User talk:AGK/Archive/27
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Activity level: full • Current activity: observing
- The following user talk subpage an archive of archived discussions on User talk:AGK. Please do not modify it. New discussions should be raised through this link; to contact this user, see User:AGK/Contact. For an overview of old discussions, see User talk:AGK/Archive.
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. |
[edit] Contacting admin
Hi, any luck with contacting the admin who blocked me? 124.168.189.183 (talk) 01:45, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm unsure who you are, so you'll need to tell me what your usual account is before I can answer the query :) Anthøny 07:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
You said on my Userpage (link) that you would contact the admin who blocked me. Ishq —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.189.183 (talk) 02:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, the request has already been handled. However, the blocking administrator did email me, and it is clear that the account is a sock puppet. Anthøny 07:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
And how was that ascertained? I would like to have evidence to back this claim up - it is apparently not the first time this administrator has blocked users without prealamble. How is it clear that the account is a sock puppet? 203.158.41.38 (talk) 10:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Rollback
I was wondering if you could grant me Rollback status. I know that my edit count is quite less, even lesser than the criterion(if any) to grant rollback status,but here's why I'm making you this request. I recently installed Lupin's Anit-Vandal tool and Azatoth's Twinkle and found that they had very good features to detect and remove vandalism. I'm rather more interested (and able) in keeping Wikipedia free from Vandalism than editing article. Now that my exams have (almost) ended I'll do this more often and it would be easier if I do have the ability to rollback. Please give it a thought. Thank You. CSumit (talk) 17:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- Y Done. Please remember that, per Wikipedia:Rollback feature, this tool is only to be used for reverting vandalism, and not for reverting good-faith edits: for that, if it's necessary, use "undo", and fill in a more explanatory edit summary (rollback does not allow for custom edit summaries, in its standard form). Otherwise, thanks for requesting, and happy rollbacking ;) Regards, Anthøny 17:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: (Un)Block of User:Irn
Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you on this - I only just noticed the response you had left on Irn's talk page. After I made the effort to unblock Irn (which wasn't accomplished, as it had expired moments earlier), I made a report of the situation at WP:ANI (already archived) to raise attention about the issue; I also brought it to the attention of the admins in #wikipedia-en-admins since I was in the channel at the time. All admins who took note of the situation concurred with my actions. Had the block been longer in duration, I would have made an effort to contact you beforehand - as it was, I was too late anyway. As I stated in the ANI discussion, you had already made your position clear anyway when responding to User:Tiamut on Irn's talk page. I accepted Irn's request because no effort whatsoever had been made to make Irn aware of 3RR as you claim. Editors do not come to Wikipedia with an already ingrained knowledge of policy; this is why we have the warning system in place for vandalism and edit wars such as this one. Furthermore, in reviewing the history of Falafel, I could only see that Irn and User:M1rth each had only made two reversions, to a relatively small section of the article - actions neither in violation of WP:3RR nor (in my opinion) particularly disruptive, since that is what you made the block for. Irn even made an effort to discuss the issue on the talk page here. I don't see Irn's actions to be blatantly disruptive, and certainly not deserving of a block. He could certainly have taken other steps to resolve the issue - contacting M1rth directly on his talk page, for one - but he is at least willing to acknowledge his mistakes ([1]). I hope this clarifies my reasoning for the attempted unblock. Again, I do apologize for not contacting you first, and will certainly make an effort to do so in the future. Thanks for your time. Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] RFA
Thanks - I however, have already gone through admin coaching. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] User talk:Animal00
I protected the page after the user vandalized his/her own talk page while making nonsense unblock requests. Purely disruptive editor. Toddst1 (talk) 18:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- This does not appear to be very fair: the editor has never abused the {{unblock}} template, and hence has not vandalised. Rather, this appears to be a lack of education and technical knowledge as to how to utilise the unblock template—a process which has caused problems in the past, considering its moderately advanced wiki code. In the hope that you don't object to assuming good faith, I've lifted the protection, to allow the editor to make good use of the advice I gave him/her, as to correctly using the unblock template. Regards, Anthøny 18:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- This edit was clearly not good faith attempting to request an unblock. That said, I don't object to lifting protection. Toddst1 (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, that one was rather disruptive. Having said that, it's not technically an abuse of the unblock template—rather, it's an abuse of the privilege to edit one's talk page whilst blocked. But that's just semantics now :) Anthøny 21:30, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- This edit was clearly not good faith attempting to request an unblock. That said, I don't object to lifting protection. Toddst1 (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars
I realize it's somewhat late, but I would like to apply for at least observer status, if not participant. I'll take whichever can still be offered. Thanks! —PētersV (talk) 22:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Better late than never, eh? Actually, I'm not officially conducting the requests to join—for that, you need to email the arbitration committee, using the email address listed on their page (see pink box). You will need to explain your experience with edit warring, cultural issues, and what not. Check out here, and the various links and subpages, for more information. I hope to see your request being put through soon. Kind regards, Anthøny 22:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Review of user conduct
Hi. Did you in fact file a review of his conduct? [2]. Could you point me to the discussion? Thanks. Jd2718 (talk) 12:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hi AGK
Hi AGK, sorry for your health problems. When you have time, could you kindly update the Block Log at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Franco-Mongol_alliance, with the information about the block being finally limited to 20 hours, and, if possible, reason for doing so? Thank you. PHG (talk) 16:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- You'll probably also want to know that PHG is discussing you at ANI Shell babelfish 16:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the notification, PHG, and moreover, the direction to the ANI thread, Shell. I will comment in due course, although I think it is imprudent to raise this matter that has clearly been put to bed. It's going to do nothing but make PHG worse off. Well, if he wants to dig the grave deeper, he can be my guest. Regards, Anthøny 16:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
FYI, PHG started a thread at ANI (since closed),[3] and then this morning started a new thread at WP:AE if you would like to participate, and or render a determination on whether or not he is saying things that violate his sanctions. --Elonka 10:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Rollback
I understand that I have not been editing long enough, but may I reapply for rollback rights later? Limaye (talk) 01:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Of course! Simply because you're not quite experienced enough just now, does not mean you won't be in the future! All the best, Anthøny 10:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/header
It seems like since you deleted Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/header the bot reported vandalism functions at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism are not working. I am going to try to restore it and see what happens. If I am missing something let me know.
-
- restoring did not fix the problem, so I deleted it again. Jeepday (talk) 05:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Some one removed some code in Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism/TB2, I've fixed it now --Chris 05:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- restoring did not fix the problem, so I deleted it again. Jeepday (talk) 05:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Request to amend case
Please note that I filed a request to amend my case at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Request to amend prior cases: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Franco-Mongol alliance. Regards PHG (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I noticed, thank you. Regards, Anthøny 12:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly
Thanks for expressing an interest in coming along to the next conversation - if you click above you'll see that we've confirmed a new date and time, and have also created a new 'confirmed participants' section (sorry about the extra hoops to jump through - but hopefully it'll help us figure out if 'everyone's here'!) - if you do happen to be free at the suggested time, that's great! - I'll create the 'room' about 30mins early, as usual, and please do pop in as soon as possible so we can iron out the inevitable technical problems in time for a prompt-ish start! thanks, and I look forward to chatting tomorrow! best, Privatemusings (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advanced notification. I still have some hardware problems (e.g. my mic is currently not picking up sound :) which will directly affect my availability for the event, but I will do my best. Additionally, I will try and let you, or another of the confirmed participants, know whether I will be available immediately before it begins.
Anthøny 22:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] My RfA
Hi AGK/Archive/27! Thank you for your support in my RfA (87/3/3).
|
- My pleasure, and use the tools well. Regards, Anthøny 17:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] For the attention of the recently-posting anonymous editor
Unfortunately, you appear to have a dynamic IP address, and hence I cannot directly address you though a talk page. Nevertheless, I think it would be generally helpful if you at least noted my comment. It is clear that you have some sort of greviance with administrators or editors of the project, and perhaps Wikipedia as a whole.
There is not much I can do about that. What I can, however, help you with, is whatever you are upset about. If you would prefer to contact me privately, I would be glad to have a chat with you: details for contacting me via email are available here, and other, private mediums' details, here.
I look forward to hearing from you. In the meanwhile, it's probably best to stop continually posting rather angry messages ;) Chances are, they will continue to be reverted. All the best, Anthøny 17:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Clerk notice
Hi — I was just wondering if you could comment on this regarding the 9/11 ArbCom. --Haemo (talk) 23:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Reply to come soon. Apologies for the delay.
Anthøny 22:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Please check out this ANI report
Here it seems that User:M1rth is back and up to the same old, same old. What happened to the RfC you were going to request? Thanks. Tiamuttalk 13:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note, M1rth is indefinitely blocked. To that end, there's not much need for a RfC. Hopefully this resolves matters.
Anthøny 22:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] your offer
Thanks for the offer of nomination! In my first RFA, I promised to wait six months before trying again. That was in November, so I've got a bit to go. I'd be happy to accept your nomination then, along with my coach Acalamari and Tim Vickers. Thanks again, VanTucky 21:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Nudge me when you're getting your affairs in order and preparing to run–I'd definitely like to chip in a co-nomination, for what it's worth :)
Anthøny 21:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Skypecast
We're getting ready to start the skypecast. Are you coming? Raul654 (talk) 22:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I mentioned this to Majorly, but the message didn't get passed on: I've got some faulty hardware—my mic is not picking up sound—which means I'm having to miss this one. Please accept my sincere apologies—I realise that you folks put it back so that I could attend, and I feel pretty bad in having to sit this one out. I do hope to come on soon, though, and so long as I can get a replacement mic, I am targeting attending the next skypecast. I will, of course, tune in when the episode is publicly released. All the best, and have fun, Anthøny 22:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: My talk
I don't think that was a fair assessment on your part AGK. I remained civil throughout today's content dispute (one which a consensus pre-existed in accordance with the preferences I held, coupled with an 8-1 objection on the talk page). Furthermore, User:Yorkshirian actually apologised for his hostilities; despite naming me called a "troll", "vandal" and other things. I remained polite throughout and believe the feedback left about how incivility damages Wikipedia was quite permissable. Given this, coupled with having a cherished article on the main page today, means I think I acted rather admirably. --Jza84 | Talk 20:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
- I did notice your rather good work on the main page, which is how I stumbled across that thread. I'm sorry if I made you look at fault—I mainly pointed out the fact that Yorkshirian was being incivil, and noted that disruption in general is not to be tolerated. I simply advised that you stay away from his talk page iff you were going to further the dispute, rather than help the encyclopedia. If you are capable of staying civil and communicating under the standards expected of an editor—which I am sure you are—then please, go about your business as usual :) Regards, Anthøny 20:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Procedure query
Hi, on the FMA case, I saw that you had put your proposed amendment down into that lower section... Should I do the same, moving my amendment from my statement down into the proposal section? Or is that an "arbitrators and clerks only" thing? --Elonka 22:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Good evening, Elonka. I have actually removed my proposal from that section; I was just informed on IRC, that only arbitrators may make proposals there, a factor of which I was not previously aware. I have removed my statement, and I believe PHG's will also be removed shortly, unless he does it himself. I have instead opted to note my proposal under my statement; perhaps you'd like to do likewise? Anthøny 22:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the clarification. And yes, I actually already have my proposed amendment in my statement, but as it's gotten zero response, I'm not sure if anyone (including you!) actually saw it. :/ I also have a "P.S." where I am ready to offer additional evidence about PHG's latest activities, but I didn't get any response on that either. What do you think, should I just go ahead and create an evidence page and link to it? I'm trying to be mindful of Fayssal's comment, but I have to admit I'm bewildered on that too, since I think he's confused. I never used my admin tools in any situation with PHG. I am concerned that Fayssal is taking PHG's complaints to heart, rather than realizing that PHG has just been constantly complaining that I was harassing him, regardless of whether or not I was actually doing anything, heh. So, any advice appreciated! --Elonka 22:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hrm, tricky one. I think it will be worthwhile creating a separate evidence page, detailing relevant evidence that you wish to make. It may also be worthwhile pointing Fayssal, in particular, directly to that page. Similarly, however, I do not think any arbitrators are in any doubt as to who is the disruptive party in this case. You may wish to clarify this, and perhaps propose an amendment solidifying that—then again, your evidence page could probably fill that function rather effectively. It's really up to you, Elonka; it's your pitch to the arbitrators, and you'll best know how to communicate it as briefly and as best as possible. Anthøny 22:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the clarification. And yes, I actually already have my proposed amendment in my statement, but as it's gotten zero response, I'm not sure if anyone (including you!) actually saw it. :/ I also have a "P.S." where I am ready to offer additional evidence about PHG's latest activities, but I didn't get any response on that either. What do you think, should I just go ahead and create an evidence page and link to it? I'm trying to be mindful of Fayssal's comment, but I have to admit I'm bewildered on that too, since I think he's confused. I never used my admin tools in any situation with PHG. I am concerned that Fayssal is taking PHG's complaints to heart, rather than realizing that PHG has just been constantly complaining that I was harassing him, regardless of whether or not I was actually doing anything, heh. So, any advice appreciated! --Elonka 22:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)