Open main menu

User talk:Doug Weller

The current date and time is 14 November 2018 T 13:05 UTC.

User:Doug Weller
User talk:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Workshop
Special:Prefixindex/User:Doug Weller
User:Doug Weller/Userboxes
Special:Contributions/Doug Weller
Special:Emailuser/Doug Weller
home

Talk Page

Workshop

Site Map

Userboxes

Edits

Email

Notice Coming here to ask why I reverted your edit? Read this page first...
Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia.

If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click here to start a new topic.
If I have not made any edits in a while, (check) you may get a faster response by posting your request in a more centralized place.



You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise. Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.

Contents

Was blocked unjustly, and via circular reasoningEdit

Hello! You blocked me. This I circular reasoning for the first delete by Yaniv was inappropriate. He called my post “garbage”. I have a right to appeal to the editors board and speak, and people have been siding with me, but you and others keep blocking me! For nothing I’ve done on the administrators page! This is not okay! You aren’t using logic or sources, but ridiculous rules that you use whenever you feel it meets your agenda! STOP! Thank you for your time!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.203.4.16 (talk) 05:05, 4 September 2018‎ (UTC)

ARBCOMEdit

Please tell me you're planning on running again? Vanamonde (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: thanks, but why would I do that? 4 years seems enough. :-) Hopefully there are a number of good editors out there planning to run. Doug Weller talk 20:07, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm sure 4 years feels like far too many. But it would be great to see you run again even so. No doubt there will be the usual e-bay-style flurry in the closing minutes of the nom period. Johnbod (talk) 20:14, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I can see why longer than four years may seem too long. Your workload seems to have eased off of late, though. I'm not sure that there are enough editors looking to run, which was part of what prompted my question...there's only three candidates, and 1 admin, running as I write this. Vanamonde (talk) 20:24, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Naw, you should do it anyway. I hope you do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi Doug, I would really like to see you run again. You're an excellent Arb, and reliable and sensible. We need good candidates; currently there are only three people running to fill six seats, and two of those three are not even administrators. Please continue to be of service this way, if you are able to. Softlavender (talk) 10:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • (+1) Prolific contributions to main-space and one of the most sensible folks of the outgoing lot; I do hope to see you back:-)WBGconverse 15:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
    • Although I'm still listening, I'm still loathe to run. Even when ArbCom is quiet, I still find even just keeping up with my watchlist time-consuming. And our email load seems to have risen considerably. Hopefully some of the other outgoing Arbs will run again. Doug Weller talk 15:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
      • Just thought to check and I see Courcelles, an ex-Arb, has thrown his hat into the ring. Doug Weller talk 15:28, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
        • Oh, that is good to see. There's still five other seats to fill, though. :-) Vanamonde (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
        • And I'm happier still to see you went for it. Much appreciated. Vanamonde (talk) 22:24, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for running. Softlavender (talk) 02:57, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Reliable sources??Edit

Bernstein yes, Pipes obviously no. Doug Weller talk 15:22, 8 November 2018 (UTC) @Kansas Bear:. Doug Weller talk 15:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

User:65.24.196.61Edit

Hi, Doug, there's a user that has been persistently vandalising the Aesop page since the start of the month, despite warnings. It's a new user, probably some childish schoolboy, who might need a short block to bring him to his senses. Sweetpool50 (talk) 11:59, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Sweetpool50: sorry, I missed this. Seems quiet now however, and I see another Admin seems to be watching the page. Doug Weller talk 19:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Your comment at ARCAEdit

Hi. I'm writing here to reduce clutter. In your comment here, you say you can't "go back" to 1RR because 1RR is already the rule. But that's not the point.

The current situation is "1RR + this convoluted rule". If you remove the convoluted part, you'll be left with plain 1RR. That's what I asked for. You can certainly do this. Whether you think it's wise is a different question, but you certainly have the capability to do it. Kingsindian   04:14, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Dragon's TriangleEdit

You have reverted ALL my edit. Do you mean Japanese newspapers are not reliable? Onhigan (talk) 11:53, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I am waiting your reply. Onhigan (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Onhigan: I'd say you were impatient, but I replied on your talk page within minutes of your post. Please respond there. You can ping me with {{ping|Doug Weller}} Doug Weller talk 13:28, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
I know that and I have responded on my talk page. Onhigan (talk) 13:33, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Fake Sasanid prince?Edit

Raidashir?? I am not finding any sources. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

All these people have 15 spellings. I suspect he existed, but this 2nd edit in 2005 suggests trouble - you might check the other edits of the isp. Johnbod (talk) 17:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

ShebaEdit

I confess to be not happy with your move from Sheba to Kingdom of Sheba. Look at templates such as Template:Book of Joel: all short names. IF you believe in the move, please clean up after it: in the article, and mimimum in templates which link, because they don't work for redirects. I did the three templates for you, but believe the best action would be to revert the move, and the 3 changes in templates, for consistency with other biblical places. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: ok, I'll revert, but it isn't just a biblical place and I suspect the other editor will do a move. I was going to fix the article but somehow got distracted, too much multi-tasking! Doug Weller talk 18:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
No problem, I know multi-tasking, got reminded today that I left an article unfinished that is in the queue for DYK tomorrow (done), and didn't supply promised references for a discography (not done yet) ;) - How about two articles for Sheba, - the biblical and the other? But again, I suggested two articles for Luther's hymn and its translation, and was reverted twice (once last year), and accused of "deliberate misleading" (see talk). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:18, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: I've reverted the templates and your edit to Sheba so those are fixed now I hope. Maybe you could comment on the article's talk page? I'm going to be too busy for a few days I think answering questions to do anything more. I've given in to requests above and via email. I've already been told I'm crazy for doing it again. :-) I've got to go reheat my dinner now! Doug Weller talk 18:23, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Coincidence?Edit

After you addressed another IP/editor using said PA.[2] --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Kansas Bear: I can't find the editor I addressed, but this one seems to be from Vermont given their first edit. Possibly COI. Doug Weller talk 19:40, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Eraj b Far0den? --Kansas Bear (talk) 21:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Very different interests. Doug Weller talk 19:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

ARC declinedEdit

FYI, there was an arbitration case request filed involving you that has now been declined. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 07:54, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #338Edit

who are you and why is this message sent to my IP?Edit

Using talk pages to rant about a religion can get you blocked Doug Weller talk 09:52, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

I have a floating IP so I guess you are sending this to someone else?

Perhaps this is not a good method for communicating with users?

Maybe they should be signed in to comment?

Regardless, the person you were addressing will have got a new IP when they reset their device, like I did today, and then I saw that message! Which means they didn't see it!

Hope that clears up floating IP's for you?

Cheers :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.141.252 (talk) 19:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! Thank you very much for your continued support.Edit

Thanks for the reply! Thank you very much for your continued support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orugaberuteika (talkcontribs) 13:39, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

HiEdit

Hi Doug, sorry to bother you, more than month ago about the situation in the Saudi page with Oxfordlaw, you asked me to open a RfC to see the result. I did, and more people supported one section over different sections for the pre-Islamic period of Saudi Arabia[3]. When I changed the article to accommodate the result, Oxfordlaw reverted me by saying that this version was in place for much longer and gained much support. However, in reality 1) the pinged users preferred the "one section" over every kingdom/state having its separate sections[4], [5] 2) the 3O discouraged multiple sections "There probably shouldn't be separate sections for Lihyan, Nabataean, Dilmun, Thamud and Kindah, etc." 3) the RfC result, was that, more people preferred one section over multiple sections.

I have done really everything to gain consensus, from pinging users to asking for 3O and opening a DRN (which he failed to participate in) to requesting comments. It is worth noting that the said user was recently banned in Saudi Arabia article for edit warring over Khashoggi incident. Nabataeus (talk) 07:27, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Doug Weller".