User talk:Wafulz/Archive 17
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 14 | 31 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 22:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
A little help here?
Hi, sorry to bother you with this, but it's about the Technocracy articles. As you may (or may not) know, several of these articles have recently been put up for deletion by User:JzG, I have of-course opposed most of these, but now we are in an edit dispute about the Technocracy movement page. I was about to post a message on the talk page stating my reasons for wanting to include certain things and inviting him to discuss it, however it seems I am unable to post to the page, I get this message:
- "Spam filter notice
- The spam filter blocked your page save because it detected a blacklisted hyperlink. You may have added it yourself, the link may have been added by another editor before it was blacklisted, or you may be infected by spyware that adds links to wiki pages. You will need to remove all instances of the blacklisted URL before you can save. If you are attempting a section edit, note that this block may even be due to spam links in other sections.
- Blacklists are maintained both locally and globally. Before proceeding, please review both lists to determine which one (or both) are affecting you. You can request help removing the link, request that the link be removed from the blacklist, or report a possible error on the local or global spam blacklist talk page. If you'd like to request that a specific link be allowed without removing similar links from the blacklist, you can request whitelisting on the local spam whitelist talk page.
- The following link has triggered our spam protection filter: ***********************
- Either that exact link, or a portion of it (typically the root domain name) is currently blacklisted."
I am now completely unable to post in the talk page and apparently unable to have any say on the article, what the heck is going on? My post did not contain any URLs, so I cannot understand why I am apparently being blocked out.
I assume that this editor is an administrator of some sort, if that is so then I assume he has used some admin privilege to block the talk page, but this is completely ridiculous in the middle of a dispute, how can anything be done if we can't communicate? He has essentially steamrolled over the previous consensus regarding links (without any discussion), and if he has blocked the talk page in order to stifle discussion then that sounds like a pretty big misuse of his powers. Can you do anything here, such as unblocking the talk page at-least? --Hibernian (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
P.S. I had to take out the URL from the message (the blanked out part) there as it wouldn't even let me post it on you page to tell you about it, suffice to say the address is that of the NET website.--Hibernian (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- That means there's a blacklisted URL somewhere on the talk page. My best guess would be lulu.com. I can't get around it either (ie, it blocks all edits, not just non-admin edits).-Wafulz (talk) 16:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Eh no, I still can't post on the Talk:Technocracy movement page, that's the Tech Inc. article you've linked there. I need to post about the Technocracy movement article, not the other one. What is going on with this anyway, how can somebody just "blacklist" something like that, with no debate at all? --Hibernian (talk) 17:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Okay I've removed the blacklisted URLs. You should be able to post now. I think it was the NET's website that was blacklisted. Usually URLs get blacklisted because they're being placed (ie spammed) into tons of articles. The reason given on the list is:
- "Added by User:JzG to control linking by site owner in a walled garden of articles. Will review in 2 weeks once some AfDs are done."-Wafulz (talk) 20:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Howard Johnson Experience (band)
Hi there. You speedy deleted this article earlier today. Just FYI, there was an open Afd, which I closed as a non admin. Take care, Xymmax (talk) 19:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Malkin
I born Russia and know malkin family long time. everyone in russia know he jewish. so i add. not many good source online, but in russian newspaper there is many.
but i dont know why u delete it from andropov....it history that those are his parents name and he is jewish. thousand of source for it.
thank you
- If you have a link to the Russian newspaper it'll do. I can read it.-Wafulz (talk) 21:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 15 | 7 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 16 | 14 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
What?
I'm not mad but, why did you delete it?It wasn't that bad.I know I'm not the greatest article writer but,hey I can admit I'd did ok.And I did not copy from other sites!
Jimmy Nichols
I think it was premature to close the AfD -- nominators concerns about notability certainly are not addressed. Would you please reopen the discussion? Jfire (talk) 05:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Network of European Technocrats
Wafulz.. Isenhand editor also known as Andrew Wallace the NET director has put up what appears to be a complete copy of the previous article that was deleted via the Article for deletion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_of_European_Technocrats Network of European Technocrats - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Network_of_European_Technocrats Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Network of European Technocrats. Is this a candidate for this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_delete Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion ? if so could you please do that. This would appear to be another attempt at advertising a website done by the administrator of an organization.
Wafulz being unfamiliar with procedure in this situation I am giving this same message to a couple other Admin. editors. Thanks. skip sievert (talk) 14:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- Another admin nailed it, but in the future, just tag it with {{db-repost}}.-Wafulz (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Biewer
Hello, I would like to know why you deleted the information submitted by the BTCA, Inc. on the history of the Biewer. We have visited Mrs. Biewer and are in constant communication with her, and the history we provided is the most accurate, up to date information about the Biewer Terrier. We have been involved with genetic scientists to map the DNA genetic make up of the Biewer to bring more credence to the history provided by our club. If you have any questions please feel free to call me, Gayle Pruett (President of the BTCA, Inc.) 205-688-1710 or email me at pruettyorkies@aol.com or btca06@aol.com The Biewer Terrier Club of America, Inc. is the mother club for the Biewer Terrier in America. ARBA (American Rare Breed Association) has recognized the Biewer Terrier as a breed of it's own. JragPruett (talk) 00:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- To be honest, it wasn't written well, it was written in a heavily promotional tone, and it contained copyrighted text.-Wafulz (talk) 00:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
May I ask what the copyrighted text was? All information submitted was 100% written by the BTCA, Inc. Would you like to see the history and standard submitted to ARBA, that has been accepted as the true history and applicable standard for the Biewer Terrier? We feel it is imperative that the truth about the Biewer be presented to the American public. Thank You JragPruett (talk) 01:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Pretty much all of the text was copied from other websites, which isn't allowed.-Wafulz (talk) 11:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
All the text on the history of the Biewer was put there by me. I wrote and it and felt I had the right to post it. The ACH started to register the dog under the name Biewer Yorkshire Terrier a la Pom Pon. Germany has always called it a Biewer Yorkshire Terrier, not just Biewer Yorkshire. Thank You 15:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- There are several problems with the text. For one, it's not written according to the proper tone or manual of style. Additionally, it shouldn't be copied because Wikipedia is not a mirror. Also, once you write your material here, it's released under the GNU Free Documentation License, which is incompatible with your website's copyright. You're free to contribute to the article, but you have to follow guidelines regarding content.-Wafulz (talk) 20:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I will go over the guidelines you referred me to and show you the text I would like to add before posting it. Is that ok? JragPruett (talk) 03:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- You may want to post it on Talk:Biewer or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs, where another editor has raised concerns.-Wafulz (talk) 12:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
User Werwerwer11
Hi. I see you recently reverted some personal attacks by this guy. He (and also some anons who I believe to be the same editor) has been extremely (sometimes racially) abusive over the last few days regarding an edit dispute, where he's been injecting non-notable genres and uncited or badly cited material into an article myself and a couple of other editors worked really hard on [1], [2], [3], [4]. I have tried to compromise and asked for WP:CIVIL a number of times. I was wondering if you had any advice you could offer? --Kaini (talk) 19:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
User Hibernian
User Hibernian is using the talk page below much like a personal attack blog. Could you revert some of his statements about me? He has inserted them out of order throughout the page. Also after his editing he is also making personal diatribes. Thanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Technocracy_movement Talk:Technocracy movement - skip sievert (talk) 02:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
User talk:Jéské Couriano
Its being used as a honey pot at the moment. So Jéské may undo your protection shortly.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 03:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I do mind
Please do not semi my talk page. I have another one set up for occasions like this; it's semiprotected. -Jéské (v^_^v Karistaa Usko) 03:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
User Hibernian
..is using the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Technocracy_movement Talk: as a kind of personal attack blog. Example. Skip quote: "I am not involved in TechInc or NET.". Wow! somebody actually got Skip to admit that he was kicked out of Technocracy Inc.! It took him about 2 years to admit it and come to the realisation, but better late than never I guess! What you didn't mention of-course, is that you were very embittered by that dismissal and have since attacked the organization in any way you can (including on Wiki) and even tried to setup a rival group. You've recently also attempted to insert the name of your "group" into Wiki articles. Hmmm no, no conflicts of interests there, I think Skips just a honest contributor with no hidden agenda at all (And if you can't guess, yes I’m being Sarcastic). --Hibernian
Could you revert that type of thing out of the page? I have asked a couple other people for help on this. skip sievert (talk) 15:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- While he might have gone a bit overboard, he's stating that you have a conflict of interest, which I don't see as a personal attack.-Wafulz (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok... He is making a lot of nonsense comments about me that are connected to off site stuff which are not true. Demeaning behavior in my book. This is not stating a conflict of interest. It is spreading a brand of lie. I made a report here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Talk:Tomislav_II_of_Croatia.2C_4th_Duke_of_Aosta skip sievert (talk) 18:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
My talk page
In the future I ask you do not remove comments and messages from my talk page without expressed or written permission. --I Write Stuff (talk) 20:19, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oh relax, it was an honest mistake from reverting the article talk pages.-Wafulz (talk) 20:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.
|
|
|---|
|
|
||
| Volume 4, Issue 17 | 21 April 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
|
||
|
|
|
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
|
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Hibernian
Is this the type of stuff I have to put up with... this as a personal attack blog ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocratic_movement Technocratic movement.
Quote. Uh hm, right, well I'm really not even going to bother refuting the baloney that you continue to spew, but like I've said before, Your opinions of this or any other Tech Inc. publications don't matter to anybody but yourself, they don't matter to me and they certainly don't matter to Wikipedia. The fact still remains that that electronic version is the only one that has so far been made available by Tech Inc. on the internet, it's as simply as that, no other version is necessary or acceptable. That's the version we can use, End of Story. --Hibernian (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2008 end quote (UTC)
Not only is he talking about a spam link marked as spam on wiki... he is also claiming to be a spokesperson for wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OWN Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. This person is not civil.. is continuing to hurl insults. skip sievert (talk) 04:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
2007-08 Pittsburgh Penguins season
Would you mind taking a look at this article for GA or FA nomination after the season's over? If so inclined, you could leave comments on my talk page. Thanks, Grsztalk 15:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- You can look any time now, I just meant I wouldn't want it nominated until it's for the most part complete. Grsztalk 16:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
FAC of Degrassi
Thank you for the comments and review at the article's FAC. I think I've satisfactorily addressed your points, here's the diff]. Cheers! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 17:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Technocracy Movement worth attempting to save?
I have a feeling that you are probably fed up of this article, but I would like to ask you a few questions, since you are probably more familiar with it than anyone else, if you don`t mind.
I was intending to try and get some consensus on this article and attempt to reduce/stop the rolling edits/reverts, but it is beginning to look to me that that may unfortunately be an impossible task with the attitude of some current editors and the nature of wikis.
Do you think that it would actually be possible to get any form of consensus or should the article be "put out of its misery" ? Do you think it is worth the effort of me trying as currently all I seem to get from my efforts is incivility, accusations and reverts ?
Currently I'm beginning to think that I should forget the whole thing and go make a contribution elsewhere, where it might be appreciated
Thx in advance
- It's fine if you can keep Skip from posting his War-and-Peace-like replies.-Wafulz (talk) 22:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- That may well be true, but so far I don`t have a clue how to do that--Firebladed (talk) 13:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
Not to butt in here, but we seem to be talking about this as if it's an actual legitimate dispute between groups of editors, it isn't, it's all just about one man. And Firebladed, I think suggesting deleting the article just because of Skip Sievert’s trouble causing, is a bit of an over reaction. Since the Wikipedia community has completely failed to deal with Skip, I've long since resigned myself to having to combat him endlessly. If you want to do work on the article, you may well find yourself having to do the same, not a very good introduction to Wikipedia, I know, but what can ya do? --Hibernian (talk) 16:35, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- Extending the personal attack blog now to Wafulz page Hibernian ? If by saying causing trouble you mean pointing out conflicts of interests and original research I guess you are right. It is noted that I have no desire to fight with you or anyone. My only interest is in getting some good articles that are not controlled by special interest pov.. that are accurate. skip sievert (talk) 21:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
