User talk:Neutralisation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Page Renaming Poll 2 Xed 3 Please e-mail me 4 You probably should take a look at this

[edit] Page Renaming Poll

Thanks for your good suggestion on Talk:Israeli violence against Palestinian children. I would like to cast an informal poll to vote on your idea. I believe we currently have enough votes to change the name to Violence against children in Israel and Palestine. To list the poll, see Wikipedia:Current_polls. Please let me know what you think on my talk page. Thanks in advance. --Viriditas 23:58, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Xed

There's no point with him, I'm going to ignore him again, which was always the best policy. Jayjg 06:48, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'll take that advice in hand, thanks. Neutralisation 06:54, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Talking to yourself isn't particularly sane.. - Xed 10:55, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That goes even moreso for just about anything you type. Jayjg 11:55, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Xed, once again, I am not Jayjg, he is not me. Stop being delusional, you would've already been diagnosed as mentally unstable in the United Kingdom. Neutralisation 21:36, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Xed has requested arbitration on myself, User:Pir and two others for accusing him/her of being a sockpuppet. You may want to do the same. JFW | T@lk 12:54, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The difference of course is that Neutralisation is. On a side note, JFW is notorious for attempting to remove votes when the voter doesn't vote in the same way as him - Xed 13:29, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The difference is that you are notorious for lying. I have requested removal of your vote once, and the motivation was not that you voted against but that you appeared to be a sockpuppet. But I should rather starve the trolls rather than feed them uh? JFW | T@lk 14:25, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

So you're happy for no action to be taken against sockpuppets (or those you think are) as long as they agree with you. JFW, defender of sockpuppers and vote-remover. - Xed 14:58, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No, I dispute the allegation. Now get lost. JFW | T@lk 16:24, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Xed, if you continue to accuse me of being a sockpuppet I will have no choice but to go through Wikipedia's Mediation and Arbitration committee and other avenues. I've proved to you that I am not a sockpuppet, but you dismiss this evidence and proof which you yourself requested in Talk:Israeli_violence_against_Palestinian_children and when you reported me as a sockpuppet falsely in Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress and accuse me of being a sockpuppet again despite the evidence showing the opposite. You have not provided one single piece of evidence that I am a sockpuppet whereas I have provided solid evidence that I am not a sockpuppet. On top of this there are others have pointed out to you the idiocy of your claims, including User:Cool Hand Luke and User:Jayjg. Grow up. Neutralisation 13:45, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Your lack of edits and the narrow range of them are all the evidence anyone needs. - Xed 14:15, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I happen to have a special interest in this section and prior to signing up I anonymously made many edits to subjects matters similair to this as well as other subject matters. After signing up this was my second target after trying to remove POV in the IDF history article. I have edited no more because of your childish antics, I am now absorbed into the Israeli violence against Palestinian children article and your ludicrous claims that I am a sockpuppet. Lack of edits and narrow range of articles is not evidence. Keep this up and I will report you. Neutralisation 15:48, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Report me? You sound like an old timer. - Xed 15:59, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Frankly, there are any number of items that Xed could be Arbitrated on, if you do decide to go this route, and feel free to contact me on that. I haven't bothered, because he's wasted enough of my time as it is, and I don't think anyone takes him seriously any more (if they ever did). Jayjg 16:49, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have qualms about RfA'ing without first RfC'ing or RfM'ing the situation. Any attempts at RfA'ing before the two other steps heightens the chances of rejection, doesn't it? Neutralisation 17:04, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Unfortunately you are right, though if the behaviour is egregious or longstanding enough there might be exceptions. As you see above, he started a mediation with someone else for calling him a sockpuppet. He also started a mediation with me, for alleged false accusations, and then later rejected the mediator he himself chose; I don't know if those would count or not. Jayjg 17:09, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"Alleged"? They weren't just alleged. The mediator turned out to be a bigot. - Xed 18:03, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

So what do you suggest I do? Neutralisation 17:14, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Let me go find your e-mail first. Jayjg 17:15, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A rogue admin never does anything in the open. - Xed 18:03, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I recommend building a case that you can use for whatever dispute resolution mechanism you prefer. If it doesn't work for arbitration, then it can certainly be used for Mediation or RfC, and it saves a lot of work in the future. Jayjg 22:37, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Please e-mail me

Neutralization, please e-mail me; you'll find a link to e-mailing me on the "toolbox" at the left side of my user page. Jayjg 11:55, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You've been emailed. Neutralisation 21:34, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I didn't get anything yet. Could you try e-mailing me at viritalk at hotmail.com ? Jayjg 15:47, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ok, I've emailed you manually. Neutralisation 16:53, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] You probably should take a look at this

Vandalism_in_progress#Various_IPs_and_.22New_User.22_sockpuppets Jayjg 20:59, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Have done and have commented on it. Xed, his theories and his whole outlook on subjects is warped, nothing much I can do about it. Neutralisation 21:37, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

.