User talk:HighInBC/Archive 18

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Thank you!

Dear Chillum: Thanks for your warm welcome. I will read those pages and I surely enjoy being a Wikipedian! Thanks again. --Bugnot (talk) 16:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

And another thank you!

I appreciate the comment you left on the AN board regarding my being less "retired." A major reason was burnout trying to fight the vandals and, unfortunately, taking some heat from other established users over perceived biting. I'd asked an admin to simply delete my pages so that I could simply walk away, but I didn't want to burn my bridges. All too often, good work is overlooked and the worst is spotlighted. Hope to see you around this site before long, but for now, I'm weaning myself off of Wikipedia for the near future. Thanks again.  :) Regards, PMDrive1061 via --76.79.100.242 (talk) 22:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Redsteel136 block

I have no interest one way or another in this user or his/her charming interpretation of our deletion process. I noticed, however, that his/her block reason was that the account is being used only for vandalism. I defer to your judgment on what to do with this editor, but I wanted to ask about his/her editing history. Of the 3 edits visible, only one strikes me as obvious vandalism; Is there more to this story? Are there deleted edits that are more obviously vandalism? Thanks for your time, SSBohio 14:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

A poor use of templates, what I meant was that the user was being disruptive with few or no useful contributions. Chillum 15:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation. I can surely see your point about this editor's history: Of three edits, one was a particularly piquant page-blank at WP:ANI. My only question would regard the edits he made to the article that was deleted, and whether there's evidence of a redeemable editor in them. I have no knowledge and no position regarding this editor, but I do feel concerned when what seems to be a first offense results in a permanent block. Presuming that he made non-vandalism edits to the deleted article, I'd like you to consider a shorter block. Again, I have no interest in this editor one way or the other; It's strictly a matter of not wanting to throw the baby out with the bathwater. So, what are his/her deleted edits like? Is there room for a shorter block to be attempted? --SSBohio 18:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

After reconsidering I have decided not to unblock a person who communicates with phrases such as: "fucking british bastards or american bastards who are racist". We take a dim view of nationalist insults here. Chillum 18:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Completely understandable. I always hope that someone who comes here and does some constructive editing can be redeemed of their vandalism, but, this is a case where one spectacular piece of vandalism is enough to justify blocking. Until I saw his/her edit, I hadn't really thought about the Macedonian people, much less formed a prejudice against them. I'm just glad this editor was around to explain the racism we intended by a more-or-less automatic, uncontested speedy deletion.  :-) Thanks again for taking the time to have a second look. --SSBohio 19:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The account creation block expires after a couple days even with an indef block. The user can create a new account in the future and if they choose not to be disruptive then they will do fine. Chillum 19:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Financialtimeseditor

Why do you say "months" when its been barely two weeks? Avruch ^T 21:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I misread. While I personally think we should block company names on sight, the current policy is that unless they are actively promoting the company then it is not a blatant username violation. Chillum 21:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Fucking off

• Barnstar moved to user page.

Thank you, I am glad that there are still jolly folks about that can appreciate a good exit. Chillum 17:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, real collaborative on her part

While she was at it, she should've just threatened to kill you and steal your Social Security number. --harej 23:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, it sure did not make me feel welcome here. Chillum 17:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

NLT?

On WP:NLT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_legal_threats#need_to_define_legal_threat , I have made a proposal. You also edited on that page. I am asking 2 people at random who edited on that page for comments to jumpstart the discussion. Thank you. Spevw (talk) 01:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Too late. Chillum 17:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back, Chillum

Welcome back, Chillum. Here's a cookie. :)

I was randomly searching through userpages on Wikipedia (as I do sometimes), and I noticed that you'd returned after a month-long hiatus due to some level of stress. I then checked your talkpage and was quite surprised to find that nobody has yet welcomed you back here, so I figured I'd be the first.

I understand, it's hard not to feel offended when it seems like nobody really appreciates anything you do for the project, and of course, even the best of us can sometimes be brought down by somewhat unfortunate circumstances. But try not to let it get you down too much, everyone has bad days sometimes. Nobody really thinks negatively about you - quite the contrary, in fact. You're a highly valued asset to the project, and set a very good example for what a Wikipedian contributor should aspire to be. We would miss you very much if you were truly gone for good. Wikipedia's just not the same without you.

Welcome back, Chillum. Valtoras (talk) 07:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for making me feel welcome. Chillum 14:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome Chillum

Hi Chillum Thanks for the welcome to wikipedia. I will try to settle down and be a positive contributer. I did not realize there was so much politics that goes on here. lots of fun. Sitedown (talk) 02:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:PG

Your edit summary tells me that you have not really looked at WP:PG for a while. --Irpen 04:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I remember a similar disagreement with you at WT:DTTR#Consensus_to_be_a_guideline. I think it is better to let discussion decide, instead of one man's opinion of how things are. Chillum 16:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion at WT:Civility

Hi Chillum. I noticed your revert of the disputed tagging at WP:CIV. I've been posting at WT:Civility (I see you've posted there as well) and trying to focus things on discussions rather than tagging. Do you think you could read the recent posts there and contribute to the discussions? Section is at Wikipedia_talk:Civility#Change_in_status_of_policy_to_proposed, but the preceding sections are worth looking at as well. Carcharoth (talk) 04:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Civility

Hi there. A follow up to my recent post here. You've been active recently at Wikipedia talk:Civility. Would you be interested in commenting at Wikipedia talk:Civility#Discussion of civility at recent Request for Arbitration? There are several other threads on that talk page that you might be interested in as well, and a proposal to rewrite the policy. For the whole recent story, read downwards from Wikipedia talk:Civility#A Big Question: Does this page make sense?. This will need to be advertised more widely to get more balanced input, but for now I'm notifying those I quoted from the RfArb, and a few other editors who have either written essays on this, or have been active on the talk page recently. Apologies if you had this watchlisted anyway. Carcharoth (talk) 06:13, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I am dead tired of defending the simple idea that we should be required to treat our peers with respect when working here. To be frank I think I will just wait and see how this policy ends up and decide if I still want to edit here. I am busy in RL these days, I can't give any time to this. Either Wikipedia will require a minimal level of respect towards its editors or I will seek other venues. Chillum 16:41, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Starmen.Net AfD closure

Hi, the article has been nominated for the sixth (!) time for VfD/AfD, the first four nominations led to the article being kept, however, the fifth in december last year was closed by you as a delete, but the article is somehow still there. I can't see any evidence it's gone through deletion review and was restored. To make it all worse, I had to fix and relist the current nomination made by someone else. A bit of a mess here, could you cast some light on the previous closure ? Equendil Talk 09:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Uploader

Hi, I want to know if you remember who uploaded the Image:Torino peru.png before you deleted it. MicroX 21:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

It was uploaded by User:Curswine on the 14th of May 2006, 09:16(UTC). Chillum 00:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

User and talk page

I deleted and protected your pages due to vanadalism that included a phone number. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 00:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. It was just someone I blocked for vandalizing WP:AN. Chillum 00:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's a bit more than that, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive742#Death threat. This IP is attacking a particular user, leaving a phone number and adding various obscenities. Look at this as well. The last nine and the whole section starting at 00:04 on 29 November are all the same thing. It appears that some of the edits have since been oversighted. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 00:49, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The vandal who uses the term "HAGGER" has been about Wikipedia for some time now being blocked in one form or another. Chillum 01:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

This isn't the hagger vandal. This is someone else with a thing for RedPenOfDoom, see this. They are just using the hagger meme. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 01:25, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Chillum 01:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.