User:Peter M Dodge/Archives/archive dec222006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] So that you don't forget

Hello. Just to remind you to look for James Beveridge. Relevant links - [1], [2]. Thanks. - Aksi_great (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Also found this on IMDB if it helps. - Aksi_great (talk) 08:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Did you find anything? - Aksi_great (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, due to events that happened on Thursday, I was unable to look into that. My apologies. ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 18:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editor review

When you get the time, please would you review me at Wikipedia:Editor review/SunStar Net. I'd appreciate this, thanks! --SunStar Nettalk 20:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I've even encountered you before, and as such I am not really qualified to offer an opinion on your editing. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 22:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photoshop Request

per IRC. I was hoping you could crop this picture vertically, so that we get a closer image of Mr. Jennings with the thumbnail at Peter Jennings. I don't see a real need to upload a new file...overwriting is fine with me. Many thanks, and I hope you feel better soon! Gzkn 05:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The last word on the nine words

Let me see if I have this straight. 1) I add nine words to the WKBS-TV page; 2) Rollosmokes has a hairy conniption fit, insulting me in the process (a common reaction for this guy when someone dares edit "his" pages)); 3) I respond in kind, and 4) I get banned for "personal attacks"!

Boy, that's rich. Are you guys all on the same bowling team or something?

This has gone well beyong the WKBS-TV page; there's principle involved here, which I why I keep pursuing it.

I'm going to edit WKBS-TV one last time. The admins have a choice to make:

1) Leave it alone, or 2) Revert it yet again, which sends the message that if a user jumps up and down and waves his arms (and has the right friends), he can get his way.

Your choice, fellas. RMc 11:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

As an impartial perspective on this issue, I peeked into the WKBS-TV (Philadelphia) article, its history and its contributors. These 'nine words' have been re-added in upwards of 9 times, something that is consistently reverted by at least 4 different editors. You do call people a 'jerk' in your edit summaries. You obviously tried the article talk page and people didn't see it the same way as you. Simply being persistent in adding the sentence '(the first-ever Kickoff Classic, played at Giants Stadium)' to the article is no way to go about this. All in all you could have been banned on vandalism, abusing the 3 revert rule or personal attacks - so it isn't as if you were banned out of the blue. I suggest you civilly try to reach consensus on the issue on WKBS-TV (Philadelphia)'s talk page. JoeSmack Talk 15:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yes

Yes, I have no problem with you handling the case; and if you can, I am a junior mediator in the MedCabal, and I wish to learn ways to help...well...mediate cases sucessfully;

Merry, Happy, Chris-ma-hana-kwan-za-ka from WikieZach| talk 00:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

If you are an admin, deal with this please, [3]WikieZach| talk 00:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
A sysop has taken care of it. Please do not replace the article with the CSD template in the future. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 01:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] mediation

I'm ok with you mediating on zoophilia and health Skopp (Talk) 16:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, now we just need to know whether or not the other party in the case agrees to me mediating the case. If they do, we can get started. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 19:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article BattleTech technology, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.
If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
You have been left this message by PocKleanBot, an automated process that notifies editors that articles to which they may have contributed on more than one occasion in the past now need cleanup. If you have any comments or object to this message being left, please leave a message on PocKleanBot's talk page.

[edit] Vote graphics

Please do not use these vote graphics, like " Oppose". These are discussions and the graphics are pointless. Especially on an Arbcom workshop page, it just looks foolish. —Centrx→talk • 05:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd forgotten my textcomplete templates were using them until Eagle mentioned it to me, but he said he would clean them up so I just left them. If there's any remaining I can axe them if you point them out. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 17:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Postscript: I've removed the stragglers from the ArbCom case and also stricken them from my textcomplete templates. If this reoccurs please let me know. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 19:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about missing one or two Wizardry Dragon. My bad. —— Eagle 101 (Need help?) 02:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Barnstar

Ooh, shiny. Danke schoen! Been awhile since one of those came by. I'm horrible at taking compliments, so I should shush up before I say something stupid. ;) Luna Santin 22:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Du bist willkommen. :) Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 22:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
What does that mean? What language is it? Any ways, I should give you a barnstar for you support of E@L. If you remind me (I'm busy at the moment), I will. Cheers! —¡Randfan!Sign here? 00:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
It is german. Luna said "Thank you" (Danke shoen), to which I replied "You are welcome" (Du bist willkommen). Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 00:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Post

If you're around. I have an off-topic concern.NinaEliza (talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 03:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Huaiwei article bans

Where are these article bans documented? They are not listed at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Instantnood_3#Log_of_blocks_and_bans. Thanks. Thatcher131 22:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Probation is where I found the documentation. ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 22:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

Not a big deal, but do you know you just reverted a bureaucrat? :) Regards, Newyorkbrad 23:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC) P.S. It's been edited since, I don't think you need to change it again.

I just looked at the content, why it was removed, and made a decision based on that. User rights do not factor into my decision :) ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality) 00:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No Personal Attacks

Regarding your comment to Armankav here - Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me • Support Neutrality • RFCU) 21:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Peter, I have no idea who you are? Thus, I am going to assume that you have no idea as to the background behind the conversation you are referring to, such as connected conversations on other talk pages (involving more than two dozen people) from weeks earlier, abuse of administrative tools, deletion or misrepresentation of article material (so as to underhandedly justify one’s argument), defending editor viewpoint over that of reader viewpoint, false, incorrect, or derogatory misrepresentations of user actions or viewpoints, unjustified reverts, outright deletions of material, adding unjustified non-referenced original research materials, etc. The list goes on an on. My point is that just as we assume good faith we also assume that people are not out making personal attacks; sometimes there is more to a conversation than meets the eye. Thus, in some cases, falsely accusing someone of being a personal attacker a detriment to the moral of Wikipedia and is vandalism in itself. I sure, however, that your intentions are good. Thank-you: --Sadi Carnot 21:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
That was very incoherent, at best. I will say only this - personal attacks are disruptive and divisive. Please comment on the content and not the contributor. If you are uncivil and continue personal attacks, you will be blocked. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge aka "Wiz" (Talk to Me • Support Neutrality • RFCU) 21:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)