User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2013/2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

Help me?

Hello there, I'm trying to appeal my ban. Can you please help me to do so? --Երևանցի talk 21:44, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

MoS sock

Did I hallucinate a block of this guy by you, or was that undone by you or someone else? Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 08:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Factocop (again)

I'm asking that this editor's 'Troubles' restrictions be reapplied. These 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 are not "per IMOS", as they should be only too well aware. If they don't understand the wording of IMOS, they shouldn't be editing in this area. If they do understand it and insist on imposing their mistaken 'interpretation' anyway, they should still not be editing in this area. Have left a note accordingly at "Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Ireland-related articles" RashersTierney (talk) 23:29, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

lets be clear, highking is going page to page replacing Republic of Ireland with Ireland. i count 30 or so edits like this in last 2 months. i made these reverts given that Northern Ireland is mentioned in text per IMOS.Factocop (talk) 05:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Lets be crystal clear. You are stalking another's edits and reverting them on sight because you don't like how an element of IMOS is worded, despite its clarity to everyone else. Your inability not to edit disruptively in this area is long past a joke. I am in no doubt that your new-found obsession was kicked off by my edit here, per your very next edit (see time stamps)RashersTierney (talk) 08:49, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Dont refractor others comments FC, you are on here long enough to know this. And on point, if you correctly read IMOS, and the discussions, its not if NI is mentioned in the same article, but in a context similar. Murry1975 (talk) 05:52, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
And for what its worth Organic farming doesnt mention NI, so that is just purely a hounding/disruptive revert that you gave an incorrect summary for. Murry1975 (talk) 06:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Just realised FC said he was going by the reference source on that on not IMOS, but it is a very clear revert. Murry1975 (talk) 06:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Please don't twist the facts here.Factocop (talk) 10:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
ohh right, I'm the one who has misread IMOS. Here's my issue, Highking is going page to page replacing Republic of Ireland with Ireland, quoting WP:IMOS as the reasoning. I honestly thought that when Northern Ireland is mentioned in the body of the text that then Republic of Ireland would be used. Following recent allegations at ANI, regarding Highkings behaviour, I had to check it out and found these edits [1],

[2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. What is weird is that Rashers is the user who reverted all of the edits I made, sparing Highking any breach of 1RR, then Murry turns up to lay the boot in as well. Let me edit please without constant harrassment.Factocop (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

"Constant harassment" is a pretty good description of Factocop's behaviour in relation to any article that might afford an opportunity to bray his/her POV endlessly, even if the topic is one in which he/she appears to have very limited knowledge or expertise; for instance, making repetitive and pointless interventions into discussions around Gaelic sports for the sole purpose of stirring the Derry/Londonderry pot. Brocach (talk) 11:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Very rich Brocach, very very rich.Factocop (talk) 11:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Knock knock ArbCom. Anyone home? RashersTierney (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Is there such a thing as WP:WITCHHUNT? TC, just look at the edits made by highking/rashers. Heres one example [9] where NI and ROI are linked in the same paragraph. If that isnt the same context, then the definition of the word has changed.Factocop (talk) 00:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I've just indeffblocked Factocop for socking. See my talkpage for the whole story. Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2013

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
Thanks for your (sadly forgotten) program, Kissle! Looks great; I'm looking forward to future updates. Kevin12xd (contribs) 00:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

User talk:-- -- --#Unblock request

Hello Tim. This user is requesting relief from an autoblock. Since you placed the original block, perhaps you can leave some advice on his page. The message about checkuser blocks indicates that there must be more to the story. I can't tell if he is likely to be the person for whom the block was intended or an innocent bystander. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

refactor

Please don't refactor other user's comments like you did [10] here. Page was perfectly readable with the table showing (and more convenient to the reader, actually). NE Ent 03:30, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Ajayupai95

Hi Timotheus. User:Ajayupai95, whom your checkuser investigation showed up as a sock of Vrghs jacob, is vociferously protesting his innocence. In the interests of a quite life, I've acceded to his demands for another checkuser, and have asked WilliamH to take a second look - nothing required on your part, this is just a courtesy note to let you know. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 08:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

But....

But everybody loves blue boxes! KillerChihuahua 01:06, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Great talk at the NYC Wikipedia Day!

I really learned a lot about ArbCom, and appreciated it all. I only wish you'd had more time for Q&A. Keep churning out that sausage! -Thomas Craven (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

upping to hard block?

Any strong negative consequence to upgrading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Block/2A01:E35:8A39:10A0:0:0:0:0/64 to a hard block? I was just going to block the range when I discovered your existing soft block.—Kww(talk) 17:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

No, go for it. T. Canens (talk) 13:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You!

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 13:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

For this. Even if the decision is to go by motion, I appreciate that you know the deal here. It is good to have an ex-AE admin on the ArbCom. Puppy (talk) 23:23, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2013

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timotheus_Canens/Archives/2013/2&oldid=584680000"