User talk:T-man, the Wise Scarecrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

...there is not any thing harder to take in hand, nor doubtfuller to succeed, nor more dangerous to mannage, than to be the chief in bringing in new orders; for this Chief finds all those his enemies, that thrive upon the old orders; and hath but luke warme defenders of all those that would do well upon the new orders, which luke-warme temper proceeds partly from fear of the opposers who have the laws to their advantage; partly from the incredulity of the men who truly beleeve not a new thing, unless there be some certain proof given them thereof. Whereupon it arises, that whensoever they that are adversaries, take the occasion to assayle, they do it factiously; and these others defend but cooly, so that their whole party altogether runs a hazzard. -- Nicholas Machiavelli

This user is banned from editing Wikipedia. Please review the banning policy before commenting or unblocking.
(see: block log • contributions • page moves • current autoblocks)

I've made your block indefinite because of continuing personal attacks, as seen here and the threat of vandalism made in this edit. Note you were already serving an arb-com imposed ban of six months for making personal attacks, a ban you attempted to circumvent through sock puppet accounts. Wikipedia is not a battleground. I've also protected your talk page to prevent further personal attacks. Steve block Talk 15:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

  • T-Man, if you wish to appeal your block, I suggest you take it up with the arbitration committee directly. If you go to WP:AC you will see members contact details, and you can email them and request an unblock or perhaps raise the issue of a check-user request with them. Nobody here can perform the check-user or ask for one to be performed, as banned users are not allowed to induce others to edit for them. Steve block Talk 13:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


  • No, there is no need to need for that. I trust your judgement, just keep on my case, please. I still find your mentorship very smart.
  • As I said, my current opinion is that because I was not aware of the 5 blocks limit, eventually like 3 to 4 months after the 5th block I'd have sliped and therefore, I'd be currently blocked for 6 monts anyway. So I just want to be over with the 6 months thing.
  • I also agree that using sock puppets was a huge mistake, and that it is fear to set the clock back.
  • I didn't find out about the T-manWiki sockpuppet, you guys did. In that sense it wouldn't be a favor. Wouldn't asking through mail be kinda cheating? You are leading this case, you're a very straight person and I feel that it's up to you and that its kinda the ethical thing to do not to left any lose ends for this case (...then again who am I to use the word ethic?). I think the task is in your jusrisction and that it would be disrespectful to ask somebody else to do it and make you look like hiding something. I feel it would be like doing it behind your back.
Another way to do it would be asking you for your permission to request the checkuser through e-mail. I'll do as you say.--T-man, the wise 18:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh and please, if posible, a little rephasing of your above comment would be enourmosly apreciated. As I explained you before I asked to CovenatD to stop editing my page in such way because he woulnd like me to do the *same* to his page. He was not vandalizing my page, therefore the same (including an equaly valid pretext) wouldn't be vandalism. I did meant similar conditions. However, I'd rather avoid the guy. My experience with the Judge ells me he is not the kind of person you want on your bad side. Thanks.--T-man, the wise 18:58, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not convinced T-Man wiki was a sock puppet, and I wouldn't even know who it was a sock puppet of. But that's beside the point. You lost your editing rights when you were banned. When your ban is lifted, you can make the request. If anyone else, off their own back, wants to make the request, that's up to them, but nobody should do it because you asked, because you are banned. If you think it matters, then like I say, take it up via email with the arb-com. They all have check users. Onto your other point, there are no pretexts for messing with someone's user page, and messing with someone's page when you are banned is vandalism. It's also disruptive. And making threats ain't nice. You should move on. I'll check back with you in six months, okay. Steve block Talk 19:06, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, it was kinda my point not to do that because I'm asking, but because it's the right thing to do and because there is a policy stating so when a new user choses a user name with controversial words including other user's names, nemes that reflect wikipedia policies or charges. I think we all know kinda who he is, or at least I had the impression for a while. I didn't think it was a copycat, but it's possible. I will consider your last comment like the premission to do this through e-mail or whenever you decide to unblock me, unless you specify otherwise.
  • I neither mess with anybody's page nor threat to vandalize anything. I was talking about alouded similar edits under similar conditions, because I wanted to point that from my point of view, those edits were legal, yet obnoxious, and that if I was the one doing the same to him he wouldn't apreciate it. I tried to make him picture himself in my shoes for that moment, that's all. I wasn't asuring I'd do anything, I wasn't planning on doing anything and I'm still not. I didn't imagine it could have been interpreted as a threat of vandalism, that's too heavy, it's like Wow! Wow! threat of what what who what?. I just wanted to clarify. I do apologise if I lead to such misinterpretation, it was never my intention to even look like I'm going near that far.--T-man, the wise 19:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Contents

Thanks

Oh, and Steve, maybe I didn't make it clear with all that that complaining about minor issues I've been doing, but thank you. I appreciate a lot the 6 months opportunity you gave me. --T-man, the wise 18:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:GP2-TNBA.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:GP2-TNBA.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipediholic

User:Tenebrae, made a good point in your talk page. We do need a way to self blocking or blocking at users' request. I'm also a wikipediholic (add temperamental, pro-innovations/changes and the stress of being followed, and the outcome it's pretty logic), Shannel did me the favor of blocking me at my request, and believe me, it really helped! Or at least it gave me chance to dedicate my tme to more productive bussiness.

Think about it, I think it'd be a good idea to make it a common practice for wikipediholics. --T-man, the wise 06:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Help

{{help me}} Firstly, I want to clarify I'm not sure I should be asking help for this, if I'm doing wrong I apologise and promess not to do something similar again.

I created in a legitime way an article about a DC comics character called Draaga, this is a fearly common practice with comic book characters.

Some time later I did several poor choices that lead to my 6 month blocking, I violated it and kept editing, after this was noticed by some administrators, my edits were reverted according to Wikepedia's guidelines for these kind of situations. (I think a message should have been left in all the respective talk pages specifing tha if somebody liked the edits they can re make them, but nevermind) I broke the rules, so that's fair enough.

The problem is that somebody has gone further and started erasing articles I legitimaly made way before I was blocked. I find that somewhat abusive and an agression to me and the ways of wikipedia. However, I hope there is a logical explanation for this.

I though it was important to notify this, but if I'm doing wrong please tell me.--T-man, the wise 11:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear T-man, looking at your note here; I want to assume good faith with you; but your blocklog prevents me from doing so. I completely emphatise with the frustration you feel when you are blocked, but that is as per the choices you have made earlier and the decision of the administrators and other established users of the community. In case you want to contest your block and want to get back with a promise; you may appeal to the arbitration committee. Start off by sending appropriate emails to the members. Best wishes. — Nearly Headless Nick {L} 12:48, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm actually ok with my blocking. The issue is that I fear there might be some irregularities behind the erasing of the Draaga article and I think reporting it so someone like you is the right thing to do. My question would be: was the Draaga article rightfully erased with legitimate reasons? If the answer is yes, the reason is all I want to know, and if the answer is no, it be up to you what to do next. I wouldn't want any further involvement with the issue. And no, you don't need to assume good or bad faith, the help I need is estrictly objetive.

...Since I can't reply to yo in your talk page, should I use the {{help me}} template whenever I reply to you or what?

Thank for your time. I truly apreciate it.--T-man, the wise 13:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

  • The article was not created by you, it was created by your sock-puppet account User:The Judge on the 31st August. You were blocked from Wikipedia on the 31st July. All articles created by your sock puppets after your block were deleted in line with guidance offered. If you wish to repeal your indefinite blocking, please now take it to arb-com. I will no longer consider a review, and believe arb-com to be the only objective forum to declare whether you should be unblocked. I have protected this page top prevent further disruption to Wikipedia. Steve block Talk 13:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/-/m/User_talk%7ET-man%2C_the_Wise_Scarecrow_0392.html"