User talk:JzG/Archive 24
Guy Chapman? He's just zis Guy, you know? More about me
If you need urgent admin help please go to the incident noticeboard. To stop a vandal, try the vandal intervention page. For general help why not try the help desk? If you need me personally and it's urgent you may email me, I read all messages even if I do not reply. If next time I log on is soon enough, click this link to start a new conversation.
Terms of Service
By posting on this page you accept the JzG Terms of Service. I endeavour to satisfy good-faith requests to the best of my ability, but if you act like a dick, I will call you a dick. If you act like a troll, I will probably ignore you and may tell you to fuck off. If you want something from me, your best bet is not to demand it on pain of shopping me to ArbCom, because that way is pretty much guaranteed to piss me off to the extent that I will do whatever I can to thwart your plans. This page may contain trolling. Some of it might even be from me, but never assume trolling where a misplaced sense of humour might explain things. I can be provoked, it's not even terribly difficult. You may find, if you provoke me enough, that I will do something I later regret. Only remember, you may regret it more. I am a middle-aged surly bastard who spends his working day wrestling spammers and beating Windows with a stick, but I am capable of seeing good in the most improbable people if they don't go out of their way to make me do otherwise. Guy (Help!) 22:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
This user posts using a British sense of humour and does not repress those instantaneous motions of merriment.
Sunday is the anniversary of my sister's death. I will be available only intermittently over the next four days as I am taking my parents to inter the ashes, a journey of some hundreds of miles. Guy (Help!) 20:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry
Very sorry to hear that (and worse for your parents of course). Best wishes (I have parents and we 3 kids are alive, thriving and close), SqueakBox 20:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Best wishes to you and your family.--MONGO 20:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
From me as well. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Hang in there, Guy. --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Best wishes Guy.. may you be given peace of mind during this troubled time. SirFozzie 21:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Keep strong - all the best, Martinp23 21:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
My best wishes. Wikidan829 21:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Thinking of you at this time. I hope the journey will not be too hard on your parents, and you will find solace together. SandyGeorgien (Talk) 11:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Just keep remembering. Georgewilliamherbert 22:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm so sorry about your sister. --A. B. (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I know you're out and about...
...but the Qiun Zhijun situation is at ArbCom. --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
You recently blocked this user as a sock. If you know any of the original accounts, I would appreciate if you could comment at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Shabzar. Thanks. The Evil Spartan 15:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Byron Calvert
I recently created an article on Byron Calvert, an American Neo Nazi leader using sources from my research. Problem is Calvert himself has become wise to it and disputes the accuracy of my sources. His followers have also taken it upon themselves to blank the article. Advice please!
Dianetics
I note that you replaced Dianetics in the section of the pseudoscience list article reserved for topics that have specifically been labeled pseudoscience by mainstream scientific bodies even though the sources clearly do not meet this criterion. Since you are also clearly aware of this rule and simply yet chose to ignore it, I can only assume that you are intent on disruption. Please desist.Davkal 21:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
- I note that you have remove Dianetics from the list of pseudosciences. Please desist. Guy (Help!) 07:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Rouge Admin
I am writing to you to apologise for an insult placed on the talk page of the Rouge Admin article; my comments were the result of inebriation and fatigue, as well as my profound conviction that I was actually asleep at the time. Please accept my apologies for my rather hasty and unkind comments. I will endeavour to cease editing under the influence (EUI) forthwith. Thank you for understanding, all the best, Whiskey in the Jar 22:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Incivility
Is it really necessary to make a statement on that arbitration request if is just going to be utterly incivil and add nothing to the discussion. You, as an admin should know better - especially in an arbitration request. Had it been on talk pages I would have let it slide, but that is ridiculous. ViridaeTalk 04:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. It is a complete waste of everybody's time. Plus it does add something to the debate: it adds my opinion that Jeff is beating a dead horse. Guy (Help!) 07:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
QZ DRV Closure
Guy, please undo the speedy close of this discussion. The primary problem here is speedy closes of discussions prior to the formation of consensus. I specifically point you to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Daniel Brandt deletion wheel war#Early closure of discussions based on WP:SNOW is harmful. GRBerry 21:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree. I believe the primary problem is Jeff. I fully support taking this to RFC, what I do not want to see is yet another rehash of the same crap. We need to wait at least a month before even thinking about running this through any kind of deletion or review process again. There is no problem with the original deletion, per policy, but there is a problem with Jeff on a crusade. Take it to a slower and more wide-ranging process, and let people explore the issues in a nuanced way, and get it off DRV because that is only ever going to be a pitched battle, which will not help in any measurable way, whoever wins. Guy (Help!) 22:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'll disagree that Jeff is the problem. I had to take a break from Wikipedia over the weekend to avoid participating in the wheel war myself. I think the deletions, and especially the speedy closes of the DRVs, are abusive actions by administrators as administrators. GRBerry 22:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- If i'm the problem, feel free to pile on at the RfC i just opened. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
School of Accounting and Management
Colinlezama (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has a history of making unproductive edits[1] is curently removing an unaccredited school from the wikilist. The user was warned on the article talk and his/her talk page. I have repeatedly asked for a source, but the reply was "will continually remove their names from the list."[2] Please watch this user. If I remember correctly this user three articles about diploma mills that got deleted such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/School of Accounting and Management. Arbustoo 03:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Euphoria Volume 1
I noticed you deleted Both Euphoria Volume 1 and PF project. I can't see what the article looked like but for every other volume of Euphoria (Euphoria (compilations)) the pages are fine. Maybe the article sucked, but just so you know Euphoria volume 1 was hella popular, and its notability doesn't really need to be asserted other than "was the first in the series of Euphoria (compilations)". I don't really know what to say here, because don't know why exactly you deleted the articles, but there should definitely be articles under those names. If they fitted the format of the other volumes in the series and you came across them and deemed them not notable, you were wrong. I'm confused, help. Howboutpete 14:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Community Action
I have initiated action against you. Observe:
This is your notification. I do not mean to offend you, and, I wish you prosperity and happiness in real life, but I brook no evil. So noted:
--GordonWatts 19:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- And the only reason why I didn't remove it and refer Gordon to WP:DR is because Deskana beat me to it. SirFozzie 19:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I loled. No joke, getting looks at work. Hipocrite - «Talk» 19:15, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think you guys mean well (and who knows, maybe your options would facilitate better results), but the Community Action method is a tried and true method of gaining input from which one may obtain valid data to estimate a concensus. It was used against me, even when others kept beating a dead horse and looking for concensus repeatedly when none could be found..., so why not here, in a genuine concern? I say, just invite all persons everywhere to participate, vote in the polls (as Calton showed me, so I follow his example in setting up "polls" and "auxiliary polls" etc), and let the chips fall where they may. My opponents had their "day in court" -why not let me too.
- Fair is fair, right?
- This discussion should not pollute or cloud Guy’s page. Take it to the proper page.--GordonWatts 19:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Badlychosenexpletives
Please, no more telling people to "fuck right off" in the current discussion. It's only serving to inflame things further. I predict that this will be sent to arbitration again, and that the arbitration committee will, if it accepts it, do so on the grounds of editor conduct, most likely of several of the involved parties. Please ensure that your conduct is exemplary, so that you avoid becoming deeply embroiled in that. That wouldn't be good, in my view. Uncle G 19:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)