User talk:Ched/Archive 27

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

←

Archive 25

Happy 2013 to all

Starting the new year. — Ched : ? 20:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in 3D

Great movie, loved it. There's some irony here that is not lost on me. :-) — Ched : ? 05:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Horses

Hey Ched, responded to your question here. Basically, I can't find anything. :( — Huntster (t @ c) 12:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

An invitation for you!


	Hello, Ched. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 03:08, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

RFA comments

Fair enough, sometimes a gut feeling can exist but cannot be put into words. I just found it strange that you converted this unease into a support !vote. Giant Snowman 12:26, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for expanding, makes more sense now. Giant Snowman 09:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Flower

Hi, Ched. A flower for you.[1] Bishonen | talk 15:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC).

<honestly and literally "LOL">. Curses, foiled again. Done in and exposed as an uneducated, dim-witted ignoramus owing to my use of gutter slang. Nice catch Bish. :) — Ched : ? 15:52, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I liked the first in the list of slang terms with the same meaning: "404". Haha. "Definitions include: missing or misplaced." Good nerdy joke for Darwinfish. Bishonen | talk 17:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC).

Brown

William Robinson Brown is officially up for FA. Just an FYI. Montanabw^(talk) 00:43, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh my. I had only gotten through about half of that. I do have a text file somewhere on the article. I'll try to catch back up soon ... best of luck with it. Let me know if you want me to email you my text file when I find it. — Ched : ? 21:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, but maybe compare to current version too, some stuff might have been fixed. Montanabw^(talk) 00:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

unfortunate comment removal

I'm sure it wasn't your intention, but you should probably correct this removal. Frietjes (talk) 16:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm ... OK, that's a bit off. I'll see what I can do to fix it, and check with PS to make sure I got it back the way he intended. TY very much. Not sure how I managed to mangle that so badly, but obviously I did. BRB. — Ched : ? 16:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

OK - have a gander. I also dropped a note with Plasticspork to make sure I have his original intent restored. — Ched : ? 16:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

NASCAR images

Hey. It's possible that a couple of those pictures may be significant (there are a few stragglers in the copyright investigation that I didn't nominate since I can understand why they were added), but I tried to be safe and nominate the ones that I didn't feel were helpful. For example, the file File:1952Southern500WinningDriver.PNG simply shows us that this certain car, #14, crossed the finish line. I don't really see what makes that necessary as a nonfree image. For another example, File:1969National500.jpg shows several cars making a turn on the racetrack, that's it. Again, I don't see how that helps the reader at all. To provide an example of one I skipped over, I entirely see the significance of File:FireballRobertsAccident1964World600.PNG in the NASCAR world and have no intention of nominating that. I learn on the strict side of non-free use, but at the same time having an image just to have one doesn't sit all that well with me if it isn't free. Wizardman 04:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

As an addendum, the line between valid and invalid use of a non-free image always has been and always will be tenuous here, so if there's a valid argument to keep them then that's fine, it's just that in this case the images don't pass the "eye test" where I can clearly see what would make it significant to have. (FWIW, now that I re-look at the images again, the 1986 Firecracker one may be ok, but I would feel much better about it if the rationale for it was beefed up; how significant was the slide for that race?) Wizardman 04:21, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Sorry buddy, Ched, that I had to go against ya on the most of those images. They look purely decorative to me and feel that the images stretched fair use too thin. I have taken mental notes (without watching / stalking) of the uploader's contributions for a while. Royal broil 05:56, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

But .. but ... but - I like them :-). Yea - I knew going in I was on thin ice with that, and even mentioned the guys problematic uploads in my orig. "keep". And yes, I also confessed to the "fanboy" mentality when it comes to all things Stock Car Racing/NASCAR related. I suppose it's really me who owes the apology then. Ya know, and I think RB as a fellow fan and photographer of the sport will understand this too, there's a certain intangible factor at times to some of these things. I can look at a picture, and almost smell the aroma of burned rubber and racing fuel in the air, almost feel the excitement of that moment captured in time. As Wiz mentions, .. there may be one or two I'd try to keep, but Hey, between these deletions and with Daytona right around the corner? .. Who knows, maybe that's just the kick in the pants I need to get back to some of the old school article editing.

Thank you both for taking the time to drop a note - that really does mean a lot to me. Hope you guys have a great weekend. Cheers. — Ched : ? 13:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Precious again

Did you know that Precious for you, 18 February 2012, was my 25th PumpkinSky Prize? Proclaiming you an awesome Wikipedian (repeating, also 5 October 2009)? - I put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, still not giving up my hope for reformation in the future, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

No, I hadn't realized it was the 25th. And TY again for being such a kind, and rational person Gerda; you are a true inspiration to all who are willing to think things through. — Ched : ? 20:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Kindle

[Interested.] Editing Wikipedia from a Kindle? Wow, how do I do that? Bishonen has one! All that the silly woman uses it for is novel-reading! darwinbish ^BITE 00:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC).

Oh my gosh ... little fishey, how ya doin? I don't really know as much as I pretend to, but I promise I'll drop by to chat with ya. Your mom (?) Ms. Bish probably has much more info, but yes - those tablet things are really a thing to ponder. Maybe if we chat a bit about it then I can learn a few things. — Ched : ? 08:17, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Mom? Li'l 'shonen? Bah. Bishapod is my sockmaster. No mom! Never mind the Kindle — novels, bah — take a peek at my new sig, with contribs in the skull & crossbones! Pity it's so small, but cool unicode character, isn't it? :-) darwinbish ^BITE☠ 21:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC).

OH MY little Db, that is very impressive. Somehow I missed this yesterday, perhaps during an edit conflict or something. I'll try to do better at remembering family relationships; but that is a very impressive and intimidating sig. you're now sporting. — Ched : ? 17:16, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

RFA for Banaticus

Yes, the bit with my time zone is (was) important. Take a look at how it's constructed, it's a very technically complex bit of coding, which uses a template which I created and which I have been the sole contributor to, save for one other editor who made a cosmetic edit so that a parameter is more easily read. And that template references a second rather technically complex bit of coding which I also created. I also wrote the documentation for them. Why in the world would something like that not be relevant? Why would you disparage it? Banaticus (talk) 07:20, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

WHOOOAAAA .... WTF son? You best back your ass up boy. ~~You can take your smart assed mouth and stick it straight up your candy ass.~~ Good for you that you can write some computer code ... hate ta tell ya, but so can a ton of others. You best think things through before you come here raggin on me. — Ched : ? 07:56, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I haven't called you any names, I haven't used any sarcasm, I haven't made any derogatory statements to you. Is this how you typically respond when someone points out that you made a mistake? Banaticus (talk) 20:03, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

(TPS) It's usually not considered good form to go to the talk page of someone who opposed (or was neutral) at your unsuccessful RfA and start posting questions. That can be considered badgering by some (and may be in Ched's case, since he's normally pretty level-headed in my experience, although I'm reluctant to speak for him on that point). One thing you should understand and internalize about RfA is that people are allowed to oppose or express a neutral position for reasons THEY consider valid. Coding often isn't enough to convince people to support a bid for a position that is for life and in practice has little effective oversight. The concept of Admin here carries a great deal of baggage, and it certainly isn't for everyone. Intothat darkness 20:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) OK, I admit to being more OTT in testosterone levels as far as my initial reply. But, mistakes? What mistake would that be Banaticus? How on earth is the time zone you live in relevant to your suitability as an administrator? I saw your RfA, read through a couple hours worth of links and discussion, and took the time to type up what I considered to be helpful observations in a neutral !vote. Let me say that again .. 'NEUTRAL. I'm not sure what it was about my wording that's tripped your trigger, but I don't find your reactions to be particularly encouraging. I've written a few chunks of code in the past (years ago); Fortran, Cobol, C++, VB, etc. I've been an administrator, moderator, sysop etc on more bulletin boards, forums, websites and such than I care to remember. I even had my own domain for over 15 years, so it's not that I don't appreciate the technical skills, but rather I don't see those particular skills as a direct equation to being suitable to serving as an administrator on Wikipedia. Being able to find a misplaced comma or semi-colon does take the ability to pay attention to detail, but it shows absolutely no skill in being able to deal with the people and issues on this project. Your wording of "very technically complex bit of coding", and "I have been the sole contributor" indicate (to me) a very grave concern with WP:OWN as well.

Now, if I was overly harsh in my initial response to your post here, then I apologize. That you are confident in your abilities can be a good thing; but I'd suggest to you that your responses to your RfA show a certain lack of self-awareness. We have a few teenish to mid-20s geeks with the admin. flag around, and while in general it's a good thing, there have been more than a few times that the foot-stomping, breath holding, "I know everything" temper-tantrums have not gone well. To be more blunt, I'm not seeing an insightful maturity level here that I'd like to see in our admin. corps. Also, I never accused you of calling me names or using sarcasm. Just wanted to point that little tid-bit out too.

A RfA can be an emotionally stressful time for a person, but how they react to that will often be taken into consideration in the future. I will trust that you're doing some very good work here, and I do thank you for that. If I haven't answered your concerns here, then feel free to request some clarification. Regardless of my views in regards to your suitability for adminship, I do wish you the very best both on wiki and out there in the real world. Cheers. — Ched : ? 21:07, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, Ched. In view of your attempt to change OR's block settings, maybe you'd like to comment here? Or, I realise, maybe you'd prefer to never again touch the question with a bargepole. I apologise if I'm merely calling up disagreeable recollections. Bishonen | talk 15:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC).

(watching) OR was there from the start,just like yourself ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

TY Bish, I did notice that yesterday and was thinking on the matter. I'm not sure what I could or should say, but I will comment today. Now where did I put my thinking cap? ... — Ched : ? 17:17, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

And yep Gerda, for all the issues and problems that he had, I did, and do, appreciate what he is able to bring to the table. — Ched : ? 17:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thomas Warton and Thomas Wharton

Hi Ched. "He was a general supporter of the poetry of Thomas Gray—a fact that Johnson satirized in his parody "Hermit hoar, in solemn cell." " So this was just a coincidence, yes? Or is it wrong? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:25, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Martin. I had a friend point out that the "Thomas Warton" that we have an article on is not the same person as the "Thomas Wharton" who's mentioned in the Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard, and he offered the following book reference to support that:

from Google Books

I'll have a more complete read through of the article and see if there's something I misunderstood or was unaware of. — Ched : ? 21:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, from looking at that index it does indeed look like coincidence. There are, in fact, at least three Thomas Whartons, two of whom were Doctors. I can see no overlap in biography. Perhaps a footnote night help to avoid this trap? Cheers. (Still a little surprised that Robert L. Mack's Thomas Gray: A Life seems to have only two mentions of the Poet Laureate Thomas Warton.) Martinevans123 (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I just had this link pointed out to me as well. I see I have some reading to do in order to catch up with you guys. :) — Ched : ? 22:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Page 212 of Mack's book seems to make things clearer - Wharton, it seems, was an undergraduate friend of Gray's, from Durham, who was at Pembroke while Gray was at Peterhouse. Perhaps it would help if Wharton were described as "Gray's undergraduate friend Thomas Wharton". It seems the two remained friends for many years, although Wharton himself did not become particularly famous. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:54, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

"In the blink of an eye"

Tx. I decided a Latin name was better for consistent log-in. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Changed resolved to FYI at ANI

Hi Ched. I wanted to give you a heads up that I chnaged the "resolved" template at ANI to an "FYI" template to be more neutral. It did not appear that there was an actual resolution there and I felt the other template was more neutral. I left your message intact as you are correct, several editors (especially yourself) took great lengths to helpt the editor.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:18, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem :-) ... Thank you for the note, it's very much appreciated. — Ched : ? 20:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

reference - not that I'll be able to actually find it when I want it, but meh.

You can always find the thread (after it archives) by searching the header title under ANI Archives. Of course, I guess you do have to remember the title name. Sorry if that was an inconveniance.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Not an inconvenience in the least, in fact I learned about a template I wasn't aware of

FYI

, so all good. As long as there's Wikipedia, I'll never run out of things to learn. — Ched : ? 20:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Like--Amadscientist (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Invention Idea thanks to Ched

A pair of gloves...WikiGloves. They read your mind and will type FOR YOU. They contain a special "toggle" that will give you a slight electrical shock (low voltage, of course) whenever you break any one of the thousands of rules. WP:MoS, WP:COI, WP:BLP, WP:5 Pillars, etc, etc. (Early testing showed that this may be a problem since some editors actually enjoyed the sensation) As the number of editorial violations increase the voltage level also increases. The voltage for Edit warring and vandalism are especially intense. These gloves give new meaning to the idea that "Anyone can edit". They are still on the drawing board and the cost is currently in excess of $20000 USD. Currently we are working on implementing a "soft pad" that would allow one editor to "energize" (so to speak) another editor. The technicians are calling it "The "O'Yeah?" pad. BTW...financial backers are always welcome. ```Buster Seven Talk 22:12, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

LOL. Thanks for that Buster. Definitely a good smile getter. I have to say though .. anything or anyONE who would attempt to "read my mind", might likely go off the deep end in the attempt. It often confuses even me .. AND I LIVE THERE. Hope you're doing well buddy. Cheers. .... oh ... I'll pass along the request for financial backers. — Ched : ? 08:56, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

AN Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Crazynas^t 07:39, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the note Crazynas. Given the noise ratio at the moment, I think I'll just try to follow the bouncing ball. I've tried to help where I could, and my views aren't hard to find .. but repeating myself over and over likely wouldn't add much at this time. — Ched : ? 14:04, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

not following

Re [2]] 99%? What does your poor taste and lack of judgement have to do with topic at hand?
Seriously though, I'm not getting what you mean by
"This is beyond stupid. All right, I will not use the word "Buckwheat" -- no matter how bullshit the complaint is" seems to be quite a distance from "Battlefields" in this case ? NE Ent 11:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Naaa .. you have a damn good head on your shoulders, a keen insight, and compassion for editors as people. I consider being in agreement with you a good thing. :) ... The quote refers to your comment about "abandonment of the battleground mentality", and what I posted was a direct quote from Calton's unblock request; which indicates to me that he neither acknowledges that he did anything wrong nor that he has any intention of abandoning a WP:BATTLEFIELD approach. — Ched : ? 11:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC) It was like a teenage girl telling her parents "what-ev-er" — Ched : ? 11:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Ya thort Eye was hignoreen yer, dincha?

Hi. You have been getting better in my absence, and you was good to start with - you have found your own voice, and it comes with a lot of insight. Carry on. LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

lol LessHeard vanU (talk) 02:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Who was that masked man? File:Lone ranger.jpg ```Buster Seven Talk 08:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

LOL, Yea, I've know LHvU for a long time. I likely annoyed the ever lovin crap outta him, but he took a lot of time to help me get through some WP:RIP guidelines and practices into place. Still one of the things I'm most proud of. I also remember a time or two that he went head to head with Jimbo - and he was none too shy about it either. Good guy. Hopefully once he's done with that long vacation cruise, then he'll jump back into the game. Can't say I blame him for being away though.. been thinkin about a bit of a rest myself once a few things are put to bed. — Ched : ? 09:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Close the rest?

Hi, Please consider closing the rest of this NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 17:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look shortly. — Ched : ? 17:58, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

sigh .. quite a read. Far too much WP:IDHT, but anyway ...

Done — Ched : ? 19:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

graciasNewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

update

I'll be off-wiki for much of Monday and a good part of Tuesday. — Ched : ? 08:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Seems like a good plan/choice. Is this place crazier than usual or what? I keep waiting for the House Committee on Unwikipedian Activities to start holding meetings. Some of the language I've been seeing of late is very...uh...dramatic in a "are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party" sort of way. Is this a normal cycle or are the power struggles just becoming more visible? Sorry to whap you with questions... Intothat darkness 19:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Into, how you holding up? Yep, it thought the drama gauge was leaning a bit to the high side lately. I even asked about it. Where's Joe McCarthy when you need him huh? Maybe Jimbo should do another one of those blackout things and just give EVERYone a week off. — Ched : ? 20:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Getting more discouraged as the maturity level plummets and the "burn 'em" movement seems to gain momentum. Perhaps too many folks have decided that they OWN policy or are too heavily invested in "da rulz" or perceived norms to see what's going on. Not that I have any real claim to great perception or anything, but the passive POV pushers seem to have a much greater chance to make headway in this sort of environment. The attempts to muzzle discussion seem more strident than normal, although again I don't have the history here you do. Intothat darkness 21:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

(Lurking) IMHO, it's a combination. I always notice a bit of cabin fever on wiki this time of year (true March Madness erupts here, not on the BB court). But I also think that WP is having growing pains related to the reality that a bureaucracy of sorts is forming, except within an anarchy that runs on consensus. I've always been a fan of trying to establish something akin to a rule of law around here, but we may have to evolve past the rough justice of ~~death sentences~~ community bans and ~~stocks~~ indef blocks into something that WP:ISDEMOCRACY, properly understood (majority rule but protection of minority viewpoints. But then, I'm a dreamer. Montanabw^(talk) 21:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Quick note re: the cabin fever thing we see every year - this shooting happened just 5 minutes from home, and it turns out I had met the DJ that was killed. Sometimes it seems like the whole world is going nuts. I kinda want to scream like this drill Sargent, but there seem to be more and more Private Pyles every day. — Ched : ? 22:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Given the number of questionable people who seem to be being unblocked now, I suspect that certain "blocs" are already forming. My suspicion, Montanabw, is that the bureaucracy is already here, and has been for some time. The sort of OWN we see around "da rulz" is a clear sign of that. Rule of law is clearly needed, but there also has to be a certain awakening about roles here (Admins are one, but the overall governance structure...and yes, it is a governance structure...needs a new look). I doubt that will happen, frankly, because the emerging bureaucratic factions are simply too good at manipulating what passes for public opinion here and can also thrive in the apathy. I wonder if they realize just how off-putting this behavior is to many people who could be steady contributors...although I suspect that many of them really don't care. And that bureaucracy can also thrive in an environment that is so resistant to change in areas that need change (the role of Admin is clearly one of those areas, although Pesky's perennial drive to simply the policies is another...if the policies are both vague and numerous, it's easier to accrue bureaucratic power). But that's just me, I guess. Intothat darkness 13:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

<placeholder> - will reply when I have more time - but hey Into .. go get your adminy buttons and give us a hand. :-) — Ched : ? 15:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure I don't have enough shiny bits to even begin to make an Admin run, and like Pesky I don't think it's something that really interests me. It would just increase the personal drama level, as I'd be far more likely to whack "civil" POV types or those who use group labeling (posse or puling masses, anyone?) to further their agenda than I would someone who uses the much-feared "c" word, or the "f" word for that matter (or any other -word of that sort...although I may have used the wrong form of dash there, for which I expect to be sanctioned momentarily), which would be sure to stir up a storm of some sort of human waste product or another. Although I suppose I could start the House Committee on Un-Wikipedian Activities...;-) Intothat darkness 16:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

(watching) with buttons (Ched) or without, I just met a new one to whom you could talk, The Wikimon, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:19, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Closure

Did you just close the AN/I against DS? I couldn't even fix my message to sign it and we edit conflicted. Crtew (talk) 00:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that Crtew ... Just go ahead and edit the section like you normally would, add your sig. or whatever - then save. If anyone says anything to you - tell them to come talk to me. — Ched : ? 00:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Courtesy note

Thanks for the notification, I probably would have missed it otherwise.

If this was a topic ban instated based on enforcing an Arbitration Committee decision, there would be a log somewhere where you'd have to make a short note; but this seems to have come about as a result of this (ad hoc) ANI discussion, so the new ANI discussion describing the circumstances is documentation enough.

That is my understanding, bear in mind that I'm also a novice in the admin side of AE matters. :) --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

okies - thanks for the note too. :) — Ched : ? 01:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Greetings Noble Wikipedian....

Hi Ched, this is The Wikimon. I read through your user page and that small read me on you talk page. Two words- Respect & Respect! I really don't know how you can be such a nice guy. I had the pleasure of meeting the one person because of whom you're still on Wikipedia: Gerda Arendt who is my Wikilife mentor! And she told me about you and I thought why not make a new acquaintance... I'm a bit of a joker so check this out: will thee with the assistance of Gerda Arendt take The Wikimon and flourish in him the skills to reach thy stage of excellence... Simple: please take me under your wing and guide me to become like you guys.... Please :-)The Wikimon (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

LOL, Hi Wikimon. I don't do any formal "mentoring" or anything (just never saw the sense of following other people around), but I did add your talk page per Gerda. Most definitely you are always welcome here to ask anything - If I don't know the answer, I'll find someone who does. You seem to have a good attitude, and I'm sure you'll grow into the culture well. You'll likely hit some rough spots, everybody does; don't let it get you down and keep working away at it. Cheers and best. :-) — Ched : ? 17:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

AN/I closure

Thanks for this Ched, I admit the ending came as a nice surprise. I'd kind of given up on a good outcome but, you lose some, you win some. Cheers! Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 21:11, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

No problems - think I'm gonna have to create an "unsung hero" award just for people like you. :-) — Ched : ? 01:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

It's already on his talk page, can't you see it? NE Ent 02:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I did see the diplomacy one - very nice. — Ched : ? 02:27, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

:D

Hello Ched, Eduemoni ^↑talk↓ has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shining Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! Eduemoni ^↑talk↓ 03:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Eduemoni, that's very kind of you. — Ched : ? 03:55, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: "teh dramaz monster"

When the big guns come out, Remember to Duck and cover

When all the dick-measuring is over, and the dust has settled, remember to pay tribute to our fallen comrades who so valiantly gave their all in the name of martyrdom and principle so that we may continue to edit. We shall morn thee O' gallant knights of collateral damage. Please take a moment to lower your respective and resectful flags to half-mast. A moment of silence if you will. — Ched : ? 03:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join Wikiproject Conflict Resolution

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conflict Resolution.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the link Amad. I've talked to Steve about this before too - I'll get back to you when I have time for a more lengthy reply. — Ched : ? 13:36, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Leaving so soon?

I'm so sorry to hear that you are very frustrated over the recent ArbCom issue and have decided to hastily depart Wikipedia. I hope you will return when you are ready. Take care and best wishes, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I tried to tell everyone that they were making a HUGE mistake when they did the Law/the_undertow thing - nobody listened. But thank you for the kind thoughts. There's a lot of truly good people here - shame that "teh management" simply refuses to get a clue. — Ched : ? 06:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem, mate, and I am one of those good editors out there too. I can really understand the frustration you've been through and I hate to see really good editors or administrators leave over issues beyond their control. But as they say, an editor's got to do what an editor's got to do. :-) Best wishes, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 06:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there are plenty of folks who have no clue but are in charge. That said, I ignore the politics (and most of the people, tbh) and just focus on the articles. I know you're frustrated, but perhaps it's time to take ANI and other drama pages off the watch list and just have fun editing again. Just because you have the admin bit does not mean you must take part in the inane back and forth that occurs (I'm proof of that). — Huntster (t @ c) 07:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Would that I was as wise as you Huntster. It's not that I regret trying to make a difference, but I admit that it was a naive... perhaps even foolish effort. If I see a typo, I'll fix it. I hope you know that even if I go months without chatting with you, I will always be grateful for the example that you set. — Ched : ? 07:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

To the memory of the scuttled,
the banned, and those
who have just given up.

Does this mean I have to put you on the sad list that you started? And what about the new one to whom I recommended you as an admin I trust? (And what about me?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

If I see a typo, then I'll fix it. — Ched : ? 09:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Although we may not have conversed directly, I have admired your contributions to Talk pages.
Please do take a break, and lose the frustration that we suffer here amongst the good times — and return refreshed! –
– Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 12:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Amen --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow there, hold your horses... You're leaving??? Come on!!! Don't do that, I mean you're such a cool guy!!! But if you really want to then get back here as fast as possible because I need you to look at me develop into a good editor like you so don't bail out on me! Get your a** (sorry) back here!!! The Wikimon (talk) 13:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Take a break, my friend. Get away from those yapping little pests at your feet. ArbCom is toxic. You have been effected by the fumes. Get some fresh air and you will feel better.```Buster Seven Talk 13:07, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I find it interesting that the automatic response of many here isn't to try to fix things but rather to step away and simply hope that things get better. It should be clear by now that they WON'T get better on their own. Stepping away simply gives those who would mangle or abuse policy more time to solidify their hold on "da rulz" (and far too many with that mindset have a clear case of OWN when it comes to how things work). Things will not change on their own...at least not in a good way. Intothat darkness 13:43, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I fully agree with you, Intothat— what can you suggest to help fix things? — but sometimes to walk away to return refreshed is the only way –
– Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 13:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I've tossed out a few ideas and observations here and there, but I think at least part of it comes down to some fundamental issues. Wikipedia has outgrown (by quite a bit) its original governance model, but there is a deep reluctance on the part of established users (many of whom seem to OWN policy and related essays to a ridiculous degree) to face up to that reality. All you have to do is look at the various debates that swirl around Admin reform to see examples of that. There's also a reluctance to admit that bureaucracies DO exist here (and I use the plural with reason), but they are scattered in various enclaves and work at cross-purposes. And every time a content creator "walks away to return refreshed" (and I'm quoting you out of respect to the words, not to mock), one of those OWNing types can worm in and set up another shadow bureaucracy. Stepping back lets them stake out turf. My suggestions? One good start would be to break up the Admin toolset in recognition that the role has certainly changed as the project has grown. Another step would be to admit that the consensus model is still good, but very open to manipulation by those who OWN policy and use it to their own ends. Civil POV pushing to block things like Admin reform is, IMO, far more damaging to the climate here than someone who says fuck on occasion. Sorry for the ramble, but I think that this project is at something of a critical stage and small changes will no longer do enough to help it. Intothat darkness 14:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

That is, to my mind, an excellent analysis. This must be developed. Thank you! –
– Gareth Griffith-Jones |The Welsh Buzzard| 14:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The one thing that concerns me is that it may be too late. The shadow bureaucracies are well in place and have a great deal of experience now at slowing or halting meaningful change (or diverting it into one of the endless drama streams). A quick look at the endless Admin debates and some of the other circular drama that surfaces here should be enough to show that. There's so much OWN of policies (and essays that masquerade as policy) that I suspect some people may actually feel physical pain at this point if there's so much as a suggestion of change. Intothat darkness 16:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC) ETA We may be seeing signs of that now. Intothat darkness 16:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Wrong. Not for leaving or taking a break -- I encourage anyone who's not having fun go do something that is fun: it's supposed to be a hobby. Not for asserting this place is seriously messed up. (Ya didn't know that?) No, you're wrong if you think you haven't made a difference or made this place better / suck less. (Depending on your POV). NE Ent 20:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Confused

What was this? Does Demiurge have some sort of topic ban on mentioning Malleus that i'm not aware of? Silver seren^C 14:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm confused about this, too. Why did that comment call for an extension to indefinite? Writ Keeper (t + c) 15:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

How could a single comment mean that the block was extended? Plus, you are WP:INVOLVED after participating in the ANI thread. Awful block, in my opinion. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not willing to opine on ewhether it's a bad block or not until I hear from Ched, but he's certainly not involved just because of that ANI thread. (That is, Ched could have been considered involved with respect to that specific ANI thread--he certainly considered himself to be--but that doesn't make him involved with all issues with Demiurge.) Writ Keeper (t + c) 16:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm definitely willing to say that it was a bit of a wacky block, especially because this user just asked for his bit back recently, and now uses it in a dispute he's made comments on for a while? That's a little... I'm not sure of the correct word, maybe WP:INVOLVED? Regardless, the comment shouldn't have merited a block at all, much less from Ched. Those were a bit uncivil, sorry :) gwickwire^talk_editing 16:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Ched indicated he's pissed off. He did green-light adjustment of the action by any admin. As his action has no practical effect until the expiration date of the prior block (15:39, 16 March 2013), concur with WK that waiting for further comments from Ched at this point is best course of action. NE Ent 16:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to try making these comments again. I'd like to wait for Ched as well, for all we know he's sleeping right now, and I hate these "while the person is sleeping omg lets rag on/block/yell at them!" discussions. Ched, if you'd not mind commenting on a) Why the comment deserved an indefinite block, for what you said was WP:CLUE and b) Why you felt you weren't involved in the discussion, I'd really appreciate it. gwickwire^talk_editing 16:59, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to adjust. Personally I think wp:nothere, and wp:disrupt apply - but I'm not married to any of my actions meaning I don't wp:own anything — Ched : ? 18:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Ched, you should undo the block yourself. Whether or not the block has merit, you are clearly involved. Otherwise, you wouldn't have asked an uninvolved administrator to close the discussion. I'll likely undo it myself if you haven't in a couple of hours, but it will be much better if you do so yourself. AniMate 19:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

How is making a comment on one's talk page that it's not surprising that Malleus had sockpuppets disruptive? I also think it's not surprising. Am I not allowed to make that sort of comment? Silver seren^C 19:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

~~Actually, I see you have retired and this appears to be a last admin action/leave in a blaze of glory situation. I'll adjust the block accordingly. AniMate 20:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)~~

Seriously, that's what this was? Wow. Silver seren^C 20:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

D'oh! You attempted to change the block at the same time as I did. Thank you so much for doing that. I know things have been heated lately, so I appreciate you taking a step back and undoing the action. As I am uninvolved, I'll let my reblock stand as it lines up with the one week length a little better than yours. AniMate 20:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Silver seren, belatedly, thank you for your support here and elsewhere. However, implying that I commented on my talk page "that it's not surprising that Malleus had sockpuppets" is potentially misleading on a subject which tends to make some people rather emotional, if I can put it that way. I was genuinely surprised at the arbcom announcement, its timing and its contents. I had been aware of the Ponderevo issue for some time (certainly since this), but no-one had informed me that such an announcement was going to be made (they would have had no reason to do so). I wouldn't want any future drama (of which we might hope there would be none) to be based on a misperception rooted in a comment here. As regards the original topic of this section, I hold no grudges and it's all water under the bridge now as far as I'm concerned. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you all for your comments, discussion, consideration, and contributions to this project. — Ched : ? 20:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
- And thank you for your comments and contributions. We're very lucky to have you as a part of our community. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ched, remember The Pedro Cabal is all about rising above the fray. Do what I did, unwatchlist everything, and you'll discover that the whole rest of the encyclopedia has no idea all this idiocy is going on. In fact, it's more peaceful than normal because all the dramatists are too busy arguing. It's like making one's normal commute into the city, except at 6:00am on a Saturday morning. We have the place to ourselves. I bet we could even sneak in a change to the "no pay for admins" policy page, and no one would even notice. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand your frustration. I seriously do. But, if you give up now you leave when the project needs you the most! When adversity slaps you in the face you don't run away...you charge headlong into the fray!--Amadscientist (talk) 08:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind sentiments AMS. I'm not going to continue to repeat the same actions over and over again; and expect different results. I have a deep and abiding love for this project, so I doubt that I'd ever want to simply turn my back on it. I will continue to rethink my options, and I deeply appreciate all the venues I have to draw upon for strength. If the management had not allowed itself to be drawn into sinking to such depths lately, I'd be a bit more encouraged. Sadly it appears that they've been baited and coerced into trollish behavior themselves - but they are all we have. If they manage to pull themselves out of this quagmire, perhaps I'll consider a charge headlong into the fray!. There are some very good individuals both there, and elsewhere about the 'pedia; that fact is not lost on me. And on the original topic, I must say that I honestly find no joy in the vindication which has been put forth for my actions, but it's likely best to WP:DENY the obvious for now. There appears to be an epidemic of childlike behavior at the moment, but I can imagine that focusing on an individual ent at a picnic would be a painstakingly long process. I'll try to keep abreast of things on the project, and wish you the very best in your own endeavors. Peace — Ched : ? 08:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

The one thing about the block button, is that it is just a button - it does not come with responsibilities (the role of admin does, but the community has decided that you are capable of discharging them by the simple fact that you act in that capacity), and it is not equipped with barbs that entraps the user forever. You do not WP:OWN your blocks, and you have no duty to the community to only use the facility as they see fit. You were given the facility to block accounts because it was considered that you would do so to the best of your ability in determining and in which manner, but like many aspects of adminship access to that button is "no big deal" and other people can come to different conclusions and push it (or not) on their own cognizance. There is nothing to stop you from walking away from any block - you did what you thought was appropriate, you still consider it appropriate, and it means nothing to your sense of appropriate if someone else thinks that their summisation of the situation leads them to unblock; they are just another admin not wedded to the use of the block button, entrusted by the community to do use their judgement to the best of their ability. It really as easy as that... LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey LessHeard. I did get to read this as I was on the way out the door yesterday morning for a day of traveling. The more the concept took shape and developed while rattling around my head over the day, the more I liked it. I've always held dear the concept of wp:own, and tried to be open with the "feel free to adjust" types of things in regards to my "actions" (as well as my editing) - but I had never divorced the "buttons" from the "responsibilities", and it's something that I had never approached from that angle. As much as I try to view things from all angles, it's simply a concept that hadn't occurred to me, and admit that I'm growing very fond of that concept. Perhaps it's something an admin. gains with years of experience, and I really appreciate that nudge and insight. I could easily go on with all sorts of flattery here, but suffice to say that is is certainly one of those "words to the wise" moments that I'll be taking onboard as I move forward. TY, .. and I know I have an email to get caught up on, and will do so in the next day or so hopefully. Thank you again - it's certainly clarified the "no big deal" and provides me with a more productive use of time. (rather than the "it's only a web-site, and walking away to enjoy life" approach - although that has merits in the right place and time as well). Cheers, — Ched : ? 06:58, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Please don't

I have been a little distracted over the past week, but I do have some things I'd like to run over with you on your ideas, so would really rather this didn't happen. I'll hopefully comment on it today :) Worm^TT(talk) 11:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Premature obituaries

Love it. Thanks! — Hex (❝?!❞) 13:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

LOL ... yea, I really like that essay Hex. Good job. For the (talk page stalker) folks out there, see: Wikipedia:Imminent death of Wikipedia predicted. — Ched : ? 15:08, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:Evangp_unblock_request

Hi.

Do you not agree with my comment, that users shouldn't be unblocked unless they've shown they understand what they'd done wrong? 88.104.27.2 (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi 88. Yes, for the most part. I don't think it's a good practice to make (or try to make) people get down on all 4s and beg though. We all have our own unique view of life, and I often am not fond of the judgmental practices that our project seems to take. If something happened a year or 3 ago, I tend to put it in the past and chalk it up to experience. And that's if I even remember what happened a year or 3 ago. Is there something specific that Evangp has done recently that leads you to believe he'll be disruptive in some way if he's given another chance? — Ched : ? 20:01, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

1. In general, I don't like to see people unblocked unless they've at least shown some example of understanding why they were blocked. I'm not looking for begging; a couple of lines would do. In this case, perhaps "I won't create tiny articles with no references, and I won't call people nasty names" would be quite enough. If you have the time to look at their history, you'd probably see why I think it's worth it in this case.

2. I do have concerns about this specific one; I want to always AGF too, but the user caused a lot of work for a lot of people, and utterly disregarded many people trying to explain what they were doing wrong. In addition, a bit of 'detective work' (nothing nefarious) shows links to other websites that they appear to have disrupted. Let's not get into details about that unless we absolutely have to, but it reinforces my desire to see just a hint of recognition of their past errors before welcoming them back. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

3. It's policy to require it, as I quoted on AN. If the policy is wrong, we could change it - but when we disregard policy, I don't like it.

4. The way your comment appears on AN, saying 'support as above', looks like you're totally disregarding what I'd written directly above it. I'm sure that wasn't your intention, and you meant that you supported per all the other supports.

TLDR - it's surely not too much to ask the user to write a couple of lines showing they understand what they did wrong, and to promise not to do it again, before unblocking them. Compare that with probably hundreds of wasted man-hours spent sorting out the mess they created last time. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll have a look. — Ched : ? 20:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. And it's not all 3 years, Buttchunker (talk · contribs) was 6 months ago.88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:31, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I've left a suggestion on their talk page. I'll check back to see if there's a reply in a bit. — Ched : ? 20:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Ched; that's good of you. I sincerely hope it works out.

There's another reason behind my belief that some (even 1-liner) apology is necessary; if a user is capable of understanding a clear message about a problem and can respond, it indicates reasonable competence - and if they're incapable of understanding the request, they're not gonna be a net+. I think that helps, in cases like this where there's little evidence of it in their previous messages.

I really, sincerely applaud your AGFing in many cases - I have great respect for your adminning in general. I'm just trying to slightly push you away from the "AGF is not a suicide pact" stuff.

Also, it's not really about this specific case; my zeal comes from my general wish to 'make things better' - usually that means more AGF, but this is case it means a little less. Fine line, for sure. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 21:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Yea - I do get caught with my hand in the AGF cookie jar some times. .. thank you for the kind words 88, hey - for all I know, you may be a long standing admin., who's just not logged in at the moment. :) Have a good one. — Ched : ? 21:26, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Honestly... what is it with you admins, that think you're so fucking special? :-) 88.104.27.2 (talk) 21:31, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably something about "the shirt: :-) — Ched : ? 21:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Silly master - no need shirt to edit. — ChedZILLA 21:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

<waves a rolled-up newspaper> Silly monster! Go eat a subdivision! Intothat darkness 21:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

P, Your user-page, saying "GONE", appears to be out of date? 88.104.27.2 (talk) 22:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Yea, ... I suppose I should modify that a bit. Maybe work up a whole new one. I guess I could just say the page is gone? <shrugs> :) — ChedZILLA 22:43, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably. And BTW, sadly, that Godzilla picture on your other user page is up for deletion - there's no FOP in Japan. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 16:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm ... ty for the note. Guess I'll have to dig something else up. — Ched : ? 16:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Your signature

I notice it sometimes line-wraps in weird places. If you change

<span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;">

to

<span class="nowrap" style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;">

...that should fix it. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks 28, I'll have a go at that shortly. — Ched : ? 20:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

checking sig change. — Ched : ? 20:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you too!

Sorry I didn't thank you. You deserve it. Take care. Evangp (talk) 04:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Just messin with ya Evan .. Welcome back. :) — Ched : ? 12:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

future "helpme"

Need to find users who speak: French, Serbian and Chinese for usurp of those wiki accounts so that I can get my commons SUL. Will try to type something up this weekend. (link) WJBscribe will help as will MBianz if I get things in order. — Ched : ? 12:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding User talk:Mark Arsten#comment from Ched

Now that the case is closed per my request, and you therefore have no valid rationale whatsoever for blocking me at this point, I would like to ask how exactly you can possibly justify:

Posting a block threat in connection with that case
More importantly, posting an indefinite block threat in connection with that case
Even more importantly, doing so at another page
Most importantly, doing so at another user's talk page!

(Besides, I might as well attempt to find out whether those "I don't mind you being blunt with me" and "Feel free to chastise me" parts of the editnotice of this page are accurate or not for myself...) Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 14:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Dogmaticeclectic, I just wanted to drop a note here; I'm an admin who was totally uninvolved with your earlier ANI report, and I have no horse in this race. I've read through that report, and some of your other posts, and I think you're seriously running off the rails here. First of all: it is of no particular relevance where Ched posted his warning, as long as you read it (which you apparently have). The basis for a block is not any one thread or another, but an overall pattern of editing on your part. Basically, as many, many people have told you already, you need to learn how to collaborate with others here, and a request like this is not the way to go about it. The pattern is more than serious enough to warrant a block, since you are still showing no signs of stopping, and an indefinite one would be justified, as well. Keep in mind that it's not "infinite"; an indefinite block can be (and has been in many cases) successfully appealed. The key is you realizing what you're doing wrong. IF you do that, then your block can be released (or you can avoid a block in the first place). Clearly, you haven't yet: I would strongly recommend you take a few days away from Wikipedia altogether and think about what everyone has been trying to tell you. Writ Keeper (t + c) 15:05, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I'll defer to Writ Keeper here in the hopes that this can be resolved calmly. — Ched : ? 15:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

note for future reference. — Ched : ? 15:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Evangp

Please note that Evangp (talk · contribs), after being unblocked, has started doing exactly the same thing that led to the block - creating short articles with weak references. I've tried to explain, [3]. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Just had a real quick look as I'm on the way out - but I do see what you mean. Maybe if he put them in WP:AFC or at least a sandbox to get them fleshed out a bit more before putting into article space. I'll keep his talk page watchlisted a bit longer. TY for the note. — Ched : ? 20:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

If he could start to understand, yeah.

A lot of people tried to explain this exact same thing before... that's kinda my whole reason for querying the unblock in the first place - the time many good editors put into trying to explain the need for refs. I hope they'll get the idea. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

What he really needs is, to create the articles as drafts and get someone to check them before making them live. A year or so ago, I'd have pointed him to AFC... but now, it's so back-logged that I couldn't recommend it. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 20:25, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll try to find time to drop by and offer a hand. Email me. Stop trying to prove a point, and get back in the game. — Ched : ? 23:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:ACTRIAL - it's exactly what people like that need. If WMF ignores consensus, what's the point? 88.104.27.2 (talk) 23:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that ... but ... I'm just one person out here all by my self. I understand where you're coming from, I really do. The WMF is what it is .. Arbcom is what it is ... yes, without a doubt there are some real flaws in our project. For me the "point" is to do the very best I can on a day to day basis for THIS project. I screw-up constantly, ... but I do try my best. I'm not going to run from my past, I'm not even going to try to excuse it - I'll try to explain my thinking at the time when asked, but I'm not going to run from who I am. NO - I am not going to loose sleep over "stub articles"; I'm also not going to try to pass judgement on other editors. Yes, there are "zOMG admins" that I think are far too harsh and strict ... and there's a ton of folks that would likely say that "I" am far to "AGF - too damned nice". Somewhere in the middle is where we all meet. I've pushed the limits at times, and even smashed down on that zOMG block button when I probably shouldn't have. I try to learn from my mistakes, and move on. ... I see I have emails and other things I need to respond to, so I'll stop here. All I can say is that I wish everyone the very best. — Ched : ? 00:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I asked him to try to use better references, and he said he was trying. But he's just created this. I'm afraid he just doesn't understand what is required. 88.104.27.2 (talk) 14:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to consider myself as informally "Bish blocked" at this time; and while I do have access to my talk page, I think it would be best if I refrained from making any further comments. I will trust the community to resolve any issues at hand. — Ched : ? 14:46, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Notification of user conduct discussion

You may wish to comment on a user conduct discussion regarding Niemti, which can be found here. If you comment there you may wish to review the rules for user conduct comments first. You are receiving this message because you were previously involved in unblocking this user. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Sigh .. Really? ... Are you familiar with this policy?: But best of luck with hounding another editor off the project. You really do need to rethink your reasons for being on this project, to say it more clearly: Grow the fuck up. — Ched : ? 01:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

To clarify, yes, I am extremely familiar with the harassment policy quite clearly, and I have already moved on from the previous "wikihounding" dispute, but the RFC/U has nothing to do with that earlier dispute. But if I honestly did something to upset you, then I am deeply sorry. It was not my intention to hurt or upset anyone, nor do I really intend to wikihound or harass other users, and I don't ever want to be blocked for anything involving this matter. I do not truly intend to drive off another user off a project and I completely understand what is going on at the moment. Having been involved with Wikipedia for over 6 years, 50,000 edits, 12 good articles, and 11 featured articles, I understand all of the policies and guidelines and have been a fairly competent editor with regards to editing subjects related to music, video games and films as well as trying to help out with other work like reviewing GAs or FAs for consideration. Also, I mostly respect and understand your reasons to give Niemti a fair chance though back in August and I understand how you feel about the current situation. Once again, I must apologize if I did something to upset you or cause you any trouble. You don't have to participate in the RFC/U if you don't want to. By the way, you always do very good work as an administrator though. I just wanted to let you know about the RFC, that's all. :-) Kindest regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:45, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not upset with anyone .. and I'll reply to this tomorrow. — Ched : ? 02:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Understood. And just to clarify, the RFC/U is about Niemti's behavior. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry for being so mean to you Sjones. — Ched : ? 03:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

XD No hard feelings, lad. I always have tremendous respect for you and your fellow Wikipedians, and I have contributed to many, many articles. But I do occasionally lose my temper and step on some toes though. As I have stated above in my RFC notification, you don't have to participate in the RFC/U concerning Niemti if you don't want to, but I just wanted to bring this to your attention, since you were previously involved. Also, if you do participate, you may want to read the rules for user conduct comments beforehand. All the best, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:06, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

With all due respect ... "Rules of conduct" can take a flying leap off some building in a spiderman's suit. I'll say what I damned well please when and where I want. And if anyone doesn't like that? .. well they can kiss my royal mother fuckin ass. — Ched : ? 03:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC) ... and by the way .. I'm not real impressed with your "contributions" link .. it's deceptive. — Ched : ? 04:38, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you serious or are you just joking around with me? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Ched, I think you missed the "chill" button and pressed the one next door, the "chilli" button, by mistake - I did that once, when I meant to duck - and might have made the situation a bit less relaxed. Perhaps a little bit of a walk round the block might help? LessHeard vanU (talk) 04:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

@Sjones23; I think you might be looking for the real cool and humorous admin.... Unfortunately I am retired, so you gonna have to stick with Ched. He might be having a bad day, so perhaps letting him get his act together and starting anew might be wise? Remember, we have the rest of the future to fix the encyclopedia - so nothing need be done right now. LessHeard vanU (talk) 04:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you LHvU .. the (edit conflict) likely saved me from making things more difficult. I greatly appreciate your help. — Ched : ? 05:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I understood that the "Contributions" link was intended to be an easy way to read a user's [User contributions] list — such as if you were to click on Buzzard – in my signature here.
I love the With all due respect link, and may soon be pleased to use it myself ...
Well done!
– Gareth Griffith-Jones – The Welsh Buzzard — 21:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Post script Posted on Ched's Talk this evening, but forgot to add a sarcasm warning.

Arbitration committee noticeboard talkpage

I have removed your addition to the Arbitration committee noticeboard talkpage because its purpose is to discuss announcements made by the Arbitration committee. There are many other more suitable locations to discuss the matter you raise. I am not attempting to stifle discussion on the topic, and would encourage you to bring up the matter elsewhere; I'd also make it clearer that you are talking about Will Beback's ban, rather than just a heading 'Link' and a link to userspace. --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 16:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh really? So a discussion about an Arbcom ban appeal should not be noted on an Arbcom notice board? Yea, please do explain that line of thinking to me Alex. — Ched : ? 16:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

AD--are you joking? That's about as appropriate a place as it gets. PumpkinSky talk 16:45, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

(e/c) Try here as the general discussion page for Arbitration committee matters, including case requests, clarifications, amendments and enforcements. AC/N is for "discussion of formal announcements by the Committee, including clarification of the specifics of notices." (emphasis mine). --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 16:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, seeing how Will's ban was an AC announcement, and his unban was secret like the Spanish Inquisition, I can't think of a more appropriate place than where ched put it. PumpkinSky talk 16:50, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ched, AD seems both (a) correct, and (b) polite. What is it about his approach you don't like? As someone often guilty of editing-while-pissed-off-about-something, I can more easily recognize it in other people; you're doing that now, I think. My email works if you want. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Cheeky but you ain't leaving...

Plz remove that board from your user page... I don't care what problems you have, you're not gonna leave now... Just about a week or so ago you had decided to leave and I (just kidding) persuaded you to come back.. So plz return... Thanks and see ya soon...The Wikimon (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Wikimon .. Your note is very much appreciated. — Ched : ? 16:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

So you're back right??? See I'm like you're talisman to get back to Wikipedia.. And after what I just read from You're previous msgs, this ArbCom seems to be spewing poison onto you like crazy, so chill out and get some anti-venom!!! Btw how do you get you're funky signature??? Plz do share your secret... The Wikimon (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not very secret, see WP:CUSTOMSIG. Find one you like, and copy/modify the code (which you can see when editing). For example, Ched's is;

[[User:Ched|Ched]] : [[User_talk:Ched| ? ]]

88.104.27.2 (talk) 19:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wikimon, and thank you 88 for the help. Basically there is a section called "signature" section on your preferences page (the "User Profile" tab) where you can create a customized sig. — Ched : ? 16:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)