User talk:Hghyux/Archives

Messages
You can leave messages for me in this section. Hghyux (talk) 18:04, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Dirk Lankenau: Abiogenesis March 2012 (2)
Dear Hghyux: thank you for your note, advise and the good interpretation on the Abiogenesis talk page. Your comment: ''There is a fine line between having knowledge vs. a conflict of interest. It is most certainly not vandalism because it seems to be done in good faith. You don't need to go to the talk page to edit if you don't feel it's neccesary. My guess is he saw the article, put his stuff in, and thought he improved the article.'' is highly appreciated and it reflects exactly my intent. I will be in contact with Armen Mulkidjanian and coordinate further procedure. Response times will not be as fast as by e-mail or Facebook-Twitter etc as we have other things to do as well. Thus, thank you again for assist - with best regards, Dirk Lankenau--Lankenau (talk) 18:48, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Dirk Lankenau: Abiogenesis March 2012
concerning your note 14:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC) under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lankenau on "abiogensis"

Dear Hghyux - editing and constructive comments by Wiki-editors are always appreciated. However, just deleting a published and world-wide well recognized issue (i.e. Zn-world theory and colaterally published material including the references of peer reviewed journals and books) without talking to us as responsible Wiki-editors (i.e. Prof. Armen Mulkidjanian and me)is, in our eyes, an act of vandalism. Prof. Mulkidjanian is a highly respected specialist on the scientific issues of the Zn-world and everything added to the Wikipedia site was published in peer reviewed journals and books. Only published material was included in the entry to the Wikipedia article (please, check it out...) and the references were cited. I am the editor in chief of the Springer book series Genome Dynamics and Stability. A recent book co-edited by Prof. Mulkidjanian and me is entitled "Origins of Life: The Primal Self Organization". The book was peer-reviewed as well, with each article reviewed by at least three specialists. Prof. Mulkidjanian and I are working on an additional book related to the issue. In this context we discussed, how to improve the Wiki-abiogenesis article in order to update and make it a generally more usefull information for Wikipedia. We respectfully do not intend any harm to the Wiki-article and we were carefull in re-assembling the paragraphs and put them in less conflicting order (not yet sent to Wiki as we had to probe Wiki first). Not much is intended to be deleted.

We came to the following conclusion: Apparently, numerous hypotheses on the origin of life can be separated into two groups, namely 1. the models that suggest experimental testing and that are, actually, experimentally tested, and 2. the models that either do not suggest any experimental testing or which suggest such testing but have been never tested from some reasons. The first group of models we suggest to gather under the title "Current models" whereas the second, large group of models would go under the title "Other models". We think that the criterium of testability is scientifically reasonale and fair; it should be explicitely and clearly introduced into the text of the article. In addition, it might be useful to mention results of experimental tests in each relevant case. References would be added. The models of Wächtershauser and Russell, as well as the Zn world model, are currently under experimental testing; since each of these models captures some facets of real biogeochemistry, some positive results have been reported in each case. In fact, not all scientifically testable scenarios are mentioned in Wikipedia. For example there is a new and very promising "Formamide World" concept of Saladino and Di Mauro that is not even mentioned in the Wikipedia article. We would be willing to write a respective section. Another section on top-down (anthropic principle) and bottom-up approaches would be added as well.

For doing all this, we would not be willing to fight deletions again of the sort encountered this morning. However, we may need some time and are not ready to engage in any shadow-boxing type discussions. Otherwise we may drop out instantly. Technical assistence from your side would be highly appreciated, as we are not well self-trained Wikipedians.

with best regards, Dirk Lankenau — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lankenau (talk • contribs) 21:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:ORIGINAL before writing to editors about rules you don't know. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Christopher Meneses
Hi Hghyux, I hope you don't mind, but I've removed your speedy deletion tag from Christopher Meneses. According to the article this chap has played four times for his country, and that makes him notable enough for a Wikipedia article.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers 00:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Nope I don't mind. Sorry for causing confusion. Hghyux (talk) 00:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Scott Heirs
Hey, why don't you create a page about me then. Scott Hiers. (Bogart57 (talk) 00:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC))

I left a message on your page explaining why you can't do that. Hghyux (talk) 01:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to let you know that WP:AUTOBIO (within it WP:YOURSELF) also exist. ~ Feedintm Parley 01:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Why?
Why did you contest my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by STATiKC (talk • contribs) 22:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't comply with WP:NOTABILITY Hghyux (talk) 01:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The Mime Set
This is a first time article ... still gathering citations etc ... is there away to take the page off into a saved mode whilst this is worked on so that it does not show up and therefor does not get preemptively deleted?

I am currently undertaking to chronicle groups that existed in the Australian music scene that had significant bodies of work however their contributions have been lost in being out of press and disbanded etc

I appreciate you patience in this matter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmchron (talk • contribs) 01:12, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Use the tag to prevent this.. Hghyux (talk) 01:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Calm down...
...at AIV. I'll even watch him until someone takes care of him. Calabe1992 02:20, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And he just got blocked anyway. Calabe1992 02:21, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Sorry, if that was too intense. Hghyux (talk) 02:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Not at all, it's just that it won't help admins find it any faster. Calabe1992 02:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

CSD G1
is meant solely for gibberish and incomprehensible text; which this was not. Please read and understand CSD before making further speedy deletion requests under that criterion. Thank you for patrolling new pages, by the way. CharlieEchoTango ( contact ) 04:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Just dropping in...I left this user a note about this before, but xe removed it. Although this user's work as a new page patroller is appreciated, explaining G1 again is not worth it IMHO. -- B  music  ian  04:17, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I am by no means trying to cause harm. I am just trying to help out. I make mistakes sometimes, and have read the rules. I removed your earlier notice because I did not feel it needed to stay. If you wish for me to restore it, then by all means I will. Most of the pages I tag end up getting deleted. Those that don't I apologize for the inconvenience. I joined about a month ago and am still trying to familiarize myself with everything. I will do my very best in the future to appropriate taggings. Hghyux (talk) 13:55, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Teremoana Atai
Hello Hghyux, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Teremoana Atai, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not nonsense - there is meaningful content. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. B music  ian  04:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

There was absolutely no significant content on that page, and it did end up getting deleted. Hghyux (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

iContro
Hi hghyux,

I created an article based on an ERP solution that is well established in Malaysia. I did not do it for advertisement purposes but to educate people especially ERP users locally and globally about key factors in deciding to purchase an ERP solution for their respective businesses.

I should have created a draft before saving it to wiki but i'm new so i didnt know the rules...

Hope u can remove the tag so that I can re-create the article together with references...

Thank you

Planetsoft95 (talk) 07:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but "educating others wanting to purchase your product." is just another form of advertising in my opinion. Hghyux (talk) 17:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Could you hold off on something for me?
This edit is a subject of some concern and I've been asked to look into it. This may be an issue of someone's personal safety, so please hold off on it for now.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh my gosh! I had no idea! I will stay very far away from there Hghyux (talk) 18:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm actually kind of worried I hope I didn't do anything too harmful. Hghyux (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you're good. Don't worry.  Thanks for chilling.  It may end up going back in, but there is some doubt about the sourcing, etc.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:31, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Whew. Thanks. I will be sure to stay away. Hghyux (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Article piracy
Blatantly copy/pasting a userspace draft which was rejected at AFC, adding a few extra lines, posting it to mainspace AFTER it was rejected at AfC and not notifying the user who created the draft about any of this so that they can find out when the pirated mainspace article comes up for deletion is a VERY BAD thing! If you do that again you could find yourself blocked VERY quickly! Barts1a / What did I actually do right? / What did I do wrong this time? 22:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I DID notify you before it got rejected. Look at your talkpage. Hghyux (talk) 19:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Your reports to AIV declined
Thank you for making a report on Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editors you reported may not have engaged in sufficient recent vandalism, or the users had not been sufficiently or appropriately warned. If they continue to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you. EyeSerene talk 09:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I would like to offer an apology
I'm sorry I got a bit hot under the collar with your copy/paste move. As I am sure you are aware the discussion on ANI that was moved to my talk page has confirmed that the Creative Commons license means that AS LONG AS ATTRIBUTION IS PROVIDED to the original source you are free to do as you please. Please note that copy/paste moves do not provide attribution as the history is not retained. As such unless you provide proper attribution using the copied template on the talk page the moved article is in violation of the original author's copyright. Repeated copy/paste moves without attribution usually result in you being blocked. If you want to move a page in the future please use the move function to avoid violating someone's copyright. That being said if an article is under AfC review it generally should NOT be moved until the review is completed with a positive outcome. Barts1a / What did I actually do right? / What did I do wrong this time? 22:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * THANK YOU! As a thanks for your apology, I will nominate the page for speedy deletion. Thanks again. Hghyux (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Once a page is being discussed at AfD it cannot be speedied. Plus as I am the original author db-self is invalid. Sorry but that's how things work here. Barts1a / What did I actually do right? / What did I do wrong this time? 23:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh ok. Sorry I was trying to be nice. I guess the best I can do is say that I accept your apology. And give out my own apology for everything I did. Hghyux (talk) 23:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your apology has also been accepted. Barts1a / What did I actually do right? / What did I do wrong this time? 23:26, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Let's just move on from now. I think both of us learned something from this... Hghyux (talk) 23:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hghyux, it is also permissible to provide a note in the edit summary to credit the original source of the text. For future reference the preferred method is to use the "Move" function. Please see WP:MOVE for an explanation on how to do this. As a side note, an article like that will almost never survive the deletion process; it will be rendered useless by the article on the actual item. If there were people regularly cleaning out WP:AFC that particular submission would have been declined per WP:N.  N419 BH  06:56, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Yup, I heard. I watched the conversation go down, but thanks for letting me know :) Hghyux (talk) 21:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yikes, it looks like you caused quite a stir here, didn't you! I hope you realise that it's not always like this. If you've ever got any questions in the future, feel free to pop over to my page, I've got quite a lot of knowledge and a few friendly talk page stalkers, so may well be able to help out.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * OK Hghyux (talk) 00:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Responding to User:123o's help
Greetings Hghyux, Sorry to bring this to your attention, but I noticed this via the help desk, and have left a reply as the user is actually talking about me. I have provided factual diff evidence to show who is the real victim and who is the actual attacker in all of this. I fear that the user may now be trying to pull the wool over people's eyes to cover themselves up from their web of lies. Sincere regards Wesley  ☀  Mouse  23:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright. I hate when people do stuff like that. He was obviously the one in the wrong and I will fully support you. Hghyux (talk) 16:33, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

ANI report on User:123o
Hello Hghyux. I write to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an involving ; in which I classified yourself as a witness. Wesley ☀  Mouse  02:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Dear god. Second time in less than a week. Hghyux (talk) 18:51, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't worry Hghyux, you just stumbled into something there as a "witness", you're fine ;)  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 14:07, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * But how does trying to help someone tie me in with another incident that I must participate in to help out? The way that user wrote that out was misleading and my response was me trying to help report a possible attacker. Not to be shocked and find out that the user was being misleading and then the other user gets mad and brings me into another WP:ANI investigation. I find that very sad. I am very much willing to help out in such situation, but it comes not less than a week after another incident. It is very tireing. Hghyux (talk) 20:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sincere apologies for that dear Hghyux. At the time, I added names of users who had been involved, or caught up in the cross-fire, and where technically witnesses to the whole ordeal.  Sorry if that scared you.  However, I have now offered an olive branch to user123o, in a bid that we are both able to put our cross-worded differences behind us, and work unilaterally and in peace.  Fingers-crossed he accepts the peace offering, and apologies in return for calling me illiterate.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  23:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't blame you one bit. The only reason I'm so upset is because I was in another ANI not less than a few days ago. I fully support your decision and I would have done the same. I was very happy to be a witness on your behalf because it really made me explode when I found out it was a dispute that I was now part of (again!) So I accept your apology, but it was not neccesary. Hghyux (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So sorry to hear that you've been involved with ANI's twice in a few days. Don't let that discourage you from wanting to help others; it is always nice to see a helping user on here - hmm from this day fourth, I shall refer to you as the Wiki-Angel.  I did find it strange though that some users noticed the provocations, while others couldn't; even when the user himself admitted to provocation - but that is now water under the bridge, and time has come to move forward and learn a lesson from all this.  I need to learn how to read LOL.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  23:45, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Bonemarketing Warning
I would like to request a review on my last edit. I added a support group website, it was not a 12 step website like the listings just below it so I added a new section rather than adding it to the 12 step website list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonemarketing (talk • contribs) 16:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've fulfilled your request. If they find me to be right you may be blocked. I've reported your username and put you on a spam list. You've got lots of eyes on you. Hghyux (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! I am now going to create a barnstar page cause this is my first! Hghyux (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Receiving the first is exciting indeed. May I suggest the barnometer for storing awards!?  I have one on my user page, and it does look kinda neat too.   Wesley  ☀  Mouse  00:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I put them on a subpage so I don't need a barnometer. Thanks though. Hghyux (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Anti-vandal work
Hi Hghyux! It is great to see that your doing anti-vandal work - it is difficult to keep on top of the problem, so having people like you around to help out is terrific. However, it seems you may have been a tad over-zealous in your warnings. As a general rule, it is best to start from a level one warning and work up, as it has to be something extremely serious before we jump to a final warning for a first offence. There's always a chance that a simpler warning will turn an editor into one of the good guys, or that they always were editing in good faith but just made an error. Similarly, once someone has been warned for a mistake, we don't need to warn them again unless they make it a second time. With User:Bonemarketing, the user had only made one edit, for which they were warned by Secretlondon. You then warned them three more times for the same edit, including a final warning - the first was sufficient, and it feels bitey to have done so more than once. Unfortunately, the same happened in a couple of other cases - it is great that you wish to warn users, but it is worth checking to see if they've already been warned first. - Bilby (talk) 03:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright. Comments like these will only make me better in the future. So thanks for the tip. Hghyux (talk) 03:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Case
I believe that user:TheREALCableGuy is back using a new IP to circumvent a block. I have been editing the NOLA TV wiki pages for consistency lately and suddenly this new user:152.43.1.244 is foolishly editing (vandalizng) again. Please see WDSU. If you concur that this is sockpuppetry, can you help with a block or ban? I am just an editor and am not schooled in enforcing wiki policy. I think I have added appropriate tags to the relevant pages. Thanks.Sore bluto (talk) 17:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Vandialism?
How was that vandalism? The reference does not state ANYTHING about iHalloween Party in Jennette's tweet. - Alec2011 (talk) 00:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It look like section blanking to me. You provided no edit summary, and so I undid it. I would have left it I yo would have put "rm unrefed" or something similar. Remember for next time OK? Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Why didn't you preview the post first, I usually do? I usually don't bother with it sometimes since I know it's vandalism. i will next time (As I did the second time). - Alec2011 (talk) 01:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact I did preview it and to me, it just seemed as though you removed decent content. You specified no reason for doing so. I can't read your mind through my computer, so I reverted it. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoops, forgot to mention to preview the post and look at the reference, it was just copied from the one above it. I included it the second time though. - Alec2011 (talk) 01:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit Summary
For future reference, how do you type this in the Edit Summary? ''Reverted 1 edit by Alec2011 (talk) identified as vandalism to last revision by Miguel1369. (TW)'' like where it links my name and the "TW - Twinkle" in the Edit Summary?
 * That is the tag that gets put there for users who choose to use Twinkle to rollback vandalism. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh so just put (TW) in the edit summary? - Alec2011 (talk) 01:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No. You should go to your preferences and enable twinkle to gain the tools that allow you to place that tag. When you enable twinkle, and look at a diff with the current revision, there will be buttons at the top that says "ROLLBACK (AGF), "ROLLBACK", and ROLLBACK (VANDAL). Simply click one of those buttons and it will automatically do it for you. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I cannot find it in my preferences..... I'm not sure where to look, sorry. - Alec2011 (talk) 01:32, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Try clicking | this and selecting Twinkle in the Browsing section. If you can't do that then your browser may not be compatable with it. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Is there suppose to be a "browsing" tab? I don't have one. I'm using Chrome. - Alec2011 (talk) 02:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There is a browsing section in the gadgets tab. I also use chrome. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 14:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I found it now. Thanks for the help. - Alec2011 (talk) 20:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your very welcome!:) Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 21:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Hallows Aktiengesellschaft ( talk ) 01:40, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

But please slow down a little
Hey, Hghyux. I suggest that it may possibly be a good idea to check a bit before removing or tagging text or edits? I can see we have got into a little bit of a fuddle here. These things happen. Please, please don't let this put you off continuing to improve the Wikipedia project. --Shirt58 (talk) 11:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hghyux, I'm waiting for you to respond there or at Lankenau's talk page. It is something that must be done. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Hghyux, meanwhile I got informed about a couple of expert-things: WP:EXPERT. So, thank you for the cooky - no problem. When scientific papers are peer-reviewed the tone is sometimes really tough in detail. So I got kind of used to it over the years as author and editor. But with Wikipedia it is more tricky, as so many people are involved. Best greetings, the cooky was delicious, Dirk. --Lankenau (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your Welcome! Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 18:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Conflicts
On what grounds do you consider that a listed building should be speedily deleted? As a matter of interest, this is the penultimate article to complete articles on all the listed churches in Cheshire; I suggest that more editors could follow this example rather than writing about such evanescent topics as the episodes of the Simpsons, or some pop song? This is about our threatened heritage, which should be preserved for our successors. Don't bother about a notice; I'm watching you. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You have not established why the article is notable and my tagging of it is by no means meant as an insult to you or your heritage. An article about something like a pop song or TV show establishes why it is notable. Your article did not. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you mad? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you understand what a listed building is in the UK? Malleus Fatuorum 19:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not from the UK so no. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Then I suggest that you read this before tagging similar articles in the future: "Grade II: buildings that are of special interest, warranting every effort to preserve them". Malleus Fatuorum 19:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Then why stick a tag on something outside your understanding? It is a perfectly notable building by a notable architect.J3Mrs (talk) 19:36, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ignorance is no excuse. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Why was that not included in the article so that I knew not to tag it? You have to establish notability WITHIN the article so that people know that your article is OK. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:40, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The final sentence of the lead quite clearly states that it's a Grade II listed building, with a link to follow if you don't know what that means. Malleus Fatuorum 19:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Hghyux, an article that states a building is a listed building is making a claim of notability. Just as a song that says it is "Grammy winning" has made a claim of notability. If someone doesn't know music, and speedy-tagged a grammy-winning song, it would look a little silly to say "why didn't you come out and say the song was notable?" Also, on a more general note, it is often wise to (a) not nominate a page for deletion if it is outside your area of expertise, and (b) check who created an article you're about to tag for speedy deletion. People that have been here a lot longer than you can probably be assumed to know what they're doing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I endorse everything said above by Peter, Malleus, J3Mrs and Floquenbeam. Tagging an article in an area you didn't understand two minutes after its creation was an utterly ridiculous decision. You simply cannot have read the article; if you did, you clearly need to slow down on your speedy deletion tagging and remind yourself of the criteria. BencherliteTalk 19:55, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

A1 reads "Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article". This article doesn't fall under A1! The context is 100% defined: an actress from Greece. The interwiki link to a lengthy shows importance in other projects. Worst case: you could tag for A7. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, tagging a page created by an experienced editor 6 minutes after its creation is not wise either. It's not a race, Hghyux, please slow down. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'll move on to something else now. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably not a bad idea. But, whatever the something else is, please go slow on that, too. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that for too many new page patrollers it is a race. But hopefully what Hghyux is thinking of moving on to is creating or improving a few articles. God knows, there's more than enough work there to keep thousands busy for many years yet. Malleus Fatuorum 20:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

You have spent 7 minutes of your time* to request speedy deletions on three different articles, two of which I have contested, and simultaneously carried on a discussion on your talk page. You are obviously shooting in the dark without trying to investigate before you propose a deletion.

Just for your information the article you so summarily nominated for a speedy deletion took me a couple of hours to write - and now I am forced to spend even more time trying to save this article from the Wikipedia guillotine, sigh...

*19:35, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+3,057)‎ . . N User talk:Cammander shepard ‎ (Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Ambleside School of Ocala. (TW)) (top) 19:35, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+17)‎ . . Ambleside School of Ocala ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G3). (TW)) (top) 19:34, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+17)‎ . . Rena Pagrati ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD A1). (TW))

19:34, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+2,216)‎ . . User talk:Magioladitis ‎ (Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Rena Pagrati. (TW))

19:32, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+142)‎ . . User talk:Hghyux ‎ (→‎St John the Evangelist's Church, Sandbach Heath)

19:29, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+116)‎ . . User talk:Hghyux ‎ (→‎St John the Evangelist's Church, Sandbach Heath)

19:28, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+1,317)‎ . . User talk:Ottawahitech ‎ (Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Tax uncertainty. (TW))

19:28, 23 March 2012 (diff | hist). . (+12)‎ . . Tax uncertainty ‎ (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G3). (TW)) Ottawahitech (talk) 19:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok. I'm moving on to something else now! Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 20:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As everyone else said, you just really do need to slow down. What are you interested in?  Perhaps you could take a break from deletion related edits to edit in those areas? --Shirt58 (talk) 11:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hghyux, please excuse the intrusion. I now realise that you're not mad (UK) or even really mad (US), but just very keen. I'm sure no-one doubts your sincerity, or your enthusiasm. Please be assured that there is no Sheriff's Posse out to get you, even if Sheriff Vardy is a mighty fine church-article-chief in these here parts. When I was only six weeks into Wikipedia, I too got stung by my eager inexperience. I soon leant that there's very little that's done "behind anyone's back", especially when one can choose to simply "walk in at any time". And I'm just an ignorant Welshman. So I wish you well in your wiki journey and I hope that it's a long and productive one, not just a short and destructive one! We're probably just all jealous that you have a lambo. Now that is fast... Martinevans123 (talk) 00:42, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello Hghyux. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Embrem Entertainment, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:37, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I just want to follow up on the now-closed ANI report, as I hope you don't mistake my comments for something contrary to their meaning.

Understand that on your talkpage, "ignorance" was used appropriately, as per it's meaning - "unknowing". Yes, someone then added "American", which morphs into "ignorant American". This can either be an insult, or can be "unknowing American" ... which based on the entire series of conversations, is obvious what it was meaning...with of course the double entendre.

Nobody deserves to be ridiculed or attacked, as per WP:NPA ... no matter what they did. However, based on the conversation you already had, you knew which was the true meaning of "ignorant" as per context, and that it meant "unknowing" with respect to class II buildings (which I know nothing about either, so I'm clearly an "ignorant Canadian").

What were you looking for in ANI ... a block? A warning? Drama? ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 23:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I was looking for a solution for my conflict. I was not looking for anything other than such. BTW I interpreted the phrase "ignorant American" as "dumb American" Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * But what solution? WP:WQA is where we go for communication issues, ANI is where we go for blocks.  A couple of sections above, "ignorance" is used in context, right?  You therefore know the context? ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 00:07, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I was not aware of any other place to find a solution. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, but what solution were you looking for? A warning (you can do that)?  A block?  I acknowledge that you did the right thing by dropping the engagement on their talkpage - that usually is the right place to resolve problems, but not in this case ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 00:19, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I really didn't care what the solution was as long as it got solved. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The solution is for you to take a break from deletion-related editing for a while. It's that simple.--Shirt58 (talk) 00:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You were not part of this conversation. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 00:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hghyux, I understand that seeing "ignorant American" can piss you off: it's a fairly common epithet (unfortunately based on a common stereotype). In my opinion, there was indeed a double-entendre: the intended meaning was based on the earlier discussion about "ignorance of a subject", but the phrase was used probably knowing it would raise your ire.  If the real meaning was the former (an American who happens to know nothing about Class II buildings), is the anger the same? ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 00:42, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I am upset that it was used in any context because they did not let my mistake go. And resorted to saying rude things behind my back. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Dude (yes, that's an assumption), this is the internet - you have no clue what happens behind your back. If you're seriously worried about what someone on the far end of the keyboard thinks, it's time to logout ... you'll never see them in person, and they have zero influence in you or your life unless you personally let them ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 01:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So if I saw that somebody said "I'm gonna plan to stab this guy" should I still not care? Why does this matter if it's the Internet? It's still offensive and violates WP:Civil. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That's different: it's a physical threat, and has legal repercussions if you don't act. Someone being a dick is just someone being a dick.  You know what they say about bullies. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 01:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I second the suggestion that you take this opportunity to drop the subject, slow down with your tagging, and perhaps take the time to learn about things you don't know - after all, that's a perfect use for an encyclopedia. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I still maintain a WP:CIVIL violation for telling me to "fuck off" twice.
 * Right, but it is widely held that although somewhat uncivil, it's neither blockable or actionable. "Fuck off" means "go away now".  Be the bigger man here (again, an assumption ... "be the adult" might be better) ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 01:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Crikey, and at least one of them is because you were bothering them on their own talkpage. Oi! ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 01:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I noticed this at ANI and also have some advice: an editor who has been active for only two months should be much more receptive to advice offered by experienced editors, even if it comes with uncivil text attached. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a "let's all have a good time" website. Regarding speedy deletions: while certain exceptions exist, a good rule for inexperienced editors is that a speedy deletion is only for obvious junk, and should never be used for something as polished as St John the Evangelist's Church, Sandbach Heath. Johnuniq (talk) 02:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Hghyux, I concur that "newbies" should be receptive to advice from "tenured" editors...but these tenured editors need to be reminded not to bite the newcomers. The article didn't get deleted afterall...I'm not enjoying seeing repeat wikilaywering about how calling someone an "ignorant American(s)" isn't a personal attack. It would be one thing to say something of the nature that a person is ignorant but add American to that and it becomes a ethnocentic and bigoted comment...I can understand of course why the editor of that page was miffed by the tagging of the article for deletion...but that doesn't mean the response from some needed to be what it was. Good luck to you.--MONGO 05:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I responded to your speedy deletion tag further up your page and would add this, the only person here who ought to be offended is Peter I. Vardy. You assumed no good faith with your uncivil tagging of his newly created article and dug the hole deeper by protestations of not my fault. If you do indeed learn anything from this I hope it is, 1 Do not attempt to delete what you do not understand, 2 Research the editor's contributions before you delete, 3 Running to ANI does not always get you the result you seek and 4 it is not a good idea to template the regulars. Before you categorise me a member of a non-existant group, I should say prolific and well-respected editors like Peter have many page watchers and if you act in such a manner you must expect the consequences. You have received a lot of good advice, if I were you I'd take it. If you don't take it you'll need to grow a much thicker skin. J3Mrs (talk) 08:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * You know, I've had the best of intentions to try and help you towards a solution. None of the above comments will help you towards that ... they all do, indeed, have some vital points that when taken outside of the rest of the message are quite positive.  As this whole topic will merely draw more such comments, it's best to shut it down.  A few pieces before that:
 * Know what solution you want; know what solutions are actually available
 * Incivility rarely gets action
 * The written word does not express 100% of the meaning - context helps, but still is not complete
 * The people on the other end of the keyboard mean squat to your real life


 * Tag me by e-mail if you have determined what solution you're looking for, and still can't find it - or indeed, how to research what solutions are available. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 11:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Geez...the editor is "newish" (as they called themself), and he made a mistake...and not a big one at all since the article wasn't deleted....for the record, I have had several of my new pages incorrectly tagged for speedy but I didn't hit the roof...I just removed the tag and pointed the editor to Deletion policy. What could have turned around as a polite learning experience has instead been turned into a lot of false misinformation in regards to civility and NPA..."I've had the best of intentions to try and help you towards a solution"...and that means what? That "f&$@ off" and "ignorant American" are somehow to be construed as not offensive? Not a blockable offense (nor even a warning!) worthy of comment? What preposterous babble exists outside the U.S. whereby peoples in other parts of the English speaking world would be assuming that Americans are as a collective, ignorant. All great contributions aside, surely the experienced editors couldn't possibly be so offended just because ONE article got mistagged by a newish editor learning the ropes. Ah, a learning experience we do have...for now, why can't this editor in kind simply say f&$@ off whenever he is mildly miffed...great examples to follow for sure. So in summary...the tenured editor creates an article...a newish editor is doing new pages patrol and makes a mistake and tags the article for speedy deletion...a cadre/posse of experienced editors insult, harass and goad the newbie...he files a complaint in the appropriate venue and the cadre escalate their aggressions...experienced editors wikilaywer that "f&$@ off" and "ignorant American" are  not a personal attack...appalling...barnstars for all...well done! Surely with such we should well be wondering, why on earth aren't we seeing more new editors...--MONGO 16:16, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As usual Mongo, you misread the situation, and stir up shit in the wrong direction. No surprise.  It's editors like that who continue tempests in teapots that drive away editors, not those of us who are trying to teach editors to fish ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 16:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No surprise you continue to misuse your position to defend what is indefensible. Calling someone an "ignorant American" is a personal attack of a nationalistic nature and that you would even stoop to try and wikilawyer about it is outrageous. I've read all through this latest episode and am disappointed both by your commentary and reactions. I've got close editing friends from all over the world via this website and I cherish their contributions without any consideration as to their nationality. I would have to say that if what I've read from you on this sordid affair is the "teaching moment" this newish editor will need to, shall we say, survive here, then this website is definitely going in the wrong direction.--MONGO 17:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No surprise that you're acting "holier than thou" - as apparently you can't read. Let's not forget your real bias: in your perfect world, one of the editors who was uncivil in this case would be banned from Wikipedia, and drawn and quartered ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 18:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * IF I had wanted to get anyone and be a petty jerk, I could have brought what I had off site onto the civility arbcom case and it would have been much more acrimonious than it already was...but I stayed out of that case. Arbcom only saw the info posted...I didn't provide one piece of evidence. So if you think I'm one to go around here looking to settle scores, you're mistaken...however, if I see what I consider to be lousy advice and wikilaywering about the meaning behind "ignorant American" types of comments, I am going to tell you and anyone else defending such commentary that it doesn't need to exist on this website under any circumstances....and I'm sure that if you ever saw me bash someone about where they are from, then I would expect you to give me a warning quicker than a cat can lick its own arse.--MONGO 19:36, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

It appears you have enormous amounts of energy which up until now you have employed mainly to remove content donated to Wikipedia by others. I wonder if, instead, you would be interested in bringing back to life a wikiproject that seems to have lack of participants at the moment: WikiProject Websites. I know this is a big undertaking and will understand if you have no desire to take on this challenge. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

After a long discussion over a little mistake that turned into an OMG Y DID U TAG THIS IT'S NOTABLE DUH! moment with incivil remarks, another ANI discussion, and a big waste of my time, I've decided to use my account now only for reading and fixing typos. This whole thing called Wikipedia is nothing but a bunch of users who seem to be a waste of time to the whole goal of the project. I started Wikipedia after noticing extremely shocking vandalism on an article. I wanted to help combat this so that the site would be a better place for readers. I now have understood that when I make a mistake, that it is treated worse than vandalism itself, which is something that I am tired of dealing with. I do not like being told to "fuck off" nor being called an "ignorant American" or being accused of "Article Piracy" or get pulled into an ANI discussion for trying to help another user, or even have to worry about "what will happen next". It has become clear that I am not welcome here. Sorry. I am now going to stop. Please do not continue to chastise me for my edits I'm just sick of it.

If you think what's said on the Internet does not affect your real life, then you need to do lots more research BWilkins. Goodbye. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * That's a shame Hghyux. I think you made a hasty mistake and that's all. I, for one, think you could contribute a lot. For some people, you are absolutely right - the Internet (and especially Wikipedia, I have found) certainly does affect one's real life. I think I know how you feel - a while ago I felt I had to resign completely. And when I came back it was't too long before I was blocked indefinitely! When an editor is starting out he or she simply does not know exactly the right forum to use to "resolve an issue". I hope you eventually change your mind. But in the meantime, don't worry, I can keep you very busy with all the typos that I make. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:32, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hghyux...if my advice is worth anything, I'd be very methodical about editing. What gains the most respect is article contributions by way of new and well source information. For the record, Vardy's article wasn't a deletion candidate under any circumstances since it is well sourced and notable...generally, most Wikipedians are inclusionists and by that I mean, they generally require little in terms of notablity for an article to exist...and in that I concur, but make some exceptions on living people since many aren't notable unless there are multiple references from various sources. I would discover a range of articles and subjects of personal interest to you...be it the historic church in your own town or a person of interest to you and work on copyediting and adding reliable references to this subject...deletion discussions, noticeboards and what I refer to as war zones are just that, oftentimes hostile and argumentative places and they can quickly sour the grapes for anyone who is still just learning the ropes of this place.--MONGO 19:54, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * My goal on Wikipedia was to stop vandals and inappropriate articles. Not to generally improve articles with my own content and put time into it and risk that Joe Schmo removes it. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:58, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * MONGO has very sound advice here. Hghyux you have very laudable goals, especially for a lambo driver. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * How does the car I drive have anything to do with my goals? Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 20:16, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry Hghyux. It's just my warped sense of humour, which so many earnest Wikipedians seem to find so tedious. It's just that you do seem to be so "speedy"! (by the way, that poor Schmo guy seems to get a really hard time!) Martinevans123 (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hghyux...inappropriate articles is a wildcard...I would imagine you won't get much support if you do more tagging of articles that are clearly notable, and in fact, you'll likley risk being blocked for it. If indeed that is part of your interest here, I really suggest you become well versed in articles for deletion..read the commentary there and look at what consensus for deletion is all about. I know I would have been displeased if you ahd tagged one of my articles for deletion but my response to you would have been much more amicable I assure you...unless you did it twice lol. No, seriously...you said you were going to fix typos, that would be a great benefit...how about doing vandalism patrol too...just click the recent changes link at left and see what the IP's are up to...--MONGO 20:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should have a look at my contributions and my tools page to see what I do. And the ratio of articles I tag appropriately vs not. And all my vandalism reversions. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 20:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay...I will do that later but heading out now. For the record, your simple mistake did not under any circumstances warrant the response you got...in a nutshell, that is my primary focus on this issue. Let me know if I can help you with anything else.--MONGO 20:35, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I will but I just don't feel I'm welcome here. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 20:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Just to say that I noticed the bullying and uncivil treatment handed out to you and I made an attempt to call that editor out on his conduct. The support he received from his friends, and the threats they sent my way were quite an eye-opener. I was even told that my highlighting of his incivility was worse than his incivility towards you, something I find incredible, even though I teased him somewhat. It turns out that telling someone to fuck off on Wikipedia is not only tolerated by some, but supported, and the entire project is much the poorer for having these people involved. You made an unlucky mistake, but the drama that followed was a disgrace. All the best to you, Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Well done Mongo. Twist it to make it look like admins such as myself actually tolerate incivility, and as expected, you drove an editor away - but you'll shine and pretend it's my fault.  Brilliant ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 21:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * "Just back away. You fucked up. You got called on it. You should have apologized then ignored the rest of the page." Not only did you tolerate it and thereby appease those responsible, but in doing so have directly contributed to Hg's disillusionment. Leaky  Caldron  21:57, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What? You told this editor right off at AN/I he "f&$@ up" ...and informed him that nothing was going to happen to the editor who stated he was an "ignorant American"...you then tried miserably to explain that being told to "f&$@ off" is the same as "go away"...--MONGO 22:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey "hangers on", read more fucking carefully next time. There's only ONE person here actually trying to find a solution for this editor - ME.  Stop fucking whining and help save thew new guy ... rather than completely fucking up what I'm saying. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 23:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * One person trying to help (you), one frustrated onlooker who commented above (me), and some who have entirely missed the point. For them, please note that this is the talk page of a new editor who would benefit from advice regarding how to handle issues in the future. The talk of how dreadful it is that someone said a naughty word belongs elsewhere, and is distracting this user's attention with advice suggesting that they don't need to learn anything about Wikipedia except that some people say "fuck" and they can be ignored because that's a bad word (a logically absurd conclusion, and one that encourages emotional responses when what is needed is a calm appraisal of the underlying issue). Johnuniq (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You're right...I have offered no advice worth consideration --MONGO 03:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but are you accusing MONGO of driving away this editor? From my own inspection it seems you should remove the plank from your own eye. A solution would have been to calmly suggest WP:COOL, not join the pile-on with combative language as you did. Honestly, an editor isn't aware of how notability applies to obscure architecture in the U.K. and gets attacked for it, yet somehow you think the response should be to tell that editor the attack was not that bad, when it actually was quite bad. You should try to be a little more understanding B.--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 00:39, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest that you remove the plank from your own eye and investigate the facts, not your preconceptions. There was no attack, the listed building system in the UK is in no way "obscure", and it was patiently explained to Hghyux once he admitted his ignorance of it. He then took exception to a comment (not made by me) and inappropriately pursued the author of the article to his talk page demanding an apology. I would also suggest that you look at this editor's history of incorrectly requesting speedy deletions of new articles, which is far from impressive. Malleus Fatuorum 03:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks to me like the vast majority of the speedies result in deletes. This editor needs to be a little more careful about using CSD and should try to better understand some of the criteria (seems the editor is not clear on where A1 applies), but definitely does not need to withdraw from the process altogether.--The Devil&#39;s Advocate (talk) 16:14, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There are five disputed tags discussed on this talk page alone; that's way too many. Malleus Fatuorum 16:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You have been blocked 13 times for incivility. That's way too many. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 17:55, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It certainly is, and more than one of the administrators who improperly issued at least some of those block were desysoped as a direct result. Malleus Fatuorum 18:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * One look at those blocks tells me all about your behavior patterns. So why don't you just do everyone a favor and stop writing shit about me everywhere. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 18:29, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You have an unfortunate knack of quickly jumping to the wrong conclusions, which is what started this.imbroglio. As for me writing about you "everywhere", I'm not writing about you anywhere, and have no intention of doing so as long as you stick to your word to take a break from speedy deletions and to be more careful when you return; I am speaking to you here, not about you. See the difference? Malleus Fatuorum 18:50, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've left Wikipedia because of this whole waste of time. I do not appreciate you loading my talk page with utter nonsense about me. I have the full right to go back to speedy deletions if I decide to come back and you have no right to prevent me from doing so. Please stop being such an asshole and turning little mistakes into big problems. You have got to be one of the most self defensive editors ever and you drove me away from the project. Congratulations! Bravo! Well Done! Your mother will be very proud! Why don't you bring your awful behavior off the Internet and go tell 5 year olds to "fuck off"? You'd fit right in! Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What are you on about? You've clearly not left at all. And if you really want to be convincing in your howls of incivility I suggest that you rein in your potty mouth. Malleus Fatuorum 19:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You said very similar things to me and others so don't make me look like a bad guy. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * MF, why don't you just leave this guy alone, and leave the people who want to help him to do so? Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Why don't you leave me alone? Malleus Fatuorum 19:32, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Because your being an asshole. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:33, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * ^^ Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:34, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If you two keep this up then we'll be having an assignation at ANI. Malleus Fatuorum 19:35, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey you started it so.... Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:39, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter. You must stop. Now. Leaky  Caldron  19:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest we stay off each other's talk pages. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:42, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Please review the documentation of the hat template, which is restricted to administrators. You may wish to use a combination of a collapse and archive, such as I have done on my talk page. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 21:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Your name was also on the list. Malleus Fatuorum 22:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * An admin put this here. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 23:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Just saying...
Hg, I'm glad you decided to stick around.

I'm not sure that this is  good idea. Keeping lists of editors could be seen as a breach of user page guidelines which I would encourage you to read here. It also sends out an unwelcome message to non-listed editors. You might find it difficult to get support in the way that several of us did the other day if you take such a hardline and highly visible stance. I completely disagreed with the way you were treated by the Admin. and said so in the ANI discussion. So have others, he was just plain out of order. However, he was right about something, the people who upset you and are out to upset other editors do not mean anything to you in real life. I think you will get better cooperation from the vast majority if you don't try to stick out like a sore thumb with this sort of talk page and the block list, which isn't really enforceable anyway in any practical sense. Regards. Leaky Caldron  16:29, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I was coming here to say the same thing, really. The relevant guideline is UP: "Material that can be viewed as attacking other editors, including the recording of perceived flaws" and "Users should generally not maintain in public view negative information related to others without very good reason. Negative evidence, laundry lists of wrongs, collations of diffs and criticisms related to problems, etc., should be removed, blanked, or kept privately (i.e., not on the wiki) if they will not be imminently used, and the same once no longer needed".  Pages in breach of these guidelines are routinely deleted at Miscellany for deletion.  I think that it would be unfortunate if the temperature had to be raised further by such a nomination if you are unwilling to db-user the page.  But someone will surely nominate it if you let it hang around for too much longer.
 * Having a list of editors who you say are "banned" from your talk page – particularly a list that you display to everyone who leaves you a message through your (unnecessarily long?) edit notice – does not strike me as the best way of reacting to the situation in the long run. It perpetuates ill-feeling when none need exist. Please reconsider. Regards and best wishes, BencherliteTalk 19:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you. BencherliteTalk 19:20, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This website is corrupt. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 19:26, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Groucho! Por favor! Martinevans123 (talk) 22:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please excuse yet another frivolous invasion of your Talk Page. It's hardly recognisable as yours at the moment. Maybe someone should suggest a new code of conduct whereby any dispute that arises over rapid tagging of an article is the sole business of the two parties concerned (and maybe one jointly agreed administrator). It's just amazing how a slip can escalate into a big battle when "concerned bystanders" like myself start taking sides, even by mistake. (This is your Talk page, so please delete this suggestion whenever you see fit!) Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:37, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey there!
Just a word or three of moral support! I made a few goofs when I started doing new page patrol (I think we all do, when we start), but listening very carefully to other people's input (even when it seemed a bit harsh) got me through it OK. It's soooo damned easy to get into a long-running spat here in WikiLand, and it's never worth it! I know Malleus seems like the big bad bear sometimes(and he can certainly be very brusque), but despite what you may hear, he's actually helped out so many newbies to do so much good stuff, and it's one of the things which almost never gets said about him!

I gather you're probably fairly young (though I may be madly mistaken). I'm a granny myself, so off at the other end of the scale. When we're young, these things always seem so much worse, and so much more hurtful, than they need to be. I'm recovering from major surgery on my neck at the moment (only had the op on Tuesday), so I'm still a bit post-anaesthetic groggy. Please forgive me if I'm waffling! We all make stupid mistakes, I've made so many in my life that I've lost count of them! Your best bet is probably to hold up your hands and say exactly where you went wrong, offer a truce, try to make friends if you can with the people who you think of at the moment as "enemies", and kinda start over. If you'd like to get into writing articles and improving articles, (which I reckon you;d really enjoy once you got into it), then you couldn't ask for a better teacher than Malleus. See if you can think of an article which really interests you and needs improvement, and try asking Malleus if he'd mind showing you how to make it better. I know it sounds totally daft, but it might be the best possible thing to do. He loves to teach, and he really appreciates people who really want to learn to become good editors. See if you can get a bit fired-up about improving some articles, rather than just patrolling for vandalism bring out the creative side of your personality. Cheers,  Pesky  (talk ) 09:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm 32 years old. I did say I was wrong. I will not truce. Your mental if you think we can become friends after that clash. If I need a teacher on this wiki I already have an editor in mind. My mission on here is mainly reverting the bad stuff.

To address his claims against me

-I am a graduate of Harvard. I have a PhD in medicine. I focus my career on biomedical research in Boston.

-I am not an "ignorant" American.

I am not interested in working with a user that has been blocked so much for incivility. I would rather be friends with someone who relates to me and doesn't clash with me.

Cheers to you too. Maybe something used in your surgery was something that me or another doctor at my work helped work on;) Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:24, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi again; maybe something in my surgery was, indeed, worked on by you guys! I had discs at C4/5 and C5/6 totally removed, and the vertebrae C4, C5 and C6 fused together (plated).  I know that the word "ignorant" was just used purely factually - as in, someone who doesn't know / is unaware of something.  Not "dumb", just "not knowing".  But it's hardly surprising that an American (even with a PhD) wouldn't know the ins and outs of the UK's Listed Building thing  a listed building is automatically "notable" as it's "listed" as a building of important historical / architectural interest. As I know next to nothing about such things in the USA, I have no idea what would compare to it.  But hey, you know, these things happen, and we can all choose not to have "permanent enemies" and so on.  Enmity is such a destructive thing; we miss out on a lot.  Malleus's block log includes some really, really bad (and totally unjustified) blocks, for things which nobody in their right mind could have considered blockworthy, and in some instances zapped out by people just wanting to shut up the opposition in a content dispute etc., and some by admins who have been desysopped (and / or banned), and so on.  So the number of "honest blocks" is much, much lower than the block log might suggest.  Gross injustice can happen here, too (and it does). The ability to call a truce is one of the most mature abilities we humans have. But nobody can force a truce on someone else. At the moment I'm hardly touching article-space, other than fixing the odd typo in something I;m reading (mainly because I'm editing under the influence of either pain or painkillers, depending, and I'd rather not screw up an article!) So I'm focussing a bit on bridging the thought-processing gaps and communications gaps between autism-spectrum and neurotypical editors, doing a bit of policy discussion, and wishing my supraspinatus, trapezius, deltoid  muscles etc. hadn't been so badly affected for so long by the nerve compression in my neck.  They burn, now they're functioning again. 'Specially the supraspinatus, which had obviously lost most of its functionality.  Pesky  (talk ) 04:29, 15 April 2012 (UTC) Insights into other aspects of people are often enlightening.  You might find this amusing, for instance.  Pesky  (talk ) 05:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. Ouch!

2. The article on listed buildings state the equivalent in the US is the National Register of Historic Places.

3. My belief is that trucing is in fact an immature act because it shows that you do not have the developmental ability to continue to stand your ground. Even if your wrong, for example, in my instance,

''User 1: That deletion nomination was wrong!

User 2: I nominated it for (reason 1), (reason 2), and (reason 3).

User 1: Are you mental?

User 2: No.

User 1: Do you understand what (insert rule here) means/is?

User 2: No.

User 1: (TELLS USER 2 TO READ RULE)

User 2: TRUCE''

Notice how User 2 seems much more open now to a "feeding frenzy" as I say from User 1's fancub.

4. Did you know about WP:DRUNK?

Anyways thanks for talking to me. I appreciate some civility on this site. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 23:55, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, you're welcome :o) I'll always try and talk to people (but I'm nothing like as good at this kind of stuff as my younger daughter is!) My view on truces is that wherever it's humanly possible, it's a good idea. Eventually every war ends up with people having to get down to talking things through, and (of course) there are always going to be ill feelings on both sides (that's a kinda natural result of arguments from parent-child tiffs to Global Thermonuclear War.  Though whether there would be anybody left to talk, in the latter instance, is maybe doubtful!) I tend to believe that there's good in pretty much everyone, and if I can't see it, then it's my lack of perception which is at fault. (It's taken me decades to get to this stage!) As with every community, some people are more spiky than others, some take great offence at things which are just water off a duck's back to others, we all have glitches.  Every single one of us has glitches.  I've known horses worth over £1M which had more glitches than ones which sold for less than £10.  With a £1M horse, people are prepared to put up with more glitches! One of the biggest "barriers" to communication which we have on here is the multicultural thing; sometimes even though we speak the same language (well, almost) our understandings of the nuances of it are so wildly different that it would probably be better if we actually spoke different languages.  Here in the UK, we chuck around words and phrases which carry much less weight than the exact same words and phrases do in other countries.  This causes a heck of a lot of problems here in WikiLand.  I wouldn't take offence at Malleus calling me a silly old cow, for example. (Though it would be different if someone with whom I'd had no previous interaction did the same thing, but even then I might shrug it off with a chuckle and a self-deprecating grin.  I can be a silly old cow, though I do try not to be, most of the time!)  To give an example of the lightness with which some words are used here in the UK, I used to hang out with a set which included various forms of aristocracy including a princess.  And several times I heard her say "Don't be such a cunt!" to other people in the same set.  And with absolutely no intent to cause serious offence, at all.  More like "Don't be so nasty / stupid!" would be in different cultures.  It may be worth considering, as you would if you were speaking a different language (which we almost are, really), just automatically (as an internal translation thing) toning-down some of our BritSpeak by 75% to get the approximate equivalent in AmeriSpeak.  We use the same words as each other, but with wholly different nuances behind them. And yes, I did know about WP:DRUNK, though I prefer Editing_Under_the_Influence, o n the whole!  It makes me chuckle more.  Or possibly "cackle", as I'm rapidly approaching the Crone phase of life ;P  Pesky  (talk ) 09:31, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me?!
Why did you just Considered my page to be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenar328 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Read the WP:USERPAGE guidelines. You can not use the userspace for web hosting to promote yourself. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 15:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Leaving aside issues of promotion, it is probably unwise for a young editor to include their date of birth and other information which could be used to identify them. Nev1 (talk) 16:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I didn't know that! Anyways, thanks! But I recommend you to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BITE. Now, may you please cancel the deletion of my page? The other Wikipedian was right, Keep my page for now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenar328 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I can't because the discussion has already started. You can however add your feedback to the discussion. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 16:26, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, given that no one has yet !voted delete, if you withdrew the request it could be speedy-closed. Up to you, though. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ... and now that at least 1 admin is watching the page, further additions of information that can be identifying of a minor can lead to immediate deletion without MFD anyway ;-) ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 16:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I just requested a speedy delete of the discussion. Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 17:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC) ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

AfD
An article at AfD can be speedied - [WP:Deletion process#Early closure]] - and I do it reasonably often (delete them, that is). I've messaged the one who told you they couldn't. Peridon (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on You have two cows. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * Oh my gosh! I had no idea! (Was using Stiki) so I will stop and not edit that article. Was not meaning to vandalize and I need to pay better attention! :P Hghyux (talk to me)(talk to others) 01:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)