User talk:Indubitably/Archive 42
 | 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 35 | ← | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | Archive 44 | Archive 45 |
I don't really know whether userpage policy or BLP applies or even NOT, but I didn't want to take this to ANI without approaching this user and don't want to waste admin time (except yours :P). I was hoping you could help because I don't know exactly how to broach the subject with the user. I really don't care what people do on their userpage, I'm more concerned that he is minor, exposing a lot of personal information and legal background, and is going to regret it much later. Law shoot! 02:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Done. And I suppose I should expand. Of all of the user's edits, spanning several months, only five were to any page other than his user page, plus two to upload an image of himself. Of those five edits, one was to add non-notable original research about the video he's "starring" in, including adding his user name to the article; another edit was to add information about another video he's shooting; and yet another was unverifiable claims about some famous person dating some non-notable person. The other two edits were to fix his own typos. His sole purpose here is to promote himself. Therefore, after some discussion with some fellow admins, in addition to deleting the user page, he's also been blocked indefinitely. I think he accidentally landed on Wikipedia when searching for MySpace, Yahoo! 360 or, perhaps, GoDaddy.com. لennavecia 02:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:BRC – Sick joke?
Hi, I checked out the "bathrobe Cable" – Just tell me, is this [1] some sick joke? Or do you have a twisted fetish for **** *********** (I'm sure you can guess). I would've given you a warning for spam, but I'm curious to know why you would link a humorous cabal to a porn movie – and yes, that link is there for a reason. --Flewis(talk) 07:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- I am curious as well. However, I would assume good faith, and assume the domain expired. More research is necessary. That is messed up. I don't think it was intended, but good you brought it here. Law shoot! 12:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I still own the domain until next month, however, the server it is hosted on... something expired with it. I forget now. I thought it had been fixed, apparently I was wrong. It's supposed to list everything that's on the BRC page here along with a link to forums that no one has used in several months. Anyway, I do not know what your words in *** are. Bear buttfucking? I have no idea. I'll remove the link. Quite unfortunate, really. Thanks for the note. O, and would the warning have been in template form? :p لennavecia 14:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ah... I lament the old BRC forums. They were fun... Too bad the domain has been squatted by animal porn. C'est la vie... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
User:75.108.73.219's edits
Myself and User:Neutralhomer have noticed that IP user 75.108.73.219 have made what could be annoying edits on TV station articles regarding the digital transition. The IP user has been issued warnings in the past for his/her edits. What do you think about the edits---are they legit or are they annoying? Thanks, Willking1979 (talk) 15:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me. Just trimming extra, unnecessary wording, which is usually a good thing. In cases such as these, imagine if the edits were made by an established user or admin. Would you still question their quality? I know it's easy to sometimes automatically take IP edits as unconstructive, particularly if they've been a problem IP before, I've done it as well. It's important to remember that we may have a tendency to do that, and take a moment to consider if we're questioning the edit or the editor. لennavecia 15:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. Have a great TGIF. Willking1979 (talk) 16:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Jackson and that Muslim stuff
OK, I'm just going to keep reverting this crap, I won't be happy if one of you admins block me for breaching 3RR or something. I have to protect the article from BLP smut. There is a movement of sorts trying to legitimize this story. — Realist2 19:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Keyshia Cole
Hi JV, Did u look@ the Keyshia Cole page? Thx. 70.108.91.250 (talk) 00:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Help with vandal
Hi, I've problem with the same user who kept reverting the Yusuf Akbulut article. He is using his newly created account Hakkari (talk · contribs) and the ip number 24.248.39.186 (talk · contribs), also it's likely that his behind thses ip numbers to 72.201.99.34 (talk · contribs) and 128.196.232.165 (talk · contribs), and multiple other ip numbers. He is also obviously aware [2] of WP:3RR (but perhaps not WP:DIS and WP:EW) and it seems his intentions is to trying to trap me to revert more than three times so he can report me. I would appreciate any help or just some advice of how to do. Thanks. The TriZ (talk) 03:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- 128.196.233.107 (talk · contribs) is in there as well. I'm going to find out if these are socks of Am6212 (talk · contribs), Suryoyo othuroyo (talk · contribs), Mmhm1mm (talk · contribs) and TheTrizz (talk · contribs). لennavecia 03:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Good times. Well, he's blocked now, along with all his socks (master account: Am6212 (talk · contribs)), although not all of those above were confirmed as his, some it appears are surely not. Let me know if any similar accounts pop up, or if any of the IPs start back after their month block expires. لennavecia 05:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 42 | 8 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 43 | 10 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 44 | 17 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 11:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Power to the Sysop Females!
|
The Mizu onna sango15 Barnstar | |
| Thank you to all who participated in my RFA- regardless of whether you supported or opposed, all feedback is important to me. I look forward to proving in the coming months that the trust placed in me by the community is not misplaced. |
- You do know Lara's actually a middle aged male statistician in the Department of Health, right? – iridescent 21:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- NO! So soon after the revelation about Lady Catherine, this is too much. Who's next, Bishzilla? ϢereSpielChequers 22:00, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
What a beautiful design. Wow. Very nice. Also, I am not a Poetlister sock!!! Hahaha, I just happen to have a Chinchilla that shares a name with said middle-aged male statistician in the Department of Health. :D لennavecia 04:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think Risker is the only
chickfemale person going for Arb too....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- (ec) Cool! True that. Here's a puzzle, how often do you think you can pick the sex of the writer from the way they write? Or are you immediately modified by the identified sex of the editor? If they weren't, would you be able to pick it? How do the various Poetlister alters look now retrospectively? (I don't think I ever interacted directly with any to my knowledge) Hmmm. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Never, unless they post a photo or personal information that (if true) could only be M/F ("When I joined the US Army in 1947…", "When I was at Roedean School…" etc). As Giano once said, it works very well to always assume everyone on Wikipedia is a 14 year old boy and address them accordingly until you see evidence to the contrary. Try it; it works remarkably well. – iridescent 22:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Brewing battle of the intellects
No, not that it makes a difference but it is intriguing how our perceptions of others influence our interactions at times, and being aware of these things can be helpful. In my job I have dealt with all sorts of situations, and the ones which riled me the most were sly digs by patients with a personality disorder, but then later understanding transference and its flipside countertransference was enlightening as to why someone might be hostile to me – it was/is fascinating. There was also a study (which I have just been searching on google for with various word combinations but no success) where a girl was filmed talking about mood problems and self harm thoughts (??) and it was shown to two groups of clinicians – one group was told she had a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder and the other wasn't, and there was considerable difference in rating the symptoms for the girl. (damn I wish I could find teh link!). I thought Awadewit was (a) English and (b) male for a long time until I heard her on one of the blogs – funny! Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I would have to warn you that as a someone who once considered a career in clinical psychology, and then thought better of it after my first degree and a clinical placement, that I find bolloxy psychoanalytic notions like "transference" to be little more than mumbo-jumbo. There are no "personality disorders"; there are inadequate environments. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I sometimes get the impression that some editors are female by the way they write. Females tend to be more sensitive, more emotional. I am proven wrong fairly frequently, however. For example, I was about 98% on Filll, and he's been on the WP radio thing, totally male. There was another I was wrong about, but I can't recall who it was now. Anyway, Iri, I have a Chin named Baxter. And Cas, I'd be interested to see that link. لennavecia 00:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, Cas. I'm still waiting for the brewing battle to begin. And basking in the irony of its location (scroll to the very bottom). لennavecia 13:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
(unindent and return after internet access went pear-shaped for several hours...) Right, I did have you as a candidate for reviewing borderline personality disorder once it was brushed up for FAC as you identify as (a) having it, and (b) write FAc so are familiar and interested in that process so that (c) I can make an accessible article that doesn't lapse fall into jargon. We have gotten a little caned over that with major depressive disorder, the friggin' nightmare that maybe, just maybe is ending soon. Dammit I was going to do something else but a whole bunch of people got stuck into it so I helped carry it through to the bitter end...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:46, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- (Scratches head a little) I had no idea a simple thankspam would cause so much thought. And in this case, I should really change my signature; everyone usually confuses me with a male editor until they see my userpage! Cheers, Happy Thanksgiving! —Mizu onna sango15Hello! 17:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Post-goals MPRP discussion
With the support going elsewhere, I think the MPRP definitely wants to go in another direction. It's been five months since the 2008MPRP started and I think we need to shift our goals from creating a new and exciting main page to recovering and proposing what we can. One the main intents for this is that if this MPRP is completely scraped; we will likely never be able to run a MPRP with competition mentality within our foreseeable stay in WP. In short it will give a lot leverage to the position of David and likeminded. There is a discussion in the 2008MPRP. Let's see what we can do. ChyranandChloe (talk) 23:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Are they going to redo it design-wise? Or are they going to keep the current look and just change features? لennavecia 04:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think we're simply going off of the current main page, and perhaps we should prepare to rename the proposal to the "Main Page Revision Proposal" since we are significantly shrinking the scope. Most of the discussion is in the link above. ChyranandChloe (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Then I think I played my part. I'm not really all that concerned with what's on the main page... perhaps with the exception of revising DYK to include GAs, but I can work on that outside of the proposal. I joined it to give the main page a professional look. If the main page of the eighth largest website in the world is going to remain pathetic looking, I'd rather not participate in the process that settled on that. لennavecia 21:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- It is disillusioning. Thank you nevertheless. When the MPRP is finished proposing its revision, I'll start a discussion on how we are to run a MPRP in the first place; hope to see you there. ChyranandChloe (talk) 21:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Whenever there is discussion about upgrading the design, let me know, I'll be there as enthusiastic as ever and with this bullshit behind me. I can at least take pleasure in knowing my design is used on a sister project, so my great many hours of effort were not completely lost. However, it is unfortunate that so many others put so much into it so that other people could join late in the game and shut the whole thing down. As far as what's going on now, sounds like someone could make a survey and put up a watchlist notification for the whole project to weigh in on what they want. No need to ask those who wasted months on discarded designs to participate in something that is as easy as getting input and having the main page gate keepers implement. لennavecia 21:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- It is disillusioning. Thank you nevertheless. When the MPRP is finished proposing its revision, I'll start a discussion on how we are to run a MPRP in the first place; hope to see you there. ChyranandChloe (talk) 21:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Then I think I played my part. I'm not really all that concerned with what's on the main page... perhaps with the exception of revising DYK to include GAs, but I can work on that outside of the proposal. I joined it to give the main page a professional look. If the main page of the eighth largest website in the world is going to remain pathetic looking, I'd rather not participate in the process that settled on that. لennavecia 21:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think we're simply going off of the current main page, and perhaps we should prepare to rename the proposal to the "Main Page Revision Proposal" since we are significantly shrinking the scope. Most of the discussion is in the link above. ChyranandChloe (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello Jennavecia, I noticed your message on the above IP users talkpage, if it was referring to the user restoring comments on my talkpage, thanks for that. It is one of the IPs that stalk my edits, (for more information please seen User talk:Iredescent, save copying it over. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 16:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Her talk page is what led me to the IP's talk page. I'm looking into the situation, but you're coming out of it looking a lot worse than the IP so far. لennavecia 16:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Whose talkpage led you to the IP? And how am I looking worse than the IP? I was not aware I have done anything wrong. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 16:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 16:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Michael Jackson
Thank you for maintaining some sense of normality on the Michael Jackson talk page, it was appreciated. — Realist2 16:47, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
I know you and I have our differences, but I've been wanting to write something like this for a long time. Bravo. Tan | 39 16:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Do you have any idea...
...how much extra code is on the web just to make things work with IE?[4] Jehochman Talk 20:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- I won't take anything out of my user space just because it doesn't display in IE, but if I can add some code to make it look right in IE without fucking it up in FF, I'll do it. In this case, my userboxes were behind the infobox, so they couldn't be seen. Oh, and to answer the question, Malleus is correct... far, far too much! لennavecia 21:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
The RfA Barnstar | |
| Indubitably, I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with 112 supports, 4 opposes and 5 neutrals. A special mention goes out to Stwalkerster and Pedro for nominating me, thanks a lot for having trust in me! In response to the neutrals, I will try to double check articles that have been tagged for speedy deletion before I CSD them and will start off slowly with the drama boards of ANI and AN to ensure that I get used to them. In response to the oppose !votes on my RfA, I will check that any images I use meet the non-free content criteria and will attempt to handle any disputes or queries as well as I can. If you need my help at all, feel free to simply ask at my talk page and I'll see if I can help. Once again, thank you for your participation, and have a great day! :) The Helpful One 22:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC) |
design by neurolysis | to add this barnstar to your awards page, simply copy and paste {{subst:User:Neurolysis/THOBS}} and remove this bottom text | if you don't like thankspam, please accept my sincere apologies
Username Pronounciation
Don't know if you saw the reply on Keeper's talk page, but, the pronounciation listed there is correct: "Us Eight". It has a backstory, should you ever care to hear it. Useight (talk) 17:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)