Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 31 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at Beeswaxcandle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Elahrairah. You have new messages at MichaelQSchmidt's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have tried to maintain as much civility as possible with other editors including Abhishek. I do admit i have lost my temper at times but i am only human. 1 guy gets on my nerves & both of us shoot off at each other. If you look at the other editor Abhishek191288,he has been having several uncivilized conversations with several others, has also engaged in edit warring, has admitted to it but gets away with a pep talk while i get blocked.

He has even refused to accept to Government of India notification as a reliable source of information. Take a look at Surat Railway station & Mumbai Rajdhani page main images. Previously they are exactly the same images & despite explaining in detail why the particular image was incorrect, he still refuses to accept it. What do you suggest i do with such a person because talking to him is of no use or there is a way to explain how the Great Eastern royale building (in the background)in Tardeo area of Mumbai got transported to Surat ?? Perhaps there is a way to explain how Mumbai Central & Surat railway station have identical layouts. Problem is i cant explain it & it is pointless asking someone who's ego is offended by superior work. If as he claims they are irrelevant then why except him is no one removing them. As far as other editors are concerned,we have had civil discussions on way to get around the problem. For example on the Lokmanya Tilak Terminus pages,an edit was explained so clearly that it left me in no doubt whatsoever neither was i offended by it.

He has been targeting my uploads but it puzzles me that when i undo them, i get blocked, he does it he gets a pep talk. Can you please explain it to me because i cant see any reason for it. As far as ownership of articles is concerned,i have long accepted that anyone from anywhere can edit anything but that is supposed to be based on facts not opinions. Besides i have made several offers to him to upload his work so that a impartial analysis of both our works can be done. I have yet to see a single upload in that direction but what i do see on his page is undone edits of various other people.

Fact in this case is that a building in Mumbai cannot be used to depict Surat,opinion is that lets revert the edit because i don't like the other person & he is uploading more images than me especially since i cant match him for quality & quantity. There is a small quote from a John Grisham novel If a witness is unshakeable on facts then beat him up with insignificant details which is exactly the case here. This is completely unacceptable.

A additional point for the ego case is Abhishek's edit summaries. He has listed that i have been blocked for adding images where as you have been clear on why that has happened & i am certain it was not for adding images. On other fronts even when explained in detail he refuses to accept it. Another thing:He has removed the sole image at Grant Road station giving a lousy reason but has added nothing. Why is a page with no images so liked by him or is this targeting work of other users.

Help me understand why facts are superseding opinions here. Superfast1111 (talk) 11:35, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to hear a loud quack quack. If so, then this guy has clearly evaded his 1 month block. Can you have a look at this? I have filed a report at SPI. Thanks, — Abhishek  ^Talk 12:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby withdraw my request for clarification. Pls delete this thread when you can. Superfast1111 (talk) 06:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the talk page of the article concerning the last edit you made for further discussion. ThorPorre (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate. I figure you'll get a couple of pings from me about undoing your close. I think you came within seconds of edit-conflicting with Mr Cunningham and the close was duplicated so I removed it to leave the original one. But I wanted to thank you for helping out and taking time out to close it anyway. Cheers, Stalwart111 10:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I realised that Chris closed it first but when I looked at the AfD it appeared to me like my edit hadn't registered. Some caching problem I guess. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 10:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Cool. Yeah, I was having cache problems earlier today - getting edit conflicts where there were none (conflicting with myself essentially). Anyway, all good. Have a good one! Stalwart111 11:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Basalisk. How have you been?
I am currently developing a major improvement for the Falkland Islands article (see User:MarshalN20/Sandbox4), but I need a "supervisor" so that I may edit the history section of the article. Arbcomm placed a topic ban for me on all subjects related to Latin America due to a dispute at the Juan Manuel de Rosas article.
Your task would simply be that of checking up on my work and seeing that it is not breaking WP:NPOV. However, since you are a professional native-speaker of English, I would love for you to help me with the article (mainly through copy-edits or grammar fixes); but this is optional. In fact, I think that (with your help) we could possibly nominate this article straight for Featured Article status.
I hope you agree to work with me. :-)
Best wishes.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 23:35, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marshal, hope you are well. I have no objection in principle to what you're proposing, but there are a few problems. Most importantly, I can't see from the wording of your ban how you would be allowed to edit the article, "supervised" or otherwise, without violating it. From what I can see of your contribs, you haven't received (or indeed even sought) any amendment that would allow this. If you're asking for me to make edits proposed by you, I wouldn't really be comfortable doing that as I think it's sailing too close to the wind in terms of WP:PROXYING, especially as it's an Arbcom ban. I think you need to sort these things out first, then get back to me. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 10:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good points. I should probably have shown you this first: [1]. On the last paragraph of the "MarshalN20" section in his talk space, arbitrator NuclearWarfare writes the following: "The Falkland Islands seems like a good choice. I think the best way to go about it would be to first work on the sections that aren't related to the history of the article, then identify someone who would agree to be a "supervisor" of sorts, who you agree would have the power to immediately re-restrict you from the article. After that, you could apply for the exemption from the Committee."

I conclude from your statement that you agree with being the supervisor. Thank you.

I will now write to the Arbcomm (and mention you there) to apply for the exemption.

Thanks again Basalisk. I am sure that this will be mutually beneficial to us.

Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 14:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the amendment request filed ([2]).--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 15:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the block. Jajadelera socks tend to make hoax articles that should just be G5ed, so please don't close until that's dealt with. Thanks, NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:10, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. Sorry about that. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 20:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They just use IP: 24.61.73.231 on my talk page.I am One of Many (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A week ago, you blocked this editor for disruptive usage of images and edit warring. It is a virtual certainty that this editor has resumed the disruption through alternative usage of the registered account and IP 179.197.190.162. Thanks. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

God bless you, AfricaTanz! Vinícius18 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:05, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This IP address (IP 179.197.190.162) is not from my computer! Vinícius18 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

and more, never would edit with an alternate account and my computer is forbidden to revert edits! I think there was a misunderstanding! Vinícius18 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I need an answer! Thank you! Vinícius18 (talk)