User talk:Seb az86556/archive35
What led you to label User:Puff4 as a SPA? I see some older edits, back to 2006 on a couple of unrelated topics. Two topics may be "few," but the SPA label is usually reserved for those editing "one very narrow area or set of articles, or whose edits to many articles appear to be for a common purpose." There are enough real spas here in this canvass-a-palooza. What tool are you using to label unsigned and spas? I don't recognize the "namespace detect- ESP" stuff. Regards. Edison (talk) 18:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- "few" is also SPA. I don't use any tool, I know how to type. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 18:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- If you "know how to type" then I assume you also know how to read. Please re-read WP:SPA. How does this editor qualify as "A user who appears to have a very brief editing history, or an apparent focus on one (or at most a handful of) matters or purposes, creating a legitimate reason for users to assess whether their editing and comments appear neutral, reasonably free of promotion, advocacy or personal agendas, aware of project norms, not improper uses of an account, and aimed at building an encyclopedia. " Is 6 years a brief editing history? Are "Campaign slogans," Talk:Myelodysplastic syndrome, and Bell's Brewery somehow a niche topic? You need to make a better case than you have for the label to stay. Edison (talk) 18:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, and that means recently. Somebody who's not been here in 5 years and then suddenly pops up again is an SPA. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 18:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- If you "know how to type" then I assume you also know how to read. Please re-read WP:SPA. How does this editor qualify as "A user who appears to have a very brief editing history, or an apparent focus on one (or at most a handful of) matters or purposes, creating a legitimate reason for users to assess whether their editing and comments appear neutral, reasonably free of promotion, advocacy or personal agendas, aware of project norms, not improper uses of an account, and aimed at building an encyclopedia. " Is 6 years a brief editing history? Are "Campaign slogans," Talk:Myelodysplastic syndrome, and Bell's Brewery somehow a niche topic? You need to make a better case than you have for the label to stay. Edison (talk) 18:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Complaint[edit]
Sir or madam, be kind to return my vote that you deleted, or I will contact an administrator.-Drboisclair (talk)
- Go ahead. Make sure you have a good explanation why you want to !vote twice, restore it when it's pointed out to you, and then blatantly lie about it. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:09, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- I never intended to vote twice, sir or madam. That is inaccurate.-Drboisclair (talk)
- Good. But you did. So I removed the second !vote. Thank me. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- As "Dominus Vobisdu" has shown me you are right, and I am sorry for accusing you of removing my vote. Thank you for leaving my one vote on the page.-Drboisclair (talk) 03:39, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- Good. But you did. So I removed the second !vote. Thank me. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- I never intended to vote twice, sir or madam. That is inaccurate.-Drboisclair (talk)
Notice[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Barack Obama article does not conform to NPOV". Thank you.William Jockusch (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 16:11, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Warren[edit]
Just my opinion, but I really wish you'd held back that last sentence. You're dead right on inclusion, but now you've attacked the IP by taking a POV position on the politics, not on wikipedia policy. The policy was good enough, but it's kind of hard to defend going on record as saying he's been duped by the right wing whatever.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hm. I don't see how that's an attack. I really don't. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 19:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's the connotation of that word. When I hear that, I hear you saying that he's not smart enough to keep himself from being fooled. You're questioning his inteligence, or at least awareness.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:57, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Really? Ah well... interesting to know that people can understand it that way. I never thought of that. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 19:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sure you didn't mean it that way. To be clear, I'm not calling it a "NPA" type attack, but it just changes the discourse to a different direction.--Cube lurker (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- Really? Ah well... interesting to know that people can understand it that way. I never thought of that. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 19:59, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
- It's the connotation of that word. When I hear that, I hear you saying that he's not smart enough to keep himself from being fooled. You're questioning his inteligence, or at least awareness.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:57, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
ANI[edit]
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
It would be better to not refer to edits, even if annoying, as vandalism [1] when they don't actually fit the criteria. A more neutral summary would have been better. This sometimes ramps up the drama unnecessarily and leads to people doing silly and time wasting things, like reporting you to ANI. As for "your page", if a person, IP or registered, asks you to stay off their talk page, it is generally accepted that you should do so, and only go there when it is absolutely clear and necessary. We don't want to appear pointy, after all. It is helpful if you can assist me in de-dramatizing the situation by using just a little more restraint and overlook the drama of others when it is possible. I appreciate any help you can give me in this area. I have obviously left a message on the IP's talk page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 14:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, it seems I missed the show. Maybe twinkle should include an harassment button; see WP:HARASS & WP:DRRC. I was never asked to stay away from the talkpage (if I missed that, diffs please), otherwise, I woulda been the one to show up at ANI. On the other hand, "hit-lists" and grudge-repertoires like the one I was removing also count as harrasment; you might wanna keep an eye on that. Apart from that, you already saw the canvassing and the disruption. Sadly, our policies dictate that IPs cannot be blocked indefinitely; therefore, the harassment will continue, either by means of evasion or by simply waiting a few days while sitting out a short block. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 17:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think it was more implied rather that flatly stated. That said, the editor is clearly imploding and several admins are aware of the disruption and watching. What I have found is that it is easier to take action when any event looks clearly one sided. At this stage, I have offered him the maximum amount of good faith and WP:ROPE possible, and if he crosses the line, he will be blocked on the spot. I just didn't want to see back and forth bickering with templates that muddy the waters and could be seen as a basis to justify his actions. It isn't about you doing wrong, it is about giving him just a little rope here and seeing what happens. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- Got it. Thanks. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 17:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think it was more implied rather that flatly stated. That said, the editor is clearly imploding and several admins are aware of the disruption and watching. What I have found is that it is easier to take action when any event looks clearly one sided. At this stage, I have offered him the maximum amount of good faith and WP:ROPE possible, and if he crosses the line, he will be blocked on the spot. I just didn't want to see back and forth bickering with templates that muddy the waters and could be seen as a basis to justify his actions. It isn't about you doing wrong, it is about giving him just a little rope here and seeing what happens. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Input[edit]
Look at One Sonic Society, and tell me what you think of it now?HotHat (talk) 21:40, 25 May 2012 (UTC)