User:Tygrrr/Archive5
hi change
i would like to make a point about the proposed adoption. I was adopted on EN wikipedia... and I got banned there, but I am settling in fine here; be it even with a few ups and downs due quite frankly to the lack of consensus of policies here. I would certainly be far worse off if I had not been adopted. The reason I am banned is because someone else impersonated my account. Would you call that my fault? However, the disruption caused by this, and a small lie I told originally (that by its own would not have done any harm) in combination with the fact that the accounts pretending to be me were so disruptive meant that the community decided that even though it wasn't my fault, i didn't help matters, and in order to wait until people calmed down, I should wait a while... but they acknowledge that it wasn't me... which is why i am not indefinitely blocked... just until the whole thing settles down and they can be sure I will set up a responsible password etc next time. If you are standing by what you just suggested on the page, then I would suggest to you right now to go to the WP:AN and request that i am blocked from Simple Wiki too... Ben.(Talk).(Changes) 20:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, since I'm an administrator here, I wouldn't need to post it on the noticeboard, I could do it myself. And I do stand by what I said: I think mentorships allow for extra leniency, in many cases, unwarranted leniency. Also, frankly, I'm not particularly interested in hearing about how your block wasn't your fault. I'm not trying to be rude, but I feel that you will have to work hard here to prove that you're a serious editor (if you are) and I don't think you're doing a very good job of that so far. · Tygrrr... 21:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I've given him an ultimatum on his talk page. His last chance. If he blows this, then block him. Razorflame 21:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Forgive me for butting in here, but I feel I need to correct a few things Ben has said. The community did not acknowledge that the events on Wikipedia were not his fault. Far from it. It was only through my good graces that authorities were not contacted and the possibility of an eventual return was even considered. That said, Ben is most definitely indefinitely blocked, as well as being a baned user.
- Ben, you have got to stop creating drama everywhere you go. This must end. If you don't shape up, I will support calls for a ban here, as well, and if I see any nonsense from you and your friends to disrupt this website, I will definitely carry through on the agreement made on Wikipedia to contact your school and family. As your mentor on the other Wiki, I am telling you your behavior is unacceptable and must change immediately. Tygrrr, please see Creol's talk page for more information, if you want it. Jeffpw (talk) 21:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Note change
I will not stand by, though, if bad edits occur. Razorflame 21:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- And can I have temporary semiprotection of these pages:
- User:Razorflame/M
- User:Razorflame/M2
- User:Razorflame/M3
- User:Razorflame/ArticleArchive1
- User:Razorflame/ArticleArchive2
and temporary full protection of my userpage until this issue is decided? Razorflame 21:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
hi change
i don't understand how my edits have been disruptive. I am only editing in good faith :(
if there is something that I have done wrong... tell me, and explain it showing me the policy to back it up... rather than just shouting at me and threatening to block me... that didnt help in the least...
secondly... I cannot only edit on administrator's talk pages, as I have to talk to Jeffpw, my mentor, who is not an administrator, and IuseRosary, who I am in the 'music project' on here with or something... so I have to talk to both of them...
I dont know why you are all shouting @ me today... i have only been trying to help...
Ben(Talk).(Changes) 21:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Help us by ignoring all warnings we give you to stop reverting administrators changes? Gwib -(talk)- 21:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- You don't understand how you have been disruptive? Okay, I will be plain and clear: It is disruptive to change the colors on a mainspace page. It is disruptive to revert changes on simple talk when users are giving you a reason not to do what you were doing. It is disruptive to whine to multiple editors about "why?" and "i don't understand". It is disruptive to refuse to listen to what the community is telling you. It is disruptive to make multiple votes. And that is just today. I haven't been around the last few days to look at a full edit history.
- If you continue to not understand and continue to be disruptive you will be blocked. Do you really want to be blocked because of colors? · Tygrrr... 21:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- We don't have a policy because we've never had a need for one because it's common sense. Just let it go. · Tygrrr... 22:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- No policy, but there is a guideline covering it. "Formatting issues such as font size, blank space and color are issues for the Wikipedia site-wide style sheet and should not be dealt with in articles except in special cases. If you absolutely must specify a font size, use a relative size, that is, font-size: 80%; not an absolute size, for example, font-size: 8pt. It is also almost never a good idea to use other style changes, such as font family or color." And to think of all the people to forget the MOS, it would be the one who created the page... -- Creol(talk) 22:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- We don't have a policy because we've never had a need for one because it's common sense. Just let it go. · Tygrrr... 22:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
and can i edit other people's talk pages? how can you expect me to possibly even work here if you won't let me do that? Ben(Talk).(Changes) 22:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- No. Until further notice, you may only edit administrators' talk pages and Jeff's talk page. In particular, you need to stay away from IuseRosary's talk page and Razorflame's talk page. Even if you think it's dumb, just humor me and behave and these restrictions will be lifted. · Tygrrr... 22:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- er... i just edited Razorflames talk page :S
he's an administor, right? Ben(Talk).(Changes) 22:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, he's not. Here's a list of active admins. · Tygrrr... 22:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Email block change
Can you block his email here too please? He knows my email and might try to do something with it. Razorflame 22:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Done. · Tygrrr... 22:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding. Can you send me an email with a response to the question: How did I handle this issue please? Razorflame 22:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Iamandrewrice change
I can't believe I am defending him. I can understand ben getting upset at razorflame qd'ing the ghdredirect page. He actually had a decent stub going at Good Hair Day, since expanded at my suggestion. If Ben can keep up article work he could make a decent contribution to SEWP. Now he needs to be persuaded that a rule or a promise is designed to be kept not ignored--Bärliner 22:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- I also hope this is the only block he recieves. If all he had done was make a remark on Razorflame's talk page, he obviously wouldn't have been blocked. Unfortunately, he had been antagonistic, uncooperative, and disruptive for hours. He was refusing to listen to reason and for that he was blocked. For me, the edit to Razorflame's talk page was just the straw that broke the camel's back. He could have easily said something to me or you or another admin about his discontent about the QD tag on that redirect page. Or he could have waited and been content that we didn't QD it, thus showing that we aren't automatically against him or automatically taking sides against him. Let's hope that he comes back with a renewed effort at being productive around here. · Tygrrr... 23:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
What the hell? change
Simple english? What the hell? Can you explain what the hell this is? I don't know what the hell is going on. I was looking at english wikipedia and then it changed to simple english and what the hell? Then I got to your user page and I don't know how the hell that happened. How the hell do I get back and what the hell is this place? — This unsigned comment was added by 70.128.110.120 (talk • changes) on 23:34, 3 January 2008.
hello tygrrr change
I would like to say a few things...
First of all, I would like to say that I am a person that always makes sure he appologizes for what it is that he feels he has done wrong. However, I am also a person that will stick by his principles.
I would like to appologize greatly for the disruption yesterday. It was immature, thoughtless, and annoying, and I should have stopped when it was first reverted. However... having said that, I do feel that none of you in fact helped the situation either, as you continued playing a petty game of 'me write, you revert', without even using a policy to back up your claims, and instead saying it should be 'general common sense'. Well no, I do not think it is 'general common sense,' because to be quite blunt, you, as does no one else here, have the right to decide what 'common sense' is. Only the policies can do that, and since you didn't use the policies, you too were not playing by the rules... therefore, if you do not want a similar kind of event in the future, I strongly suggest that you use this incident as a small-scale preparation warning for now drawing up some policy guidelines on the matter. If it happens once, its probably going to happen again, and to be honest, you didn't deal with it appropriately this time (I am not trying to be rude here, just truthful... as if you provided me with a factual policy on the matter, I would have stopped), so I propose that by making the policies towards the matter now, we can then come to deal with a similar situation in the future, in a better way.
Also, when I was blocked, why was I not allowed to edit my talk page like a usual block?
And in addition to this, I still don't entirely understand why it is that I am not allowed to talk to other members...
However, since you are unnallowing me to do it, either way, there is a message I must get accross to Razorflame:
Razorflame... I am truthfully very very sorry for my outburst at you yesterday. Although that warning you left me was ... pointless... there was no need for me to snap at you, and I hope that you can forgive me. All that coloring in of the page was actually for you, because it was your post, and since you were my mentor, I wanted to do something to make you happy... I genuinely see you as a friend here, and hope that one moment of my stupidity will not harm that... which is why I hope that you will reconsider mentoring me again... after I am unblocked from editing your talk page. I know this is a lot to ask, but I don't want us to be enemies... and hope that we can work alongside eachother happily...
Well... that was kind of it guys... again, i'm sorry... Ben(Talk).(Changes) 09:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- First of all, thank you for apologizing for your disruptiveness. However, I feel I should clear a few things up in your message. If you look back, I think you'll notice that I didn't do any of the reverting to the colors (except to change a font size change that the others had missed). I was also far from the first person to tell you that what you were doing is not something that we do here, which does make it community consensus, which is very close to the idea of "common sense". I certainly wasn't trying to tell you it's my own common sense, only trying to point out that everyone is telling you it's our common sense. However, I did fail to point you to the guideline in the Manual of Style. Amusingly, I forgot we had anything about it in there, even though I was the one who "translated" it into Simple English from English Wikipedia. But since we have been reminded about this guideline by Creol, I think that is reason enough for you not change colors in any of the mainspace pages again.
- Secondly, I'm sorry you feel I didn't handle the situation appropriately but I have to disagree with you. I came into a situation that was an edit war and another situation that was quickly becoming heated between you and Razorflame. My first interaction with you in these situations was my message to you here. I intervened as an outsider into a hostile situation, and I happen to feel that I handled it just fine, even if you don't. So I'm afraid I won't apologize for something I didn't do. I do apologize, however, for not pointing you to the guideline that I forgot we had. I hope you'll forgive that because everyone makes mistakes, and the end result was that I was enforcing a guideline that we do in fact have.
- Finally, you are not allowed to talk to other users because you have shown in your short time here that you cannot handle the interactions effectively. If you show over the next few days that you can interact with administrators in a positive way and that you can communicate without being disruptive, I will lift this restriction. I'm sorry that it has to be this way, but, as I've said before, you will have to prove that you want to be a helpful editor in this community. Disruption and heated arguments are not helpful. Avoid these things and work on editing articles and I think you'll do fine here. Please try to remember that no one here is "against" you. I truly believe that everyone on this wiki wants you to be able to contribute positively here. We will do what we can to encourage you, but the ultimate goal of an administrator is to protect this wiki and we will do what we have to reach that goal. I hope you understand this.
- As one final note, I did see your edit to Snake311's page. I am not going to block you for it, only give you a reminder/warning to be more careful in the future. I highly suggest you become familiar with the list of administrators so that you know who you can talk to until your restriction is lifted. · Tygrrr... 15:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- When i said 'you', i was in fact referring on more than one occaision to many different people that may be reading this (since you have disallowed me from going round to each person talking to them!)
- Also, I read the colour section on that manual thing, and actually, if you want to put yourselves in the right, I suggest discussing your policies right now, as if you had read it properly, you would in fact find that I am the one who is correct, and that it is not true that I am unnallowed to add color... all it says is that one cannot use color as the only way of coding something, for color blind people... however, i did not use color as a way of coding, as I simply put subtitles in a different colour so that they would stand out more from the rest of the mass of text. Therefore, anyone who reverted my edits was actually 'vandalizing'... as removing constructive content is vandalism.
- Also, yes i understand that you have your jobs as an administrator, but without being rude, to be honest, I have a complete lack of respect for your decision to disallow me from talking to other users... as it is a waste of yours and my time. I am not an unpleasant person, but this is something that I feel very unnhappy with, as I do not feel like I have been going round being uncivil on user's talk pages. I have remained as polite as possible to them at all times. Therefore, stopping me from doing this simply because Razorflame thought that I was going to email him (EVEN THOUGH I DONT EVEN KNOW HIS EMAIL ADRESS... WHAT ON EARTH WAS HE ON ABOUT WHEN HE SAID I DID?!!!!!!!!) is completely unfair. When you compare this to what 'Snake' has done on Gwib's page, talking about a new user... i certainly think that you are looking at the wrong set of affairs here when there are more important issues such as that to be sorting out!
- And ok, i will use those terms from now on, but that is not what the discussion on the simple talk is about... it is about in which order the terms should come... Ben(Talk).(Changes) 15:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- To repeat what Creol said: "Formatting issues such as font size, blank space and color are issues for the Wikipedia site-wide style sheet and should not be dealt with in articles except in special cases. If you absolutely must specify a font size, use a relative size, that is, font-size: 80%; not an absolute size, for example, font-size: 8pt. It is also almost never a good idea to use other style changes, such as font family or color." Therefore, you are the one who was being disruptive.
- To say that you can't say anything to the users who reverted you is blatantly false. Creol, Huji, Browne34 and Oysterguitarist are all administrators.
- Also, I am tired of being a broken record. The restriction stands. Period. There are 28 users with sysop rights, 20 of whom lisst themselves as active. There are more than enough users for you to talk to if you have an issue or question.
- Don't even get me started on respect. Let's just say that I don't really care if you don't like my decision. It is necessary to try to control the disruption you have been causing since you arrived. It will stand until you can prove that you don't need it. And that is the final time I am going to say it.
- Don't worry about Snake311. Barliner, a capable admin, is dealing with it.
- One other thing, I know what the layout discussion is about. I was trying to help you out by telling you the wording we use here since you're new. Perhaps you could try to not be argumentative when someone helps you. · Tygrrr... 16:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's a shame you feel that way. I feel I've been plenty patient and civil with you. A person can only repeat themselves so many times before it becomes highly annoying to do so. If you re-read what I've said with an open mind, I think you'd see I've said many encouraging things to you, that I sincerely wish to see your attitude improve, that no one is against you, and we wish you'd be a productive non-disruptive member of our community. I guess if you think that's mean, there's nothing I can do to make you feel otherwise. · Tygrrr... 18:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- One last thing, to point you to the exact location on our MOS here about colors, it's not the one about color coding, it's the section directly above it: Formatting issues. I hope that helps you understand. · Tygrrr... 18:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Oh... thank you for pointing me to the exact bit of the policy. I was writing under false impressions for much of the time :S By the way, when talking about you, I don't ever know whether to refer to you as a he or a she (or an 'it')... what would you like to identify as? if you are prepared to disclose that information. Ben(Talk).(Changes) 18:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
i have a point... change
the phrase 'see also' is supposed to be a simplified version of 'internal links'... right? well... as a learner of several languages, and having in the past learnt many more from other continents (but since stopped), I find that this phrase does in fact warrant some difficulty in understanding. 'See' is a verb which means to 'look with the eyes', and unlike english, other languages do not then take this to mean 'read'... i suggest a further simplification in addition to the prospectus of uniformatizing the order in which the end notes come...
thus see also would become 'also read', 'read also', 'similar pages', or any other discoverable such alternative.
look youre mentioned on my user page change
are you going to mention me on yours? :) Ben(Talk).(Changes) 18:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Whatever, dude. You're really something else, you know that? I hate to say it, but I'll be very surprised if you last long around here. I don't think you have good intentions whatsoever at this wiki. If you do, quit talking to everyone and work on some articles, for crying out loud. This wiki isn't about all this petty crap you're doing. Quit disrupting me. Thanks. · Tygrrr... 19:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- You'll be surprised if i last long? now that is a personal attack! And for crying out loud what gender are you??? i am not going to give 3 different pronouns when mentioning you every single time. And you brought this on yourself. I put you as my best wiki friend, but no, you weren't happy... and also, in case you havn't noticed i cant even do most of the things I want to because I cant talk to most of the people I need to!!!!!!!!!! And also, yes I am really something else... just to let you know, I'm not the only one who has this oppinion of you, all my friends are discussing you... oh and also, I want to know how long I am going to go on without talking to other users? its a pointless thing because it means i just have to put in more effort and talk to them offwiki (which i am doing by the way)... so you havn't managed to do a thing by dealing me that condition... just thought I should tell you... it might allow you to become a better administrator next time... well actually... it is you... so maybe not. Ben(Talk).(Changes) 19:30, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
An appology change
I am writing to say that I formally appologize for putting your name on my userpage, since you found it innappropriate. You mentioned lastly however, that you doubt I will get very far here... don't you want me to get very far? :( 84.13.36.93 (talk) 20:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- I dunno that your apology could really help anything here now. I'm not taking sides, but apparently it looks like you have pushed all of the admins to a point where you could be banned indefinitely. Trust me, it could happen and it has happened before. Right now as I see it, your hanging on by a thread here since you haven't been listening to any of the admins' advices or taking the blocks seriously. I know what I'm saying may sound ridicious to you [Ben], but from a third or fourth-person's perspective, you really have pushed the admins to their limits, as if you were testing their patience or tolerance. Not just thinking the blocks as a joke, but by harrassing Tygrrr (sorry couldn't think of a nicer way to say it) which was mentioned above, using a handful of IP addresses to evade your block, and several other things. Like the admins, I really hoped that you would snap out of it and become a helpful contributor to this wiki but as the days pass, that hope seems to happen less likely. Please don't take the blocks personally and if you happen to be banned (which I hope not), I hope that you may at least learn a lesson so that you could probably receive a third chance in another wiki/wikia and be able to edit there. Thank you;)
Another Apology... change
Hello, I am sending this to all of the main users who I have been involved with or that may have been involed in my outbirst yesterday. I would like to apologise if you were involved in my outbirst yesterday. I'm sorry for wasted time and effort. I cannot justify my use of foul language, but neither can I say that it was not provocked. I feel I have let both you and simple wikipedia down. I hope you accept my apology. But on a personal note, directly to yourself, because you are and admin whom I have heard pleanty of good things about: Although I apologise to other users who may have been involved in my outbirst yesterday, I don't feel that I am ready to talk to User:Gwib at all yet. I would rater that he didn't contact me at all and I certainly will not be contacting him, I still feel very insulted that he questioned my practices and attitudes towards religion and God. I say this with no joke nor light hearted way that I have been deeply offended. Would it be considered uncivel if I were not to reply to any message that User:Gwib may or may not send me? And also, Would it be considered vandalsitic to remove all content which User:Gwib may sent me in the future from my talk page? Thank You for reading IuseR 20:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- I was not involved in your outburst, but I appreciate that you are sorry about it.
- Regarding Gwib, if he contacts you to try to mend things, I would encourage you to try to accept that and help mend things too. If he contacts you about something else and you feel that you would rather not respond, I would suggest that you politely say that you would prefer not to respond or ask for another administrator to handle the issue. · Tygrrr... 16:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank-You very much, That was the kind of good, solid advice that i needed.
IuseR 17:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Don't make out that I'm the "bad guy" here like you did here!
- You deleted information from your talk page, from my talk page, you claimed that religion had nothing to do with this site yet you left prayers on IamAR's talk page, you said that you didn't talk to anyone about religion yet you had lots of "presbyterian friends who [you] met over a social networking site" and you left prayers on IamAR's talk page. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks Ben, I might step away from the computer for a few minutes to calm down, I can't believe I dipped so low to use foul language last time. Would it be absolutely bonkers to maybe think that this user is just out to hurt my feelings? I have already deleated this message from my talk page because I found it a tad insulting.
Ps. Your new sig is really cool, What do you think abou tmine, or the lack of it/ lol IuseR 18:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Well no one could blame you, i'm sure we would have all done the same thing under the circumstances. And we can all sometimes say things in the heat of the moment we don't mean... sometimes its inevitable when someon keeps purposefully provoking it. And yes I do like your nu signature colors, i think I might try it too :) IamARe 18:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think that this convosation is appropriate for Tygrrr's talk page, As she already specified earlier, she had nothing to do with the incident of my outbirst and foul language. Also, I would just like to say that sarcasm is commonly known as the lowest form of wit.
Sorry about this Tygrr, I shan't respond on your talk page anymore to any messages this user aims at me or any other user. IuseR 18:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes yes I agree IuseR... we shouldn't make Tygrrr have to hear this awful conversation. And oh yes, sarcasm is the lowest form of whit... so I guess we can't assume much for anyone that does it. "But I guess that with such low wit, would they know any better?" That is what my R.S. and philosophies teacher told me today... so that is the principle that I will stick by, and will try not to look down on those with such low wit. Sorry again tygrrr for this terrible conversation that you had to put up with on your page... IamARe 18:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Deletion change
can you go check the history of your page... the edit that I made (that Razorflame reverted)... go check that... I deleted the other stuff because I wanted to physically show us starting again... you can keep it as it is if you want, but I hope that to show that we can put the past behind us, you will accept that version :)
And also, you have email...
IamARe 17:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I understand that you would like to show us physically starting over and I am not upset at the change you made, but I like to keep full histories of conversations so I will keep it as is. Also, I will check my email when I get home; I can't check it at work. · Tygrrr... 18:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Er... ok what is Gwib on about? Oo and do you think we can move on as friends tygrrr? :) (you have to read the email really... but I will say it here too... I am very sorry for what happened before, I truthfully am sorry, and i guess that you were actually the nicest person here so far, while everyone else was being so harsh with me, and i just wanted to lash out at someone because of the fact that everyone else, like Gwib, was being so mean, and unfortunately i ended up lashing out at you, because you were just so nice that it was easier to snap at you than at the harsh people... like Gwib... but Ive been thinking a lot about what happened, and I just can't tell you enough how much I want to put things right...)... IamARe 18:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
IuseRosary change
IuseR says that he has been autoblocked in an email to me, and that even though his block has been lifted, he can still not edit because of the autoblock. Myself and IuseR appologize heavily on both ours and Gwib's behalf (well i hope that Gwib maybe does possibly feel some sort of remorse too... maybe), for giving you so much confusion that you would make this mistake and block the wrong person. We understand, our wikifriend tygrrr :) IamARe 18:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm...the autoblock should have been undone when I unblocked. Maybe have him try again? · Tygrrr... 18:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- He says it still isnt working Oo... sorry to be such a bother :S (PS, what is Gwib talking about below? i thought we'd stopped discussing this, but he/she/it just doesn't seem to be able to let go of this issue... maybe he/she/it should go take a calm down break so that he/she/it can sort it all out in his/her/it's headIamARe 18:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- I don't feel remorse for something that doesn't deserve remorse. The fact is you vandalized my talk page, your talk page and directly insulted me, whereas if you'll check over the argument we had, I never once insulted your religion, as you said on my talk page.
- Also my not having a conscience helps. --Gwib -(talk)- 18:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually Gwib, you did insult his religion, please do not tell lies... you called him 'the frozen chosen', which you then admitted to him afterwards is a derogative term... i think that is grounds enough for anyone to see it is insulting... please go take a calm down break or two and stop posting on this kind user's talk page. IamARe 18:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- You mean the block log, Barliner? Yes, the situation is sorted out. I was just confused! The only thing not sorted out is that IuseRosary says he is still unable to edit because of the autoblock. Any ideas on why that wouldn't have been undone when I unblocked? I've posted the issue on the admin noticeboard, as well. · Tygrrr... 18:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Tygrr, I accept your apology, It was an easy mistake to make. I also apologise for accidentally moving Gwib's comment. I shall post no more unrelated comments on your talk page, I think the discussion has been moved to the AN now.. Thanks, you've been very kind
IuseR 19:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, but it also shows my quick unblocking with the fact that it was a mistake. You can see it here. · Tygrrr... 19:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
IuseRosary block change
The log says you unblocked at 18:24 but when I checked at about 18:40 the item on top was an autoblock from 18:26, which I lifted I know autoblocks aren't always lifted automatically, so I assume that happened here.--Bärliner 19:31, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Non-admin talk pages change
I have stuck as much as possible to your rules of 'no talk page unless admin thing'. However, I gave IuseR a barnstar, was that ok? i didnt really think about it till afterwards. Also, I followed a link from Razorflame's page left by Gwib, and I commented there, not checking what the page was, and then after I commented I was trying to figure out where I was, and then I saw that it was IuseR's talk page and I was just like 'ohhhh!'. So I thought I had better come tell you straight away. I didn't mean to... its just sometimes so hard... im sorry, i'll try take more care in future. :S IamAre 20:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for telling me. I did see your barnstar to IuseRosary, and I think that it's okay but I didn't like that you were using language in it that is against Gwib. I know that you have been having some conflicts with him, but you need to remember that even if you feel someone is wrong, that doesn't make it okay to say mean things about them. You are doing a pretty good job of following the restriction to talk to admins only. Keep it up and I will lift it. I still think that it is helping things right now, though.
- Also, try to keep in mind what the goal of this wiki is: creating an encyclopedia. Talking with other users is really only needed for discussing articles or asking questions about articles. Try to keep focused on the improvement aspect of the project. Think about it this way: if you're only working on articles, it's hard to hurt someone's feelings or get your's hurt. Right? :-) I think it'd be a good idea for you to do this for a while to let things settle down. · Tygrrr... 22:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Apparently Ben thought I were an admin, because he wrote on my talk page what he could have written on his page as well. So I answered there and from that respect was guilty that he answered again. --Cethegus (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ok thanks tygrrr... and ahhh, the thought didnt even cross my mind that Cethegus wasn't an admin :S ...sorry, i'm trying... i didnt mean to break the rules on purpose. May I have permission to continue the conversation with Cethegus that I have already starged? And don't worry, i wasn't insulting Gwib, just stating a fact about what he did, which I understand, so you can be sure that I'm not holding a grudge for what he did. ^^ IamAre 15:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, you may continue your conversation with Cethegus. And yes, you did insult Gwib. You called him a vandal, which he is not, and that is a personal attack. Don't do that again. Neither one of you handled the situation in the best possible way so you are in no position to make a statement like that. Again, please stick to writing articles. I don't want to see any more arguments between you and other users. You need to keep all non-article related conversations to a minimum until you prove you can handle them without problems. Keep trying--I see improvement. :-) · Tygrrr... 15:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ok thanks tygrrr... and ahhh, the thought didnt even cross my mind that Cethegus wasn't an admin :S ...sorry, i'm trying... i didnt mean to break the rules on purpose. May I have permission to continue the conversation with Cethegus that I have already starged? And don't worry, i wasn't insulting Gwib, just stating a fact about what he did, which I understand, so you can be sure that I'm not holding a grudge for what he did. ^^ IamAre 15:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Apparently Ben thought I were an admin, because he wrote on my talk page what he could have written on his page as well. So I answered there and from that respect was guilty that he answered again. --Cethegus (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
yeah yeah i know... change
but i'm not done with it... so it should (fingers crossed lol) look really nice and logical by the end of it... but i understand that it looks like a complete mess atm :S IamR 18:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
yeah I know... i made a couple of mistakes here and there... but the end effect will be that there will be one conversation and everything that is relevant to something else will be next to something else relevant, so it will all flow like one piece of text... its just time consuming ¬_¬ IamR 18:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
(Full conversation can be read at user talk:Iamandrewrice#Rearranging)
Browne34 warning change
Razorflame did the right thing... if he had not told me by explaining things the way he did, I would have probably had an arguement with Browne, so I really do welcome Razorflame to help me at any available opportunity in the future. He saved a lot of trouble with his calm response. And I thank him. ^_^ (I hope you read this comment too razorflame, but I'm not allowed to write on your talk page quite yet) IamR 18:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- What makes you think Browne34 wouldn't have been civil and explained things to you? You have no reason to think that and doing so assumes bad faith. At any rate, the issue has been taken care of so we can drop it. · Tygrrr... 18:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- With regards to that point you made, that could in fact cause many problems, as that person might have to unexpectedly go away, and having left this warning, people would be unsure whether they are allowed to discuss it... and it could take a long time for them to realise that something may have happened to the other person. Also, did you pick up your email yet? IamR 19:35, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Pour vous... change
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
| you spent a lot ov time and effort getting my talk page back to normal... (i can actually read it now! :p) thank you! :))))) IamR 19:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
well put it on your page! lol IamR 20:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- He's obviously not here. Please allow him some time to do so. Razorflame 21:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- OMG, tygrrr, can you make it so that you actually 'protect' me from talking on non-admin talk pages, cos i keep forgetting and i really don't mean to, and i'm scared that you'll block me... IamR 22:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry again, and thanks guys. Tygrrr, if I do happen to make another mistake (which i'm trying REALLy hard not to, but its so easy to forget who not to talk to), then please don't block me as you said you would... its not that I would be doing it to purposefully break your rules, for as you are aware I have been trying not to, and I have come to you straight away every time I have accidentally spoken to a non-admin and then realised... so please don't block me if it happens again, because I promise you its not happening on purpose... IamR 14:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- (Full conversation can be read at user talk:Iamandrewrice#Talk pages)
BDD change
i reverted your edit at BDD because it was not a duplicate paragraph and contained info about it being an OCD disorder. However, I will be working on the article to gradually get it into a better layout anyway, but for the moment, there isnt anything doubled in there anyway. Cheers IamR 16:09, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- You telling me this wasn't a duplication of anything?:
- "BDD has obsessive and compulsive parts, so it is an Obsessive-compulsive disorder. People with BDD may look at themselves in the mirror too much, or some people with BDD may actually try not to look in the mirror. Both of these are possible for a person with BDD. They usually think about their body for more than one hour per day, and in bad cases, can stop talking to other people, and may stay at home.
- People with BDD have a very high suicide rate compared to all mental problems.
- BDD has obsessive and compulsive parts, so it is an Obsessive-compulsive disorder. People with BDD may look at themselves in the mirror too much, or some people with BDD may actually try not to look in the mirror. Both of these are possible for a person with BDD. They usually think about their body for more than one hour per day, and in bad cases, can stop talking to other people, and may stay at home." (from this version of the page)
Restrictions change
I replied on my page... ( I can edit here too... yeah?) sorry if i wasn't allowed to, but this is just for me to kind of actually ask about the rules as I don't entirely understand them. I-R 19:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- can you tell me what exactly I should do in order to have these restrictions lifted, so I know what to work to... I-R 22:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Again, the other admins and I will use our judgment to determine when they should be lifted. If you still manage to be disruptive under the current restrictions, they will remain or perhaps you will earn yourself a block. Also, I'm tired of repeating myself. You've been told this already. If you have a new question about the whole situation, I'll answer it. If not, please refrain from asking the same thing and trying to talk your way out of the restrictions. It's not gonna happen and you're wasting my time by making me repeat myself. · Tygrrr... 22:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the greeting... change
...and happy editing. Baccyak4h (talk) 20:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you change
...for your following up the "Very good article criteria" issue. I really appreciate it. - Huji reply 20:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Bono change
Can this get protected please? There's an edit war going on here. Razorflame 20:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
You may haven't heard but bono is also called as Figüran Osman Bobneilbruce (talk) 20:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- (from Bobneilbruce's talk page) Where? Please either give a source for this information, or kindly stop adding it. · Tygrrr...
I can give you google Video link but I am not sure if it is legal.I try to help you.My purpose isn't vandalising.Thank you.Bobneilbruce (talk) 21:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- (from Bobneilbruce's talk page) Again, unless you can provide a valid source for it, it does not belong in our encyclopedia. I hope you will find something else to work on here. Thank you. · Tygrrr... 21:06, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bono you can see at unsourced — This unsigned comment was added by Bobneilbruce (talk • changes).
Schools change
With one school recently blocked as an IP edit (Bens) do we need this User:LanarkGrammarSchool account? Encouraging anonymous edits? --Bärliner 19:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm, it's an interesting situation. I don't think I've ever heard of an entire school registering an account. If they're sharing a password, I think it's a really bad idea. You should probably bring it up on the AN. I would think an outright indef block might be a possibility but I'd like to see what others think. · Tygrrr... 19:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
165.138.77.201 change
Hey Tygrr, this IP adress
Has been given their last warning and i have just put a QD tag on a nonscence page which they have just made, I think they need to be blockled
I.Rosary 18:01, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- The final warning was almost a week ago. And I have already deleted the page in question. Thanks. · Tygrrr... 18:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
- They just did something else, their edits have just been removed by user:vector
Cats change
Thanks for cleaning up the cats on my goals page. I really can't get the hang of them..
And good luck for your first wikiproject! They seem to have become quite the fashion here. --Gwib -(talk)- 17:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- No problem. The {{BD}} page has a lot of good info about how to use it. The main tips I have for you would to make sure you have 2 '|'s if they're still living and doing Last name, First name (like {{BD|1980||Doe, John}}). When you use BD you also don't need to have separate cats for Cat:1980 births and Cat:Living people. Don't worry, you'll get the hang of it! It's not as tricky as it may seem at first. · Tygrrr... 17:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- as Eptalon told me, you do not need {{DEFAULTSORT}} either :) --Bärliner 18:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Zodiac change
I accidentally got logged out while working on Template:Zodiac. Gwib then reverted my edits. I realised, and logged in, and re-put them there, but now MindTheGap has undone what I have done. And I cant ask him why because I can't talk to him. So this it the only way that he/she/they will maybe see my message. I do not know whether I should go put it back again, as this might be classed as an 'Edit War'. So I am going to wait until everyone else can see my edit change and then see that there was nothing wrong with my edit. Thanks I-R 20:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, you can talk about it on the template's talk page. You don't really need to involve me. · Tygrrr... 20:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Its sorted out now thanks I-R 21:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Do i still have all the restrictions? I would actually like you to continue the 'restriction' on me editing the AN and ST for at least another week, as I feel that everything that was ever posted there always either about me or by me, and it gave people a bad impression of me in the end, that I was trying to be disruptive or something. I think that not being able to do anything there for another week will motivate me not to speak out so loud in future, as I feel that it was the being talked about so much that didnt help my reputation, which currently lies in pieces, and will be very hard to gain back many people here's trust. However, I do hope that I will be allowed to talk on talk pages of non-admins soon, as this has been truly the most difficult part from the beginning, and is actually stopping me from trying to do anything for either of my new wikiprojects, as I can't start working on them until I actually build a community up in both of them that would be able to support the work structure that we can build inside them. But yeah, i hope that you will consider allowing me to talk to people on their talk pages sometime soon ^^ Oh and also, I don't quite understand about the whole archive-page edit thing I got blocked for last time. Which part was the thing which i was blocked for? was it for editing an archived page? (because I thought anyone could do that). Was it for not editing in "mainspace" under my restrictions? (coz i don't really understand what the 'mainspace' is... I thought that I was allowed to edit there with my restrictions Oo). Or was it for calling Gwib "he/she/it"? (for as I have already explained, i didn't realise that the term 'they' should be used instead of 'it' for gender ambiguosity, so I am sorry if it may have seemed insulting, but it wasnt supposed to be). So which one did I get blocked for? Because I don't want to end up getting blocked again by not understanding the rules. Benniguy talk•changes 13:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- Its sorted out now thanks I-R 21:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
- Razorflame, as I have already explained, I may have been wrong to edit an archived page (but I did not know about this), but what I did was not a personal attack. I honestly thought it was OK to say 'he/she/it' to describe a person, so as to be politically correct and not give a gender either way. I have now however found that it is even better to say 'he/she/they', but before you tell me I have been attacking users, I would like you to take into consideration the fact that I was actually trying to be politically correct. Benniguy talk•changes 18:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Email change
Block change
Because of this User_talk:Gwib#slt_gwibgwibgwib I have blocked them both for 15 minutes while I ask others about either letting the block expire or taking further action.
It may be silliness, I doubt if it is coincidence that Gwibs page was chosen--Bärliner 17:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Tygrrr, since you don't want to answer any of my 'illogical questions', please just answer me what the reason for my block was this time? all it said on the summary was 'putting nonsense', but that doesnt explain. Someone just posted on my page that it may be indicative that i talk too much rather than editing articles. Is this true? because i will stop talking so much if this is so. Benniguy talk•changes 18:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- You were talking to other users through my talk page, if talking is what it can be called. It was just gibberish about soft and hard blocks and a means for you and IuseR to agree then disagree then re-agree with each other like some Laurel & Hardy ripoff. --Gwib -(talk)- 18:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, it was not intended to be like that. There was a lack of communication between the two of us, and re-reading it, i understand that the overall context of the text may have in the end been a little bewildering, but I was not trying to be disruptive on purpose. I would however like the hard block on the school lifted anyway though :) Benniguy talk•changes 18:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
New protection change
Just a friendly reminder, but I would recommend protecting Hitman so that only Sysops can create it. Razorflame 18:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Since the user that was creating it has been blocked, protecting it would seem to serve no purpose right now. · Tygrrr... 18:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- If it needs it then, it'll be protected then. It doesn't need it now, so I will not be protecting it now. Is there something you don't understand about "I won't protect a page unless necessary"? We seem to have had this same conversation about 5 times now. I think you know where I stand on the issue. Thanks. (Sorry if I sound a little harsh, I'm just getting tired of repeating myself...) · Tygrrr... 19:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Careful about your opinions, Razorflame. You've already shown them to me on my talk page. --Gwib -(talk)- 19:17, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
(unindenting) What I meant when I said you don't seem to understand is that we've had this conversation about multiple pages in the past. You still seem to think that I will protect a page when it's not needed. If I feel a page needs protecting, I will do so. If I don't, I won't. We admins can usually handle our responsibilities without prodding from others. I also was honestly sort of put-off when you said you were "reminding" me about it, like I had forgotten to do it. That's not the case. I had already examined the situation, thought about protecting, and decided against it. · Tygrrr... 19:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Second place change
My talk page is soon going to beat your talk page as the new Simple Talk! :D --Gwib -(talk)- 19:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
categories change
you mentioned i wasn't allowed to edit categories i think...
does this mean I am not allowed to make: Category:Italian fashion designers ...as this exists on EN, but not yet here i don't think...? Benniguy talk•changes 19:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, when I said that you are not allowed to edit categories it means that you can't edit categories. · Tygrrr... 19:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Informatique change
What does 'copyedit' mean, please? IuseRosary (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- From wiktionary: "To correct the spelling, grammar, formatting, etc. of printed material and prepare it for typesetting, printing, or online publishing." · Tygrrr... 21:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh right, Thank-You. I only asked because I saw it in one of your edit summeries and a few others before that and wondered wht it meant. Thanks : - ) IuseRosary (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- tygrrr... why do you support blocking me even though I have made a conscious effort to talk less on talk pages and edit articles more? I am trying hard... please don't think I am making mistakes on purpose. If you look at the pages I created on my user page, do you not think that a single one has been good? I spent literally hours on that BDD article, which was in fact very upsetting for me to work on. Yet from the AN, it seems like you think that I have not edited constructively at all and that IuseRosary has done much more than me. I don't see that he has. Benniguy talk•changes 22:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- tygrrr... may i have permission just to go and leave user:whitstable a comment? he does not have email... and apparently he showed some concern yesterday for me when... you know... and i just wanted to say thank you, and sorry for worrying him. I know he's not an admin, and i'm not allowed to do this, but I hope that you will be able to trust me enough just to leave him this one thing. Benniguy talk•changes 22:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Not a problem, I can see your comment here. Just wanted to check all was okay, that's all. Whitstable (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. wow its been a while since our last chat... if you could call it that lol ;) . Well anyway, yeah, i'm taking a while to settle in here... i just hope i can learn fast enough before i end up getting blocked forever. I have already learnt so much more since my experiences at EN, but I still feel i have a way to go.
- I do not know how much exactly you know about the whole thing yesterday, but I am sorry that i may have worried you or anyone else, and jeff managed to make things better. i did not mean for it to grab so much attention... i didn't even realise jeff had passed on the message until a few moments ago. But thank you for the concern.
US State change
The idea was to split US capital cities to create "state capital" from other capitals, eg DC. PR, Guam etc. "State capitals" could also be a subcat of "US cities by state" at the same time. If you think it a bad idea I can revert.--Bärliner 22:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
since everyone is voting to ban me on the An change
am i allowed to even go there and put a comment about it? i dont want to get blocked. :( Benniguy talk•changes 23:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Help:Making a signature change
Hi there, Tygrrr. I was wondering if it would be alright if I could add your name to the list of users who are willing to help new users out with their signatures. Can I add you to the list? Razorflame 17:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Just so you know... change
That part of policy obviously doesn't have the approval of rest of the project or it would have been there sooner then yesterday. My talk page stuff was added before the was added to policy.--ChristianMan16 18:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
a suggestion change
As I do not wish to be banned, obviously, i have come up with a suggestion that will hopefully prove that I really do have good intentions for here and I will try my total very best.
- On this first week, the only thing i would be allowed to edit is articles... nothing else... so i cannot talk to anyone at all... apart from possibly my talk page if you wish.
- Then, on the second week, if I have abided by the rules, you would consider allowing me to talk on Administrators talk pages and Article talk pages.
- Then, on the third week, if i have abided strictly by the rules, caused not one single bit of disruption, and done everything i was told to... then you would possibly eventually allow me to talk to the other editors.
This is a long time-period, so I hope it shows how serious I am about trying to show that I have changed my ways here. I have been thinking a lot about everything that has happened here, and I have come to realise that I was in fact in the wrong. Honestly. I focused too much on talking rather than editing, which is something I wish to change, if you will give me the chance.
Please reply to this so I know where I stand. I cannot express enough my repentance for the mistakes I have made, but I have never intentionally vandalised or anything, so I hope you realise that my intentions are good.
Thanks Benniguy talk•changes 19:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- I have posted your above comment on the AN sort of as your one chance to speak to the community about what's going on. I feel that it's only fair that you get an opportunity to say your opinion on the matter this one time. Please note that this does not mean that you can now discuss on the AN. · Tygrrr... 20:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- On the AN, razorflame expresses that I have already been given to many chances. I would actually to an extent agree that I have been given many many chances so far. However, to be truthful, I never really learnt much inbetween each chance... however, this time, i actually finally got it into my head what it was that I was doing wrong. This was prompted by a certain message by Jeff, and also realising what people thought of me on the AN. So I hope you realise that this time, my editing stance will have a very different motivation driving it, as I have genuinely come to have understood so much now. I will stop talking to users unneccessarily, as I know wikipedia is not a social networking site, and i will concentrate my entire energy to editing articles alone, and also the 2 wikiprojects I am making. Thanks Benniguy talk•changes 20:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Copied from User talk:Huji#Question about images change
- I think I go around it. Check it out.--ChristianMan16 23:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Email change
An email I sent to you has bounced, know of any trouble with it today? - BrownE34 talk contribs 16:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to know if there is going to be a dicussion on unblocking me? change
as there are some articles I have planned. Thanks 89.242.34.93 (talk) 17:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
this is not serious. What is serious is that you are not treating this as a fair case 84.13.45.32 (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
New VGA criteria change
I think it is time to archive point 3 and 10 in Wikipedia talk:Requirements for very good articles/New, because there seems to be consensus on the final wording. If you agree, please handle it yourself. Thanks again for doing all this. - Huji reply 17:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sure. I've actually closed discussion on the page itself (Wikipedia:Requirements for very good articles) by switching it to the criteria from the /New page. I just hadn't updated the talk page yet. Thanks for reminding me. · Tygrrr... 17:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
CU change
Hello, Tygrr; Yes I am aware of the policy to not check users unless it is really necessary - I am also bound not to reveal some of the information. But also note that Benniguy is a known offender, and that he has been operating in some of the IP range cites (usually not as low though). Since I do not know offhand which IPs they were, I ran a checkuser to really corroborate that it was none of those listed. --Eptalon (talk) 19:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- To be specific (as specific as I can be to non-checkusers): One of the "problems" we had with Benniguy is that there were several (30-50, IIRC) addresses he used; As Creol said, he has not yet been seen that low in the ranges. I did my check to strengthen Creol's position there. Please note, those are IPs. I do not memorize them, neither am I particularly interested where certain users connect from (as long as they have not vandalised). If you do think I abuse the CheckUser tool, please say so openly. --Eptalon (talk) 20:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- My rationale at the time was (I think) the following: Given Benniguy uses that many different IPs, it is probably easy to not see one of them (and be wrong with the statement). Therefore, a CheckUser might be worthwile.. Remember, all a Checkuser gives is a list of not too old IPs for users, or alternatively all the users that use a given IP address. The comparison then needs to be done manually. --Eptalon (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes it is hard to wait change
Don't tell me you can watch it on ABC right away! ... - Huji reply 15:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- 10 hours, 45 minutes and counting! :-) How long do you have to wait? · Tygrrr... 15:16, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- Bummer... :-( But it'll be totally worth the wait! Have you checked out Lostpedia? I used to be on it all the time but they changed my filter at work so I can't go there as often anymore. While you're at abc.com you should check out the "Missing pieces" if haven't already. They're pretty cool. · Tygrrr... 17:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
(got edit conflict) No way! Lost is unique in many ways. - Huji reply 18:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
- I stopped watching lost halfway through season 2, it got way too confusing! What happened at the end of the last season? IuseRosary (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)