User talk:Gaijin42

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 2 as User talk:Gaijin42/Archive 1 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

Sorry Bro

Didn't mean to come off that way. A certain editor gets under my skin and I lash out. Definitely didn't mean to offend, I'm a professional writer and literally type my feelings more often than I should and sometimes the fucks and shits get in the way.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 03:55, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

seriously?

This has to stop. I'm one incident away from writing an article about the nonsense on here from the anti-gun camp. I get 40000 unique hits a day and I know it will get picked up by the other blogs as well. It's not my first go-around with this nonsense. Feel free to shoot me an email if you feel more comfortable talking offline.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 01:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Is "indefinite" worse than one year?

I feel the heat rising today - especially off SR... So I have to wonder if I personally said or did something that stirred her up. The only thing I can think of is my ArbCom vote, and then I wondered if, once again, I misunderstand the WP jargon and processes. When I saw the recommendation that you and North be banned indefinitely, that seemed severe to me, because TO ME, it implies potentially forever. Therefore, I thought a one-year ban is a less-crushing ban than an "indefinite" ban. But maybe other factors come into play that I'm not hep to... like how appeals work in various situations, etc.

So, if I have misunderstood, please let me know, and I will probably modify my vote. Lightbreather (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Lightbreather indefinite is potentially forever, but generally the phrasing used is "indefinite is not infinite". However, recently several indefinite topic ban appeals were denied after 16+ months, so who knows. It depends on the infraction, and the mood of the "jury" (Arb, or ANI depending on how the ban was implemented), and supposedly on how the editor behaved in other areas for the duration (for site bans, I'm not sure how they were supposed to show that). If I have no alternative but to be banned in some manner, I prefer a pre-limited one since it will expire all on its own and not be subject to effectively a second trial. In any case, I appreciate the !vote for something less than the maximum penalty. As you are someone on "the other side" I hope that carries some weight. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

OK. I felt bad if somehow I'd proposed something worse than the arbitrator's proposal. Lightbreather (talk) 22:28, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kars

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kars. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gun control after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Silencer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon in Madison

I saw that you (might) live in Madison (based on your userpage), so if you're interested, I wanted to invite you to a humanities edit-a-thon in the Madison Public Library on Friday, April 25th (1:30–3:30). It'll be on the shorter side and is aimed at new editors, but I hope to see you there. More information is available on the 2014 UW Conference on the Public Humanities website. Let me know if you have any questions czar ♔ 04:03, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For making me laugh (WITH YOU) due to your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Robinson (filk musician). Bearian (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Gun control arbitration proposed decision

Hello. You are named as a party to the Gun control arbitration case. The committee is now voting on its decision for this case, and findings and/or remedies relating to your conduct have been proposed. The decision is being voted on at the Proposed decision page. Comments on the decision can be made at the Proposed decision talk page. As voting is underway, please submit promptly any comments you wish the arbitrators to consider. Thank you. For the Arbitration Committee, AGK [•] 11:30, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Russia

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Russia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Notice of RfC 2 and request for participation

There is an RfC on the Gun politics in the U.S. talk page which may be of interest to editors who participated in "RfC: Remove Nazi gun control argument?" on the Gun control talk page.

• RfC: Replace existing Nazi gun control paragraphs?

Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 22:29, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Green

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Green. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gun control closed

The above named arbitration case has closed, and final decisions are now available at the link above. The following remedies were passed:

1. Standard discretionary sanctions are authorised for any edit about, and for all pages relating to, gun control;
2. AndyTheGrump (talk · contribs) reminded that further edit-warring as well as incivility will likely result in serious sanctions;
3. Gaijin42 (talk · contribs), Justanonymous (talk · contribs), and ROG5728 (talk · contribs) are topic-banned from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, gun control;
4. Goethean (talk · contribs) reminded that further incivility as well as unnecessary antagonism may result in sanctions;
5. North8000 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely site-banned from the English Language Wikipedia; appeals of this ban may be requested no earlier than twelve months since the date the case closed. The twelve-month period of the ban under this remedy is reset if new infringements of the sock puppetry policy occur. In addition, North8000 (talk · contribs) is also indefinitely topic-banned from making any edit about, and from editing any page relating to, gun control. The topic ban that North8000 was subject to due to the Tea Party case remains in force.

The topic-ban remedies passed in this case may not be appealed for at least twelve months, and another twelve months must pass for each subsequent appeal.

For the Arbitration Committee,
- Penwhale | ^{dance in the air and follow his steps} 20:18, 30 April 2014 (UTC)