Revision as of 07:49, 21 August 2006 editLarry laptop (talk | contribs)5,341 edits →Leah Remini← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:09, 21 August 2006 edit undoLarry laptop (talk | contribs)5,341 edits →my edits to Coral SmithNext edit → | ||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
:::::::Go ahead. And I'll see what I can do about your other dispute as I'll be on until 03:30, most likely so that's half and hour. <font color="blue">]</font> ]/] 03:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC) | :::::::Go ahead. And I'll see what I can do about your other dispute as I'll be on until 03:30, most likely so that's half and hour. <font color="blue">]</font> ]/] 03:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
== Coral Smith == | |||
OK let's deal with your problems one by one. | |||
'''your edit summaries and edits to my Coral Smith page were out of nothing but little petty revenge because I reverted your edits to Leah Remini. You would have no reason to go visit a page that you didn't watch the show of.''' | |||
OK - this is what happened, when I interact with someone I check out their user contribution history to see what sort of material they are working on. I might then make some edits. As for me never watching the show - there is something you need to understand, many many editors work on articles about things that they have never seen or don't watch because they are trying to get the article upto the standard of an encyclopedia. I've recently been editing a lot of BSG pages - why? Because they were in a poor condition and came to my attention after my interactions with another user. | |||
'''You must have intentionally went through my history to see if there was something you could change. I'm not an idiot. Then you made those little rude comments on the edit summary pages.''' | |||
Yes as I have just explained - I did look at the edit history to see what else you had been working on. You could be correct on the edit history comments and I'll work on that. None of them are actually incorrect however. | |||
'''No one else has ever complained about that page accept you. Everyone else made good friendly contributions and then you forced your opinion in there. You didn't even watch the show as you said yourself.''' | |||
Again - that makes no different AT ALL in regards to me copyediting. I also think you should read | |||
http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:OWN which states ''You can't stop everyone in the world from editing | |||
"your" stuff, once you've posted it to Misplaced Pages. As each edit page clearly states: | |||
If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. '' | |||
'''And I told Tyrenius on you.''' | |||
OK - this is what I want you to do - get Tyrenius to read what I have put here and see what he/she thinks. I notice that when you reverted all my changes to the article, they changed it back to my last previous version - does that tell you something about the standard of the article. --] 08:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
'''He probably didn't want to help because he noticed you had vandal proof. I was like 'wat the heck' at first because he didn't even give you any warning or anything for your ridiculous and rude edit summaries like he is always doing. then I realized you had the vandalproof.''' | |||
I'm not sure what difference it makes that I have vandal-proof, it's not some magic armour that protects me from admin action. If I'm in the wrong, action needs to be taken. | |||
'''That's the only reason if anything, anybody would take your side in this matter and refrain from talking to you about your behavior and edits.''' | |||
OK, let's get down to the nub of the issue, my removal of your material. Let's take a look at some of the material I've removed. | |||
''Coral mentioned she didn't participate in the challenge after the beginning of 2005 because she found out about some proactive bitches already plotting and alliancing to to take her out. Who they were was never exactly specified, however Coral did lay into Tonya Cooley at one point about it.'' | |||
You really think that's of the standard that would appear in a encyclopedia? (I also think it's nice how you complain to me "I am christian and do not speak and behave in such a colorful, rude manner as you do." and then use the word "bitches" in an article - nice double standard you have there). | |||
''How they think their smack-talk'' | |||
Again, do you think that is of the tone and standard that should appear in an encyclopedia? I could go on and on. | |||
Am I being very blunt about this? Yes I am, I've found that on wikipedia, the softy-softy approach does not really seem to work and it's best to be polite but brutally honest with other editors. I would give you the same suggestion that was given to me when I first arrived at Misplaced Pages. Make small contributions and edits to existing articles until you get the hand of what is expected in terms of language and tone. | |||
If you still think I'm bullying you in some manner, I suggest you take it to an administrator and see what they think. | |||
--] 08:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:09, 21 August 2006
Leah Remini
I edited that material out again - so the question is why?
Your edit was:
Leah Remini recently appeared on MTV Cribs, revealing her beautiful mansion and the fact that she is just as hilarious in real life as she is on her hit show. Leah has a sort of tough gal tomboyishness about her in real life, with a hilarious wit.
Let's say I saw the same show and decided to write:
Leah Remini recently appeared on MTV Cribs, revealing her over the top and vile mansion and the fact that she is a bit of a bitch, just as she is on her hit show. Leah has a sort of slutty needy vibe about her in real life, she is also very unfunny.
Which one is correct? Both contain one fact that we can verfy and the rest is purely POV chuff.
--Charlesknight 20:26, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
You entirely missed the point I was trying to put across to you. In both examples, the only bit that we can verify is "leah Remini recent appeared on MTV Cribs", the rest is our personal viewpoint and neither have any place in a[REDACTED] article. We are not writing puff-pieces for people. I'll deal with your Coral Smith issues below. --Charlesknight 07:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Mikedk9109
The user has retired from wiki, which solves any problems. If you have any future troubles, you are welcome to report them on my talk page, but please provide precise evidence by citing diffs. To record a diff, find the edit in the edit history and copy the URL at the top of the page. Then put a square bracket either end, as in this example:
Tyrenius 20:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Archive
Please don't delete comments from your talk page as you just did. You should archive them instead. Simply cut and paste the talk into your archive page (which you can open by clicking on the link at the top of this page). Leave a note in the edit summary that this is what you have done. Tyrenius 20:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I didn't feel otherwise about the situation, but there was no need to investigate it, as the user has left wikipedia. Also, as I mentioned above, I found your response to be OK, so :). Yes, it is a general thing not to delete talk, but you can archive it, as I did before. Tyrenius 23:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
PS the edit to 'that article' is still in place. I think the reference has protected it. References are always good! Tyrenius 00:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I've archived the material you deleted. If this is not OK, let me know and I'll put it back on this page. Better that you get in touch with me if you need to, than to get yourself in trouble! Tyrenius 00:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Yep! But I don't want to be inadvertently offensive to you on your page. Tyrenius 00:13, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
You have a good attitude, so work hard, learn a lot and end up one yourself, one day... Tyrenius 00:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure it's frustrating when someone edits material you've done a lot of work on and comments about it, but I recommend you take notice of such things and work with the editor, as it will help you to improve. What you are writing would be fine for a fan site, but there's some requirements about[REDACTED] that mean it needs to be edited quite a lot. It might be easier if you made smaller edits for now to get the hang of exactly how to get it right, or, if you start an article, make it a stub with just the basic information and see how that goes, before you spend more time on it. Make sure you don't say rude things about other people, please. And enjoy your mother's birthday. Tyrenius 00:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
What sort of friend would someone be if they didn't tell you the truth, and just said you were right, even if you were getting something wrong? Would that help anyone? Tyrenius 04:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I don't know about all of that, and you've got to understand I have a lot of things to deal with, but the article does need cleaning up and written in an encyclopedic manner from the basic information you've provided. If you have a problem, then supply me with the diffs. Then I can check it out easily. Tyrenius 04:15, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't know how he's talking. I just saw the last edit. As I said more than once: supply me with the diffs!!!! Tyrenius 04:17, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
You seem to want me to do all the work. Is that right? Why don't you go into the history and supply me with the links. I am not, believe it or not, superman, and I can't do everything! Tyrenius 04:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Wiki can be dispiriting at times. One solution is to start your own website. Then you can put on whatever you want. Free ones from www.geocities.com Tyrenius 05:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I need your help
Mike's back at it again, using bad faith edit summaries. See the history of his talkpage for details. The IP is Mike's. ForestH2 t/c 00:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think were going to let the Arbcom take care of this. ForestH2 t/c 01:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry evidence deleted. He was attacking me, you can see my userpage; for examples; but the real evidence in which he reverted what I did on his talkpage had words such as "faggot" "fuck" an "ass" in them. ForestH2 t/c 02:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- No, just take a week break or something and then return. Mike was blocked for a week. I'm taking a vacation starting Wednesday so you can fill me up on what happens during my trip when I get back. ForestH2 t/c 03:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Chancy. Most likely won't be on. Can you log on at 14:30 (UTC) tommorow to talk? I'll be on then. ForestH2 t/c 03:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Just fancy a talk whenever you can. I will most likely be on all day as today. You know I've made an edit every hour since 14:00 (UTC)? ForestH2 t/c 03:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- Go ahead. And I'll see what I can do about your other dispute as I'll be on until 03:30, most likely so that's half and hour. ForestH2 t/c 03:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Coral Smith
OK let's deal with your problems one by one.
your edit summaries and edits to my Coral Smith page were out of nothing but little petty revenge because I reverted your edits to Leah Remini. You would have no reason to go visit a page that you didn't watch the show of.
OK - this is what happened, when I interact with someone I check out their user contribution history to see what sort of material they are working on. I might then make some edits. As for me never watching the show - there is something you need to understand, many many editors work on articles about things that they have never seen or don't watch because they are trying to get the article upto the standard of an encyclopedia. I've recently been editing a lot of BSG pages - why? Because they were in a poor condition and came to my attention after my interactions with another user.
You must have intentionally went through my history to see if there was something you could change. I'm not an idiot. Then you made those little rude comments on the edit summary pages.
Yes as I have just explained - I did look at the edit history to see what else you had been working on. You could be correct on the edit history comments and I'll work on that. None of them are actually incorrect however.
No one else has ever complained about that page accept you. Everyone else made good friendly contributions and then you forced your opinion in there. You didn't even watch the show as you said yourself.
Again - that makes no different AT ALL in regards to me copyediting. I also think you should read http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:OWN which states You can't stop everyone in the world from editing
"your" stuff, once you've posted it to Misplaced Pages. As each edit page clearly states:
If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it.
And I told Tyrenius on you.
OK - this is what I want you to do - get Tyrenius to read what I have put here and see what he/she thinks. I notice that when you reverted all my changes to the article, they changed it back to my last previous version - does that tell you something about the standard of the article. --Charlesknight 08:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
He probably didn't want to help because he noticed you had vandal proof. I was like 'wat the heck' at first because he didn't even give you any warning or anything for your ridiculous and rude edit summaries like he is always doing. then I realized you had the vandalproof.
I'm not sure what difference it makes that I have vandal-proof, it's not some magic armour that protects me from admin action. If I'm in the wrong, action needs to be taken.
That's the only reason if anything, anybody would take your side in this matter and refrain from talking to you about your behavior and edits.
OK, let's get down to the nub of the issue, my removal of your material. Let's take a look at some of the material I've removed.
Coral mentioned she didn't participate in the challenge after the beginning of 2005 because she found out about some proactive bitches already plotting and alliancing to to take her out. Who they were was never exactly specified, however Coral did lay into Tonya Cooley at one point about it.
You really think that's of the standard that would appear in a encyclopedia? (I also think it's nice how you complain to me "I am christian and do not speak and behave in such a colorful, rude manner as you do." and then use the word "bitches" in an article - nice double standard you have there).
How they think their smack-talk
Again, do you think that is of the tone and standard that should appear in an encyclopedia? I could go on and on.
Am I being very blunt about this? Yes I am, I've found that on wikipedia, the softy-softy approach does not really seem to work and it's best to be polite but brutally honest with other editors. I would give you the same suggestion that was given to me when I first arrived at Misplaced Pages. Make small contributions and edits to existing articles until you get the hand of what is expected in terms of language and tone.
If you still think I'm bullying you in some manner, I suggest you take it to an administrator and see what they think.