User talk:Roux/Archives/2009/April

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

New Rochelle discussion notice

New Rochelle problem discussion notification: I've opened a new discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Long-running problem with respect to New Rochelle area articles.

This relates to the 4 part proposal i opened on March 26, which was closed on March 27 and archived at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive187#Proposal for unban, apology, amnesty for Jvolkblum and related others, and topic ban for Orlady.

This is a courtesy notice to all parties who had more than a one word comment in the previous discussion. I think it is a problem that won't go away, and I hope that you will be part of the solution, whether or not you and I have agreed previously. I hope that we can at least clarify the problem, if not immediately agree upon a solution. If anyone thinks this is inappropriate canvassing, I am sure they will express that. I don't anticipate too many separated discussions on this topic, but if this one is closed and a new one opens, I'll probably notify you again, unless you ask me not to. doncram (talk) 03:35, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD

We do not customarily use symbols with !votes at Afd.DGG (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Bleh. I'm using a script from WP:US to make voting simpler. It appears to add them. I'm well aware of how AFD works though, thanks. //roux   02:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
FWIW, I use a TextExpander keyboard macro. DGG (talk) 05:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Warning for your another personal attacks in March 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Roux. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Roux, we all know your relentless incivility and habit of making "personal attacks" (quite amusing because those descriptions that you produce are just showing "your character" very well) are nothing new, but I want you to behave yourself like constructive editors. Please do not try to behave inappropriately even if on your user page. Good luck.--Caspian blue 10:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Let me get this clear: you are calling his comment in the section above this a personal attack? —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 13:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Do you think that sounds not personal attacks? Read WP:NPA.--Caspian blue 13:35, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't template the regulars, please. Do you know how much more seriously I would have taken a polite, hand-written note? –Juliancolton | Talk 13:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Rules and policies have a superiority than essays that may contain "minority" view. I only respect editors acting respectively. If he desperately wants to keep the "hell away from me", he should not make this vicious comment behind my back; I am simultaneously singularly uninterested in anything Caspian Blue does, and very specifically interested in keeping the hell away from his shotgun blasts of incivility and personal attacks. So, no. --Caspian blue 13:49, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Behind your back, was it? As far as I can tell, it was right on-wiki... –Juliancolton | Talk 13:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Then, you have to remind that Wikipedia is an open place. That's why I can see his another disruption. --Caspian blue 13:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Honestly, mate, what are your intentions here? Are you simply trying to start a battle? If so, I suggest you have a cup of tea and be on your way. –Juliancolton | Talk 14:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
All I intended was to give him the warning for what Roux said about me. --Caspian blue 14:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
NO, Caspian blue -- in this specific context, your posting is recidivist, undeserved and unjustifiable.
Please STOP now. --Tenmei (talk) 14:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

What the fuck is this bullshit? Caspian blue, you have a long and well-documented history of attacking the hell out of anyone who makes the stupid fucking mistake of calling you on your bullshit, which is why I try to stay away from you. Your bullshit is NOT worth the stress it causes. Stay the FUCK off my talkpage, do not post here, any further posts here will result in me finding an admin to permanently block you from editing Wikipedia. That is it. I am sick and fucking tired of your bullshit. You first started attacking me when I was trying to mediate a dispute between you and someone else. Why did you start attacking me? Because I fucking told you to fucking stop attacking someone else. You are a net loss to this project and you shouldn't be here. For some reason that I cannot understand, you were allowed to get away with abusive sockpuppetry--proved by CheckUser--and you are continually allowed to get away with random personal attacks against any user you feel like, whenever you feel like it. Well that stops here. You will stay the fuck away from me, permanently. That better be clear enough for you. STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM ME. //roux   14:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Roux, calm down please.... :-/ We all realize that Caspian is not standing on firm ground with his accusations; don't escalate this into a random shouting match please...no one wants more drama... —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 14:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
This is not a random shouting match I am sick and fucking tired of his bullshit being tolerated around here for the sole reason that anytime anyone tries to do something about it, he makes using Wikipedia a living hell for them until they give up. It is time something permanent is done about him, and if he posts here again that will be the final straw. He is to stay away from me, permanently. He is to not comment here. He is to not talk to me anywhere else on Wikipedia. He is to stay the flying fuck far the fuck away from me forever, because I am sick and fucking tired of dealing with his goddamn bullshit. //roux   14:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Howdy Roux. Try my method, for dealing with unwanted visitors at one's Userpage. Give their postings the ole' deletion treatment. GoodDay (talk) 15:49, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey buddy, long time no see. I hope you're doing well? As for deletion.. no. I want his ridiculous behaviour displayed for all and sundry. He's gotten away with it for far, far too long. //roux   15:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been semi-retired since late-Februay (2-hrs a day on Wikipedia, is my limit). GoodDay (talk) 15:54, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

This was not good form

I don't want to beat up on you, but I had to say something here.

I just left Caspian Blue a warning for taunting and harrassment for all this. He/she obviously provoked you excessively.

However, you know WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. We ask and expect that editors deal with each other, even the most frustrating among us, without snapping and lashing out or back at them. What you did here was not a good response, even in light of the provocations etc.

Next time something like this happens and you find yourself frustrated enough to lash out like that, that's the time to take it to ANI or find a friendly administrator to review. If you lose your temper it does not help the situation. All the falls out of that is more drama, heat and light, but not solutions.

Again, I don't want to beat up on you in light of all this and the ANI thread, but please try to take yourself out of it and call for help if you get in another situation like this one, rather than blow your top. Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your words. One has to wonder why Prodego showed up a lot later and blocked me in a purely punitive manner. The issue as I experience it is that Caspian has an incredibly long history of personal attacks of this nature, and I am fucking fed up with it. Nobody has any interest in stopping him from doing this, so I don't see any point in taking it to AN/I. He's been there more times than anybody else that I'm aware of, and nothing has been done to curb his behaviour. //roux   15:37, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for arbitration - Unjustified ban of users

I have filed a request for arbitration regarding recent bans of user accounts from which no activities could be found that dispupt Wikipedia. The arbitration request can be found here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Block of editors related to sockpuppet Jvolkblum You are not mentioned as an involved party, I send you this message as a courtesy for your information, and I hope that your opinion there can contribute to solve the issue. Thank you! doxTxob \ talk 23:11, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I've blocked you 12 hours, based on your interaction with Caspian Blue. Even if you are baited, you still can't say behave that way. It isn't appropriate. Prodego talk 02:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Question: what is the point of a block that occurs 12 hours after the problem? This seems to be more punishment than preventive. the_ed17 :  Chat  02:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Punishment is preventative. 124.168.182.89 (talk) 02:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
To some extent, all non-vandalism blocks are punitive, if you define punitive as that which won't stop immediate damage. But if you look longer term, a block for disruption is quite helpful in preventing recurring disruptive behavior. Prodego talk 02:40, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Well I was out last night, so this didn't affect me in the slightest. What recurring disruptive behaviour, by the way? Some guy shows up on my talkpage to continue a bullshit problem he has with me, and I got pissed off. You'll also note that I made no personal attacks. So one has to wonder why you blocked me.. the issue was over and settled, so this was a purely punitive action. I would like to be blocked for one second, with a notation stating that, and stating that no personal attacks were made. Everything I said was factual; he was confirmed to have used socks abusively and he was being a jerk, and I do believe he is a net loss to the project due to his long, long history of shotgun blasts of personal attacks. //roux   15:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

another question on footnote editing (if i may)

thanks for your response to my "help" request on my discussion page. unfortunately it wasn't an answer i enjoyed (i.e., didn't make me want to ever edit footnotes). i note that on the Bill Moyers page there is a different style of within-the-text-body citation that, although it's still not getting all footnotes in one spot for special editing (mostly style conformation), it sets them off such that one can see more easily see what is article text vs. footnote material. my question: is that an acceptable MOS style or an aberration (that i happen to appreciate)?

example - 

..."work for him despite my deficiencies."<ref name="numbertwotexan">{{cite news
  | last =Anderson
  | first =Patrick
  | title =No. 2 Texan in the White House
  | pages =SM1
  | publisher =NY Times
  | date =1966-04-03
  | url =http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10F16FE3A5411708DDDAA0894DC405B868AF1D3
  | accessdate =  }}</ref><ref name="simpsonsquotations">{{cite book
  | last =Simpson
  | first =James B.
  | title =Simpson's Contemporary Quotations, No. 848
  | publisher =Houghton Mifflin
  | date =1988
  | pages =
  | url =http://www.bartleby.com/63/48/848.html
  | isbn = 0-39543-085-2 }}</ref> The details of his rift with..."

it's bizarre that one cannot isolate the footnotes and get them in a group. i suppose it's something to bug development brains about.

(btw, apologies for not using the "talkback" method. while i understand the concept and approve, i don't quite understand the methodology to implement it. i'm slowly learning many of the more advanced wiki tasks/tricks)--71.183.238.134 (talk) 05:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XI

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 21:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Neuro's RfA

Might be a good idea to sign your support :) Black Kite 00:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, I caught it for ya. :) --Dylan (chat, work, ping, sign) 00:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Press releases

The press release may not have been from the subject, but that doesn't make it a reliable source. The big problem is that the editor I reverted is a paid flack for the subject's publicity department, and shouldn't be coming near any such articles. Instead, she has served as an s.p.a., with literally no edits on any unrelated topics. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

My bad on misreading two of them. Can you just IAR block per general spamminess? //roux   20:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 22:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

my comment at ANI

Not personal, but it was a perfect example... Hope it didn't sting! LessHeard vanU (talk) 00:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Of course it didn't. I understood where you were coming from, but my feeling, seriously, is that Giano gets this "oh that's just how he is" attitude for behaviour that would have even an excellent newbie permanently banned from the site. That is totally unacceptable. And he knows--the parallels with Betacommand are striking--precisely what he's doing, that it's not allowed, and he doesn't care. The more we allow it to go on, the more he doesn't care, and the more enabled he is to continue doing it. And thus more people get upset, more people get their heads bitten off, and every time the Giano cabal shows up to say "There there, that's just how he is, stop your stupid whining." It vexes me. //roux   00:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Do you note though, that Giano reserves his invective for the "insiders" (or in this case, potential insiders)? When dealing in article terms, Giano is (IME) a total pussycat. Franamax (talk) 01:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
That matters because? I understand what you're saying, but his behaviour is still appalling and inexcusable. Plus, I somehow doubt that he checks to make sure everyone involved is an experienced editor before going off. //roux   02:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I haz gift 4 u 2

A fist to teh head! :-) Killiondude (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

ChildofMidnight

It essentially was a self-nom. He went to DougsTech and asked him to nominate him, and he did. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks bad all around, but we all know it doesn't have a periwinkle's chance, so eh. //roux   07:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Here's where he asked DougsTech to nominate him: [1]. There's a funny follow-on to that, but I'll save that for when (or if) they open up the nomination page. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 07:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
My first thought was that someone was playing a cruel trick on CoM. But no, his/her own idea. This is going to make Bug's RfA experience look like an election to the Hall of Fame. Policy question: Is it OK to mention this RfA, without comment, at talk pages of articles where CoM has established a presence? PhGustaf (talk) 08:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I would say absolutely unequivocally no. That looks like canvassing and no matter how anyone feels about COM's qualifications for adminship, the RFA should move ahead without even the appearance of impropriety on either side. //roux   08:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
That would open the door to COM doing his own canvassing, probably resulting in a right much ugly event. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 08:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Doesn't matter what it would open the door to, if anything. What matters is that canvassing is wrong, and RFAs are never advertised in that particular way. //roux   08:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
You're right, I'm just saying that COM might take it as license to canvass, and that would add another ugly layer to the whole thing. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 09:00, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I mentioned the matter at Talk:Barack Obama but undid it in response to the above. Sorry. My rationale was that the editors there are familiar with CoM and especially qualified to comment on his qualifications. If CoM wants to mention it to the Minnesota hot-dish crowd, that's fine too. PhGustaf (talk) 09:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, it's already on ANI in the complaints about his behavior, so that's good for a start. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 08:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
He's got his exit strategy now: [2] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 02:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

What is the Font for File:CanadaPortalHeader.png ?

Hi. I'm a french wikipedist, working at the french graphic lab. I am trying to make a french version of your file. No problem for the leaf, but i don't recognize the font you use. May you tell me what's the name of this font ? and where i can find it.. -- -Strogoff- (Please answer here) 22:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC) And please, excuse my so bad english..!!

I don't actually remember what font I used. I'll see if I can find it. //roux   23:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

template loop

Could you perhaps tell me why the line 

{{Wdefcon|prefix=User:Flyingidiot/alert/}}

results in a template loop, but the line 

{{User:Flyingidiot/alert/Wdefcon}}

doesn't? Debresser (talk) 22:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess because Wdefcon is a template, so after recognising the template it seeks for a "prefix" parameter in the template and doesn't find it. Debresser (talk) 13:37, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Userpage kats

I'm on ur userpage, adding gratitous felines. Ceiling Cat (talk) 17:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

ONOEZ NOT GRATUITOUS FELINES! //roux   18:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Ceiling Cat a.k.a. Raul, you make me laugh :P —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 02:56, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

Hi Roux. While I obviously agree with your suggestion to close the series of ANI threads attacking me (the accusations underlying them have long been discredited), I didn't think it was appropriate that you said "once again COM appears to have quite neatly sidestepped any sanctions being imposed." This is clearly a swat at me and seems especially inappropriate in a case where the impartial and independent assessments of the issues involved in the discussion have been that I haven't engaged in any inappropriate action and that, in fact, on the merits of the content dispute itself, those attacking me have a weak case. Cheers. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XII

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 17:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Have a burger

~~~ haz givn u Cheezburgr! Cheezburgrs promot WikiLovez and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!


Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all lolcat buddiez by addin {{subst:Cheezburgr}} to their talk paj with friendly messuj to all.

Enjoy :-) ResMar 19:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Your wonderful proposal on ANI

It is really wonderful to see something we can agree upon Roux. Since Jack refuses to agree to your proposal (A nobody agrees), I am putting it to a community vote:

Thank you. Ikip (talk) 14:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be overwhelming community support for: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Jack Merridew-A Nobody I have asked the editor who wanted to be the mentor to push this forward. Ikip (talk) 09:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

speedy deletion Felix Busse

Well so should someone else write something about Felix Busse ?? What should i change?? Kindly Regards

Felix Busse —Preceding unsigned comment added by FelixBusse (talk • contribs) 09:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Could you explain please? //roux   18:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XIII

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 09:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

IRC?

Where have you gone? It's so empty without you :(  GARDEN  11:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Exams and dead keyboard :( //roux   15:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Don't forget WP:ACC, Roux. :( --Dylan620 Efforts · Toolbox 15:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Roux. I want to work on a food-related list and try to get it to FLC. Need some ideas if you're available. Let me know when exams are over. Best, Matthewedwards :  Chat  16:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

And I'm done with IRC. Users are frequently blamed for being harassed, as opposed to doing something about the people who won't leave you alone. Petty little tyrants with their petty little tyrannies run the place, so fuck 'em. //roux   18:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
/ignore. لennavecia 18:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
The onus should not be on the person being harassed. Once you have told someone to leave you alone, they should actually leave you alone. //roux   19:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Help on reading if a RfC has consensus

I'm contacting yourself and some other uninvolved editors to see if you would be willng to read through an RfC at the Article Rescue Squad. It will be far from the most glamourous use of your time but it will help us see if we have reached a decision on this issue. I think the discussion has died down and concensus has been reached but another user has posited I'm misreading this. For the moment I've left my comments in the "Motion to close" and collapsed template in place but if others agree there is no consensus I'm fine removing or reworking them. The discussion itself isn't too brutal and the comments have stayed reasonably well organized so it shouldn't take long. Please read the RfC and discussion and offer your take in the "Motion to close" section. Thank you! -- Banjeboi 13:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather not stick my face in a blender, but thank you for asking. //roux   14:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Lol! I'd rather you didn't either but if you feel the dicussion is too ... something then no problem. -- Banjeboi 14:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I have a bit of a rule against getting involved in any discussion involving people who use 'deletionist' or 'inclusionist'. The terms are divisive and useless. The only time I'll get involved is when it's on AN/I, because by that point the twits who use the terms are causing wider disruption. //roux   15:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
That's pretty good advice, ARS has a least a few editors in each of those camps so, I'm rather numb to it all. -- Banjeboi 01:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Heraldry in Canada

Hi, I notice you've recently created Category:Heraldry in Canada, and have added Canadian heraldry-related articles to it. I wonder if you might consider changing the name to Category:Canadian heraldry, for consistency with the other subcategories in Category:Heraldry by country. Thanks for your contributions! Dr pda (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sure. After I finish this AWB run I'll change everything over. //roux   21:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Almost  Done. //roux   04:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Move over rdr

 Done. Again, sorry for the delay - this is the first ArbCom case I've been assigned to, and I had to read through all the instructions for how to open it. Hersfold (t/a/c) 02:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Ta! No worries about the delay, wasn't urgent. //roux   04:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: Edmonton COA

Thank you the information sorry about moving it, it was my mistake. Cheers Kyle1278 02:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

No worries. //roux   04:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XIV

Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 14:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Re: Tom Sayle SPI

My judgement is based on the evidence you gave at the time. Really, you should have given the evidence at the time of your request, not after I commented. There were a few tools which helped clerks to check behaviour evidences, but they are no longer available for some unknown reasons. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Much of the additional evidence came after the case was filed. Please endorse for CU, it's very very obviously Tom, but not quite quacky enough for a duck-block. //roux   17:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks man

Roux, CadenS has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Caden is cool 03:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Roux/Archives/2009/April&oldid=1214338492"