Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:39, 14 May 2016

User:Chetblong/bar

Archives

Archive 1 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 Long Inactive Period October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 June 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 October 2014 December 2014 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016

This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Need your attention

Hi, I noticed that you placed a restriction in the article about Gustavo Petro. Please take a look to this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Gustavo_Petro&diff=718934398&oldid=718916818

And then please take a look to this link (which is cited in the deleted section): https://projects.icij.org/panama-papers/power-players/?lang=en#39

What can you do to stop this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.166.144.83 (talk) 22:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet

Please also block https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Cezaroanyad, which has a similar name with https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Cézárocskácska, confirmed sockpuppet of User:Stubes99.

Cezaroanyad edited a talk page comment made by Cézárocskácska yesterday, so it should be blocked per WP:DUCK. Thanks in advance for your help 86.126.46.47 (talk)

Guy Macon is still hounding me.

Hi, can you please do something about him? I made an edit to some page and lo and behold he shows up, and then he even edits my own talk page. I thought we weren't going to follow or comment on talk pages? Sir Joseph 00:34, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

• Sorry, but I don't really see it--you and others have been discussing stuff there for over a week, haven't you? Drmies (talk) 00:40, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
  • We have and then Guy Macon shows up and then he stalks my talk page as well to warn me for a supposed personal attack. It's one thing to find two people on the same page but he is not supposed to be stalking my talk page and certainly not putting stupid warnings on there. Sir Joseph 00:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
    • I think Sir Joseph is talking about here and here where Sir Joseph edits an article neither have ever touched before and a few hours later Guy Macon shows up. Although, to be fair, Sir Joseph clearly followed Guy Macon here when he says "Is Sanders a religious Jew?" in Guy Macon's edit summary. To be clear, though, Sir Joseph's action was 3 months ago and Guy Macon's was yesterday.--v/r - TP 00:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
      • TParis, I did not follow him to Sanders article. In addition, I find his labeling of his ANI action against me, "Sir Joseph Again" extremely unfair. His editing style really does chase people away. His constant use of "goto 10" and labeling anyone who disagrees with his posts as troublemakers and "need to drop the stick" is wrong. I am Jewish, I don't say I practice Judaism and I've never heard that in my life. What he is suggesting is indeed a separate policy for Jews that they need to be practicing Jews. But that is not how the religion works. Whatever, I just want him to stop stalking me. I don't stalk him and I don't follow him and I took him off my watchlist, he was supposed to do the same. Sir Joseph 00:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
• Wait--am I missing something? Is there an iBan? Why can't Guy Macon warn an editor of a personal attack? That's not "stalking". If the warning is incorrect, then it's incorrect, but I don't see why that warning would be against some policy or restriction. (I have no opinion on the underlying matter or the supposed offense.) Drmies (talk) 00:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
  • There's no "real" IBAN but something that was discussed on this page where we both agreed to an unoffical IBAN and taking each other's pages off our watchlist. I have done so, but apparently Guy didn't. And he clearly doesn't read evidence provided. He is still going on about Migram denying his Jewishness or not going to temple, etc. Milgram was a member of a temple, he got married in a religious ceremony, had his sons circumcised and bar mitzvahed. That is called being religiously Jewish. Are we now going to impose Christian rules on Jews? Jews do not believe that you need to be practicing to be a part of the Jewish religion. Certainly someone who has a Jewish wedding, bar mitzvah, bris, etc. is Jewish. Sir Joseph 00:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
    • Drmies - where is the personal attack? This? And I've seen other editors make much stronger personal attacks that the hordes at ANI defended as simply an intellectual argument about content. You'll have to block me 3 dozen times for every time I've quoted WP:CIR.--v/r - TP 01:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
      • TParis, save your scorn for another admin: I said explicitly I wasn't commenting on "the underlying matter or the supposed offense"... Drmies (talk) 02:33, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
        • No, damnit, I only came here to scorn you!--v/r - TP 04:54, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
          • Well, you can scorn me on ANI: I haven't been put in the stocks there in quite some time. Good to see you again--glad to know you're still as wrong as you ever were. Toodles! Coffee, thanks for hosting us! Drmies (talk) 14:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
            • I came for Coffee and Scones. Where's the scones? Who's going to scone me? --DHeyward (talk) 22:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

And as expected Coffee is now suggesting a ban on ME. This is ludicrous and needs to stop. You need to read the Milgram talk page and see how Guy and Sundayclose is acting toward me and User:Bus stop, and I wonder why I'm the one Coffee decides has no good edits to my name. (as he wrote on Bishonen's wall.) Sir Joseph 18:27, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

• is being called dimwitted a violation of NPA? "... that you are too dimwitted to tell the ..." Sir Joseph 20:09, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Redundancy within leads

Hi Coffee, I hope you're well and not overly frustrated by the Trump lead. I just want to mention that my understanding is the lead can repeat stuff that's in the body of an article in order to summarize the body. And likewise, the opening paragraph of the lead can repeat stuff that's later in the lead in order to summarize the whole lead. Preferably, any redundancies within the lead will at least use different phrasing so they won't sound like a broken record. For example, you'll see that lots of stuff in the opening paragraph of the lead of Hillary Clinton is repeated later in the lead of that BLP (and repeated again in the body of that BLP)....which is fine. Any objections? Cheers.😌Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:28, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant: I had thought people were repeating it since they hadn't seen the original mention. But, if there's actually legitimate reasons for repeating some of the info, then I of course have no issues with it being done. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 18:40, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Anything in the lead is supposed to be mentioned elsewhere in the article. That is the purpose of the lead. I wouldn't include it just because it's not encyclopedic. It's newsworthy but until he's the nominee this is just trivia or news. Sir Joseph 18:41, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm aware of that stipulation, just not with repeating things in the lede that are already in the lede. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 18:44, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I don't know about the other editors, but I was aware of the repetition when I added several words to the end of the lead. At some point, it may be useful for me to do something like that again, I dunno. The Trump lead (after the opening paragraph) is chronological, so the most recent thing should be at the end, even if it's also in the opening paragraph. Anyhow, it's been nice to visit your user talk page, and thanks for helping out with these turbulent election BLP's.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:53, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Pi

Looks like you've got it, go ahead and take whatever action you want. Thanks, Nakon 06:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. He is very ugly..--Takahiro4 (talk) 10:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Respectfully, @Coffee, it's clear that Takahiro4 was acting disruptively, and I would ask that you look into it more carefully. He was well over 3RR at the article in question, having been reverted by no less than four distinct editors. Do RFPP administrators not even bother to check edit histories and count reverts? After all the vicious name-calling, and wholesale removal of large portions of a featured article, I find myself wondering why it is that the obvious pointy disruptive editor is not blocked, and the article is protected? The article was actively undergoing expansion, and I find it very unhelpful that we are now in this situation due to a single disruptive editor. That is the definition of disruption, which your administrative action appears to have facilitated rather than mitigated. Sławomir
Biały 11:43, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Potato chips

Hi, I noticed that you blocked Potato Chips from being edited by IP users, in what, I imagine, is an attempt to get me to cease editing. Here's the thing, I've repeatedly brought the topic up on the talk page, I've begged users to respond on the talk page, and I'm just restoring content to how it was before it was changed by someone with a British POV-pushing agenda. Please, if you're going to block the page from editing, at least put something addressing these issues on the talk page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 23:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

AIV

Can you take care of this user please? Thanks. 2601:1C0:4901:2191:E9DA:93F6:7B43:7E67 (talk) 03:41, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Ccffxjdksejejecmkfkdkdkopoopypantsididicicifoofofofodododooeoeoepepepeppepeppoooooooo (talk · contribs)

Got 'em, thanks! — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 03:43, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Repeat vandal

Hi, the anonymous user with the IP address 207.237.147.171, who you have blocked twice previously, has again added false information to the AB Logic page (reverted by me), and the Rhythm Is a Dancer page (reverted by another user) recently. It appears that this person may also be the anonymous user 184.153.18.12, as the same information has been added to the AB Logic article by this IP address in January 2016. Anonymous users with these IP addresses have a history of vandalising pages and being blocked. Would you mind taking a look at this?Nqr9 (talk) 02:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Trump

You recently added a warning to the Donald Trump article that 1RR now applies there. I had been considering trying to bring that high-profile BLP up to "good article" status, and then maybe up to "featured article" status, but that will apparently be impossible as a practical matter if I'm limited to 1RR. Right now, for example, I feel helpless to do anything about a long series of edits that are making the article much worse, since my last revert was less than 24 hours ago. Any advice from you would be appreciated.Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant: I understand your frustration but I refrain from becoming involved in content disputes (which this is). I hope you are aware that this decision was made to prevent disruption on one of the most viewed articles this year, and is not intended to inflict any more work on editors than required for such biographies. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 05:52, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the reply. I will keep at it, and see how it goes. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 06:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Am I allowed to report 1RR violations, and if so where do I report them? If I'm subject to 1RR, then I would like other editors to be as well.Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Anythingyouwant: Feel free to contact me here, or, if I'm not available, make a report at WP:AE. For now I've blocked the user in question for failure to gain the required consensus before making those edits (I wasn't able to find the 1RR violation, but if you can give me some diffs that would be helpful). — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 16:39, 14 May 2016 (UTC)