, but whatever.) Lar, since your block is the operative one, did you tick the "disable account creation" box when you blocked? If not, I'd advise you to unblock and then re-block doing that. (Don't tick the other box.) The CheckUser result rather suggests, to my mind, that Lingeron was editing from the wolfster's very own unique IP--we know she has one of those--rather than from an open proxy, and in that case this would be a great opportunity to disable account creation from the expansive sockfarm of this pest. Bishonen | talk 21:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC).
- I *think* I've read that the two new checkboxes don't do *anything* if it's a username being blocked and not an IP, actually. (And I'll certainly help out with that other thing too. Or just laugh. It's hard to say.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks guys. (I'm a little baffled by the way the people don't seem to have taken on board my own ANI post, but whatever.) Lar, since your block is the operative one, did you tick the "disable account creation" box when you blocked? If not, I'd advise you to unblock and then re-block doing that. (Don't tick the other box.) The CheckUser result rather suggests, to my mind, that Lingeron was editing from the wolfster's very own unique IP--we know she has one of those--rather than from an open proxy, and in that case this would be a great opportunity to disable account creation from the expansive sockfarm of this pest. Bishonen | talk 21:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC).
- As I told Deckiller, that's part of the process and good. I was however somewhat annoyed with User:GT, who I guess just took Lingeron's word that Thewolfstar was a Democrat! Actually, Lingeron didn't even say *that*, just that Thewolfstar mostly edited Democratic politic party articles, and GT picked up the implication and ran with it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I believe I did tick "disable account creation" as I usually do, but can't be 100% sure. The block log should be enhanced to record and display that maybe?? ++Lar: t/c 22:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Enjoy your wikibreak!
Have a cold one, all the way up!Have a relaxing wikibreak, Bish - you deserve it! :) Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 13:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
wikibreak
Have fun "chillin'" during your break wherever you're at right now. You seriously needs to just chillax 'cause you work wayyyy too hard on this. I'm actually on break too even though no one on here seems to give :(. But yeah anyway I'll see ya around. Take it ez P.S. Holla bak @ me when you get back okay?? I gotta ask you something. I know you're prolly real disappointed in me right now. --Bonafide.hustla 07:40, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, Boney, nope, I didn't check out the argument you were having, so I'm not disappointed yet! :-) Just behave yourself, is all. See you later. --Bishonen | talk 22:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
MSTCrow
I think that you have good cause for an arbitration request against MSTCrow, however it is also clear that the NPR request will not be accepted, largely due to the fact that dispute is seen as content-related and premature. I know you had asked that the case be accepted to look into MSTCrow's conduct, and I hate causing more work for the sake of process, but in this case I do think it would be worth the time to file a new request specifically for MSTCrow, and give more rationale specifically for that case. That would be more articlate and will probably be accepted. Thanks. Note: Copied to Calton. Dmcdevit·t 06:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Reply to Dmcdevit:
- While I (obviously) agree with you that there's enough troublesome behavior to warrant ArbCom action, a quick look at the ArbCom page tells me that you folks are already up to your eyeballs in work, so practically it may not be a good idea -- especially if, as seems likely to me, MSTCrow is on his way down the slippery slope to a community ban. Under the theory of "give 'em enough rope and they'll hang themselves", it won't take much more edit-warring, insults, pointless wikilawyering -- note his defense of Lingeron (talk · contribs) -- and occasional outright lies for him to alienate a critical mass of editors/admins, which would render ArbCom action moot.
- Besides, if he's true to form, any ArbCom case involving him would be wikilawyered up the wazoo, all intended to prove that it's everyone else's fault. His blocks certainly haven't taught him a damned thing (I've been blocked twice, not five times, and both times the blocks were vindictive and not based on fact..., as he claimed on his talk page) and I kind of doubt ArbCom sanctions would do more than provide him a martyrdom issue, either.
- We'll see, I guess. So far, no other ArbCom members have weighed in, and depending on how they feel, this may be moot. Note: Copied to Bishonen. --Calton | Talk 07:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Calton and Rattboy are better placed than me for drawing up a case against the user: I'd have to research it bigtime, as the only thing I've seen of him comes from noticing those dumbass templates on Calton's page, and the following unreasonableness and aggression. I'm pretty centrally involved in two RFAr cases right now, plus I'm on vacation dammit, there's no way I'm going to instigate another one. I'll weigh in if you guys request arbitration, though. Calton, you might be interested in my latest comment on Bunchofgrapes' page: I see certain reasons to suspect MSTCrow of being yet another maggie sock. The coincidences aren't enough to be certain at all, but there's the unreasoning Bishonen hatred (see how there's no resentment of El C, the actual blocker, all the venom reserved for me? And BoG mentioned, too: both of us are old adversaries of the wolfster, especially me.) And on the sensible principle, enunciated by Lar, I think it was, that anybody who thinks maggie is a good editor has to be maggie (or be insane), this should be maggie. Anyway, you might want to keep it in mind as a possibility. There's something about the tone that strikes me as not the same, though. Equally objectionable, but not exactly in the same way. Bishonen | talk 13:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
- Maggie's nothing like the wikilawyer that this critter is. Further, this critter keeps trying to stay just inside the letters of what he perceives as the law, where Maggie would gleefully run about with a flame thrower and a can of gasoline. I really don't think they're the same person, even though I think this Mystery Science Theater fan may well be a reincarnated troll. Geogre 14:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Calton and Rattboy are better placed than me for drawing up a case against the user: I'd have to research it bigtime, as the only thing I've seen of him comes from noticing those dumbass templates on Calton's page, and the following unreasonableness and aggression. I'm pretty centrally involved in two RFAr cases right now, plus I'm on vacation dammit, there's no way I'm going to instigate another one. I'll weigh in if you guys request arbitration, though. Calton, you might be interested in my latest comment on Bunchofgrapes' page: I see certain reasons to suspect MSTCrow of being yet another maggie sock. The coincidences aren't enough to be certain at all, but there's the unreasoning Bishonen hatred (see how there's no resentment of El C, the actual blocker, all the venom reserved for me? And BoG mentioned, too: both of us are old adversaries of the wolfster, especially me.) And on the sensible principle, enunciated by Lar, I think it was, that anybody who thinks maggie is a good editor has to be maggie (or be insane), this should be maggie. Anyway, you might want to keep it in mind as a possibility. There's something about the tone that strikes me as not the same, though. Equally objectionable, but not exactly in the same way. Bishonen | talk 13:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
LMK if you need an outside view. ++Lar: t/c 22:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Ultimately I'd say he's just a disgruntled wikipedian who fell in with Lingeron because they were both "abused" by Bishonen. Lingeron expressed sympathy for one of MSTCrow's earlier blocks because she too felt Bishonen was unfair, and MSTCrow later started rabble-rousing about Lingeron's block because he had an axe to grind against Bishonen. Think horses, not zebras. That said, I'd still say MSTCrow is probably going to flame out spectacularly and earn himself a block all by his lonesome if he keeps up the inflammatory rhetoric accusing Bishonen of corruption.--Rosicrucian 22:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Winslow Hall
Why are you never here when I need you? Who has deleted this important page, can you find out where it has gone - i don't just write these things for my own amusement - I know I wrote it, im my early days (under the first name) but where has it gone? Giano | talk 21:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Taken care of. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) It got deleted, but you don't need me--Bunch has restored it. Now thank him nicely. Did you see this and this from Fred? I've just posted my disagreement with the first one. :-) Bishonen | talk 22:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
- I have thanked him nicely, but I am, still less than thrilld by his edit here . I note he has now changed his mind - rather like Fred really Giano | talk 22:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) It got deleted, but you don't need me--Bunch has restored it. Now thank him nicely. Did you see this and this from Fred? I've just posted my disagreement with the first one. :-) Bishonen | talk 22:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
H.E.'s arbcom case
Just letting you know that I plan on staying on top of him and Usher once the case is completed. I figure you'll need the assistance. :) And hey, I'm a glutton for punishment, I admit it. --Woohookitty 11:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, Woohoo. Considering the evidence I've posted in this case, I think it would be a rare situation where it became appropriate for me to block or unblock anybody involved in it in the future, so... congratulations, it's all yours! Bishonen | talk 17:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
Welcome back
You're early, even if you meant August 6th UTC.
Welcome back. Let's get in touch soon, eh? Geogre 17:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- I deleted that...? Sorry! I was messing with my page, trying to produce a version with both the new wikiquote and the ... never mind, doesn't matter, suffice that it was an accident. I never got an edit conflict either. Why aren't you on Skype?? Bishonen | talk 19:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
- Back already, what was the matter? Hotel no good? Well if you will stay in these cut price establishments what do you expect - its a false economy to be so miserly. Well you have not missed much (I am still here) and shortly to be become an arbitrator! - seize the moment and the bull by the horn has always been my motto - so I'm organizing coup d'état of the arb-com, it's all BoG's idea - I could never have thought of it on my own - isn't he clever - we storm tomorrow. BoG is painting his face with cork and putting folliage (from Paul August's Hall tree) in his hair as we speak Giano | talk 20:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- What do you mean hotel? I was in the middle of the North Sea with a modem between my teeth. Are you sure you want to be an arbitrator? You do realize Bishzilla keeps them in her pocket? Bishonen | talk 20:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
- You're about to become an arbitrator??? ORLY? ++Lar: t/c 20:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- You sound surprised Lar - any particular reason? Giano | talk 21:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Um, every female arbitrator is going to show bias and vote however you vote? ++Lar: t/c 10:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- You sound surprised Lar - any particular reason? Giano | talk 21:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- You're about to become an arbitrator??? ORLY? ++Lar: t/c 20:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- What do you mean hotel? I was in the middle of the North Sea with a modem between my teeth. Are you sure you want to be an arbitrator? You do realize Bishzilla keeps them in her pocket? Bishonen | talk 20:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
Despite scientists' expectations, the population of modem-chewing elephants in the North Sea has tripled over the last six months. (Hi Bish! Great to have you officially back on board.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. I actually managed two edits from the North-Sea bound train, principally this. It took rage and some filial tech support, but I did it. Ho hum , have you edited from a train? Trainzilla | talk 23:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
- In the U.S., the internet is just series of tubes, so we can't edit from trains here... the last tube would rip right off. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Lmfao, the comment above was hilarious. Anyway, welcome back Bish, good to see ya.--Bonafide.hustla 01:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Johnny Canuck
I wouldn't object to some progressive blocks. I'm wondering what Johnny's connection to Vaughnwatch is? User:Zoe|(talk) 22:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Are User:JohnnyCanuck and User:Johnny Canuck related? The latter seems to be doin OK work on Carl Lewis, a page I watch. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- They look like different guys to me, even though both are into sports. Congratulations, you get to do something about the username melée. Bishonen | talk 23:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
- Oh boy! Let the fun begin! Well, I started the process. Soon comes the inevitable "I don't wanna! I'm blocking you! Waaaah!" stage, right? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:19, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- They look like different guys to me, even though both are into sports. Congratulations, you get to do something about the username melée. Bishonen | talk 23:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC).
- Have you guys looked into the other half of this edit/flame war. In my opinion, user:pm_shef isn't the innocent victim here. ED209 01:40, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's possible. It's not the point here, the point is that pm_shef's action was not vandalism. Do you realize that I've been telling JC that he must stop referring to non-vandalism edits as vandalism for several months now, and he just keeps going? Oh, you do. Good. Do you also realize that Zoe and I are in agreement that it's time for a block, and, indeed, progressively longer blocks, if he keeps going? JohnnyCanuck needs to get his head round the WP:Vandalism page, especially the section "What vandalism is not". His behavior hurts the wiki. I quote from WP:Vandalism: "If a user treats situations which are not clear vandalism as vandalism, then he or she is actually damaging the encyclopedia". Bishonen | talk 19:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
- JC only does that because Pm_shef removes warnings from his page and calls it "vandalism". As well as removing other critical commentary. ED203
- Why the sock, ED209/203?--Rosicrucian 20:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- EDwhatever, you seem to be missing several salient points here. Pm_shef is well entitled to remove baseless warnings from his page. Posting and re-posting frivolous warnings IS vandalism. Bishonen | talk 20:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
- Why the sock, ED209/203?--Rosicrucian 20:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- JC only does that because Pm_shef removes warnings from his page and calls it "vandalism". As well as removing other critical commentary. ED203
- That's possible. It's not the point here, the point is that pm_shef's action was not vandalism. Do you realize that I've been telling JC that he must stop referring to non-vandalism edits as vandalism for several months now, and he just keeps going? Oh, you do. Good. Do you also realize that Zoe and I are in agreement that it's time for a block, and, indeed, progressively longer blocks, if he keeps going? JohnnyCanuck needs to get his head round the WP:Vandalism page, especially the section "What vandalism is not". His behavior hurts the wiki. I quote from WP:Vandalism: "If a user treats situations which are not clear vandalism as vandalism, then he or she is actually damaging the encyclopedia". Bishonen | talk 19:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
User:Cute 1 4 u
This user has two sockpuppets confirmed by CheckUser. After the kerfuffle over her Raven Symone sock, I'm presently debating putting the sockpuppeteer template on her userpage. However, I suspect she'd probably just delete it and cause Wikidrama. Your thoughts?--Rosicrucian 02:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- My basic feelings about the user are still represented by my ANI listing back in June. This is a kid and a newbie. She thinks wiki is Myspace and makes up imaginary friends when she has trouble getting enough action... shrug... OK, we can't have that,[REDACTED] is an encyclopedia, but I wish somebody would just take her in hand and explain stuff, rather than the blocks and the templates. That wish isn't directed at you, I know it's a lot to ask, and I'm not willing to do it myself either. (Children have enough nightmares about Bishzilla as it is.) It looks to me like there are two options: either put on the puppeteer template and adminprotect the page, or post an appeal for a volunteer nanny on ANI. Bishonen | talk 10:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
- It's worrisome I'll agree. At first I was inclined to say she knew too much HTML to really be eleven years old, but when I saw her add the warning tag to her userpage today and break about every div tag on the page, I realized she's just probably copy/pasting what she likes from other userpages. So while I grit my teeth at her claim that she created the Perry Mason article (which she's never even edited on) I do wonder if there's anything we can (or even should) do. Certainly she doesn't seem to understand warnings and other input from admins, and will often just delete them. In other users this certainly wouldn't be tolerated, but I can understand your concern about taking a harsh approach with her.--Rosicrucian 14:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- On the subject of the naive, I agree with Rosicrucian, but I also note that Bishonen is more asking for a patient parent-figure to help the child than that the child's misdeeds be ignored. I like to be a New Critic about this stuff and say that, if a person is doing harm and no good, then it's just a case where "You must be this tall to ride the Misplaced Pages" -- that we still have to correct and prevent damage, even at the same time that we shower the user with the grace of Wikilove (it's Sunday, and I'm missing church, so expect religious metaphors all day). Geogre 14:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- While I do understand what Bish is getting at, it'd be with some trepidation that I'd ask someone, indeed anyone to open this can of worms, which is largely why I haven't slapped a puppeteer template on the kid. I remain doubtful the user would take any outside criticism or advice the right way, as she seems to just get confused when people try to nudge her in the right direction. Certainly given the tone some editors and admins have taken with her, she probably doesn't know who to listen to and who to ignore.--Rosicrucian 14:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
My userpage protection
Bishonen, it's been almost a year. Can you unprotect my user and talk pages now? I promise, I will behave 99% of the time. Due to current circumstances, I need to contribute anonymously, and would like the avenue for debate open. 67.18.109.218 03:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- It's not my protect on it now, the page has been unprotected and protected several times since I did it. But sure, I'll assume good faith and unprotect. The warnings are all very old, you shouldn't have to keep them up there any more, so I've blanked the page. I hope you won't incur any new ones (those would have to stay). Good luck with your editing. Bishonen | talk 09:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
Feedback
Bishonen, I know you may not be happy with me as you may feel I am defending Timothy. As I said in the evidence part, Timothy sometimes makes quick judgments. Anyways, Do you have any feedback here? we are trying to write a mannual of style for Islam related article. Your comments are most welcome. --Aminz 04:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Your experience of TU is quite different from mine, and I don't object at all to your expressing your perspective on him, how could I? I've no feedback to give on your manual of style, sorry. It sounds like a worthwhile project, but I'm far too ignorant of the subject to be involved in it even peripherally. Bishonen | talk 09:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
Message from JohnnyCanuck
Please explain your message on my talk page that I removed because I can not make sense out of it.--JohnnyCanuck 18:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- I really cannot put it any more clearly. Please see my new message on your page. You have been blocked. Bishonen | talk 18:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
User:JohnnyCanuck
- Hey Bishonen, you may want to check JohnnyCancuks' talk page. He deleted your warning as "nonsense" in the edit summary, and put that baseless vandalism warning back on my page. If you could remove it from my page, it'd be much appreciated :) -- pm_shef 18:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Relax, I am sure he is aware. Read the above message from Johnny himself. Mind your own business and assume good faith. ED209 18:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
?? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Near as I can tell, ED209 has created ED203 solely for the purpose of continuing this dispute. It's bewildering, because his old account isn't banned. At the very least, the new account has no other real edits.--Rosicrucian 20:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Please do a checkuser. This was fairly predicatable. Somebody has created an account to impersonate me. It could be user:pm_shef. Don't make comments such as "near as I can tell." What is this based on? You say yourself, my account is not banned. ED209 20:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Why would user:pm_shef accuse himself of vandalism, sockpuppetry, and other banworthy offenses?--Rosicrucian 21:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Whatever the case, its not me. ED203 and myself have posted at identical times and on his talk page, we are in the process of having a discussion. This is not my style. I have no need to create more accounts, and if you look at my edits, they are fair. On the talk pages, I am very aggressive because I am tired of user:pm_shef and his political agenda. ED209 21:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- For goodness sakes, this is just another example of User:ED209 accusing me of various offences without ever providing any proof at all. All he does is accuse me of vandalism, sockpuppetry, not assuming good faith, POV pushing and God knows what else, and yet through all this he has yet to provide even a single morsel of evidence to back up his claims, all the while dragging my name through the mud. Bishonen, sorry for continuing this on your talk page. -- pm_shef 21:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- I said "it could be." I don't know what to think about it. I find it weird that somebody has created this account. ED209 21:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Pm, that's ok. But actually, ED209, unless you think ED203 is me, I'd appreciate it if you took your discussion with various users off my page and on to your own. Lord knows I have to archive often enough. Bishonen | talk 21:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
Welcome back
Welcome back Bish. Martial Law 18:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC):)
- Thank you. Bishonen | talk 19:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC).
Your talents are needed
Bishonen, you are one of the most respected editors on Misplaced Pages. I would be eternally grateful if you would edit the "Alternative Treatments" and "Controversy" and "Parental Roles" sections of the ADHD to give them a more neutral viewpoint. I would do this, but having ADHD myself, I find myself unable to handle it with a neutral point of view.
Sincerely, --*Kat* 03:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- Flattery will get you everywhere! Sure, I'll take a shot at NPOVing those sections, fully expecting to be laughed to scorn on the talk page for my ignorance. Bishonen | talk 09:02, 7 August 2006 (UTC).
Sock of Jipanzee
Thank you for indef blocking User:Jipanzee, he seems however to to have created a sockpuppet to evade his block a grand total of two minutes (at 15:41) after the block. the sockpuppet is User:Sowpon, his sole edit seems fairly self explanatory. If you're interested, as I told User:JamesTeterenko, I believe these latest sockpuppets are in fact seperate from VaughanWatch/JohnnyCanuck (assuming JC is a sock). Their edit patterns seem sufficiently different (VW focused on PoV pushing in mainspace, the new ones, included ED, focused more on personal attacks and disrupting wiki) to lead me to believe that rather than all being spawn of VW, we're dealing with two seperate groups, with the second cooperating with the first simply out of convienience. Anyways, thanks for keeping an eye out - wish we had a more effective way of dealing with them. --pm_shef 00:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Note Sowponn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Very original eh? -- pm_shef 00:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- Please see Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/ED209. Feel free to comment if you wish. -- pm_shef 01:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
To the rescue! Oops, I should have taken a left at Albuquerque
No doubt I'm too late. If you still need help, I'm going to need a broader hint as to where. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm having some other Admins comming to assist you. I do apologise if I'm in error. Just concerned when I saw your S.O.S. Martial Law 04:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- This is up to you. Martial Law 04:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm having some other Admins comming to assist you. I do apologise if I'm in error. Just concerned when I saw your S.O.S. Martial Law 04:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Bish, what's up? my email link works if you want to keep the details private but if you need help I will try to give it... ++Lar: t/c 04:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- What is going on ? This is getting me concerned. Again, I do apologise if I'm in error. Martial Law 05:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- It's fine, Lar and ML, nothing serious at all. Bunchofgrapes knows what "help me" means, he's heard it before, and surely understands the concerns of discretion that make me a bit enigmatic . I expect he's simply too busy rolling on the floor laughing out loud. Bishonen | talk 06:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC).
- Damn, Bish, we need a copy of the code book, unless you wanna scare us to death next time :) (and wb by the way - and thank you, you know why!) Hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 06:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- /Bishzilla picks up the little Phaedriel and smells her experimentally, looks pleased. Bishonen | talk 06:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC).
- Ahem. There is to be NO smelling of my (co)nominee here. You wanna sniff an admin? Go sniff one of your OWN nominees. I do not care HOW good you think she smells. Thank you. ++Lar: t/c 06:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I really can't be held held responsible for what that scary dinosaur does, even if I do turn into her from time to time. Bishonen | talk 07:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC).