User talk:PCHS-NJROTC/Archive 4

Hello!

Hi, PCHS-NJROTC! I'm very delighted to tell you I have been adopted by Peterdownunder. Thank you for the happy suggestion. Happy New Year~! Classical Esther (talk) 09:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Great to hear! You have a Happy New Year as well! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 14:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

ACC

I wish to obtain access to the WP:ACC tool. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

re Delicious Carbuncle

It really would be for the best if you did not involve yourself in the above editors talkpage unless it is a matter you are already involved in. I can take care of myself, thanks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I know, I only did that for the sake of clearing it out of the queue of people asking to be unblocked. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

You've been asked repeatedly to disengage from Delicious carbuncle. These edits [1] and [2] show you are continuing to abuse of your editing privledges. This is totally unacceptable and is clear harassment. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to be civil, but where does it all stop? He threatens me, he continues to insist on bans, how can I be expected not to submit heated replies now and then? He's harassing me, I can't even pull myself away from WP because I fear DC's got some kind of nonsense started again. He harasses me on Christmas and New Years. He is just plain being rediculous. Yet I try so hard to be civil and polite, I offer him WP:TEA and wish him Merry Chistmas/Happy New Year. I did not start all of this again, DC did with his nonsenscial user subpage. Furthermore, what did I do wrong closing that unblock request? If DC wants to report the admin, he needs to do it at WP:AN/I. I've supported the interaction ban because I'm sick of this abuse. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

None of that explains the two edits ChildofMidnight highlighted. Totally unnecessary. You need to disengage just as much as the other party. Wknight94 ^talk 21:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Clearly you're both at fault, as several editors have noted. He's just been blocked for 10 minutes, and I expect you will be also if you don't drop it. You should have been blocked for the above cited edits.

Sometimes you just have to ignore things. I know it's hard and responding can be tempting, but if things are already going your way (as at the Admin noticboard) adding fuel to the fire isn't constructive. If you leave him alone and he comes after you he will be blocked. If he leaves you alone and you continue to go after him you will be blocked. If you continue to go after each other, I expect you will both be blocked. None of those are useful outcomes. Just take a break or work on something else. If you can't restrain yourself from commenting then don't read or look at what he's up to. Cheers. Good luck. And Happy New Year! ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Agree entirely with CoM. You say you agree with calls to disengage, put your money where your mouth is and do it. Just ignore DC, hopefully he will do the same. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Let me pile on. If this means what I assume it does, you're dropping it and pretending it never happened, right? "Fault" doesn't matter, but I do hope (and request) you'll leave the drama alone. CoM can probably suggest many pages that need creating. tedder (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I was actually trying to get into ACC as you can see, although I wouldn't be opposed to article building. I guess my interest is mostly with the technical behind the seens work because of my interests in information technology. I'll take your advice and build some articles. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm a geek too. I've written more than one or two perl scripts to help me add data to a series of articles. The advantage of article-building is it gets you away from the areas that, frankly, are causing you trouble. tedder (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:RfA prefers that one has contributed to articles too, and I hope to eventually become an admin once I feel I'm up to the task (certainly not at present). I say article building and more participation in non-vandalism/troll related discussions (such as AfD, which I've been participating more in lately). RC patrol was always neat because I could revert several vandalism incidents in a short period of time (i.e. back when I could get on here from school I would RC patrol the last two minutes of class and could revert as much as 10 incidents). Vandal fighting is becomeing ugly however; vandals are stalking me on multiple wikis and even finding me on social networks. I'm not opposed to less vandal fighting and more contributions elsewhere, however, I'd rather not volunteer to completely abandon it as I have previously found vandalism without even looking for it. However, for a refreshing break, I have already volunteered to abandon LBHSC issues. I've become less active at WP:ABUSE anyway mainly because I've gotten burned out on it, I wasn't even aware of the changes until long into the revamp. No one ever questioned my activities before, that may be why some see me a drama hungry. Now's a chance to gain more expeience with other elements of the project. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:40, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Easy does it

Go get some WP:TEA. I'll make sure you aren't railroaded. You're trying too hard at WP:AN and this will work against you. Jehochman ^Brrr 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

:)Hi Again

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. Thank you for your kind and encouraging message. I am afraid Delicious Carbuncle was mistaken about my writing: I was neither "playing" nor "pretending", or violating copyright intentionally - indeed, I can honestly say I wrote the larger part of it myself. I consider Wikipedia very seriously indeed. And my sister's email to DC was simply an explanation of the confusion that had ensued from her "joke", which I am certain she will not repeat. However, I am very honored indeed to see you are so kindly concerned for me, and thankful for it. Bye, and happy new year! Classical Esther (talk) 06:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Woohoo! My first barnstar!!

Thanks! And I'm sorry about being uncivil and not assuming good faith in the past. I'm doing my best to change my ways. Keegscee (talk) 04:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

No problem! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 19:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Don't be prejudice

Hi PCHS-NJROTC, please see User talk:174.106.0.122, the anon has agreed upon a version which states; "it is morally wrong and can conflict with the goals of the project", and I have implemented this upon the page. Is this version alright with you? Kindest regards, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for your mediation. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 18:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Guess who just reared "her" ugly head(s)?

If you guessed a certain account which claims to be a high school cheerleader in Florida, you'd be right. See this insanity. I know it's colder than normal down your way, but jeez, you think those idiots would find something more constructive to do with their time. Gotta run; always a pleasure chatting with you! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:19, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

• Didn't get it, but not surprising. I can't get this darn system to send me anything. I'll PM you with one of my direct personal addresses. The one I use here goes to my work address which I rarely check. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Abuse response/212.219.143.250

I see you are the investigator. I have just blocked this IP for a further 3 months, as silly/rude vandalism started within days of the previus month's block expiring. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Got your e-mail...I went ahead and semi-protected Cheerleading for a little while. That should hopefully plug the last hole in the dike. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Range block request

WP:AN/I isn't the right venue for your request. Regular administrators don't have access to the IPs being used by this person. Take it to WP:SPI and get one of the checkusers to sort it out. Also, try not to let them bother, since I'm pretty sure you've given them the reactions they want. AniMate 06:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, yes, but this isn't about any of the registered accounts; this is about abuse from the IP range. I did try to handle it through off-wiki email in order to WP:DENY, but the user I emailed just went on a well deserved wikibreak, and I wasn't sure who else to email about it. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Administrators have no way of knowing IP ranges without a checkuser. You can ask all you want for a range block, but we don't have access to IPs unless the edits are made while logged out. SPIs aren't just about registered accounts, they're about the user controlling the accounts and blocking their access to Wikipedia. Be forewarned, I've filed reports against users on highly dynamic IPs. All the checkuser could do is block the account, since the collateral damage would have been too high for a range block. If you know some of the IPs you can use this tool to see how many users would potentially be blocked. Using just four of the IPs a puppeteer was using, I found over 500,000 users could potentially be blocked so a range block was out and the checkuser didn't offer. Still, this is the best option for dealing with an editor who is harassing you and frankly the only option you really have. AniMate 20:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Up to 128 users would be affected by blocking 69.171.160.0/25, and who's to say that any of them have anything useful to contribute. My purpose for proposing the range block had nothing to do with any registered account, but rather contributions coming from IPs such as 69.171.160.8, 69.171.160.21, 69.171.160.58, and 69.171.160.104. Abuse reports have not worked, and if any of the 128 users that would be affected have anything useful to contribute, they can request unblock, although I recommend having them have their ISP contact an administrator in that case. Employees of Best Buy would be unable to contribute because the entire Best Buy range is hardblocked due to the untracability of their customers, so I have no sympathy for 128 users of an uncooperative ISP. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk to a checkuser and file a report. I can't think of any admin who would do a range block without concrete technical evidence backed up by a checkuser. Just complaining isn't going to get any results. AniMate 21:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/John254. I don't know if the IP is related to this troll or not, but I think you're missing my point. I originally started the thread at WP:AN/I because of actions from logged out, unregistered users editing from IPs in that range. Since they didn't use accounts, there's no need for a checkuser, although if it turns out that any of John254/User:LBHS Cheerleader's vandalism from registered accounts originated from that range, then it's just more evidence in support of a range block. Furthermore, the examples aren't the only IPs in the range involved, but I wanted to avoid writing a textbook chapter (that would never be read) about the vandal. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of PCS Revenue Control Systems

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is PCS Revenue Control Systems. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PCS Revenue Control Systems. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Port Charlotte High School

Hi there.I was studying the Port Charlotte High School article and I noticed you were the main editor of the article. I edit high schools almost exclusively and would really like to help improve this article. I have a few suggestions and questions. I was wondering if you were going to expand the athletics section since there is almost no information about the athletics department. Also, nearly every school of this size offers golf, yet I didn't see it listed on the page. Finally, I could create a state championships table for this article if I knew of all the state championships the school has won. If you know where I could find a list, I would for sure make a table for you. Any comments or suggestions? --JHawk88 (talk) 12:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Golf is indeed offered, I must have somehow left it off when adding the list of sports, or perhaps the source I failed to include it for whatever reason. I'm sure there must be a list of championships won somewhere, perhaps you would be able to find it, or maybe I could ask the principal. If you have any ideas, be bold and contribute! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

What a pleasure it was to log on this morning and see not one but two Barnstars! Thank you very, very much for the one you left for me. I'd tried a wikibreak for a couple of weeks and I'm still fairly inactive, but it was no less a pleasure to see your thoughtful gesture. Glad you thought of me.  :) Here's hoping that the semi-literate little demon spawns from Lemon Bay have gotten the message at last. If not, you know that I have your back. Good luck in school and enjoy your weekend. Regards, --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

PMDrive1061 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

You're welcome, and thanks for the cookie! Thanks for helping me deal with the vandals too! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

What a bunch of punks.

Tell you what: I will personally take the initiative and block that range, "collateral damage" be damned. If there's one thing I cannot stand, it's a coward hiding behind a computer keyboard. They're gone in just a moment. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you so much! As I had pointed out at WP:AN/I, the collateral damage would likely be less than that at the average school based on a tool I was instructed to run. I recommend you leave a rangeblock message stating "please have your ISP contact me or a Wikipedia administrator to have this block lifted" as I had recommended at AN/I. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

• All set. I blocked the 0 to 16 range for one year which should take care of most of their addresses. To be safe and to avoid some collateral damage, I did allow the creation of new accounts. Anyone trying to log on via the range will be instructed to create a new account. If any new sockpuppet accounts appear, let me know and I'll change the block. Gotta boogie. Don't let these little bastards grind you down. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:54, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Oversight

In future if anyone posts information that is an attack or outing, contact the Oversight volunteers who can suppress that edit. I've already done so for four edits that linked to the blog. Fences&Windows 15:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PcsRcsLogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PcsRcsLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 20:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Your edit to William F Buckley

Please do not arbitrarily edit pages when you know not what you are talking about. Anyone who is in the know knows it was the 1968 democratic Convention when the legendary Vidal/Buckley feud took place. Either your edit was vandalism or severe ignorance Sayyed al afghani (talk) 21:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't have put it so harshly, but the feud did take place at the Democratic National Convention. Keegscee (talk) 00:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, she/he changed a perfectly good correct edit to one which was wrong without bothering to check. Sayyed al afghani (talk) 12:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Note that I didn't post one of those threatening warning templates on the IP's talk page. I looked over it a bit, but if you think that people are going to thoroughly look into every IPs edit, you must not have a lot of experience here. If I had a dime for every time I've seen an RC patrol revert good edits from IPs (including one of my own when I forgot to log in), I'd be a millionare. You have to see that it looks kind of suspicious when some random IP changes one word in an article to its exact opposite without even an edit description. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

So essentially you just admitted that you don't assume good faith when it comes to IPs. Keegscee (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, it's a wide spread problem. Especially, as I said, when they change something to it's opposite without even an edit summary. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

AIV message

Hey PCHS, this isn't helpful on the AIV board. File a sock complaint and maybe ask for a checkuser to make future indef blocks easier, but don't clutter up the board--that's not the place for discussions and accusations from either side. I understand you're pretty rightfully ticked off, but count to 10, make some coffee, and come back to it later--be the bigger person. Good luck with it, Drmies (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the advice. Actually, I thought their attempt at trolling was funny, but very inappropriate and unacceptable. This has been mentioned at WP:SPI. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 14:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Right on. You're dealing with some teenager with little better to do. Rely on WP policy and people's short attention span. ;) Drmies (talk) 14:43, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Happy PCHS-NJROTC's Day!

User:PCHS-NJROTC has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as PCHS-NJROTC's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear PCHS-NJROTC! Peace, Rlevse 04:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 04:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks much, I feel so honored to receive such acknowledgement! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

keegscee spi

might as well leave the name there. We don't want a CU to miss it. Its still in a sig in the page, its in the history and it might help them figure out the socking.--Crossmr (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be possible to rename the account then? PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 20:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Bad idea

As the author of this essay you should know better than to create this page. I don't think a trout goes nearly far enough in regards to your inability to take your own advice. AniMate 21:38, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I tried. I failed. Many people here are reasonable. However, I feel many unreasonable people are running them away. For the record, that page I just made is for my own reference, not to attack. I will eventually move on, but for now, I have to say I am honestly ashamed to be a member of this project because of the actions that are apparently A-OK according to a small, yet dominant group of the users here. May I ask, do you think there's hope for this wiki? Can it someday be neutral again? Or is it destined to crumble? PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 22:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

If you really feel the need to keep that list then you should do it somewhere else. Beach drifter (talk) 23:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:PCHS-NJROTC/RW editors at WP

User:PCHS-NJROTC/RW editors at WP, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:PCHS-NJROTC/RW editors at WP and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:PCHS-NJROTC/RW editors at WP 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. Beach drifter (talk) 23:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

Hey, sorry I didn't know about the 3RR and I WON'T violate it again. Thanks for letting me know.

(Amandaxpandax14 (talk) 22:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC))

Drama proneness

Seeing you pop up for the umpteenth time on AN or ANI, I feel obliged to ask if you're aware that you're bringing drama on yourself. First cheerleaders and blog stalkers, now Rational Wiki. Most editors get on fine without regularly needing to post new threads at the dramaboards, so I suggest taking a step back and looking at why it is you get entangled in these disputes. Fences&Windows 23:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I know. I didn't expect the RW stuff to make me popular, but I think it's best for Wikipedia's sake that some of the RW people back off. It pretty much has to involve some sort of drama to attract me here right now; I'm kind of sort of on a semi wikibreak. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:12, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Drama attracted you, you say? Not the other way around? You think by trolling people are going to back off? What do you even mean by that? This is the same old problem with you. Your seem to think it's your job to police the wiki, to interpret and enforce policy. If you want to play games, then play games, but don't act like this is all in good faith. Beach drifter (talk) 01:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Whatever, say what ever you want. Go ahead and assume bad faith Mr. Beach Drifter, but I can't stick my head in the sand while people disgrace WP with their political nonsense. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

BTW, a WP:Nice cup of tea and a sit down might do good for you, BD. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I've seen some diffs that show some nonsense alright. But I'm sure you've matured since then. Beach drifter (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Been here three years. The day one stops maturing is the day one dies. Hey, I know it may sometimes look like I can't just mind my own business, but in fact, User:Keegscee was hounding me about things that were none of his business, which alerted me of comments on his user page, so I started an AN/I about it. He ended up blocked, and after a nice CU mess, I moved on. Then he emailed me. I reported it to the WMF postmaster who hasn't yet revoked his access to email. I look around and find him on RW, and this gets me interested in their activities. The thing about me is once I get started, I don't stop; I never give up. Basically, people can save them selves a LOT of drama by not engaging me; it's nothing for me to whip up a nice drama fest for them, usually in good faith, nailing them down for things they have done wrong. Sorry if it appears to you as bad faith or failure to mind my own business, but it gets old to always see some nosey liberal/cheerleader from rival school/pedophile/vandal that hounds me for little things while they are no angel themselves.

BD, I suggest you take a lesson from Keegscee; if you're always hounding me, and you're doing something wrong, I'll pick up on it and likely by accident. I generally don't go out of my way to railroad anybody, but there's some things that shouldn't be ignored, like Keegsee's immaturity. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:55, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

So, in short, since I find your trollish behavior deplorable, you threaten to "railroad" me? Beach drifter (talk) 01:59, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't approve of your referring to me as a troll Mr. I'm not threatening to "railroad" you but rather saying don't step out of line. I find your behavior to be trollish and deplorable. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:03, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

This conversation isn't going to be productive. Beach drifter, leave him alone or discuss his behavior in the proper venue, ie WP:RFC/U or WP:AN/I. PCHS-NJROTC, you're displaying the moral absolutism that only a teenager has. People keep picking at you and bothering you because you give them the exact response they want. You're perfect flame bait, because you're not yet mature enough to rise above it. When I was a teenager, I remember always desperately wanting to be treated like an adult. My parents always said they would do so when I acted like an adult. Start acting like an adult and stop entering into useless drama. We're here to build an encyclopedia, and if you're smart you'll ignore all of the meta crap that gets you so riled up. The best defense against what you see as offensive behavior from Rational Wiki, is to improve articles with solid, reliable sourcing. Not fighting and making silly lists. You'll find you're reception here a lot more rewarding, if you start behaving like someone who isn't just interested in online flame wars. AniMate 02:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I know all of this. I can rise above it. I should rise above it. I have been a WP:RBI person (on and off wiki). And here's a trout to me for WP:Feeding the trolls.

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

BTW, before the excess dramafesting, I had a decent reputation here. Conservapedia doesn't even allow links to RW at all because they basically do what you just said; they don't give them the satisfaction. It's less of an age thing and more of a pride thing; I gave trolls less direct attention three years ago. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to give you one more bit of advice. Look at you edit count. Less than a quarter of your edits are to actual articles and article talk. You spend the majority of your time on user talk pages and in Wikipedia space. If you're wondering why you're disillusioned with Wikipedia, it's because your focusing solely on drama. Get an article up to WP:GA status. Get some WP:DYKs under your belt. Worrying about user pages or others political beliefs is pointless, we're here to edit an encyclopedia. I think for every edit you make to user talk or Wikipedia space, you should try to make twenty to article space. Not reverts or other script assisted edits, but actual meaningful edits. I'm not sure what areas you're interested in, but I can guarantee you that there articles than need some TLC. If you can't think of any articles, try User:SuggestBot/Requests for some ideas. If you feel the need to battle Rational Wiki, do so elsewhere. Who cares what people have on their user pages anyway? AniMate 02:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:PCHS-NJROTC. Thank you. —DoRD (talk) 02:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

RW section

It'd be great if you could explain on the talk page how and why it is relevant to include the "owner" of the site in the small section, and also if you could heed your own advice about drama. Beach drifter (talk) 01:54, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I fail to see how just adding a fact should be so dramatic. Although you do make a good point; go look at CP's talk page. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:59, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Abuse responce

Just to let you know, you have an open case still at Wikipedia:Abuse response/212.219.143.250. If you are unable to finsh it at this time, please reset the status to new. Thank you. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 00:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Just to let you know, you have an open case still at Wikipedia:Abuse response/24.106.28.122. If you are unable to finsh it at this time, please reset the status to new. Thank you. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 00:03, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. You have new messages at MWOAP's talk page.
Message added 01:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 01:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. You have new messages at MWOAP's talk page.
Message added 01:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 01:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Abuse

The case at Wikipedia:Abuse response/24.106.28.122 is ready for contact. :) I appreciate your patience with me as I am dealing with off-wiki issues that limit my time on-wiki. Let me know if you need anything. ^Avicenna_sis @ 21:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Abuse Team IRC

Hi! Just to let you know that several members of Wikipedia:Abuse are meeting on the IRC server regularly. We are in the channel #wikipedia-en-abuse. Hope to see you on there :) Enti342 (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Keegscee

RE: Keegscee RFAR. I don't even remember this and merely blocking someone does not defacto make you involved. So I don't think that I'd necessarily be involved. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:02, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Beach Drifters Behavior

I have moved your criticisms of my behavior here for your convenience. A long drawn out debate of my editing history has no place on the sock page. Beach drifter (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The 69.171.160.110 IP has plenty of vandal edits, and has had some personal attack edits against PCHS. This is not something I have ever done. None of my edits are vandalism. I simply reverted or argued with PCHS over edits I disagreed with. Pretty standard Wiki stuff. As for off-wiki activities I'm not sure what PCHS is getting at. I am aware that he has had run ins with numerous others on numerous other websites, he seems to play the same games there that he does here. To constantly try to link us all together is laughable, this is the internet for crying out loud, and it seems to be making him paranoid. Beach drifter (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The issue at hand is that you have been making controversial and sometimes even uncivil comments under your IP address, and then when I asked if you knew anything about it (which was a test, by the way), you denied it. You can say you didn't deny it all you want, but saying Looks like an IP with about twenty random edits. Likely has an account or a more frequent IP based on the random areas of editing. Couldn't tell you much else at first glance. is pretty much denying relation. This leads me to believe that you've deliberately logged out to conduct questionable or even malicious actions in hopes that no one would figure you out. We consider this to be sockpuppetry. By the way, you can choose not to believe it if you so desire, but I was not going out of my way to catch you doing wrong; I figured this one out by accident keeping tabs on the Road Runner IP address (which turned out to be you) because I considered that person to be a troll, and quite frankly, a creep. I'm honestly sad to see such behavior was actually coming from a registered user here. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC) Just as an added note, you shouldn't revert a vandal logged in and leave a non-standard, somewhat uncivil warning for the vandal logged out if you don't want to be figured out.

In response to BD, the specific part of WP:SOCK that BD seems to be violating is "Good hand" and "bad hand" accounts. My better judgement says that there is grounds for administrative actions, but if only the user could take some sort of responsiblity here, and agree to alter his behavior, then maybe this could be handled informally without all of the drama. For example, BD has expressed that he has only engaged in "pretty standard wiki stuff," yet I beg to differ that posting Get off your high horse, we all know you enjoy this crap. from in response to a user one disagrees with, using an IP address instead of his username, is "pretty standard wiki stuff." So if we look at the multiple identities, incivility, creeping on and off wiki, trying to deny the fact until he sees that someone has evidence, and the fact that it seems BD sees nothing wrong at all with what he's doing... you make the call. If only he could take some responsibility for his actions. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Beach Drifters Behavior

I have moved your criticisms of my behavior here for your convenience. A long drawn out debate of my editing history has no place on the sock page. Beach drifter (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The 69.171.160.110 IP has plenty of vandal edits, and has had some personal attack edits against PCHS. This is not something I have ever done. None of my edits are vandalism. I simply reverted or argued with PCHS over edits I disagreed with. Pretty standard Wiki stuff. As for off-wiki activities I'm not sure what PCHS is getting at. I am aware that he has had run ins with numerous others on numerous other websites, he seems to play the same games there that he does here. To constantly try to link us all together is laughable, this is the internet for crying out loud, and it seems to be making him paranoid. Beach drifter (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The issue at hand is that you have been making controversial and sometimes even uncivil comments under your IP address, and then when I asked if you knew anything about it (which was a test, by the way), you denied it. You can say you didn't deny it all you want, but saying Looks like an IP with about twenty random edits. Likely has an account or a more frequent IP based on the random areas of editing. Couldn't tell you much else at first glance. is pretty much denying relation. This leads me to believe that you've deliberately logged out to conduct questionable or even malicious actions in hopes that no one would figure you out. We consider this to be sockpuppetry. By the way, you can choose not to believe it if you so desire, but I was not going out of my way to catch you doing wrong; I figured this one out by accident keeping tabs on the Road Runner IP address (which turned out to be you) because I considered that person to be a troll, and quite frankly, a creep. I'm honestly sad to see such behavior was actually coming from a registered user here. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC) Just as an added note, you shouldn't revert a vandal logged in and leave a non-standard, somewhat uncivil warning for the vandal logged out if you don't want to be figured out.

In response to BD, the specific part of WP:SOCK that BD seems to be violating is "Good hand" and "bad hand" accounts. My better judgement says that there is grounds for administrative actions, but if only the user could take some sort of responsiblity here, and agree to alter his behavior, then maybe this could be handled informally without all of the drama. For example, BD has expressed that he has only engaged in "pretty standard wiki stuff," yet I beg to differ that posting Get off your high horse, we all know you enjoy this crap. from in response to a user one disagrees with, using an IP address instead of his username, is "pretty standard wiki stuff." So if we look at the multiple identities, incivility, creeping on and off wiki, trying to deny the fact until he sees that someone has evidence, and the fact that it seems BD sees nothing wrong at all with what he's doing... you make the call. If only he could take some responsibility for his actions. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 18:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

My edits are only controversial to you, you are only making an issue out of this because you are offended. Pointing out that you have an attitude problem is not uncivil, it is obvious. I edited logged out because you have a history of this kind of harassment. I don't have to answer to you, I don't need to be "responsible" for my behavior, I don't need to seek your "leniency". You annoy me, and so I annoy you. My edits in relation to you are silly, immature, and harmless, get over them. You certainly went out of your way, you must of spent a lot of time going through my edit history, several hundred deep. You are attempting to carrying out your promise, when you told me a few months that you make people sorry who cross you. I'm not sorry, I don't care. My edits while logged out are not vandalism, they are not "bad hand" edits, they were simply pointing out that someone out there really, really disagrees with the way you pursue things on here. That is what I mean by standard stuff, the banter. So in conclusion, I see no incivility, definitely no "creeping", I've never run into you elsewhere, it's flat out ridiculous that you think I would follow you around, stalk you. My IP edits are four months old. Move on. Beach drifter (talk) 23:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I personally disagree, but I'll leave it at that. What "other websites" are you referring to that I apparently "play games" on? I know as much as you know that your IP was snooping around on my accounts off-wiki, but I don't know what "games" you might be referring to. I do hope you realize that the only reason I got involved in this is because I now consider you a blatant troll, and there is no room for trolls on Wikipedia. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess you decided you didn't want the clerks to handle this anymore? Beach drifter (talk) 00:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I do, but they're not working fast enough. I'm sick of arguing about this already. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

So, in short, you are (virtually) pulling your hair out to try and get me blocked for some nonsense from four months ago? Beach drifter (talk) 00:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Would it be possible for the two of you to agree to avoid each other? This is ridiculous. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:37, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

It is entirely ridiculous, and before yesterday's SPI, there was no contact between us for about ninety days. Beach drifter (talk) 00:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be possible. Thanks for the mediation, and watch your email, NYB. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an admin.

You're barking up the wrong tree. Sorry. HalfShadow 00:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol, fail. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Keegskee

I just replied over on the arbcom cases page, but in my opinion, arbcom is the wrong venue for that. The community is able to handle the next step, which is a community ban proposal. Arbcom is needed in cases where the community can't or won't act; it's premature in this case (both on the level of abuse, and because a community ban wasn't tried/proposed yet).

I agree that his conduct reaches the minimal threshold for a ban, if he's been caught sockpuppeting to get around an indef block for that type of behavior, particularly if his behavior while socking was at least in part the stuff that got him blocked.

I can help file a community ban proposal on WP:AN if you like, but it's pretty simple to do it.

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 03:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Please, start the WP:AN. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 15:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, but the AN ban proposal discussion is now up. A large chunk of the proposal was a copy-paste of your section from the arbcom case filing, with credit for origin, as that was comprehensive and appropriate as a summation. Hope that was ok. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:04, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

dramaout

The next one should be in July. I notified Jayron32 (see his talk page). I took the liberty of mentioning your possible interest. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 18:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 04:04, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. You have new messages at Tommy2010's talk page.
Message added 16:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Tommy2010 16:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, PCHS-NJROTC. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Abuse response.
Message added 20:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry that I am doing this even after I asked you to come back. Didn't really know about this stuff. -- /DeltaQuad|Notify Me\ 20:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Note

You are being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed_amendment. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:SharedIPUSAF

Template:SharedIPUSAF has been nominated for merging with Template:SharedIP US military. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:SharedIPUSArmy

Template:SharedIPUSArmy has been nominated for merging with Template:SharedIP US military. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:SharedIPUSCG

Template:SharedIPUSCG has been nominated for merging with Template:SharedIP US military. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:SharedIPUSMC

Template:SharedIPUSMC has been nominated for merging with Template:SharedIP US military. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:SharedIPUSN

Template:SharedIPUSN has been nominated for merging with Template:SharedIP US military. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Unprotected talk page

Could you set up an unprotected talk page for non-autoconfirmed users to get in touch with you, as per Wikipedia:Protection_policy#User_pages, which I just had pointed out to me? If it doesn't work out, we can get rid of it later. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

PCHS-NJROTC, could you reply to this? Having a permanently protected talk page inhibits IP communication; f you would not like this page unprotected then having an unprotected talk page would be helpful. Please see this as well. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned this can be unprotected. It was protected to reduce drama from a handful of trolls, but most seem to be gone for now, and it's no big deal if they return there beyond the annoyance factor. I would rather the user page stay protected though because I might not immediately notice vandalism there, and there's really no reason for IPs to edit it without discussion anyway. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

SharedIP

GOV looks good. I concur about redirecting MIL to GOV and I'll see to it. I'll work on that image too. Glad to be working with you. --Bsherr (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 01:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:SharedIP US military

Template:SharedIP US military has been nominated for merging with Template:SharedIPGOV. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 16:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Hospital project

Doesn't sound like a bad idea. You might want to add it to the list of proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals and leave a few messages on the talk pages of the most relevant articles and see if there is enough interest to create it, or maybe work with the WikiProject Medicine to create it as a task force. In this case, considering that (I think) most if not all of the relevant content already falls within the scope of the Medicine project, it would probably be easier to work with them and create it as a task force. The difference between the two really is, well, minimal other than the difference of name. John Carter (talk) 20:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)