User talk:Gamaliel/Archive 27

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20 ← Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27

A favour perhaps?

Might you look at the edit summary at [1] which I fear I find quite a tad less than collegial? I found the article sans references and added two New York Times sources - so I fear the obvious umbrage at actually adding cites to an article which had none at all - and complaining as though I had done some sort of heinous act in so doing - seems to me to be quite over the top. Many thanks. Collect (talk) 06:44, 5 February 2016 (UTC) His previous "correction" of my first reference also has a slightly snarky edit summary, in my opinion. [2]. As I found the article as being just marked as lacking any references whatsoever, I would have hoped editors would regard adding them as an improvement. Sigh. Collect (talk) 06:48, 5 February 2016 (UTC) [3] then follows me, repeats the same attack that my use of the NYT was "OR" and that I misstated what was in that article in simple English. I find such use of following a specific editor just in order to make edit summaries accusing an editor of misuse of a source and putting in unsourced material to be an eensy bit uncivil and uncollegial, and the accusations in the edit summary are actually and blatantly made just as an attack as I made no such "OR" when I actually dared give an actual RS source to an entirely unsourced section. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Collect The edit summaries are a bit brusque, but I don't think they cross a line. I think they best solution is to open a talk page discussion if you disagree with the changes. If the other editor continues in a tone which you consider uncivil I'll take a look. Gamaliel (talk) 03:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
I have never "followed" that editor, and the aim of the "charges" is clearly to bolster his "following" of me (I have scrupulously avoided any interaction with him at all). If one used the editor interaction tool one can easily confirm his continued snark about me.
For the current instance see [4] which I think shows the problem clearly. One might note another editor there is at CCI, with some great examples of absolute and blatant plagiarism - which that editor blamed me for finding, of all things. Read also his "sound advice" section on his user page, and some of the many thinly veiled attacks over a period of some years.
When faced with any editor who makes such "charges" and who repeats them as though he were stating facts, it is usually best to have a completely disinterested party actually examine them. I had thought that adding a cite to an article which had absolutely no cites in it was generally considered a "good thing" but the accusation here makes me think that an editor who Jimbo has barred from his UT page as a troll or worse is not something one would wish to wrestle with.
[5] shows the editor specifically following me to UT:Jimbo, and his direct attacks on Jimbo (including "your own actions make a pretty good job of that: allowing your WMF servers to serve the agenda of despots like Nazarbayev and his cronies" along with walls of text), as well as Jimbo's stating that the editor is not welcome at the UT page and (quite curiously) the post by the second editor in the affair who says "Also, I would ask Jimbo Wales, 'What about Writegeist's comments was beyond the pale?" and "Is Smallbones [sic] ban of Writegeist from your page a reasonable and defensible action given the circumstances?' "
Thank you. For some odd reason I think having these two in particular attack me as often as they do is a bit of a badge of honour. Collect (talk) 09:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #195

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 21:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 February 2016

arbcom

Hello Gamaliel, 

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=bSjw
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

DZahn (WMF) (talk) 22:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 February 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #196

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 09:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #196

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 09:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorcycling/Conventions

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorcycling/Conventions. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 15

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 15, December-January 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - Ships, medical resources, plus Arabic and Farsi resources
  • #1lib1ref campaign summary and highlights
  • New branches and coordinators

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 February 2016

The Feminism Barnstar

The Feminism Barnstar The Feminism Barnstar
Because 15 fucking years and it's the profanity they get upset about. OwenBlacker (Talk) 00:56, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Sadly the language detracted completely from the message. Wrong time, wrong place for the invective. – SchroCat (talk) 20:27, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Banned?

You reverted the following comment:

Privileged white woman promotes articles about privileged white women, so progressive. Please tell us how hard you have it white woman, my blackness prevents me from understanding your suffering. Laticia Hersey (talk) 20:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

You state the user is banned. I am assuming GF on your behalf, but could you point to which banned user has made this quite reasonable comment? – SchroCat (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are asking me. The blocked user signed her own comment. Gamaliel (talk) 20:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm asking you to say who the banned user is. The account has only posted one comment, so I'm not sure how you see the user is banned. Where were they banned? – SchroCat (talk) 20:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea who Laticia Hersey is, but I can see from their block log they are blocked indefinitely. Gamaliel (talk) 20:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
So not a banned user then: a user who has been blocked, which is massively different. The block is also bollocks: there was no harassment there. – SchroCat (talk) 20:35, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
You'll have to take that up with the blocking admin. But talk pages should not be used as a forum by blocked or banned users. Gamaliel (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
The user wasn't blocked when they made the comment. And the talk thread of an op-ed page is exactly when people are going to make comments. Just because you don't like it is no excuse for deletion (or to have a the account block either). – SchroCat (talk) 20:43, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
The user was blocked for that comment and thus the comment should be immediately removed. Whether or not the block was valid is immaterial and not my concern; users trolling and edit warring in the comments section of The Signpost are directly my concern. Gamaliel (talk) 20:45, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikimedia Highlights from January 2016

Here are the highlights from the Wikimedia blog in January 2016.
About · Subscribe/unsubscribe, 20:18, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #197

Wikidata weekly summary #186

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 22:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 February 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your long piece this week. – SJ + 05:25, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Invite

You are invited...

Women's History Month worldwide online edit-a-thon

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #198

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 22:00, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

This Month in Education: [March 2016]


We apologize for an earlier distribution that mistakenly took on the older content. We hope you enjoy the newest issue of the newsletter we are sharing now.--Sailesh Patnaik (Distribution leader) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

My apologies

I mentioned you, from the handle, as Jewish. That's no offence. It's just a stupid and irrelevant inference.Nishidani (talk) 21:27, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

@Nishidani: No need to apologize, I took no offense. In fact, I view it as a compliment, I always thought I'd be Jewish if I hadn't ended up Catholic. Gamaliel (talk) 21:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I am appalled by my stupidity of making an inference from a name. My mentor who handed me on a silver-platter the chance of a very fine career (which I rejected simply because I thought my scholarship wasn't up to his standards and might turn out embarrassing his sponsorship) celebrated his bar mitzvah in his 70s. I believe he was totally skeptical of all religious claims or cultural myths. I only realized he was Jewish when I heard his colleague, until that moment a friend of mine, make a shocking anti-Semitic remark in his regard. The scholar in question later dropped me a newsy note telling me, inter alia, that he had learnt the elements of Hebrew at that late age and had memorized for the first time the requisite prayers. My impression, perhaps wrong, was that he did it for complex reasons, going back to one's roots, one more civic association for one's busy retirement years etc,, all unrelated to what we call formal religion. His wife wasn't Jewish, nor his children. This influenced my reading of Bernie Sanders. I think it was William James who said religion was what a man did in his private world, and I dislike the way people pry into it, or other aspects of one's identity, to make it a public issue. Best regards Nishidani (talk) 08:39, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Cantino Planisphere

Is this still on your watchlist? I see you've edited it in the past. Doug Weller talk 21:34, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, though I don't know much about the map beyond its connection to Florida. Gamaliel (talk) 21:35, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #199

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

The Signpost: 02 March 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The Magically Get Free Candy and Ponies Award

The Magically Get Free Candy and Ponies Award
Gamaliel, this comment was hilarious !

On a continuing lighter note, thank you for all you do chipping in with your role as co Editor-in-Chief of The Signpost.

The Wikipedia community appreciates your efforts very much!

Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 22:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Just a reminder that posting the exact same argument on tons of AfDs is not a very good method of debate

Posting the same "Keep Sources indicate that she is a well-established artist" on multiple articles related to the recent Regina Art+Feminism meet-up isn't very helpful. You should try addressing the intricacies of each article, instead of posting the same boilerplate message on every AfD. Thanks. Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying 16:34, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 March 2016

User_talk:Adam_Cuerden#WikiCup_report???

Um... what was up with this? It certainly doesn't seem to have affected the published article, nor did Kharkiv07 ever respond to the message I sent him regarding it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was busy with the other sections this week so I wasn't following editing the WikiCup section. Kharkiv07 was in charge of editing that section and I trust his judgement and whatever decisions he made. Gamaliel (talk) 22:05, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
I don't object, just think a ball got dropped before any edits got made. He said that, I replied asking if we could include a few more people than his suggested ten, and the article got published unchanged (accidentally?). Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:09, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I see now. Perhaps he ran out of time to followup? That happens at the Signpost way more often than we'd like to admit. Gamaliel (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Shall I trim it to, say, 20? That way at least my suggested compromise is done. Or shall we say publication stops such changes? Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
It's already published and it looks okay, so maybe we just leave it as is? Thanks for contributing this, by the way. Gamaliel (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
No worries! Just wanted to run that by you, as, y'know, better to check when that happens. Just hope I didn't screw up the lists and leave someone out again. (I caught one I missed while writing it). The number of people decreases every round, so it should, at least in theory, be more managable each time, although we may want to decide how many people to do for Round 2 in advance. There's theoretically 32 people that pass that round, and I presume you don't want to do all 32. We could do the top 50%, which is roughly what we did this time. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:15, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, half sounds good. 32 would be overwhelming. If there's time, maybe two parts over two weeks? Gamaliel (talk) 22:20, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Only issue might be if the second round wasn't very competitive, in which case I will need to trim out some of the bottom scorers from illustration if there's nothing relevant (though I could discuss the remainder in text as part of the second week's report, which is probably better than a gallery-only report.) I think from Round 3 (where 16 contestants pass) it should be easy enough to just do everyone who passes (and perhaps a short discussion of any particularly accomplished people who don't pass to the next round, in either text or gallery). Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #200

Wikidata weekly summary #186

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 12:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Sock

Hi,

Thanks for the recent CU-block. Do you believe a blanket revert as per WP:DENY is justified? I am not very experienced with this sock case. Thanks, GABHello! 19:12, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

As long as we make sure that no vandalism is accidentally restored (I'm guilty of that a couple days ago when reverting another sock) a blanket revert is justified. Gamaliel (talk) 19:19, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Biden rule.

The portions I removed were clearly partisan in nature. Politico is a left-wing fringe site and not suitable as a reference. Jose Canyusi (talk) 01:18, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but Politico is a pretty middle of the road, almost generic political publication. Have a look at WP:RS and see what Wikipedia policy says about appropriate references. Gamaliel (talk) 03:00, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 March 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #201

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 11:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Fdaskyvfgbawrt7i3qyrhgk8sa

Hi, did you mean to disable autoblock on this user? And if you do fix this, can you also revoke their talk page access, thanks! 172.58.33.176 (talk) 03:40, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #202

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) 16:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: Submitting a piece for publishing

Hello, Gamaliel. I've completed my WikiProject Report interview and would like to submit it for publishing by The Signpost. I'm pinging Go Phightins! as well. Thanks, --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks 3family6. @Razr Nation: could you have a look when you have a chance? Gamaliel (talk) 16:53, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
@Gamaliel:, sure. I'll take a look later today. → Call me Razr Nation 18:52, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Word count limit

In my amendment request about GMOs, it occurs to me that I'm starting to go over the word count limit. That's happening mainly because I'm answering questions from you and from admins whom you've asked to comment there, so I hope that it's OK. If you agree that it's OK, then could you perhaps wave the ArbCom magic wand so that the clerks allow it? Thanks! --Tryptofish (talk) 00:24, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

@Tryptofish: The wand has been waved. I've let the clerks know that it's okay for you to exceed the limit. Gamaliel (talk) 06:20, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! I appreciate it. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:34, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments at WP:ARCA

I don't think that we want to rehash the old User:Charles Matthews affair of the Wikipedia-related newspaper attack on me.

Suggestions, how I can reword my contributions. are greatly appreciated.

Thanks! Carl (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

If you want to pursue sanctions against this user for whatever they may have allegedly done, I will assist you, but it is unproductive and disruptive to mention it in the context of other discussions. We have a saying on Wikipedia: "Comment on content, not on the contributor." Please keep that in mind. Gamaliel (talk) 21:25, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! It seems unproductive to pursue this further since the user has already been sanctioned. As per your suggestion, I have removed my comments about specific other contributors from here.Carl (talk) 12:13, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science

Join us!

Women Scientists - worldwide online edit-a-thon -
a Year of Science initiative

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

This day's This Special Day's article for improvement (day 1, month 4, 2016)

Skvader - Tetrao lepus pseudo-hybridus rarissimus in the wild at Örnsköldsvik
Hello!

The following is WikiProject This Special Day's articles for improvement's daily selection:

Skvader

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Snipe hunt • Jenny Haniver

Get involved with the TSDAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Share this message with other editors

Posted by: w.carter-Talk 20:45, 1 April 2016 (UTC) using New improved MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of WikiProject TSDAFI • [April Fools!]

Editor editing another's user page without discussion

I would appreciate your help in addressing User:LaserBrain editing my user page.

Thanks!Carl (talk) 03:59, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #203

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-03-17/News and notes

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-03-17/News and notes, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-03-17/News and notes and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-03-17/News and notes during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ~ RobTalk 19:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Blatant BLP violation and subsequent protection by involved Admin. Thank you. GABHello! 22:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

To settle the record

I didn't return from retirement just to bash you and I haven't suddenly taken a position opposed to you. But I do think you dun fucked up here. Hope we're still friends after this settles.--v/r - TP 23:07, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm willing to listen. I'd like to be able to discuss a disagreement with a civil editor. It would be a nice change from the last two days. Gamaliel (talk) 23:08, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I don't see anything you said (so far) about me or this issue on ANI terrible offensive. I do think your snap at Jytdog, whoever they are, was unwarranted, however. Also, welcome back. I saw you editing a day or so ago but I wanted to see if it wasn't a fluke before I said anything. Gamaliel (talk) 23:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm a bit pissed at Jytdog for something unrelated. So I'll give them a little heat for a few days before I completely let it go. I'm back off and on. I'm going to hit up a library here this weekend to dredge up whatever I can find on the USS Arizona Memorial and try to get it to GA class.--v/r - TP 23:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:User pages/RfC for stale drafts policy restructuring

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia:User pages/RfC for stale drafts policy restructuring. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Kittens don't care about the size of your hands.

Strongjam (talk) 13:16, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Small hands?

What is the point of User:Gamaliel/Small hands? I have small eyes, but that's not something to be proud of, given that most people view big eyes as more attractive. Usually one uses userboxes to promote positive things about themselves. wbm1058 (talk) 15:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Small hands are a blessing. You can play piano, solder tiny parts, run for president... HighInBC 15:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I suppose, as are my nearsighted small eyes an asset for doing close-up work, though not really useful for anything to do with Wikipedia editing. Still seems rather pointy, given the timing. wbm1058 (talk) 15:29, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I believe in the promise of America, where anyone can become president, no matter how small their hands. Gamaliel (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
no matter how big their belly button?
no matter how long their hair is?
no matter their religion?
no matter what their (trans)gender is?
Why not simply, "where anyone eligible can become president"? Are you planning on running for president? If so, you've got some work do do. I wouldn't fancy your chances of getting reelected to the Arbitration Committee right now. wbm1058 (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
I have a feeling this conversation isn't about my hands anymore. Gamaliel (talk) 17:16, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I have small hands which is one reason why I never got very far learning to play the guitar. I even looked into getting a guitar with a narrower neck so I could use bar chords. I don't find it embarassing, it's just a physical feature like curly hair, long legs or brown eyes. While body parts don't have anything to do with a person's qualification for higher office, I also don't understand why some editors found it offensive. But in BLP debates, it's the consensus view of what is appropriate, not a single editor's views, that matters. Liz Read! Talk! 15:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
The consensus view matters when it's a consensus, and when it's a view. It’s not a consensus here: it's a bunch of canvassed Gamergate fans and a few score-settlers. And it's not actually their view, or anyone’s: Trump himself raised the matter on TV, it's been covered in humor magazines from the New York on down, and nobody anywhere is really upset about it. Notice how many of these people watch the Gamergate cluster of pages, and how seldom (if ever) they've deleted or called for oversight when (as still happens regularly) real BLP issues that do real harm to real people. One of Gamaliel's detractors, for example, recently edit-warred to include a misleading quote indicating that one Gamergate target was a pedophile; the matter in question was an old undergraduate essay that observed that Japanese law differs from contemporary US law in matters like age of consent and argues that Japan has the right to maintain its laws and traditions. I cannot recall a single instance where any of these terribly-concerned editors chose to edit to the advantage of any Gamergate target, and as you know I’ve been reading the topic for some time. MarkBernstein (talk) 16:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

[removing nonsense]

So it's okay to make fun of people on Wikipedia, unless they are a rich and famous politician? If you all would like to make fun of Dr. Bernstein, Reddit is thataway ----> GamerPro64 and MONGO, you are welcome to visit my user talk page at any time, but please do not use it this way. Gamaliel (talk) 04:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I did not make fun of anyone.--MONGO 05:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

You're right, I looked at the diffs and you did not. Allow me to rephrase in your particular case. Maybe "poke the bear with a stick"? Gamaliel (talk) 12:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

AN/I and Legacypac

Since you commented at the thread, I think someone needs to cut through the pointy B.S. and revert this "close" by Legacypac. I tried, but was reverted by him. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 19:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I left a note for him. Someone else reverted his closure. I asked him not to close again. Gamaliel (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I continue to be disturbed by his insistence on referring to me and Ches as sockpuppets/meatpuppets/proxies of each other. It's been going on for days (over a week) now. I know he's doing it to get a rise out of us, but when is enough if that kind of provocation/poking going to be enough with an admin making an impression on him that it needs to stop? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 20:44, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll take a look at the existing thread at ANI if you put some relevant diffs in there about this specific issue. Gamaliel (talk) 20:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
It's in the ANI report started by MaranoFan (you're welcome to look there): "Ches & WV are essentially joined at the hip, to the point I wonder if one is not a sock of the other." 06:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC); "this is just another attempt by WV's meat puppet to attack an editor they disagree with. 04:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC). And now, today, with this underneath the now closed proposal he put up at ANI regarding Ches: "Ches and his proxy did." at 20:32, 9 April 2016 (UTC) found here. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 23:05, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gamaliel/Archive_27&oldid=1083472936"