This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk | contribs) at 20:15, 13 December 2010 (→Question regarding your response: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:15, 13 December 2010 by Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk | contribs) (→Question regarding your response: re)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archives |
---|
Note: If you leave a message here I will most often respond here
User:Bertport
Hi, Future Perfect at Sunrise. Since you blocked twice my access to English wiki, I have no choice but contact you anonymously. Firstly, I want to express my deepest regret and disaffection for the two blockages. How could people jump to a judgement only by listening to one side's words? Don't you know the villain always sues his victim before he himself is prosecuted. It's User:Bertport who made the very first revert at 00:19, 19 February 2010 while I, mainly with User:Clemensmarabu, had been contributing days to the article Tibet. I never see he does any constructive edit but only undoes others' contributions or stealthily stuffs his biased words.
I waited one week to finally edit the article, if you please have a look at what content is restored , you'll tell at once good from bad. Both sides' opinions are presented and historical events are scholarly argued, thus I wonder where come from the courage of Bertport to revert such an edit and his boldness to accuse others anticipately. Regards. -- LaGrandefr
Watch out
See this. Not another interest party flood. Just a heads up ;) Michi
Talkback
Hello, Future Perfect at Sunrise. You have new messages at Jéské Couriano's talk page.You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Could you "semi-protect" the Istanbul article for the time being from anonymous users. It is constantly attacked and vandalized. I have never seen such constant onslaught on a city article.
Could you "semi-protect" the Istanbul article for the time being from anonymous users. It is constantly attacked and vandalized. I have checked the history of editions and I have never seen such constant referenceless changes and attacks on a city article in Misplaced Pages, I have never seen such constant onslaught on a city article, not even hotly contested Jerusalem comes close! Any contribution one makes is either changed with no explanation or erased altogether.
Even the climate section I (currently) last edited, has been previously constantly changed with no reason and attacked. Even this section seems to be a "hot political issue"!
I am a new user orginally from Turkish Misplaced Pages and try to base the editions I make on credible sources.
Thank you if you could protect this articles for more well meaning users for a while.
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure
You are invited to participate in the Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/2010 ArbCom election voting procedure which is expected to close in a little over a week. If you have received this message, it is because it appears that you participated in the 2009 AC RfC, and your contributions indicate that you are currently active on Misplaced Pages. Ncmvocalist (talk) 26 October 2010 (UTC)
User:Tenmei
I deleted File:Yeonpyeong_smoke_Nov2010.jpg because Tenmei uploaded over the original file, what appeared to be another version of the AP photograph, which he had taken from some blog or other, and he licensed it as PD (so the deletion was for bad license rather than bad FUR). I didn't get time to put that info in the deletion discussion before AnomieBot archived it. I have not blocked him...yet, but if he uploads any more non-free images with ridiculous FURs I might, and if he uploads that image again, I will. He can spend the time reading our image policies. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- Nothing to do with my participation in our Misplaced Pages project justifies ridicule. "Ridiculous" is word with meaning. --Tenmei (talk) 18:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Helpful vs unhelpful
Re: Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2010 December 4
Please see comment here --Tenmei (talk) 18:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Please see edit summary here --Tenmei (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Please see diff here. --Tenmei (talk) 06:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Barts1a
Thank you for using a trout on this guy. It was only last week that this guy mistakenly believed that an article I wrote was not notable for inclusion because all of its references were of Japanese origin.
I honestly don't know why I bother leaving messages on the talk pages of IP addresses at times. I've only received a response once, and that's because they both have accounts but don't edit logged in all the time. The IP that Barts1a removed my warnings to has continued the disruptive editing, and aside from protecting the article (which won't happen because it has been consistently perceived as a conflict dispute rather than a user adding in false information), I don't know hwo to get these edits to stop. It does not require a talk page discussion, because obviously the IP doesn't know that the talk pages exist.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:14, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Your Wisdom has been Noted
I just wanted to let you know that one of your comments has been included (and attributed to you) as part of my Nuggets of Wiki Wisdom . Thanks, and if you object then let me know :o) Redthoreau -- (talk) 07:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Dale Robertson pic
A standing ovation to you on your close of Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2010 November 25#File:Dale Robertson Racist Sign.jpg. It addressed all the arguments beautifully, though I'd almost put money on it ending up at Deletion Review within the next week. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Second request
I see my first request to have a sanction lifted has been archived. I would like to request again that the sanction on me here be lifted. If this is something you don't have the time or inclination to deal with please let me know. Thanks very much for your consideration.(olive (talk) 23:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC))
- Sorry for not answering sooner. I wanted to see what happened with the AE request. I still have some reservations about the kind of editing atmosphere I am seeing on those pages, but since apparently some of the other editors feel that your participation has been significantly better than that of some others, and now that ESL has been excluded for a while, I guess we can give it a try . Needless to say, I would still recommend being very careful about reverting. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:35, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
What's wrong with this picture?
Hi,
I fail to understand why you have repeatedly removed an image from 2010 Nobel Peace Prize which was being used on grounds of 'historically significant fair use'. I would have agreed to its removal had there been BLP issues, but the article is not a bio, and there are no GFDL images available.. I believe that the image of the ceremony falls within that category of use, and that absence of same is detrimental to the article. --Ohconfucius 04:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I only removed that image once so far, but I stand by my assessment. It has nothing at all to do with BLP, but with WP:NFCC. It is purely decorative, not itself the object of sourced discussion, and not needed for understanding the article; hence, it fails NFCC#8. It also lacks a meaningful fair-use rationale. "Of historical record" is not a meaningful criterion in NFC issues. I'll leave it open for the moment to what extent the BBC counts as a commercial news agency in the sense of WP:CSD F7 (do they make money by re-licensing their images to others?) In that case, using the image would be totally and immediately out, and subject to immediate speedy deletion. For now, I'll take it to FFD. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:35, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Please check article about Ukrainians
Sorry for any inconvenience, but please check the work of several users when it comes to a site about Ukrainians and Ukrainian culture in general. Results of several users are evident example of intolerance towards Ukrainians and their culture. Users do not use facts and sources and they also deliberately deleted relevant sources. I think that such work is a shame for Misplaced Pages. Administrators should particularly pay attention on hidden fascism of several users with completly antiukrainian sentiment and their usles interpretations. History of Russia and Ukraine is specialy not objectiv. Incompetent users often delete all traces of the existence of Ukrainians in Russian history and often does not allow others to engage in the work of the development of Misplaced Pages. I believe in honest and professional work but when I read articles about Ukrainians I realy dont see it. I hope you'll make an exception and help to remove abusers of Misplaced Pages when it comes to the articles about Ukrainians. Best regards! --SeikoEn (talk) 12:48, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
AE query
I see you have posted recently as an admin at AE. Perhaps you could have a look at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Delicious_carbuncle? Jayen466 (talk · contribs) (who previously has a history of making almost his entire evidence presentation in the Scientology arbcom case be an attack against me) is attempting to use my report against Delicious carbuncle (talk · contribs) as a desperate tactic to railroad in yet another irrelevant attack against me. Thoughts? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 15:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Question regarding your response
In response to a personal appeal by Cirt you show up to AE, and impose this on Carbuncle? It seems highly inapporpriate to me. Not just because it was in response to Cirt's request just above, but because your remedy is beyond draconian. How can you ban an editor from reporting what they think is user misconduct regarding another editor? Any false reports, instances of hounding and harassment, or disruptive complaints can be dealt with as they come. I also fail to see how this is an "interaction ban" at all, as you claim, since it aims at only one of the two editors. Would you mind letting an uninvolved admin, who was not lobbied specifically to go to AE come up with the remedy. Thanks.Griswaldo (talk) 20:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't specifically go there because Cirt contacted me – I was well aware of the request before, and had commented as an admin on a related ANI thread previously. I am as uninvolved as can be. And I don't find this overly draconian at all – as I showed in my posting, there is quite substantial evidence that D.c. deliberately set up the conflict over this article in bad faith, in order to "get" Cirt. Given the extensive history of prior hounding, what I'm doing now is just what you say: "false reports, instances of hounding and harassment, or disruptive complaints can be dealt with as they come". We've had enough of them coming forward, now they are stopped. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I have to agree, you are not clear cut case of WP:INVOLVED but previously commenting on the ANI thread and imposing a sanction after this posting does seem to mean you more involved than not The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 20:12, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- Shrug. Admins take part in process discussions prior to imposing sanctions in related AE threads all the time. And as for Cirt's posting above, I swear, by my honour, I didn't even read it – other than glancing over the first few words to see what it was about. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
- I have to agree, you are not clear cut case of WP:INVOLVED but previously commenting on the ANI thread and imposing a sanction after this posting does seem to mean you more involved than not The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 20:12, 13 December 2010 (UTC)