User talk:FreeatlastChitchat/Archive 1

Abuse accounts
Saw your message at ANI that you were thanked by similar abuse accounts in the past as myself. I wanted to look at the correlation. Were you topic banned right before those incidents because I was topic banned right before the incident? And I see we (you and me) only worked on a handful of articles together, if its the same user then it shouldn't be hard to find!  Sh eri ff  |  ☎ 911  | 09:11, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Ahmadiyya project
 --Peace world  21:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Blanking a page, then tagging it for speedy as "no content"?
You blanked Sawad e Azam (Sunni), a redirect, and then tagged it for speedy deletion as A1 and A3 (no content or context). This is not the way to deal with redirects to pages which contain no content about the subject (not using this for redirects is even explicitly mentioned in the A3 template). If you think a redirect should be deleted, and it doesn't match redirect criteria R2 or R3, then you should post it at redirects for discussion. In this case, I have redirected it to a better target, according to sources like. You are still free to post it at WP:RFD if you have good reasons to want it deleted. Fram (talk) 09:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marvel Hero (talk • contribs) 08:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Archiving at ANI
I reverted your archiving at WP:ANI because you removed 282,974 bytes and many sections with recent comments. I hope to start a discussion at WT:AN later about archiving because I don't know why people have chosen to archive AN/ANI (what happened to the bot?), nor what the criterion is. Johnuniq (talk) 04:29, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * @Johnuniq I archives the sections which seemed to have been read by the involved parties. It was housekeeping as far as I could see. I just saw ten or so sections which were taking up space and just archived them. Perhaps you can ask for ANI to be included in the list of pages that should not be archived manually? People do archive manually from time to time. ty for the heads up. Regards FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 04:35, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi. No, we only archive based on time not on the size of space it is feeding. Normally we wait 48 hours to archive. The bot archives after 72 hours of inactivity if it ever shows up. I did the same by archiving quickly, but I learned that you have to wait a minimum of 48 hours in order to archive it. Callmemirela  🍁  &#123;Talk&#125;   &#9809;  04:44, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I started a discussion. See WT:Administrators' noticeboard. Johnuniq (talk) 04:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

You should know discretionary sanctions
-- Human 3015   Send WikiLove   07:06, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

"Imbecilic liar"
is not OK. The next time you make personal attacks like that I will block you. I would do it now for this one, if it hadn't been a few days old already. Perhaps this cussing out of other editors, for which you have been a few times already, is compulsive. If that is the case, next time you say unacceptable stuff like that, please ping me so I can block you on the spot. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 21:35, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * @Drmies and what about totally fabricated claims of canvass? Is it all ok to just go ahead and say, without a shred of proof, that a certain editor is canvassing, over and over and over again? btw what is a person supposed to call someone who is not telling the truth? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 03:01, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * NOT "imbecilic liar". You explain where they went wrong, and then you move along. Sweet Jesus FreeatlastChitchat, if you can't understand that, I should just block you for incompetence. "Totally fabricated"--grow up. Those claims were mistaken, and that is what I and others pointed out. "Totally fabricated" is something else entirely, and if were your mother/father/caretaker I'd box you over the years and make you read and then copy WP:AGF a hundred times before bed. If you keep on ascribing bad faith to everyone who says anything negative about you, you make all this impossible. We have AGF so we can work here. Look, what you need to say here is something else entirely. Drmies (talk) 03:08, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * @Drmies Last word from me, you can reply to these then this goes into archives. Every single human has his limits, you do, so do I. When someone starts this kind of shit you try to let it go and get on, then do it again and again and again. How many times should I explain that they went wrong? He says I was canvassing I told him I was not, again and again and again he says I am canvassing. I reach my limit and I lash out, I think that's what usual humans do. Same case with others, every single day they are goading, attacking, limits are limits and everyone has them. To be frank if a guy like this pulls this kind of shit in the gym he will have a barbell where the sun doesn't shine. What happened on Assuming good faith on their part? No, not even assuming good faith, just telling the truth. No smoke without fire, but let them for the Love of God show some smoke. Take a look through the RFc, I have not even mentioned anyone, let alone use a canvass style text. And furthermore I do not see a single warning on the pages of other editors who reported me as if what they did was ok. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 03:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * a. NPA is policy and I promise you you will be blocked--not because people want to block you but because you seem unable to grasp that, well, NPA is policy. b. you must not have looked at the close for the entire discussion--so what if they didn't all get individual warnings. I put one here early on in the process of closing that discussion; the others can read the thread. I still have not seen you say what you need to say; kindly don't ping me anymore since this is just a waste of my time. All the best, Drmies (talk) 03:35, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Polish census of 1931 is covered by discretionary sanctions under WP:ARBEE
Doctor Franklin (talk) 12:11, 13 February 2016 (UTC)