User talk:Xavexgoem/archive3

Sicani Mediation Case

Please re-semi-protect this case. IP socks are continuing to cause disruption.--Yolgnu (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

History of the Jews in Poland mediation

Could you please weigh in on the mediation. I am pleading for WP:AGF and specific issues to be addressed, and am being barraged with filibustering and personal attacks. This is not constructive. Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 16:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Eau Claire City Council

You prod'd Eau Claire City Council before. I have proposed a merge. Brian Jason Drake 05:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: SpongeBob vandalism

The user has continuously altered disambiguated links so that they show up improperly on the page ("Nickelodeon") and are rendered nonexistent altogether ("kitchen sponge" and "The Flying Dutchman") despite being informed that it was unconstructive. It's going to continue until he's dealt with. Beemer69 ^chitchat 03:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but his account creation is old enough, and he's made enough legit contribs, that AIV is not the best venue. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:29, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kije

Hey, thanks for closing this AfD. While doing a WP search to make a disambig page, I stumbled upon Lieutenant Kijé (Prokofiev). Looks like we found what the article was a hoax about! GlassCobra 06:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Gjdickie1992

Hi. Regarding Gjdickie1992's EA request, I've commented on their talk page. I guess I just snapped since the page is currently experience a bout of "speculation" regarding the voice on the trailer. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 13:14, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Confused?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ChubmasterFat The Thunderer (talk) 16:19, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which did not succeed with 47 support, 21 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate both the supports and the opposes. Thank you again and cheers! TN‑X-Man 18:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Maple Leaf Rag

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Maple Leaf RagQ.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 06:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello! I just wanted to pass along my thanks for your support in my RfA from earlier this week. I hope I did not disappoint you. I am going on Wikibreak and I will let you know when or if I am back on the site -- I am trying to take time away to clear my thoughts and refocus on this and other priorities. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Your encouragement is appreciated

Thanks for the encouraging words, and also for the nudge toward the bias project: definitely something I can be involved in. You can expect to see more of me as I learn the ropes. Cheers! - Damian Doyle (talk) 04:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, oh great one

Just a thank you for re-protecting pony. Not sure why that article is such a vandal magnet, but there you have it. Maybe just because everyone wants a pony at some point in their lives?? (grin) Anyway, thanks again. Will simplify matters considerably. Montanabw^(talk) 08:46, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin wheel war case request for evidence

Copying this to all admins who applied or extended protection on the Sarah Palin article.

To date there's been plenty of evidence pointing to discussions and otherwise offering commentary on the admin actions taken, but there's been little covering the circumstances prior to admin actions, namely the edits that the admins concerned based protection on. Newyorkbrad has put a question to the parties on this basis, but it seems to be only non-parties that have noticed that so far, so I'm putting this question to those involved directly.

Rootology has made a start here, and GRBerry has started drafting in his userspace. Ye might like to assist them in their efforts, or add a section of your own. This evidence will be vital in assisting the Committee's understanding of not only what happened and when, but why it happened. --bainer (talk) 14:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Closing Gilad Shalit Case

I've closed the case as there was no will to continue. Thank you for your participation. Sunray (talk) 07:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Ajja78

Note that the user last edited 5 hours before the block, I guess he won't feel the block at all ;) (I personally wouldn't have blocked, since he was not given the chance to reply to the warning) -- lucasbfr ^talk 12:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

• However, thank you! But I will look at Ajja78 in the near future. Ciao!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 12:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Your protection of Fareham (borough)

While your protection of this article was then accompanied by an edit to a favored version, it's clear from the history that this version currently enjoys rough consensus, and, besides, BLP policy and all that, so.... good work. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 17:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

re: hobby horse

Hey Xavex, thanks for dropping me a note, will look into it tomorrow. Might be a good distraction from the general hilarity gained e.g. here, here and especially here. Everyme 02:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Buffalo, Bradford and Pittsburgh Railroad

499 years is correct: . Railroad leases were often for "virtually forever". --NE2 08:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Undo button? The IP had corrected spelling. --NE2 08:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

 ?

Hi, what's the policy concerning people who already have accounts editing anonymously to avoid scrutiny on one hand, and following users with whom they have previous disputes to unrelated articles just for the purpose of confronting and harassing them, on the other? 63.216.117.165 (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The issue over Nabih Berri is not the POV tag. It is a couple of users, including User:WWGB editing anonymously, removing amounts of sourced content for the purpose, in WWGB's case (via his socks 203.220.10.226 (talk · contribs) and 220.253.178.48 (talk · contribs)), of harassing me. 63.216.117.165 (talk) 12:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

To rephrase my inquiry above: WWGB, with whom I had a previous dispute, followed me to Nabih Berri and keeps reverting my edits anonymously for the purpose of harassing me. He is breaking policy by avoiding scrutiny and stalking me and has been doing so for quite a while, and it is your responsibility, as an admin, to deal with this kind of behavior and prevent it from re-occurring. 63.216.117.165 (talk) 12:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Note the identical editing pattern and the areas of interest from Special:Contributions/WWGB and Special:Contributions/203.220.10.226. He edits Deaths in 2008, removes references to "Shi'a Islam" from articles about Pakistani politicians, edits Geoffrey Edelsten and as you can see from WWGB's userpage and the IP's location, is from New South Wales. I don't spend much time on Wikipedia so I hope you could look into that. 63.216.117.165 (talk) 12:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

LOL! I didn't even think this was an issue. "They" edit the exact same fucking Pakistani articles with the same exact fucking edits, "they" are both necrophiliacs who edit Deaths in 2008, "they" both edit from New South Wales and "they" are both following me around reverting my edits to articles they know I edit! Concluding that WWGB and his IPs are the same isn't even the issue. The issue is how many policies he's breaking with his editing! Nevermind, this is getting really sad.

Again, if you think you have a case (and you very well might), go to request for checkuser. The problem isn't that I can't do anything about it (I can block the IP - though it's dynamically assigned it appears); it's that I can't link the two together. Those things need to go through checkuser to become actionable. That's all there is to it. Sorry I can't help much more than that. Xavexgoem (talk) 16:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Malcolm X GA

Thank you! — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 22:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Request

Since you noted you were keeping an eye on the MedCab case that I'm mediating, I'd like to know your opinion on the matter. Thanks! —Sunday [speak+] 01:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Ping. Could you go back to the case discussion please? —Sunday [speak+] 11:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Ping again. ;) —Sunday His Grandiloquence 15:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Reopen

I would like to request that Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-09-04 1950s Topps be reopened. There is a dispute that I would like some other people to look in on. Thank you. Libro0 (talk) 18:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

• Keep it closed. This is just another one of Libro0's attacks. Just see what he has done to me. Baseball Card Guy (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
  • It's clear you two aren't interested in actually talking, so no: not going to re-open. Baseball Card Guy, I've looked at Libro0s contribs and there's no indication on any other page that he intended to re-open it. Just here. I realize you two are at each others throats, but you can make the choice not to follow his contribs. Thank you. Xavexgoem (talk) 20:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I am disappointed in your attitude. You are also disrespectful. My asking you to reopen this case IS an attempt at dispute resolution. Please honor the system. The discussion pages have been well used or have you not bothered to look. There is content dispute. It would be greatly appreciated if you focus on the relevant issues I have brought up. Please devote your attention to the mediation case and not the RFA. The RFA is someone else's concern. Writing it off as behavioral is an excuse that looks lazy. I will not have an admin come to my talk page and say that people are trying to write an encyclopedia and that we are getting in the way of that. The way I see it, I am trying to contribute here and when admins don't help enforce their own guidelines then they are getting in my way of contributing. Libro0 (talk) 00:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll reply later. You have good points, but right now someone is bugging me to log off. Xavexgoem (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC) Apparently, I'm not having a good wiki-day

Orissa - Update

Hiya, I've made a proposal for fixing the article. Short version: I've asked Moni3 if she would be interested in rewriting the article from soup to nuts and eliminating all POV. Step 2 is then getting the disputants to comment (no editing) on the new version if they feel anything is still POV. Step -1 is getting all the disputants to sign on. What do you think of this? Also, may I contact you off-wiki regarding another matter? Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 01:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

0.02c: for now, I think it's important for all editors to focus on content and not contributors. The comment above - "Cool down, Recordfree. It is un-Christian to call people 'immature' etc , just because they do not contribute to your POV. Most unfortunate that you a Priest, should do so." - is more than a little mean. Please don't make comments like that :-P Xavexgoem (talk) 13:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Did you read tht he said I am immature; because I objected to his POV? Has he been advised that such words are immature? Jobxavier (talk) 23:57, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2008-09-18_Orissa_religious_violence" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jobxavier (talk • contribs) 00:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Tu quoque ;-) Don't worry about it. Remember: kill them with kindness :-) Xavexgoem (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 18:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

NTWW

I'd love to, but timing might be an issue. Appreciate the invite, though. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 01:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:nnnn singles

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 22#Category:1929 singles describes a series of categories that have been deleted and merged. Since you closed this, would you please let me know what category(ies) they have been merged to. I can't seem to find any category similar to Phono Records for 1929 as described in the deletion discussion. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 02:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply on my talk page. That helps! Truthanado (talk) 02:36, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Mediation

Hi sorry for not being more direct. I have contacted another Professor of Akkadian in a university and I am awaiting his feedback. He might even has access to Grayson. Of course I have also CC'ed some admins in the process. I will try to fill in your new section soon. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 14:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that.. I will pursue the arguments in the talkpage. I have no intention of even reverting or editing the article until there is understanding from the other side. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 06:48, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

For now I won't bother with the article until I get feedback from the Professors I e-mailed. But the issue from an academic stand point is far from settled. Due to the bullying and intimidation tactics (even threatening of ban by users who have been blocked for breaking wikipedia rules), I must confess that I can not do much. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 06:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they have more relevant points with regards to Wikipedia rules(and Lambert's paper has not been discussed), but I think the academics (Dr. Hurowitz/Dr. Hughes) agreed more with my POV and my logical arguments were better. Anyhow thanks for your help again.--Nepaheshgar (talk) 07:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Editor Assistance

Hi. I'm involved in a dispute with an editor on the article semi-highway and I'm not really sure how to continue. I feel like I'm being stonewalled in my efforts and that the other editor is refusing to get to the point. I'm sure there's something that I can do differently, but I'm also sure that my actions have been warranted. I've been editing on wikipedia for about two months. Any feedback would be appreciated. Synchronism (talk) 23:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Nickhh

Not sure I agree with that block. I disagree with his rationale for keeping the picture (and it belongs somewhere on Wiki), and his comment was a bit sarcastic, but it really wasn't an attack. I have seen a lot worse by other editors on these pages that didn't get blocked.Sposer (talk) 19:04, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

(e/c) I have placed my own comments about his block, at User talk:Nickhh. --Elonka 19:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Per Elonka's comment, I unblocked and warned him under the appropriate ArbCom ruling. Consider the remaining 27 hours of the block suspended, to be reimposed should he violate again. Daniel Case (talk) 19:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Venture Bros.

Are you the mediator? (Wallamoose (talk) 04:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC))