User talk:Etcetc

Regarding your edit on the "anarchism without adjectives" page, while I don't necessarily disagree, with your edit, could you please give explanation on the talk page. Looking at what you removed, it doesn't seem that bad. If this is a fight coming in from another article (which I doubt 'cause this is your first edit) then please state that. You can respond either here or on my talk page. And if I don't sign this, the stupid bot will leave another message telling me so. AFA http&#58;//revleft.com

hey
Hey, I just wanted to say that I appreciate your attempts to correct POV on various anarchism-related articles, and I think you're doing a good job of it. :) If you have time, could you also have a look at Anarchism_and_anarcho-capitalism? There's various bits of POV floating around like "ancapism is a form of ind-anarchism" when I had a look at it, but I'm not sure how to correct all of them. -- infinity  0  17:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, you too :) but careful not to get dragged into this site too much. :) -- infinity  0  16:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

hah i remember
Welcome back. i do keep an eye out for folk. infinty and others are obviously still chirpy! --  maxrspct  ping me  22:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Your recent comments
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Your comments at Talk:Anarcho-capitalism are inappropriate for a Wikipedia talk page. I would strongly encourage you to remove your own comments from that page. If you feel someone may be a sockpuppet, you should report the issue at WP:SSP. However, you should not make accusations nor disparage other editors on an article talk page. Also, regardless of your suspicions about another user, you should not revert without comment and you're still required to follow the revert rules. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Vassyana 10:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You posted your accusations along with uncivil comments towards that editor. Please review WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA for what is considered unacceptable. Inappropriate behaviour by others is not an excuse to engage in inappropriate behaviour. You can have your accusations of sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry reviewed at WP:SSP. If the person is a problem editor you may wish to file a request for comment or seek sysop intervention. However, none of these options are a replacement for dispute resolution. Just because you're convinced someone else is violating the rules and mores of Wikipedia does not give you free reign to do so. Contrary to your assertion, that does not improve Wikipedia, but rather leads to edit wars and disruption to the wiki. Instead, I implore you to act in a civil fashion and use the appropriate venues for this dispute. I will again politely but strongly request you remove your comments from the article talk page. The venom is distinctly unhelpful to the editing climate. Vassyana 11:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I will ask you to please reconsider your actions. What steps have you taken to resolve the issue? When have admins reviewed your concerns? I will be removing your comments from the article talk page. While I appreciate your good intentions, you should well know that sort of post is highly inappropriate. Please address the situation appropriately. Vassyana 11:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Turning to disparaging comments against me will not improve the situation. I understand your frustration, however insults and attacks are simply not acceptable. Those questions should have made you reflect. If what you provided is the whole of what was done, you have not tried very hard to resolve the situation. You linked a couple checkuser cases which showed that Vision Thing was unrelated (by checkuser standards) to Billy Ego, and also bafflingly linked to the sockpuppets of Billy Ego category, which does not include Vision Thing. The only thing you linked that was directly relevant to my question was the AN/I post. A couple failed checkuser attempts to get VT associated with a banned account and a nearly year old single attempt to seek sysop attention on AN/I nearly a year ago don't add up to much of an effort to resolve the issue. If you want sockpuppet allegations investigated and considered, please post them to WP:SSP. If there are ongoing behaviour concerns with the editor report those kinds of concerns at WP:AN/I. Have you made any attempts to resolve the content disputes with VT through dispute resolution? I have faith in our various processes. However, in order for them to work, they have to be used. You have yet to exhaust the options openly available to you. Vassyana 12:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. Diffs: Incivility. Canvassing. Vassyana 16:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

VT
FWIW, I would say, based on editing style and habits, that VT is not a Billy Ego sockpuppet. Libertatia 22:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Having coming back from a block for WP:NPA, this is not a good sign. Are you looking to get blocked for a week to re-consider the way you engage other editors? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Editwarring
You are also editwarring, and misusing edit summaries. Do not use edit summaries for anything else that to explain the edit. Please follow dispute resolution if you cannot find common ground with fellow editors. I will place a similar notice in other editors' talk pages that are editwarring with you. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

hey
hey, just for the record, I don't think Vision Thing is a sockpuppet. But that doesn't mean he's not editing tendentiously - see the email i sent you. -- infinity  0  18:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Influence and activism of J. K. Rowling
Help I'm being railroaded by user:Jossi. Can you review this and see if it is OR or just a biased admin? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Influence_and_activism_of_J._K._Rowling Thanks, Libertycookies 18:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration
Hello. I've asked an arbitration case to be started related to Vision Thing's editing. Your input is requested. :) -- infinity  0  19:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Vision Thing
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Vision Thing. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Vision Thing/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Vision Thing/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,  Cbrown1023   talk   20:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

sock
I have had the same suspicions since he started editing, due primarily to his very account name, amongst many other things. However, I've talked to several admins and they aren't willing to take any action unless more explicit evidence comes forward. He's not being too disruptive at the moment, I don't think. There's a good number of other editors editing articles at the moment, might you consider coming back, perhaps in occasional bursts like I'm doing at the moment? -- infinity  0  12:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Vision Thing dismissed
The Arbitration Committee has passed a motion to dismiss the Arbitration case entitled "Vision Thing". This has been passed with the rationale that there is a lack of usable evidence. For the arbitration committe,  Cbrown1023   talk   00:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Criticisms of libertarian socialism
Criticisms of libertarian socialism, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Criticisms of libertarian socialism satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Criticisms of libertarian socialism and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Criticisms of libertarian socialism during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. • Lawrence Cohen  15:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Firing squad.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Firing squad.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 15:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)