User talk:SirFozzie/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

→

Archive 15

User talk:Durova

I have warned the editor for 3RR and am watching the page. Meanwhile, you are at 3 reverts yourself, so you should stop reverting. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For this. I appreciate it. --John (talk) 22:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem John. I thought about being selective in what I removed, (there are some things uncomfortably close to the NPA line, if not over it completely), but I figured I'd rather have a word with him, and see if we can focus on the content (which he did at some points), and not the contributors (which he did at others). Hopefully we can tamp this down before it opens up again. Just give him space, please, while I work with him? We know how personalities can escalate a conflict.. SirFozzie (talk) 22:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Sure will, Sir Fozzie. I am really happy if you, Alison, Giano, can police this as I understand that he is wound up by having admins he has previously dealt with deal with him and that you may well be able to do the job more effectively. On the down side though, I noticed this reversion. The up side is that the article has been improved, which is always nice. Ho hum, and good luck . --John (talk) 22:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

And well done from me. Blessed are the cheesemakers (I assume you know your Monty Python?)--Major Bonkers (talk) 17:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Much appreciated. :) SirFozzie (talk) 17:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You-know-who again

Sorry to bother you again SirFozzie but I thought I should alert you to this. It doesn't seem like Vk's much-vaunted reformation has lasted very long. Can I request you warn the user; it will sound better coming from you? Thanks in advance. --John (talk) 18:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

whats wrong with that edit? You accused BigDunc or blind reverting without there beign a shread of evidence for it!--Vintagekits (talk) 18:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's another one. Once again I apologise for troubling you; if there is another person monitoring Vk's 'parole' maybe you can let me know and I can copy them in on this sort of thing too. --John (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I dont see how a little sarcasim can warrent the attention of this admin as VK says above I didn't see you WP:AGF on my recent edit. BigDunc (talk) 19:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:AAGF. I, of course, am not (supposedly) on parole. --John (talk) 19:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I have and it's right I agree with it. BigDunc (talk) 20:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok.. both sides, step back. VK.. I know it's difficult, but can you please try to not respond so harshly to John? And Dunc.... a little sarcasm is sometimes not a bad thing, agreed, but there are times where sarcasm can be read the wrong way and escalates a conflict. This applies to all sides. Lets not let personalities make a mountain out of molehills, here!

John: Except for personality conflicts (which VK will admit himself he has with folks), he HAS reformed. Even Alison, who was one of his harshest critics, awarded VK a barnstar, for the work he's doing (admittedly, for work OUTSIDE the usual conflicts). I agree there are still rough edges to be worked on, but then again, who doesn't have a bit of a rough edge here and there?

Now, as far as the current conflict goes, I saw that the section in question is resolved on Dunc's page, and I think we all (the four of us, and the encyclopedia as a whole) would be best served if both sides took a step back, acknowledge that there are personalities that rub us all the wrong way, and the NEXT time any of you come into contact with each other, to take the extra step NOT to react harshly to being questioned, no matter if the wrong in question is real, perceived or imagined. As John said, all sides not only need to assume good faith, but assume the other side is assuming good faith as well. SirFozzie (talk) 20:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Shot a dawn

Me letting them know of the reports at 3rr was Not very polite coming from an Admin. In furture, I will not place anything on their talk page. If that was me Fozz, you would have had me shot at dawn. LOL --Domer48 (talk) 16:59, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You know I gave you several chances before I brought the heavy end of the hammer down, Domer ;) I left a final warning about the personal attacks/civility issues on his page, and noted the aggravating circumstances on the 3RR report that you provided.. and if this continues, I think a trip to either a RfC or AN/ANI is going to be needed to get more eyes on it. SirFozzie (talk) 17:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Did I cry about it, took it on the chin, and cursed you under my breath. I will have to do something though, it's the technical side to it thats of putting. At least I know I'm not alone. How far do I go back (17 December 2005). P.S I still think the block was over the top. LOL. --Domer48 (talk) 17:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You heavy plastic hammer had little effect. I got a smack of your real one. --Domer48 (talk) 17:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Please review what I did here. Thanks in advance. --John (talk) 17:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

That is the link I used, thanks John. I was just saying Fozz had brought out the heavy warning and they just ignored it. Now you try to be helpful, and they tell you not to bother, and ask you to leave their comment in. Hense, the plastic hammer, and me being shot for less. --Domer48 (talk) 17:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw your post right after I made mine. Remember please Domer that what people say to each other is less important than their actions. If we can agree a compromise on the article, that will be a victory indeed. The rest is just froth. --John (talk) 18:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

"WP:3RR is an electric fence. You shall not break 3 Reverts within 24 hours for ANY reason whatsoever." Fozz I think your electric frence is broken, or just on the blink. I suppose if you have the right tools, you can fix just about anything. I see that the abuse of admin tools is now being discussed as a content dispute, ah sure what can ye do. I'm LOL. Could you possibly consider using the glass hammer on me next time;) --Domer48 (talk) 13:02, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Considering the force I swing the hammer, do you really want a glass hammer that will shatter and add dangerous shards? ;) Anyway, I THINK what happened is someone saw my note about final warning R. fiend, and thought that was the case being handled. I'm REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLY busy at work today, but I will try to follow up on the AN3 report and see if that's the case. SirFozzie (talk) 15:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Name

Domer not Padraig-- BigDunc (talk) 20:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Had Padraig on the brain for some reason :P :) SirFozzie (talk) 20:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

So much for christmas spirit the big guns are all out lol good work so far pat on the back. BigDunc (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• grumbles* My christmas spirit fled the same time a foot of snow arrived :) SirFozzie (talk) 20:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Typical I get the blame for everything :).--Padraig (talk) 15:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Geeeeeee.. I wonder why. ;) (merry christmas btw ;)) SirFozzie (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

User: Alex Makedon

Hi. I'd like to bring to your attention the behaviour of the above user.

At first, he started spamming inflammatory comments and links in my talk page [1]. After having a look at his userpage, I saw he's actively promoting nationalistic and hateful ideas, like annexation of Greek and Bulgarian territories (see also Macedonia (terminology) for further detail), which in many cases resulted in userpages being blanked. I've explained the situation in his talk page and reminded him of the recent ArbCom decision. I've also realised this is not his first reincarnation. He has multiple accounts for the same job and reported him. All this resulted in me being considered "obsessed", "loser" and "psycho" [2].

I believe this user has violated a plethora of Wikipedia policies and ArbCom decisions and it is not his first time (since he's a sockpuppet). Should some measures be taken?--   Avg    21:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

U R Awezum

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for dealing with yesterday's crisis while I was away (I was ill - *meeps*). You're totally awesome :) Alison ❤ 22:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Ali! Hope you're feeling better :) SirFozzie (talk) 22:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Buon Natale e buon anno! Giano (talk) 20:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/IRC

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/IRC/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher 00:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back ....

... to mayhem :p Looks like it's business as usual around here, on all sides, eh? - Alison ^❤ 23:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

How's that phrase go? "Welcome back my friends, to the show that never ends..." SirFozzie (talk) 23:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

And it wasn't me :), anyway welcome back.--Padraig (talk)

/*considers blocking Padraig, just on general principles* :) Thanks, I've been around, but I think Ali was just "welcoming" me back to the usual wars, that's all. SirFozzie (talk) 23:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at the edit history on the Ireland article, where we have two editors an a anon IP adding text with a source that dosent even mention or support the content their trying to add, I think the 3 editors may be the same editor, but they seem to have stopped now, but maybe worth keeping a eye on.--Padraig (talk) 23:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

SirFozzie, can you look at this apparently someone didn't like me agreeing with Alison that they were edit warring earlier on another article, I have reverted this nonsense twice already today so I can't revert it.--Padraig (talk) 00:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Page Protected for 96 hours, hopefully Sarah and everyone will discuss it and come to an agreement and I can unprotect early. SirFozzie (talk) 02:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Fozzie; I'm out of that article (self-imposed exile) and the socks are blocked so I think you can safely release it. (Sarah777 (talk) 13:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC))

Done, Thanks Sarah. SirFozzie (talk) 17:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

So Fozzie comes back soon after I disappear....I guess looking through Orange tinted glasses he must be my sock then right? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Again, I've been around and editing, just Ali was saying "Well, here we go again!" that's all. BTW, Hack, you still using two cans anD a piece of string to get to the internet? :) SirFozzie (talk) 16:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't get me started on the idiocy prevalent in UK ISPs, you'd think they were all staffed by complete and total fuckwits! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 10:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Believe me, its not any better in Ireland either. :-( Bastun^{BaStun not BaTsun} 10:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Must...not...make...obvious...joke! One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 09:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)