User talk:DuncanHill/Archives/2008/August

re Phillips sound recording services
Dunc, I am far too busy being demoniacally obsessive about my sysop bit and using it to abuse hardworking editors... which is precisely why I am suggesting that you draw User:Andreasegde's attention to it - he has just put Heather Mills up for GA and might appreciate a little diversion. BTW, the Beatles Newsletter has been issued again so there may be other Beatles inclined editors who might take a gander. For the time being I shall not be sanctioning you for daring to comment upon my talkpage, but just watch it in future! Cheers, Mark. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:32, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've just done some work on it, and added a photo of Percy. Hope you're happy with it. :)--andreasegde (talk) 13:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

FYI:
...I have been trying fr the last five minutes to set things straight with that misguided new user and all I get are edit conflicts and a locked database notice. If you have a disagreement with me, please e-mail me next time rather than leave a nasty comment on a public page. Thank you. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I won't email as I prefer to keep discussion about wikipedia on wikipedia. I think that the other editor concerned has made it clear that you are not welcome on his talk page, and I am not surprised, as the very first edit to his talk page was an attack from you. DuncanHill (talk) 22:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, I got it to work and I have left a friendly message on that user's talk page. I do a lot of patrolling for real vandalism and I'd aappreciate it if you'd give me the benefit of the doubt next time. Thanks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well at least this time you didn't attack his religious beliefs or his sexuality. DuncanHill (talk) 22:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see where this came from. I honestly didn't recall a time when you and I had an issue, but I now know why. I spoke to Jimbo about that matter and he seemed to think that particular user had a potentially blockable username and that he was likely a troll. I wasn't attacking him per se. I just happened to have some really healthy doubts about his claims as a practicing Catholic. Another FYI: One of my oldest and dearest friends is bisexual. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 1) I would have called you on this one anyway - but I also felt it shews a developing pattern of biteing new editors which needs to be stopped. 2) Your comments to Boy2Boy were disgusting, and you did attack him. It is never acceptable to comment on another editor's religious beliefs or sexuality in the way you did. Still, you appear to have succeeded in driving away an editor who identifies as gay, which was obviously your intention. Several of my dearest friends are Catholic, but none of them have ever behaved to gay people (including gay Catholics) in the way you did. 3) You spoke to Jimbo about this? Are you that insecure in your own judgement that you must run to him for approval? Maybe Jimbo shares your prejudices -I don't know, but I certainly don't regard him as in any way possessing better judgement in such matters as any of the rest of us. DuncanHill (talk) 23:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

When one is active in new page patrolling or just plain patrolling for vandalism, sometimes some biting occurs. If it's unjustified, I am the first to apologize and set things straight, which is exactly what I'm tried to do with this user and what I'm trying to do with you now. My behavior toward that other user was not because he was gay, but because I believed him to be trolling. He simply didn't pass the smell test IMO. I have never at any time attacked an established editor based on his/her sexuality and I have even overturned genuinely hateful comments and vandalism on LGBT-related articles. One of the few users I've had direct personal contact via this site is openly gay and I certainly do not hate him nor do I consider him "disgusting." In fact, I consider him to be a friend, As for Jimbo, this is his site and I wanted his feedback, nothing more. On the other hand, I will take your concerns to heart. Really. I am not a "biter" nor a "hater" in real life and I will try and be more vigilant. Thanks for your concern and please don't hesitate to let me know if you feel I've done wrong. Sometimes, it helps to have someone at your back. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe you are active in the wrong areas on Wikipedia. Try hanging around the Help Desk, or the Reference desks, answering questions there, and when you see a red user-talkpage link, drop a on it. There are plenty of new page & vandalism patrollers looking to gain their adminships. Now please, I do not wish to continue this conversation with you. DuncanHill (talk) 23:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Conversation closed, no need to respond and I'm logging off. Thank you for the suggestions and I look forward to a more constructive relationship. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

ANI
You are the subject of this ANI topic. D.M.N. (talk) 16:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. DuncanHill (talk) 16:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't type fast enough to nip this in the bud, but if I may suggest, Guy's explained what he did, and if you're still dissatisfied, you can always bring it up at WP:DRV. You and Guy sniping at each other won't help much, and I don't see much benefit to a long argument at ANI; I'm pretty sure the end result is going to be just what I said above, except passions will be further inflamed first. free advice, worth every penny. --barneca (talk) 16:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message. I must try to remember that there is little point questioning anything Guy does, as his non-explanations do get my back up. DuncanHill (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

AN
"Slow day at the office Guy?" I'm assuming that this catty remark and conversation that followed was inspired by the cat sockpuppet? It's clear that you have some kind of problem with Guy. I don't know what it is, but nasty quips on the AN sure looks bad on you. Please don't do it. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your message, I had already noticed your comment in the thread, and was no longer contributing to it, so I really think that perhaps you should consider if your message here was entirely necessary. DuncanHill (talk) 17:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Instead of running to complain about it on ANI, why didn't JzG come here instead to discuss it with you? And what was that deletion closure you refer to that he declined to give any details on? Cla68 (talk) 21:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I do not know why he did not come here, or indeed why he did not say on his talk page that he did not want me posting there. There is a link to the deletion closure on his talk page. For the record, I do not necessarily disagree with the deletion, simply with his refactoring of the discussion (removing his previous delete !vote) when he closed it. DuncanHill (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I made a note of it on the RfC's talk page . Cla68 (talk) 00:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

You ask me to consider whether my message was necessary, then you restore my blanking of it? I'm not willing to strike it I'm afraid as that rather looks like I withdraw it, which I don't. Feel free to blank it if you change your mind. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If you don't withdraw it, why blank it? If you think the comment was necessary, then leave it as is. If you think it unnecessary, then strike it and say so. Don't play about with blanking it and then saying you don't withdraw it. I do not appreciate having comments blanked from my talkpage, my personal feeling is that it is disruptive because it needlessly complicates the task of anyone trying to follow who said what to whom. I note that you did not comment on Guy's "catty" remark on the lines of "nobody cares", or his comment that I have a "naturally acidic personality". DuncanHill (talk) 22:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I blanked it because you had already read it and your comment seemed to suggest that you didn't like having it on the page. But if you want to keep it here I'm fine with that too. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm perfectly happy to have it here, it is always helpful to have an accurate record of what an editor's contribution was. DuncanHill (talk) 23:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

"People should be free to criticize admins" & "Admins cannot be baited, and if they are it is absolutely the admin's fault no one elses"  seem to be relevant here. DuncanHill (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)}

August 2008
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Chafford (talk) 16:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you, my signature got lost in an edit conflict, and before I had time to add it myself, I had some orange message bars which distracted me. DuncanHill (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)}

Re: This
You're much, much closer to forty than I am, so you'll be able to tell me what's it's like very soon, I'm sure. Scarian Call me Pat!  00:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I see. Well, at least I know how seriously to take your comments now. DuncanHill (talk) 00:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Duncan...
This edit made me smile. Thank you. --Dweller (talk) 13:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia needs more smiles at the moment. DuncanHill (talk) 13:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry to see you have some RL problems. Hope they resolve well. What's the Wikipedia issue(s) you're obliquely referring to? --Dweller (talk) 13:23, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * How long do you have? Jeffpw, of course, but an atrophied arbcom, rampant biting and idiotic speedies to be going along with. DuncanHill (talk) 13:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Not familiar with 1 or 2. 3 I encounter from time to time, but seem blissfully unaware of it as a "rampant" problem. I'm guessing you see it in project space, but maybe I'm wrong? What's the issue with speedies? --Dweller (talk) 13:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) is an editor who has recently died. 2) related (in part) to the stalled "Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all" arbcom case, 3) see it via the noticeboards, and also relates to...4) admins who admit knowing nothing about a subject failing to recognize an assertion of notability, and proceeding to delete dozens of articles on that basis (and who then do not respond to questions on their talk page). Admins who speedy valid articles without bothering to tell anyone (not the creator, not other editors who have contributed to it, nor the Wikiproject which had assessed it), and then another admin turns up to make a frivolous AfD on a rescued article, and then runs to ANI to accuse me of stalking him when I question one of his AfD closures. DuncanHill (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Duncan, I came along to thank you for stub-sorting BIBM but I'm afraid I can't leave without pointing out that the so-called "rescued" article, if it's the one I think it is, was not rescued as such, it was reposted from a userspace copy which had already been seen and deletion endorsed by DRV only a couple of months ago - and said user is the owner of the website which is the subject, and his contributions include spamming his site on numerous financial institutions' articles. Sorry, I don't like spammers. I don't think that makes me a bad person. Guy (Help!) 21:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Lanner and District Silver Band ring any bells? Try to remember that AfD is not for cleanup. Not liking spammers doesn't make you a bad person, but your arrogance and disregard for other's views, your pathetic attempt to label me a stalker when I ask you a perfectly civil question about your actions, your refusal to engage with the community in your RfC, your apparent inability ever to admit your mistakes, all combine to make you a bad admin (and a pretty poor editor too). I notice in one of your recent edit summaries you comment about having forgotten how to format ref tags. I think that you, and the encyclopædia, would benefit from you writing more articles, and spending some time on things like stub-sorting, linking to orphaned articles, mending dablinks, and the like. You have a good knowledge of classical music - how about helping out at the refdesks? Spend some time just on the "nuts and bolts" - you will benefit (I am sure that, at heart, you do not enjoy all the drama you create), the community will benefit, and the encyclopædia will benefit. As for stub-sorting BIBM, you're welcome - I try to properly stub and categorize any article I come across, as it helps other users find articles of interest to them. DuncanHill (talk) 21:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Timeline of music in the United States (1920 - 1949)
Thanks for your help on the references, I've fixed the remaining one! Tuf-Kat (talk) 20:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much
You're so onto it that I see you've even redirected the moove. Thanks Duncan, : )  Julia Rossi (talk) 01:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
For trying to fix the refs for the UN General session, I would have, but with my 102 F fever, I don't trust my self. You are a truly a quick, hardworking gentleman. Thanks again! Jason3777 (talk) 21:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problems - glad to help! DuncanHill (talk) 21:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Banned/indef blocked editors
I've undone your reversion in Jeff's memorial page. Prohibited editors are not allowed to contribute, as per policy. I told the banned editor to grieve off-list, as this isn't a podium to point out how recalcitrant they are now. The time to do so would have been before they were blocked/banned. They cannot contribute to the project now. For any reason. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  17:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * And I undid your undoing. Common human decency trumps policy. DuncanHill (talk) 17:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You might want to consider asking an admin to assist your understanding on policy here - in fact, i insist upon it, as you are clearly in the wrong here. It's an encyclopedia, not an Irish wake. Please stop, or I will have to ask for you to be blocked for disruption. - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  17:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * (ec)I found the comments added by the IP to be of help me in my grief for Jeff, and I feel sure that they could be of help to others. I think you are behaving in a disgusting way on this matter. Please stop, and please do not post on my talk page again. DuncanHill (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


 * As an admin, I agree with Duncan. It's human decency and it's a user talk page. If he hadn't said who he has, it wouldn't have mattered. This is a blatant case of IAR, let the community grieve. There is no harm done by the user adding his memories/tribute. TravellingCari  17:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Another admin here Arcayne, just reverted you for the third time, which I know means you'll stop to skirt the 3rr rule. IAR is core.  If "ben" was vandalizing pages and acting like a banned user, I would be the first in line reverting and blocking.  Curious how you only bothered to "revert" the high-profile edit of his, and not the posts to Alison's and SandyGeorgia's pages.   Keeper    76  17:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Slightly related, this was spot on. I'm sure you'll get flamed for it, but still, spot on. Keeper   76  18:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcoming message.
Hello DuncanHill,

I wanted to thank you for the welcoming message you wrote in my talk page. It's always nice when someone welcomes you to a new place, be it in real life or in the Internet, and I just felt the need to let you know that it's appreciated.

Blessings to you,

― Ann ( user 20:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Trouble with Wikipedia
I am currently finding it almost impossible to view Wikipedia pages (let alone edit them), they take an interminable time to load. It is impossible for me to report this on the Village Pump (technical) or the Help Desk. DuncanHill (talk) 20:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: your post at WP:VPT
posting here in the hope you can read it. For the avoidance of doubt, can you access the rest of the internet without any problems? Algebraist 21:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No problems at all anywhere but WP. WP now a bit better, but not great. DuncanHill (talk) 21:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added this info to your post; hope you don't mind. Algebraist 21:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine thanks. Seems to be a lot better now. It is odd that 1) no error message, 2) was able to read articles by following links from some other websites, but not by coming directly. DuncanHill (talk) 21:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikibreak
I will not be editing much (if at all) for about a week, as I will be busy with some other things, and much of Wikipedia is unusable from a dial-up connexion (which is all I will have access to). DuncanHill (talk) 23:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)