User talk:TAnthony/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive

  Archive 1
  Archive 2
  Archive 3
  Archive 4
  Archive 5
  Archive 6

Contents

[edit] Yrgh

[edit] Dune

I'd believe you when you say the Dune articles need references, except you tagged the Dune: House Corrino article, which is like one paragraph! And it's from the book the page is about! It looks like I'm not the only one who has issues with some of your edits, so don't take mine so personally. TAnthony

WHERE's the proof that I'm mad at you!? Vandalism? Says who? Page needs to be checked for accuracy. User:Yrgh

I don't want to start a war, but it's obvious you looked on my recent contribution list and picked a few articles to tag. COME ON! The House Corrino article is one paragraph, why is it you picked that one and not one of the other dozen books that actually have something written in them? And the Hagal page? I'm sorry I said you were mad at me in the edit notes, but no one cares. TAnthony 21:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

I really can't believe what a 2-year-old you are! But I am going to leave your notability tags alone because I didn't create these articles and there are plenty of people monitoring them that can argue the point. And by the way, Mentats and the Suk School are notable within the Dune universe, which itself is one of the most acclaimed sci-fi series in existence. If that much happens at Genoa City University, maybe there should be an article. You seem to think the minutae of Daytime is important, why don't you stick to what you know? Clearly you know nothing about Dune, or about editing on Wikipedia for that matter TAnthony 23:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFD tags

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose the deletion of an article, you may comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Seems we have a bit of a delicate situation, here -- I can understand that you're frustrated, but please also note that calling Yrgh crazy hasn't done anything to calm him/her down. Let's try to calm this all down a bit, if that's alright? Luna Santin 02:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Apparently, Yrgh has accused you of a personal attack here. If it is true, please apologize. Thanks. Sr13 (T|C) 03:37, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  • very disruptive presence on Wikipedia!?!?! misguided edits!?!? I will NOT lay down when I'm being PERSONALLY ATTACKED! Even by YOU! I NEVER PERSONALLY ATTACK ANYONE ON WIKIPEDIA! NEVER!
  • I'm a VALUABLE editor; contributed to HUNDREDS of pages. YOU, TAnthony, called me "crazy"! YOU called me an "idiot", among other things!
  • You couldn't bring yourself to apologize. You even feel that u r justified to PERSONALLY ATTACK me!!!!!!!!! YOU wrote attack in quotations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • I reported YOU, but have yet to receive any response from the powers that be on Wiki about YOU REPEATEDLY ATTACKING ME! Yrgh 02:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)yrgh

[edit] Vendetta?

Sorry, but your addition of tags to the Dune-related pages is starting to look like some sort of vendetta. Maybe you could discuss on the relevant discussion pages exactly what you find objectionable about the Frank Herbert and Duniverse articles? --SandChigger 09:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean a vendetta against Dune...but you probably know that. True, a lot of the articles need to be rewritten, and probably a few are unnecessary. Which parts of the Frank Herbert article are not credible? --SandChigger 09:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Capitization

Hi, I've noticed you capitalizing all words in section headings in many of your edits. I wanted to point out that this is incorrect Wikipedia policy for headings; see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Wording. Only the first letter is to be capitalized, unless a proper noun is used (Name or Title). Also, you keep putting in soap opera title links with capital "the" and "to", but proper English has these articles and particples lowercase; if you look at the article totles themselves, they are correctly spelled One Life to Live, As the World Turns, etc. Finally, when alphabetizing titles, any "The" or "A" used at the beginning is ignored (which is why your B&B change was reverted). "As" is not an article/participle and so is considered the first word in the title. I hope I've ben of help, and thanks for your contributions! TheRhani 01:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AFDs

Please note that randomly tagging articles for WP:AFD is disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Please stop now before you are blocked for your disruption.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:37, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

Hey, there! I notice you've recently tagged a large number of articles with {{afd}} -- please take a moment to complete each nomination, so that we can be assured that you have a rationale to begin the discussion. Mass-tagging like that may be considered disruptive, if performed without a good explanation. Thanks! Luna Santin 01:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, please review our deletion policy to determine what articles should be nominated for deletion or speedy deletion. The full process of how to list an article for deletion can be found here. Thanks! —bbatsell ¿? 01:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Dune planets

(←Created page with 'STRONG DELETE: This "list" should be included as a section in the Dune main page TAnthony 01:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)yrgh')

The main Dune page is already long, this and other articles were purposely split off the main one. In the case of Dune planets, many minor Dune planet links redirect here, if you checked the "What links here". Why is List of One Life to Live characters deserving of its own article and this one isn't? Because you're crazy. TAnthony 01:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: PERSONALLY ATTACKED!

I've left the user in question a note. I'd prefer it if the both of you could work this out amicably. For your part, please try to calm down and work past what was probably just a frustrated comment. Luna Santin 02:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please calm down. Also, stop blanking portions of the talk page. Remember, it is not your talk page, it is the community's. Sr13 (T|C) 02:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Remember that two wrongs don't make a right. Don't blame others for an offense when you have committed an offense. Just admit it, and move on.
Also, Juppiter has apologized about his blatant remark. TAnthony has only critiqued you. Please consider what you are doing before you talk about what others have done. Thank you. Sr13 (T|C) 02:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I will notify TAnthony of the situation. Sr13 (T|C) 03:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

NEVER!!!!!!!

  • FOR THE RECORD: Juppiter and TAnthony are NOT, nor will they ever be MY peers!!!!!!!
  • Their actions have PROVEN to ME that their FAKE apologies ARE indeed FAKE apologies. Look at the notes they left to ME! READ THEM CAREFULLY!!!!!
  • Good faith!? THEY have proven that they the PERSONAL ATTACK rules on Wiki don't apply to them
  • Is that the image Wiki wants to portray: Edit on wiki, then be PERSONALLY ATTACKED, RIDICULED & INSULTED.....REPEATDELY!?!!?!?!?
  • And NOTHING was done about it! They have NOT been reprimanded!
  • Do u like to be PERSONALLY ATTACKED repeatdely!?!?! Yrgh 10:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


THE NEXT TIME you want to refer to something someone else has said on my talk page, COPY IT rather than editing the original comment. I frankly couldn't care less about what names you have been called by someone else. NOT MY PROBLEM. --SandChigger 08:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks are against Wikipedia policy. But so is leaving unsigned comments. And generally trying to cause trouble. You should reread Sr13's comment above about cleaning up your own house before advising others on theirs. --SandChigger 09:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TAnthony

Look, I'm sorry if I lost my cool, but I (and others) have repeatedly "played fair" with you and yet you continue your incorrect and misguided tagging. I have tried to be objective and indulge you, thinking that perhaps some articles you've tagged do need to be better sourced, etc. But you have tagged several articles that are clearly sourced, or stubs, or notable, which makes your opinion about such things questionable. I am not the only one who feels this way about some of your edits; if I was, I would shut up. Please realize that when you tag an article for AfD, you're requiring people to spend a lot of time "justifying" articles that are perfectly fine.

I would also ask that you take some of the advice left here; for example, one user above has informed you about not capitalizing all of the words in section headers and article names, and yet you've just created the History Of General Hospital (2000-Present) article and capitalized "of" in both the title and the header. You have repeatedly "corrected" articles with this type of thing. You cite "Wikipedia standards" in many of your tags but seem to repeatedly ignore some yourself.

I will not be "attacking" you anymore, but please try to be much more careful in your edits. TAnthony 00:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yikes, I see you're still mad. Look, I'm sorry I called you an idiot, but you're acting like I ran over your dog! I tried to get my point across to you the regular way, but you continued with the tagging and I got frustrated. I admit I'm stubborn in that I stand by my opinions about some of your edits, but you're stubborn too because you won't listen to anyone else. I never said you didn't contribute a lot to Wikipedia or that every edit you make is bad. But on two different days you tagged many articles AfD or whatever, which was disruptive because the majority of these articles were fine, and your reasoning was unclear. Can we just get over this and move on? TAnthony 15:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your behavior

You have been advised several times by myself and others to please follow Wikipedia conventions in your edits, and yet you continue to make edits that must immediately be reverted. I apologized for insulting you, and it was an honest apology. Unfortunately you didn't take the opportunity to accept my apology, and if you feel you're being railroaded off WP I don't really have any sympathy. I think you could've been a GREAT editor, but you continue to blow it big time.

Juppiter 05:25, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way.... You added a LOT of unproven rumors to Wikipedia, which is against the rules, and it was annoying for me to have to revert all that, so I called you an asshole. On further investigation, I realized that a lot of your edits were worthwhile and you were just inexperienced, and I made an honest apology for calling you an asshole much earlier. Now, your behavior has led me to believe that I was right the first time. This is my last word on the subject... I'm sorry we couldn't get along, and I'll continue to revert any edits you make that include unproven rumors. Juppiter 05:32, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note

Your peers, Juppiter and TAnthony have apologized for their actions, yet you run them down on the talk pages. Please assume good faith, which includes accepting their apologies as honest and truthful. Please correct yourself accordingly. Sr13 (T|C) 09:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sr13

I'm sorry you have to feel discouraged about being a Wikipedian because of those personal attacks, but you should shape up yourself first.

Here are all of the policies that you broke:

You refuse to remain cool and civil after being told repeatedly by others (SandChigger, Juppiter, TAnthony, Luna Santin).

You have been blocked previously for disruption.

You have refused to take an apology as honest and truthful and retorted with a personal attack on his talk page (both here).

Juppiter has apologized here and warned you here.

You have been warned by others here.

TAnthony has apologized here.

So please, shape up. Thank you. Sr13 (T|C) 06:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Yrgh, why are you still pursuing these attacks? The other editors have apologized and moved on, this issue seems to be resolved per Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. You were definitely attacked, but it has stopped and these users clearly will not be harrassing you in the future. What kind of reprimand are you expecting for these users? They know they were wrong and other users have pointed that out to them. By perpetuating this, you are in essence committing your own attack. Please focus your energies on making sure your edits fall within Wikipedia guidelines, and let this issue go. TheRhani 01:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
PEOPLE AGREE THAT THOSE USERS WERE RIGHT TO PERSONALLY ATTACK REPEATDELY. WOULDN'T U B ANGRY!? User:Yrgh
I don't think anyone agrees that they should have attacked you. And I am angry that they called you names, there is no place for that here, but it is over. I understand you're probably feeling singled out because a lot of people seem to be criticizing your edits (including me, and I don't mean to be difficult). Obviously they don't like you and you don't like them, so you should agree to disagree and move on. I don't think an Adminstrator will escalate this any further because the attacks have stopped and the violators have responded thoughtfully. Yes, they may seem a little condescending, but they have not been inappropriate in their responses and have made reasonable points about your own behavior. I think your Wikistress level will go way down if you can put this out of your mind! Good luck ... TheRhani 01:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFC

You should know that Yrgh has filed an RFC against you at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/TAnthony, but since it's filed so haphazardly and incorrectly, it will probably be deleted anyway, and that's not even mentioning the two-person threshhold it has to pass. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 03:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification,I did see it. I'm not going to get involved unless I'm contacted; I don't want to antagonize Yrgh any further. I'm not worried about it, because I feel like this thing is over and anyone looking into this can see that. I don't understand why he won't let it go, but he's hurting his own reputation more than he is mine. Thanks again. TAnthony 04:19, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent spate of disruption from a single editor

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive164#Recent_spate_of_disruption_from_a_single_editor

Yrgh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log), who I had the misfortune of dealing with in the past because of his repeated removals of a single website from Soap Opera characters/actors with another one, has been recently been going on a disruptive editting spree, starting with tagging an article I have on my watchlist with {{notability}} when a cursory read of the article shows that notability is asserted and meets the requirements of notability.

This has then gone onto other areas, such as putting up List of Dune planets for AFD for no known reason, making articles about gay porn actors, and other disruptive activities, including a malformed RFC on User:TAnthony, and extreme incivility on Yrgh's behalf whenever he's encountered about his actions, visible from his contributions to other's user talk pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deep breaths :)

My interpretation of your current user page message is that you have a lot of tension, and perhaps resent, regarding and/or direct to Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation.

Just dropping you a message that I am always open for chat at my talk page. Drop by sometime for a chat about anything.

Cheers and regards,
Anthonycfc [TC] 01:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO SHIT SHERLOCK! NO FUCKING SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!YES I'M FRIGGIN PISSED OFF AT WIKIPEDIA, THE WAY IT'S OPERATED, THE PEOPLE BEHIND IT & IT'S USERS! THIS SITE IS TERRIBLY INACCURATE AS I HAVE DONE WHAT I COULD TO IMPROVE WIKIPEDIA. I'M SO FRIGGIN PISSED THAT I WAS UNJUSTLY BLOCKED NOT ONCE BUT 2 FRIGGIN TIMES THAT i'M NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER GONNA CREATE A NEW PAGE OR ADD ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL TO WIKIPEDIA. THE ONLY THING I'LL DO IS REVERT MY, YES MY, EDITS CUZ I FEEL THAT MANY OF THE EDITS DONE TO THEM AREN;T WARRANTED. THAT;S THE WHAT I'LL DO BE DOING FROM NOW ON! STILL FRIGGIN PISSED THAT I WAS BLOCKED TWO FRIGGIN TIMES BY TWO FRIGGIN "EDITORS"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'VE TOLD SO MANY PEOPLE THAT WIKIPEDIA IS NOT THE SITE THAT PEOPLE SHOULD GO TO FOR ACCURATE, NON-BIASED INFO! I'M FRIGGIN DONE! i TOLD MYSELF THAT IF I'M EVER BLOCKED AGAIN THAT I WOULD DO DONE. I WAS BLOCKED A 2ND TIME & NOW i'M DONE FOREVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GET FRIGGIN BLOCKED WHEN OTHERS SHOULD BE FRIGGIN BLOCKED FOR FRIGGIN BREAKING WIKI RULES!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT THE HELL!?????????????????????????? I'M DONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I WAS, HENCE THE WORD: WAS, A VALUABLE, HENCE THE WORD: VALUABLE, WIKI EDITOR! NO MORE! NO FRIGGIN MORE! I'LL JUST DO MY OWN RESEARCH & POST INFO THAT INTERESTS ME ON MY OWN BLOG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SAYONORA, FRIGGIN WIKIPEDIA!
!!!!!!!!!! WHAT ABOUT USER:TANTHONY & USER:JUPPITER & THE OTHER USERS WHO POSTED NASTY COMMENTS ON MY, YES MY, TALK PAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????????? NO CONSEQUENCES!?!?!?!?
HERE;'S YOUR NEW FRIGGIN SLOGAN TO PROMOTE TO HIGH HEAVEN: EDIT ON WIKIPEDIA, BE ABUSED, ATTACKED, RIDICULED, ASSAULTED, DISPARAGED, HARASSED, THEN EDIT SOME MORE! GREAT MARKETING! BEST EVER, HUH?!?!?!?!?!?
F-U-C-K U, WIKPEDIA! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yrgh (talkcontribs) 03:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
You know, acting uncivilly is not the way to get things done. So - would you like to talk about why you are so angry in a bit more detail? Is your desire to bring these other two users to justice? What would it take for you to stay on and edit Wikipedia - we really don't want to lose you. Anthonycfc [TC] 00:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
--> Also, you are not hated; everyone is welcome on Wikipedia, and so long as you go about it civilly, we can have these users answer for their actions. Anthonycfc [TC] 13:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Your hysterical outpourings on WP:PAIN are likely to achieve very little other than to ensure that you are dismissed as a crank. Would you like to go back and try again, citing diffs and without the capitalisation? Guy (Help!) 15:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I removed your reports from WP:PAIN since there is no evidence of attacks provided. In future please bear in mind that we need, at the very least, information as to where the supposed attacks occurred. I did spend some time looking into it but the only aggression I could find was from you. Guy (Help!) 19:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

For the record, this user has made a habit out of accusing... everyone... of personally attacking him (and in a rather disruptive way at that) after he was confronted by multiple editors about a series of dubious edits. He has previously been mentioned on AN/I here. —bbatsell ¿? 00:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

And why wasn't anything done about it then? D: And at what point is the community's patience exhausted with Mr. Yrgh?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
This is also wonderful.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:25, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I was just marvelling at that myself. --Masamage 00:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Blocked indef per that latest ... marvel. Can't say I've ever seen anything quite like that. --Cyde Weys 00:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attack intervention noticeboard

Personal attack intervention noticeboard

[edit] User:Juppiter

What should someone do if they have been PERSONALLY ATTACKED!? User:Juppiter called me an "asshole" in the Christopher Goutman history page thinking that I wasn't going to find out about it, done in a very sneaky way. ATTACK: Revision as of 20:34, November 19, 2006 (edit) (undo) Juppiter (Talk | contribs) m (My god, this asshole user:Yrgh would have you believe that every soap opera is changing executive producer and hw in "early 2007") Newer edit → Juppiter Yrgh 14:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)Yrgh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yrgh (talkcontribs)

I was over this months ago.... I just wanted to post that my userpage was vandalized this morning. I wonder who did it. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Juppiter&oldid=98408290

Juppiter 17:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:TAnthony

Tired Of Being Personally Attacked! What should someone do if they have been REPEATEDLY PERSONALLY ATTACKED!? Isn't PERSONALLY ATTACKING someone AGAINST Wiki policy!? This user (TAnthony) ATTACKED me TWO times! Here's the attack that the below user (TAnthony) posted! He should be reprimaned IMMEDIATELY! I highlighted his ABUSE:

ATTACK 1 by TAnthony: OMG, this guy is an idiot. Unfortunately, I think I "started" it in a way; I tagged some disambig page thing he did for speedy deletion, and then all of a sudden a few Dune articles were tagged as "unreferenced" -- and they were literally articles pulled from my recent contribs, things I'd made tiny edits on. He said it was because the articles needed references, but one he tagged was the Dune: House Corrino article, which as you probably know is one paragraph of synopsis, and the article itself is the source! I reverted the first few things he did immediately but I knew eventually the rest of the Dune posse would get in on the act. Anyway, I think he'll lose interest; it's too much to hope that he'll realize he's wrong! User:TAnthony 15:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

ATTACK 2 by TAnthony: This and MANY other articles have been tagged by Yrgh latly with nebulous reasoning. He says these pages fit into the deltion policy but he doesn't say how; he cites articles as unreliable and unsourced and yet they clearly are. It is ludicrous that discussions need to be held on dozens of pages to indulge his insane tagging. Can any idiot just tag AfDs? TAnthony 01:44, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Since becoming a valuable Wiki editor, I've been PERSONALLY ATTACKED THREE TIMES ON WIKIPEDIA & NOTHING WAS DONE ABOUT IT! The other time was when User:Juppiter (on the Christopher Goutman history pg) called mean "asshole"! I reported Juppiter & NOTHING was done about it! Consequences!?

No one, i repeat: no one, has told me about what is being or what will be done to TAnthony! Is this the image Wiki wants to portray: Come to Wiki, edit & BE INSULTED.....REPEATEDELY. THEN GET BLOCKED & BANNED!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????????????????????????????!?!?!?!?!?! Yrgh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yrgh (talkcontribs)

Please don't type in all caps on the WP:ANI and please state where the personal attack is because I can see pretty straight talking advice but not an attack. I removed your cut and past from WP:PAIN as I see no reason to duplicate a discussion. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Anthony cfc

[edit] User:Yrgh

Hi. I have been watching the activities of User Yrgh since he made some questionnable edits to a few of the Dune-related pages, which are my primary area of interest, and noticed that you have become the latest to join a group of people who have tried to reason with him. While I make no excuse for the behavior of other users, I trust that you have also had a look at his archived talk page and his contributions. --SandChigger 17:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there anything in particlular I should be looking for in the archive? Also, did you notice my request at the top of the page - don't include "re" in the header! I'm not being picky - it's just that it sets of a certain medical condition of mine :) Anthonycfc [TC] 17:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Oops...I did in fact read it the first time I came by this page. Sorry for the oversight.
What to look for in the archive: where the two users in question have apologized and tried to patch things up and where others, including myself, have tried to persuade Yrgh to consider the implications of his own actions. (Your "You're not hated" comment echoes one of my own.)
More important is Yrgh's contributions, specifically his continuing failure to post complaints correctly on the RFC page, his uncivil comments on various pages (including yours), failure to sign comments almost everywhere, and his posting of copyrighted material to the Illuminati article, for which he was temporarily blocked. (I can provide diff links for all of these if you want.) Note also these two suspicious edits from IP address 64.230.47.240: Juppiter user page, Konman72 user page.
I don't really know Juppiter other than in this connection, but I do know that TAnthony has done an enormous amount of valuable work on the Dune pages. I would hate to see him be censured as a result of having tangled with someone who appears, from my POV, to be something of a trouble maker. Until now I have been under the impression that it takes more than edit count to qualify as a "valuable editor". --SandChigger 18:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll CheckUser him with the two IPs - the edits do indeed seem suspicious. Perhaps it is time to post User:Yrgh on AIV? Anthonycfc [TC] 18:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks to SandChigger

Hey, thanks for the kind words on Anthony cfc's Talk page. It looks like Yrgh is finally out! TAnthony 04:42, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

As my grandsire was wont to quote...
"Do not commence your jubilations before your propositions fully 'terialize." (No, I have no idea what he meant, either! :)
It might do to keep a watch on this one for a while, though. --SandChigger 05:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Banning of Yrgh

No, we cannot ban him yet, because the only area where he is acting in bad faith is in trying to get you and TAnthony lynched for the comments you apologized to him for. The only thing I would feel comfortable with at this juncture is to block him for 24 hours so he can have a period of acquaintance with rules and guidelines, which is obvious he has not read (he has fumbled very badly with listing AFDs and filing an RFC). Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 20:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't realize that the incident he's going on about happened way back in mid/late-November. He's still at it with the lynch attempts, violating proper procedure along the way. (I have to wonder if he's not doing it the right way because he knows it will fail.) Juppiter, have you considered filing a bad faith RFC of your own? --SandChigger 02:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. It doesn't look like it will take very long, actually. (No separate section creation, no signature, same ole same ole.) --SandChigger 17:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Cyde has done it. I replaced his user and talk pages with an indef ban template. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 00:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To Sandchigger re: Yrgh

Cyde has banned him after he went apeshit on Anthony cfc's talk page. I replaced Yrgh's user and talk pages with an indef ban template. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 00:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yrgh Block Log

Yrgh Block Log

  • 16:49, 4 January 2007 Cyde (Talk | contribs) blocked "Yrgh (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (User appears to have utterly lost it.)
  • 08:29, 27 December 2006 Mike Halterman (Talk | contribs) blocked "Yrgh (contribs)" with an expiry time of 48 hours (For many issues, most recently having to do with copying copyrighted material.)
  • 14:21, 21 November 2006 Slowking Man (Talk | contribs) unblocked Yrgh (contribs) (Looks like he/she's stopped)
  • 01:54, 21 November 2006 Slowking Man (Talk | contribs) blocked "Yrgh (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Disruption, selectively replacing links, blanking Talk page)

[edit] IP Vandal - Yrgh?

  • IP address 64.230.47.240
    • Vandalism to my Talk archive (blanked entire Yrgh section):
      • 05:39, 4 January 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:TAnthony/archive 1
    • Reverted by SandChigger:
      • 09:49, 4 January 2007 SandChigger (Talk | contribs) (Undo revision 98407815 by 64.230.47.240 (talk) - DO NOT EDIT ARCHIVED TALK PAGES!)