Revision as of 01:53, 27 May 2008 editTiggerjay (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers14,626 edits yep← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:40, 23 January 2025 edit undoTiggerjay (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers14,626 edits →Stanley Green: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
⚫ | <!-- ----------------------------------------------------- --> | ||
<!-- Feel free to steal this style - it's GFDL'd! - Tiggerjay --> | |||
<!-- Click the "NEW SECTION" tab above instead of directly --> | |||
<div class="usermessage"><center>'''Today is ], ]. Tiggerjay's local time is: '''{{#time:G|-7 hours}}<span style="text-decoration:blink">:</span>{{#time:i|+0 hours}}'''</center></div> | |||
⚫ | <!-- editing the entire page --> | ||
⚫ | {{User:Tiggerjay/ |
||
<!-- ----------------------------------------------------- --> | |||
<noinclude>{{User:Tiggerjay/Icons}}<div id="coordinates" class="plainlinks">'']:'' {{Ustatus/ColourCoded|Tiggerjay}}</div> | |||
<div style="background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px solid #88a; padding: 5px; padding-top: 5px; margin-top: 6px;"> | |||
{{User:Tiggerjay/Bar}} | |||
</div> | |||
<div id="shortcut" style="border: 1px solid #CC9; margin: 0em 1em 0em 1em; text-align: center; padding:5px; clear: both; background-color: #F1F1DE"> | |||
''Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.'' | |||
</div> | |||
{{usercomment}} | |||
{{archive box| | |||
]<br /> | |||
]<br /> | |||
]<br /> | |||
]<br /> | |||
''Note: archives may be ].''<br /> | |||
}} | |||
{|style="background-color: #EEEEEE; border: 1px solid #999999; margin: 0.5em; padding: 0.5em;" | |||
|- | |||
|<center>]</center> | |||
|<font size='-2'>'''If you are here to register a complaint''' regarding my edits, before doing so please note: | |||
# This editor believes in ] | |||
# Check and make sure that your edit has a valid, reliable source | |||
# Understand that I do ''not'' want to see valid articles, content or images deleted | |||
# I disclose that I sometimes make mistakes, and you are at liberty to ] my edits. | |||
</font> | |||
|} | |||
⚫ | <!-- |
||
⚫ | <!-- |
||
<!-- --------------------------------------------------------- --> | <!-- --------------------------------------------------------- --> | ||
<!-- Please remember to add new discussions to the very bottom --> | <!-- Please remember to add new discussions to the very bottom --> | ||
<!-- --------------------------------------------------------- --> | <!-- --------------------------------------------------------- --> | ||
⚫ | {{User:Tiggerjay/Status|bgcol=#00FF00}} | ||
<div align=center>{{/Talkbox}}</div> | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config|minthreadsleft = 0|minthreadstoarchive = 1|algo = old(14d)|archive = User talk:Tiggerjay/Archives %(year)d|archivenow=<nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}</nowiki>}} | |||
<!-- --------------------------------------------------------- --> | |||
==Abusive IP User Watch== | |||
<!-- New Discussions Begin BELOW this box --> | |||
*] | |||
<!-- --------------------------------------------------------- --> | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
== ] == | |||
Hi, thank you for your edits of the GGWO article. I am now in an editting dispute with someone else and so got the page protected. As a neutral party, can you please help us through this dispute? ] (]) 20:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
* Oh my, I'm gone for the weekend and look what breaks out... I'm too busy at the moment to resolve this right now, but will look into it later today. ] (]) 18:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Thank you for your involvement with editing this page and your interest in having a consensus reached in this article so the block can be lifted and the article to be brought to some sort of consensus. I was brought in by a request on the Christianity Project page to have someone review the article. I have ''absolutely no former knowledge of GGWO'', nor any particular bias. All I can tell you it in its current state, it looks like an absolute disaster (both the article, and the organization as a whole). My hopes is to help bring the interested editors to the table on the talk page to resolve the conflicts and have the page properly created/edited. Please take a moment to go over to the ] and review my most recent postings. Also do no be alarmed as your earlier comments/posts were refactored and archived (there is a link available on the page to the archive). My post is only one of several which will hopefully help guide this page towards something everybody can agree is appropriate. ] (]) 00:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
:I wish you the best of luck regarding this page. I cannot be part of any effort that abuses the ideas of developing a good article to the point of trashing peoples edits. While I strongly disagree with those who have edits for GGWO I would not simply undo their work or remove their work which has been done so many times I cannot count. It is as though we have admins supporting the efforts of vandals. Again I think that regardless of the opinion editors should try at best to respect the work of others. I have done so. But that appears to be unacceptable by my peers. | |||
:To which I say this article will either be useless or a promotion of GGWO. | |||
== January 2025 == | |||
:] (]) 01:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
{{cot|Accusiations from a disruptive user who was boomeranged at ANI}} | |||
Please do not post anymore on my talk page at all, even after January 20, even after the consensus is determined on ]. I asked you yesterday, today you choice to discuss Deb Hutton on there, instead of using the article's talk page. I asked you again today, and you made a reply again despite being clearly aware of the request. Thank you! ] (]) 06:09, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:@] you are absolutely welcome to post here at any time. As far as “your talk page” I will engage on their pursuant to the policies of Misplaced Pages. As such, you have been notified ('''''as required by policy)''''' on the AfD nom for this article, and all discussion regarding this article can be handled there. ] ] 06:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
== dude - i just corrected a spelling mistake exlusively = exclusively. == | |||
:@] with regards to your request for your talk page to not be used by me, your rights of ] is not available as a means to avoid notification of disruptive behavior -- see ] and ]. You were also warned that it was a . When I chose to bring Hutton to your page it was properly disclosed , and I of course responded to your question ({{tq|Please share why...}}) which you cannot ''claim'' now you're were not wanting me to answer ''on your talk page''. The only final edit was, again, a NOBAN compliant AfD notice. You have zero rights to complain that violates your control over a page you down even own (see ]). It is also just a bit ironic that you feel that you can ban people from being contentious items to your talk page, but feel it is completely acceptable to do the opposite. ] ] 21:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I do not like the tone your communication has taken with me. I feel like many of your communications have a condescending tone and your complaining about the same actions over and over again is unproductive. On AfD, you have chosen to raise my ANI notices, January 2025 section on my talk page and notices on BLPN despite them having no baring on whether Deb Hutton should be deleted. It should not have been brought up. It was very possible for you to say that you were deferring to other editors without once again complaining about my past conduct. I'm going ask that you not use article discussions like AfD as places to discuss about past grievances against me. Thanks! ] (]) 19:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
''Welcome to Misplaced Pages. The recent edit you made to White Paper of 1939 has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Tiggerjay (talk) 06:34, 26 May 2008 (UTC)'' | |||
: I replied on your talk page. ] (]) 06:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
:I cannot control how you ''feel'' when I'm simply explaining why I am not going to further respond to your ] the AfD process. I provided the rational by stating that your {{tq|approach to handling contentious issues does not work towards consensus building}} (i.e. ]), and supported it with evidence, thus to not be seen as casting ]. If you don't like what the evidence points towards, then you should be more concerned with correcting your behavior instead of attempting to complaining about the fact that is has been brought up. Moreover, things like attempting to presented; of course you have the absolute right to per ], but would proffer that it does not reflect positivity when such as post was referenced in a project discussion. Oddly enough the single referenced article that has specifically to do with the AfD in question is the conversation you deleted. | |||
== Consistency of style == | |||
:I also hope you find it incredibly ironic that you feel like you can have talk page discussions about editors behavior on their talk page, but do not accept the same actions on your own? Again, another example of ''failing to get the point on how consensus building works''. ] ] 20:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
{{cob}} | |||
== Thread moved to ANI == | |||
You have reverted my correction to ] because you claim it was not constructive. I beg to differ. The dates have no consistency of style. The styles appear are May 17, 17 May, and May 17th. I made them consistent. Constructive? I think so. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 07:34, 26 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Feel free to make this article consistant any way you like, but please be sure to use an ]. Thanks. ] (]) 07:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
] There is currently a discussion at ] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> This thread was previously at the help desk. ] (]) 17:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
I have now signed on using my user name. | |||
:Thanks for bringing that over to ANI, and hopefully they have become more aware of the disruption they have caused. Cheers! ] ] 18:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Your revert of my Vine correction resulted in a factual error being reinstated. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 07:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Yes, but you still need to remember to sign your posts using <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. Also you are welcome to revert my revert. See ] --- as stated at the top of my talk page. ] (]) 07:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Dodgers== | |||
Calling the placement of accurate tags on pages unconstructive is your own opinion, and while it is fine that you have that opinion, it is not ok that you attempt to implement your opinions as Wiki policy.--<small>]]</span></span></small> 01:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
:What I assume you're talking about is . What I noticed while performing ] is the math formula template/test. What I did not notice was your <nowiki>{{OR}}</nowiki> tag. ] (]) 01:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Stanley Green== | |||
== your reversion == | |||
Why on earth have you relisted ] when there's a clear consensus? The page is listed to be TFA next week, and the banner at the top of the article would have been removed with the closure of the discussion. We can't have an article on the MP which has a banner plastered over the top. - ] (]) 07:43, 23 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
:First regarding the TFA, the 7 days would ''expire'' prior to TFA if my math is correct, plus a ''relisting doesn’t mandate a full seven days'', and can be closed at any time, including right now, especially since after the relisting it appears that the nom is effectively withdrawing the RM. As for why relist, it is determined because while there was consensus against the RM as proposed, dispute apparent bludgeoning, there was still talks about possible alternative moves. When there are length discussions that are still ongoing, as recent as 12 hours before the relist, it makes sense to relist versus close. ] ] 14:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
Why did you make the reversion above and then warn the previous editor for vandalism?--] (]) 01:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC) | |||
: |
::@] -- I hope that helped answer your question. Also note that given the nom's effective withdrawal, I have gone ahead and closed it given your TFA concerns. ] ] 20:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:40, 23 January 2025
Tiggerjay is busy traveling, but has returned from an extended wiki-break. |
|
|
January 2025
Accusiations from a disruptive user who was boomeranged at ANI |
---|
Please do not post anymore on my talk page at all, even after January 20, even after the consensus is determined on Deb Hutton. I asked you yesterday, today you choice to discuss Deb Hutton on there, instead of using the article's talk page. I asked you again today, and you made a reply again despite being clearly aware of the request. Thank you! Legend of 14 (talk) 06:09, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I do not like the tone your communication has taken with me. I feel like many of your communications have a condescending tone and your complaining about the same actions over and over again is unproductive. On AfD, you have chosen to raise my ANI notices, January 2025 section on my talk page and notices on BLPN despite them having no baring on whether Deb Hutton should be deleted. It should not have been brought up. It was very possible for you to say that you were deferring to other editors without once again complaining about my past conduct. I'm going ask that you not use article discussions like AfD as places to discuss about past grievances against me. Thanks! Legend of 14 (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
|
Thread moved to ANI
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. This thread was previously at the help desk. Departure– (talk) 17:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing that over to ANI, and hopefully they have become more aware of the disruption they have caused. Cheers! TiggerJay (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Stanley Green
Why on earth have you relisted this discussion when there's a clear consensus? The page is listed to be TFA next week, and the banner at the top of the article would have been removed with the closure of the discussion. We can't have an article on the MP which has a banner plastered over the top. - SchroCat (talk) 07:43, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- First regarding the TFA, the 7 days would expire prior to TFA if my math is correct, plus a relisting doesn’t mandate a full seven days, and can be closed at any time, including right now, especially since after the relisting it appears that the nom is effectively withdrawing the RM. As for why relist, it is determined because while there was consensus against the RM as proposed, dispute apparent bludgeoning, there was still talks about possible alternative moves. When there are length discussions that are still ongoing, as recent as 12 hours before the relist, it makes sense to relist versus close. TiggerJay (talk) 14:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- @SchroCat -- I hope that helped answer your question. Also note that given the nom's effective withdrawal, I have gone ahead and closed it given your TFA concerns. TiggerJay (talk) 20:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC)