User talk:MartinRe/Sep06-Nov06

Message on my talk page

Hi,

Thanks for the reminder on how to use the cite/fact tage; actually that user was into some pretty hardcore vandalism--so much so, that he wound up getting himself a permanent ban--he was using ips to skirt the weeklong bans he was already on.

If I recall, the sections he removed actually had been sourced--he was removing sourced tagged/sections saying that he "didn't see" the sources/links. It was an obvious misguiding to distract from the real issue. I'm aware that unsourced material can be removed, but in this case it wasn't what was happening (offhand, I can't recall if this happened from this specific IP or not--I'd have to check).

Thanks again for taking time to explain, just in case :D —LactoseTI^T 01:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

In regards to your recent response--I looked at that ip's contributions and I agree I jumped the gun a bit on it. It was, though, part of the block of edits from the user who was permanently banned based on the checkuser request. The ip's might not be in the same class, but if you look at their domain name they are virtually identical (basically all the anon ips working on that article in the past few days were part of avoidance of a ban), share the same pattern of edits/style, etc. As that had drawn on for days (and did involve real vandalism instead of just content, like the ip you pointed out), I had grown frustrated and my patience, perhaps, had worn too thin. I should have stuck with just the civility tags instead (which, when they were removed, was more clearly "vandalism").

In any case, I agree with your assessment and I'll definitely watch what I tag/when a bit more closely in the future. Thank you for pointing it out--it is helpful. —LactoseTI^T 13:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll add my two cents...I've been watching the edit conflit between LactoseTI and the anonyomous editor (which appears to be sock puppets of Teaguk Warrior (TW), now one of the few with the "rare" honor of being indefinitely banned from Wikipedia.). Although neither one can convincingly prove the other was conducting vandlism, TW, contrary to LactoseTI, actually violated Wikipedia rules, including trying to delete comments from the discussion page of the article in dispute. TW's account is currently banned from Wikipedia, and deservedly so, IMO. Cla68 10:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I understand. I appreciate your efforts to resolve the issue. Cla68 17:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irish property bubble

Hi, I have come up with a few references for this article. You might want to check them out. Pathlessdesert 12:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for that, I'll have a look at them shortly, but it's unlikley to be today. Regards, MartinRe 12:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking another look! Pathlessdesert 15:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:DUST

Considering the last comment on the page was a couple months ago, I doubt this is really active at the moment. If you are interested in it, I'd recommend going to the village pump to gather some more opinions and feedback on the matter. >Radiant< 21:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

There has been discussion within that time, and it has been referred to from other places more recently. I've also given it a prod (as in poke, not WP:PROD) on the VP again. Regards, MartinRe 22:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• I'm afraid there doesn't still seem to be much community interest in your proposal; with so little participation, it seems unlikely to reach consensus. I think it would be best to tag it as an essay, since it mainly represents your view on things. >Radiant< 09:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)