User talk:Stifle/Archive 0810b

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Veterinary terms

Hi. Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal and veterinary terms in Karimojong, could you check the deleted article, to see if there were any references in it? If there were, please userfy the article for me, and I'll try to determine where Wiktionary might want the content. If there were no references, then I don't have time for it. Much thanks :) -- Quiddity (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Done, User:Quiddity/Animal and veterinary terms in Karimojong; tag it {{db-userreq}} when you're done. Stifle (talk) 08:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:33, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Forsts23 (talk · contribs)

This editor is edit-warring at Mitanni and his edits are Armenian related. You gave him a sanction warning in June, is this (besides being clear edit-warring) a violation of that sanction? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Please file your request at WP:AE. Stifle (talk) 10:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Shouldn't your warning have been logged? Dougweller (talk) 13:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
I suppose, although few if any other users have done so. Stifle (talk) 13:22, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Saffron Coomber listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Saffron Coomber. Since you had some involvement with the Saffron Coomber redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). J Milburn (talk) 12:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Could you please userfy an article you have deleted to my user space?

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Cartoon - I feel that this is clearly notable and I would like to add some more references to satisfy WP:V and redo the article. Thanks! meshach (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Done at User:Meshach/The Cartoon. Stifle (talk) 08:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! meshach (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

AfD review please

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basic Fantasy RPG, you can take a second look please? There were two users suggested a merge, which makes sense. All said it should be Keep did not cite any evidence notability or improved referencing required to keep it. I believe WP:ILIKEIT keep votes should be discounted. Thank you. Miami33139 (talk) 22:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

  • I think I need to second this request. Reyk YO! 01:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question is answered in my FAQs. They're linked at the top of my talk page and in the editnotice. Why not check them out next time?
AFDs have ultimately two results, which are delete and not-delete. Merge, no consensus, redirect, and so on are all variants on not-delete. I don't think there's any question that the article should be deleted. Any editor can take normal editorial actions such as merging or redirecting, either unilaterally or after a discussion on the article talk page. Stifle (talk) 08:02, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I was unclear. Excuse. I did mean that a merge would make sense but did not mean imply that was my choice of outcome. Your decision was no consensus while I was more interested in the outcome of delete, by removing opinion of !voters who did not make policy based rationale or provide evidence. Miami33139 (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Your edit at WP:AE

I've reverted your edit to Brews ohare appeal as inappropriate; I left a set of procedural notes so that no one would make the sort of edit you did, but evidently, neither you, nor Jehochman, made a remote effort to read what was written. It was poor judgement; you should familiarise yourself with the full facts rather than act and then think later. Note that of my notes, an arb has specifically endorsed my second bullet point. Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

  • I have read all points and noted them. I am entirely satisfied with my decision and reject and resent your accusations, but in the interest of not escalating an edit war, I will not revert again and will instead leave a comment. Stifle (talk) 08:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
    • So despite the fact an arbitrator was quite OK with the appeal going ahead, you attempted to overrule that and you're standing by that judgement? Ncmvocalist (talk) 08:44, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
      • "An arbitrator" is not "ArbCom", and notwithstanding that, it is entirely unclear whether Steve Smith posted his comment to you in a personal capacity or an arbitrator capacity, or indeed what he was referring to. If and when ArbCom, as a whole (or by majority) passes a motion to say that the sanction in question, or sanctions in general, are open to appeal at WP:AE, I will of course abide by that. Stifle (talk) 08:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
        • In other words, you weren't clear about what an arbitrator said in which capactiy, but you personally decided to take it upon yourself to stifle an appeal while it is in progress. I think that's remarkably poor judgement, and I don't think any editor would be ready to stand for that sort of despicable treatment, be it from an admin or any other body of bureaucracy. If you weren't sure, you should have requested clarification instead of forcing the aggrieved user to have to dispute several admin actions at the same time. Furthermore, the editor in question was clearly asking for guidance as to how to correctly appeal and you provided no such guidance - you just closed it up and then went on editing as if nothing else happened. That's totally unhelpful. You should have allowed discussion to continue. I don't think it's unclear whether the discussion will go, but each editor is allowed an opportunity to be heard by the community and you interfered with that. Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:00, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
          • Your opinions are noted. Stifle (talk) 09:29, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Disruption at AE

I think you need to block somebody needs to be blocked.[1] Jehochman Talk 08:32, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

  • That would be counterproductive. Stifle (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
    • As you like. Ncmvocalist has previously been warned not to clerk arbitration pages. This was some time ago. Jehochman Talk 08:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Correcting the above as it looks highly suspect to block somebody after they've reverted you. Jehochman Talk 10:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Undo feature

I happened to notice a peculiar statement you made: that using the undo feature was "explicitly prohibited for non-vandalism reverts" [2]. This is news to me, where did you get that idea? –xenotalk 12:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that too. You were probably thinking of the rollback (revert) feature, Stifle. Eh? Jehochman Talk 12:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I know it exists for reverting; I'm sure I remember it showing up for undo as well somewhere. But it's probably been changed since. I've stricken the relevant part of my comment. Stifle (talk) 12:38, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for remaining calm throughout that situation. You did well. Jehochman Talk 12:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, using native rollback (without changing the edit summary using a script) is inappropriate for non-vandal reverts; but as far as I know, using "undo" (with the prefilled prefix appended with a further explanation) is the preferred way of undoing edits with which one doesn't agree but aren't subject to rollback. –xenotalk 12:45, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heroes of Graxia

Hi,

As you closed the above, would you mind also handling the second article part of the nomination, Guardians of Graxia? As the nom, I don't belive it would be proper for me to deal with it, even if it's a clerical task. Sorry for the bother. MLauba (Talk) 16:23, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Stifle (talk) 17:06, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Heads up

Hi. An OTRS ticket matter you addressed is under dispute. See [3] and the talk page discussion. The contributor currently doesn't seem to want to contact our designated agent or to try for community consensus, though I'm not sure why. (Note, there may be a modicum of creativity in the content, though I don't really know how extensive it is; see his notes at that talk page discussion.) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:46, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Noted. I think things are under control. Stifle (talk) 08:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

List of female performers in lesbian porn films

You proposed this article for deletion back in March; the PROD was contested, but I do not think it is a suitable subject for an article, and have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of female performers in lesbian porn films. Robofish (talk) 18:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Topic ban vio

Hello Stifle. Shuki made this edit to an article on a "place in Israel". That is a clear cut violation of the Shuki's topic ban. Would you rather I report this to AE or will you enforce the topic ban? nableezy - 22:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Well this is sort of weenie I think all will agree. RVV is not a violation of the topic ban. Nableezy, add a knotch to the list of your frivoulous accusations. I think Nableezy should be warned for this hounding of me and waste of your time. --Shuki (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Just to reinforce how Nableezy likes bring on judgement to himself, now that I'm looking - making edits to a location in violation of his topic ban here. Stifle, should I file an AE? --Shuki (talk) 22:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
User_talk:Stifle/Archive_0810a#topic_ban_exemption nableezy - 23:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
No violations in either case.
The intention behind a topic ban is so that users are encouraged to direct their productive efforts to articles which are further away from the locus of disputes. It is not so that other affected editors should be combing people's edits in order to say "GOTCHA!! I'M TELLING TEACHER ON YOU!!!!11" Therefore:
  • Pursuant to the discretionary sanctions remedy of WP:ARBPIA,
  • Believing that other measures are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project,
  • Shuki (talk · contribs) and Nableezy (talk · contribs) are banned from reporting each other for alleged violations of the topic ban imposed by me on them on 27th July last, for the duration of the topic ban. For the avoidance of doubt, this includes any report anywhere on Wikipedia, and includes attempts to solicit other users to report the other's violation. Violating this ban will result in a block of appropriate length. This sanction may be appealed to me, to WP:AE, or to ArbCom.
Seriously guys, knock it off. Wikipedia is not primary school. The next step will be an interaction ban. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)


Much appreciated. --Shuki (talk) 18:56, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Stifle, this is silly. If you want to say reverts of vandalism are not included in the topic ban then say that. I reported an edit that on its face is a violation of the topic ban as an edit to a place in Israel. There have been a number of edits to "places" that I think are vandalism and have refrained from reverting because of the topic ban. If you say that those edits are not violation then great, but to impose a sanction because I made a report that on its face is valid is stupid. I also note that users have repeatedly made frivolous reports about supposed violations by me without you imposing such a ban on them. Please reconsider, Id rather not have to go through the hassle of an appeal at AE over such a trivial matter. nableezy - 18:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

It's generally considered implicit. I would suggest both of you disengage from the matter and stop wikilawyering. Stifle (talk) 08:10, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Nobody is "wikilawyering" and given your first reaction to my comment implying that I should not revert vandalism I dont see how you can say I am. Questioning your judgment is not "wikilawyering". Your initial comment notwithstanding, Ill assume that I am free to revert vandalism on such articles. nableezy - 14:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Finding fake reality game pages

Just out of curiosity, how do you find those pages? Random browsing is unlikely to have any results, and the search function turns up a lot of false positives... Netalarmtalk 05:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The links at the bottom of Template:Spamsearch are the main thing I use, but there are a lot of false positives to plough through. Stifle (talk) 08:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The Cartoon

Your decision on The Cartoon has been appealed.

Rainjar (talk) 13:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Fantasy Wikipedia Page

Fine, killjoy. Delete my Amazing Race MK. But don't be unfair. Hurry up and delete all of the other ones. Here's a list for your convinience: User:T/Sandbox User:DanielTAR/DanielTAR User talk:Kessin011 User:Puppykung999 User talk:Kessin02 User talk:Kessin012 User talk:Kessin013 User talk:Kessin014174.1.48.24 (talk) 08:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for this list, it will be addressed. Stifle (talk) 10:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Could you relist these debates

I need help with Stanley Zbornak, Nafma and Ban Sen Juku school Dwanyewest (talk) 07:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Why do they need to be relisted? Stifle (talk) 16:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I thought was the done thing when an article didn't have enough people participating in debate to decide an outcome when concerning deletion. Dwanyewest (talk) 17:29, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but only after a week. Give them time. Stifle (talk) 17:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Re; Handy Light CSD

It has reliable sources, isn't that a claim of notability? ViperSnake151  Talk  23:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Handy Light

Hello Stifle, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Handy Light, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to software. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you.  1year  02:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion contested: 1990–91 Phoenix Suns season

Hi Stifle, I'd like to let you know that I'm contesting the proposed deletion of the 1990–91 Phoenix Suns season article that you tagged citing: Wikipedia is not a sports almanac. I'm well aware of that, however, my goal is to complete the articles in a manner similar to the 1990–91 Seattle SuperSonics season article I edited, trying to be as in-depth as possible. I was going to wait a few days more to do so, but I'll get on it right away, as to avoid any other further deletion notices, so thanks for the heads up! Xaviersc (talk) 16:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:Results of the 2005 Little League World Series

Explain to me what I could do exactly to keep Results of the 2005 Little League World Series from getting deleted, especially since I could do the same things for 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. Tampabay721 (talk) 16:33, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, on an immediate basis you could delete the proposed deletion notice, and I'd have to nominate it for community discussion. But Wikipedia is not for collections of sports statistics, so it would probably be deleted along with the others. Stifle (talk) 12:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bugsx

Hello, I have removed the prod tag you placed on Bugsx, as it has been prodded and contested in the past and therefore ineligible for deletion via prod. Please take to AfD. Thanks! —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2010–11 Arkansas Razorbacks men's basketball team

I have contested the prod of 2010–11 Arkansas Razorbacks men's basketball team on the grounds that I believe it should not be deleted without discussion. Please take to AfD. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Duffy DrV

Hi Stifle, I've asked a question of you at [4]. Thanks, Hobit (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

  • And again. Hobit (talk) 20:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Question on permission for John Soares.jpg

I just noted that John Soares.jpg was posted as "OTRS received"... but it was also tagged for deletion. In what way was the permission not sufficient? I asked John to follow the directions on the WP permissions page precisely, that is, to cut and paste the form letter. This is frustrating because to my knowledge he has sent in permission letters three times, the most recent over a month ago I believe. Thank you. --Jonnybgoode44 (talk) 16:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

All emails to OTRS are private, so unfortunately I cannot provide information on why the permission we received was not sufficient. A reply was sent to the email explaining what needs to be done to proceed. Stifle (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Denial of removal of Voobly from Blacklist

I was disappointed to note your comments on the denial of the request to remove voobly.com from wikipedia blacklist. I had supported this removal for the various reasons that were stated by me, being that there remains a possibility that voobly was itself a victim of spam. As a programmer and developer (and occassional keen gamer when I have the time!) myself, it is not uncommon to experience these things on the web. I did hunt around the various reports etc., but could not identify anything which suggested a direct link with voobly.com itself, other than it was clear that this site was being spammed on wikipedia. I sincerely hope that wikipedia look further into these matters as it could render a lot of valuable resources and sites being removed or blacklisted on wikipedia by persons acting with the intent of doing harm to other sites for malicious reasons, and this could in turn impact wikipedia. It seems to me that if someone wanted to get a website removed or blacklisted from wikipedia, all they need do is go on a spam-fest with a link pool of users, and that should be sufficient effort to achieve that outcome based on your stated reasons. Such practices do unfortunately occur on the web, and you can find many criticisms of how google suffered from this themselves when it was shown how easy it was to get a competitor delisted from google by using similar malicious practices such as spamming. I recognise also that admins have difficult decisions to make at times, especially in these specific areas - to blacklist or not to blacklist - however as a long time donor and contributor to wikipedia it is rather sad to see that I can not even list a site that I play at on my personal page on wikipedia because it is blacklisted. I have been involved in games and mobile projects, so I have a legitimate interest in these areas, and I also have experience of being a victim of such spamming tactics. Chrissyboi (talk) 11:11, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Our policy is that when a trusted, independent, and uninterested editor requests the removal of a site from the blacklist, it will be given all due consideration. Stifle (talk) 11:25, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

I've only been on here 3 and a half years, maybe some time to go to reach TS! I only attempted to put a link to the site on my personal page because I play there occasionally that's how I became aware of it's blacklist status - I like AOC and that's about one of the few reliable places to play (only one I know actually), that's really my only interest. MSN were recommending gamespy for older AOE games, but that's been long dead for AOE games. I know one of the developers on voobly from the days at MSN zone (he created one of the most famous hacks), aside from that I have no connection with the site at all. I figured most peeps only edit where they have an interest anyway - at least that's what I do as I have limited time due to my studies. Like I said though, it's unfortunate that users like myself can't even put a link on our personal page. Chrissyboi (talk) 01:30, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Adequate Digwuren notice?

Hello Stifle. So far you are the only admin to comment on the Nmate/Iadrian yu case at WP:AE.

*Please provide evidence that User:Iadrian yu has been notified by an uninvolved administrator of the existence of the discretionary sanctions. Failure to do so will result in the request being struck out. Stifle (talk) 15:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I've discussed the question of proper Digwuren notice with both Iadrian yu and Nmate. It's my belief that this post by Nmate on Iadrian yu's talk is a sufficient notice to meet the Digwuren requirements. If other admins agree, then we have the harder question of whether anybody deserves sanctions over this dispute. The Digwuren notice was placed on 23 August and some of the diffs offered by Nmate here are from as along ago as 15 July. As to whether the Digwuren notice needs to be left by an admin, I've heard different stories on that. Nmate cites this opinion by Sandstein that just says the notice should be placed on the person's talk by anybody at all, with a link to the Digwuren decision. Do you have a recommendation of what to do next? EdJohnston (talk) 00:18, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Please leave any followups to the AE post at AE, and not here. Stifle (talk) 08:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Violation of Topic ban and sock puppetry

Hello Stifle. Please see this discussion involving a violation of your topic ban [5]--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 02:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Please file all requests for enforcement at WP:AE, and not here. Stifle (talk) 08:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 Done[6]--Jiujitsuguy (talk) 13:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

ARBCOM warning

Dear Stifle,

I notice after I had posted at Iadrian Yu's tak page you posted an administration warning about Eastern European articles. I think it was a coincidence that this was posted not long after I enquired about his reversion.

The User:Quadruplum has been vexing me for a little time, since sometimes he posts as an IP, sometimes under that name, and there seems to be a feeling he is a puppet of the blocked User:Strubes99. I am not so sure myself; his behaviour is certainly not up to WP standards, and frankly I think his English is not good enough to edit at the English WP; for various reasons he is a nuisance to me, but I don't think he is deliberately trying to hurt the project, just needs a bit of teaching of how to go and edit WP. I could well be mistaken and perhaps he is the blocked user, but from his style I think it is quite different, and I am assuming good faith that he is trying to edit Hungarian articles to make them better, and pretty much always getting it wrong. SO I am coming to you for a bit of advice on how to proceed. The traits Quadruplum has, as far as I see, are these:

  • He edits quite a lot of articles, almost always with relation to Hungary in some way.
  • He asks me and my partner User:Monkap for translations, which we have provided from Latin, German, Hungarian and now Spanish.
  • He then copy-pastes the translations into articles, with no sources or references. THis loses the wikimarkup that I have provided in my initial translation. I am not his slave and while nobody owns anything on Wikipedia, it is a bit galling when I could have improved the article myself, with proper references and markup, instead of having it copy-pasted in.
  • He does not sign his posts. He never says thank you for the translation.

I am not particularly having a go at him there (though I think a thankyou would be nice from time to time) just the traits of this user are to me fairly evident: and because of that am not convinced he is the same as the blocked user.

I'd appreciate your advice and can give you more references to particular articles and edits, and so on, but in the first place would just like to hear what you think. Si Trew (talk) 09:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

By the way the requests for translation are on my talk page (sections ANYOUS JEDLIK, Louis Kossoth and Louis the Great). I am not as green as I am cabbage looking, but have been assuminbg good faith with this editor. Some others on the same topic are at the missus' talk page User talk:Monkap. We are in fact separate people but we do sometimes edit an article together, and we make that quite plain: we're not sockpuppets. Si Trew (talk) 09:23, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question is answered in my FAQs. They're linked at the top of my talk page and in the editnotice. Why not check them out next time?
Due to previous bad experiences, I maintain a policy of not intervening on request in others' disputes. Please use dispute resolution. Stifle (talk) 11:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration sanctions warning

Hello, I have seen you message on my talk page. My I ask why did I received this warning? What did I do to receive this warning on behalf Nmate`s wishes ? I don`t understand why did he reported my in the first place? He deletes my comment and then reports me and I receive a warning for what? I quote from the warning " If you engage in further inappropriate behavior in this area, you may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban." What inappropriate behavior ? If anyone should receive a warning that is Nmate for deleting my comment and for supporting a vandal. I am sorry, but I fail to see any logic in this so if you can explain it to me please. As I explained, Nmate`s request is false and biased. As such I would like for this warning to be retracted. Thank you. Adrian (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

The conduct in question is outlined at WP:AE#Iadrian_yu. You accused someone of having ultra-nationalistic opinions regarding Romanian lands, with insufficient evidence. You should be aware that there has been endemic content disputes on several articles about Eastern Europe, so ensure you conduct yourself appropriately there. Stifle (talk) 14:35, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Stifle. You have new messages at Iadrian yu's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Adrian (talk) 14:51, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

wow quick delete AC:B clan help me out bro i can explain

The Assassin's Guild thanks you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitoriodemedici (talk • contribs) 11:16, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to Roma Morte. Wikipedia is not a place for you to write about your guild, please use your own website instead. Stifle (talk) 11:24, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh sorry I Didnt know that. facebook said i need to create a wiki article to complete my group. it may be in your best interests though because a lot of people are going to be wondering what it is after i win the Assassin's Creed Brotherhood Cosplay Contest at PAX this weekend but no big deal, Youre right about making my own site...any suggestions for free site builders? thanks buddy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitoriodemedici (talk • contribs) 18:08, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure why Facebook was telling you that. Good luck in your event. List of free web hosting services suggests some alternatives to place your site. Stifle (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

re: August 2010

You said: You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on United States Senate elections in Illinois, 2010. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stifle (talk) 20:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I apologize for any inappropriate behavior on my part that lead to you posting this on my talk page. Having said that, could you please review the edit history of United_States_Senate_elections_in_Illinois,_2010 for neutrality and encyclopedic content. The edit war seems to be between me and User:Jerzeykydd I have cited authoritative sources for my edits with the intention of making the content of Wikipedia regarding the election encyclopedic and neutral. I recognize that my behavior about these edits are veering dangerously close to unacceptable, but my editing is being done in good faith. In this case, the authoritative sources are being ignored in favor of a consensus that no one can cite. Could you please recommend the best method of dispute resolution in this case? Previous attempts at communicating directly with User:Jerzeykydd have not been successful.

Thank you

Ejmarten (talk) 21:38, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I do not intend to review edit history; I don't get involved by request into other people's disputes. Try WP:3O. Stifle (talk) 09:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
And for further clarification, the three-revert rule is there to stop sterile revert wars. It's a bright-line rule that doesn't care about who's right or wrong. Stifle (talk) 14:57, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

New section

Hi Stifle, do you mind chipping in your two cents here if you're not too busy? Thanks.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 18:05, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Spam help

Hi Stifle. A user has asked me about putting a URL on the spam whitelist. Unfortunately, I know next to nothing about Wikipedia's spam pages. Do you think you can help out (see User talk:Dabomb87#MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist)? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:29, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Requests at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist are handled from time to time by a small handful of sysops. I'll go look at this one now. Stifle (talk) 08:00, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Stifle. You have new messages at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#examiner.com_.2F_Frank_Sherosky.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Greg L (talk) 15:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

FYI

[7] /HeyMid (contributions) 12:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 16:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: HersfoldOTRSBot

Hey, Stifle. Sorry for not running the bots lately, I've been out for the last few months. As soon as I get a chance to look over the code and make sure everything's still up to snuff, I'll send it off to do its thing. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:39, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Stifle/Archive_0810b&oldid=1142799481"