Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:49, 30 April 2008 editJaakobou (talk | contribs)15,880 edits Do I have your approval?← Previous edit Revision as of 17:50, 30 April 2008 edit undoJaakobou (talk | contribs)15,880 edits Do I have your approval?Next edit →
Line 125: Line 125:
With respect, <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC) With respect, <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


* '''Extra note:''' PalestineRmemebered was repeatedly noted, warned and blocked "01:18, 29 October 2007 GRBerry (requested by mentor)" by mentors and admins for his repetitive (mis)citation of old issues. Going over some of the notes he'd recieved from past mentors, it is disturbing to find that he was told be previous mentor Kendrick that "remove the tags usually frowned upon" but one of his first edits returning to edit was without taking an active part in the discussions. <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC) * '''Extra note:''' PalestineRmemebered was repeatedly noted, warned and blocked "01:18, 29 October 2007 GRBerry (requested by mentor)" by mentors and admins for his repetitive (mis)citation of old issues. Going over some of the notes he'd recieved from past mentors, it is disturbing to find that he was told be previous mentor Kendrick that "remove the tags usually frowned upon" but one of his first edits returning to edit was without taking an active part in the discussions.
So apparently, there's already two issues addressed by previous mentors that he's returned to ignore. <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC) clarify. <b><font face="Arial" color="teal">]</font><font color="1F860E"><sup>'']''</sup></font></b> 17:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


== ]: Recent edits == == ]: Recent edits ==

Revision as of 17:50, 30 April 2008

Ryan Postlethwaite is away on vacation and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Archive

Dates:

NAS notice

Hi Ryan, I thought you'd want to know about Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Granting and revoking rollback. I just moved it out of my userspace and into the school. Acalamari 21:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Uck, look at all the policy and problems this rollback thing has caused. *Cremepuff222* 01:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

The Misplaced Pages Signpost
The Misplaced Pages Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 4, Issue 17 21 April 2008 About the Signpost

Template:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-s

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:29, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Page protection at WP:WORDS

Should be safe to undo the page protection now; see discussion here. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 14:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll give it a few more days, I know you're busy, and if you haven't had a chance to reply, I'll ask another admin to do it. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 17:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

I have ported over the first section of the WG "Dealing with disputes" page, here to the EN wiki, at Misplaced Pages:New admin school/Dispute resolution. If you have a chance, could you please take a look before I make it more public? Thanks, --Elonka 16:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you back? Mediation?

Hi, Ryan. Just curious if you are back home and editing again. I am ever to desiring to continue formal mediation between IZAK and I. Thanks so much. Bstone (talk) 14:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Fred Phelps

You denied this at RFP, but I protected before you denied the request. To be honest, all I see is IP vandalism on the history. Sure, its not exactly a torrent, but its almost all there is. -- Anonymous Dissident 08:38, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

3 or 4 edits a day is not a reason to block out all IP's from an article - this can easily be dealt with by the RC patrollers. We don't want to alienate possible new users who can't edit the page constructively. I think you should unprotect. Ryan Postlethwaite 08:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
3 or 4 edits a day isn't much. But I re-iterate—one must also the number of *positive* IP contributions to the article and weigh them against the damage the same collection of editors are relentlessly inflicting on the content. In this case, I also think a look at the subject of the article could give fair estimation to the answer of the previous. But, I suppose we could discuss the traditional fire and flames war between the approaches of "IPs contribute a good majority of our content, we should only protect in extremities" and "So many IPs vandalise, RC can't cover everything, we should protect fairly leniently" for hours. I am supposing that I am merely of the latter approach; and you prefer the former. As I noted as RFP, I am not strongly opposing your decision, nor at the same time supporting my own rigorously—if you feel the need to remove the protection, I will not mind in the slightest. -- Anonymous Dissident 08:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

What is a lot of vandalism?

You turned down my request for semi protection on Egyptian pyramids saying "there's not much vandalism considering how high profile the topic is" - that was at 08:33, 30 April 2008, about four hours after the request. The page was being further vandalized almost as you typed - heres the vandalism just since last night:

  • 07:59, 30 April 2008 124.184.9.155 (2 edits)
  • 08:44, 30 April 2008 58.107.208.121
  • 08:50, 30 April 2008 121.45.32.199 (5 edits)
  • 08:58, 30 April 2008 217.44.99.75
  • 09:02, 30 April 2008 58.179.206.160 (3 edits)
  • 14:22, 30 April 2008 64.90.250.244

The page history shows hundreds of incidents of vandalism, and almost all of it from anonymous IP's. Semi-protection would have been instant relief for any editors or bots working to remove vandalism on that page. If you will not reconsider I would at least appreciate a better explanation than "there's not much" - which just isn't true, again it was practically being vandalized as you wrote those words. You have to go back three pages just to get to the first of the month. Is that because there's so many wonderful contributions being added? Of course not, the whole list is IP vandalism and reverts, with a few nuggets here and there of real encyclopedic edits. Is there a way for me to request a second opinion? As I believe my requests absolutely fills the bill set by WP:PROT and especially WP:ROUGH Brando130 (talk) 15:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the second opinion I have posted a request for one on WP:ANI, I hope you don't take offense. Brando130 (talk) 16:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Do I have your approval?

I wouldn't bother you with this, but User:Jaakobou seems to think he has some authority in the project and I should contact you in order to be properly aprised of it. Do I have your approval to tell him to only crap in the litter-tray? After months of harrassment of people on their Talk-Pages, and a block of him, he's still doing exactly the same thing. It's particularily disturbing because this time round since his hatred and accusations are not restricted to "crack-head Arabs" but seems aimed at practicing followers of Judaism, and the testimony of victims of a pogrom (the 1929 Hebron massacre). PR 16:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Note:

  • PalestineRemembered has just recently started editing again and I've already noticed a few obvious issues and suggested he revert one of them and redefine his forced mentorship.
  • To remind, one of the reasons PR was assigned forced mentorship was improper behavior around me, more specifically, repeatedly accusing me of being a war criminal. There was also an issue of repeatedly (50+ times) making false accusations regarding my second block on Misplaced Pages, an event he not only did not participate on and misread into, but clearly didn't care for my explanations either.
  • I believe this is a good point in time to clarify to him the results of the last Arbcom and to redefine his forced mentorship.

With respect, Jaakobou 17:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Extra note: PalestineRmemebered was repeatedly noted, warned and blocked "01:18, 29 October 2007 GRBerry (requested by mentor)" by mentors and admins for his repetitive (mis)citation of old issues. Going over some of the notes he'd recieved from past mentors, it is disturbing to find that he was told be previous mentor Kendrick that "remove the tags usually frowned upon" but one of his first edits returning to edit was a removal of such a tag without taking an active part in the discussions.

So apparently, there's already two issues addressed by previous mentors that he's returned to ignore. Jaakobou 17:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC) clarify. Jaakobou 17:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Pedophile topic mentorship: Recent edits

Welcome back, Ryan, I hope your vacation went well.

I was hoping to discuss with you this edit at Misplaced Pages:Pedophile topic mentorship. It appears to me that the discussion was about the meta-issue of ArbCom taking these cases in secret at all, rather than about the specific case we were told should be discussed with ArbCom. Because of that, I don't see the applicability of the reasoning cited in your edit summary. Are there terms under which you feel that discussion could continue? --SSBohio 17:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Ryan Postlethwaite: Difference between revisions Add topic