User talk:JarlaxleArtemis/Archive III



userpage discussions
Hi, I see you left a note with Jvian already about your userpage. I left both of them a note and moved their discussions to their talk pages. I left the one that you left originally, just rv'd the two latest ones. They were moved to User talk:Jvian & User talk:Eduardo Cuellar respectively. I just wanted to give you a heads up on what I did. Cheers. &infin; Who ? &iquest; ? 08:33, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

my userpage
Actually, it was a "friendly vandal" who came through and tweaked the layout. It's always looked fine on my screen! :-) I'm not up for going around and doing rigorous testing on different setups, so I suppose I should simplify it. Anyway, thanks for the feedback! FreplySpang (talk) 18:10, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

Nomen nudum
You marked nomen nudum for speedy deletion. But the article was in fact quite correct. Please take more care. Gdr 15:37:18, 2005-07-31 (UTC)


 * At the time, it was patent nonsense.  ‡   Jarlaxle   20:17, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

No, it wasn't. The revision you marked for speedy deletion was quite correct, as a simple Google search would have told you. Gdr 21:42:33, 2005-07-31 (UTC)


 * Oops. My mistake.  ‡   Jarlaxle   21:50, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome
I don't need to say anything else ... nice to be welcomed, thank you. WP can be a place of overwhelming "cliqueness", where sensible edits are instantly removed by "members" for no legitimate reason other than the poster is not a member. I will work to change that, and my undesireable activities will cease shortly, once I have had enough fun with certain members.

Thanks again. oops --Zippydeedoodah 22:15, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Dambrath
Thank you for the modifications on Dambrath :-) Reply to David Latapie 11:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)


 * No problem.  ‡   Jarlaxle   17:48, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Problems with font
Hi there, I saw your complaint on the am.wiki, I haven't actually tried the solution on that page so I can't vouch for that one, but there is another solution you can link to from the Main Page, just look for the English words "Can't see the font?" and try that method...

If that doesn't work, it could be a Unicode issue with your windows or browser system...

Regards, Codex Sinaiticus 15:54, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks.  ‡   Jarlaxle   23:42, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Temporary Injunction Violation
You have, for the fourth time, violated your temporary injunction as outlined in your RFAr case. You have been blocked for one week and your illegal edits reverted. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 15:47, August 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * I haven't violated anything. It says I can't edit articles, which I haven't. I have edited discussion pages.  ‡   Jarlaxle   21:51, August 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * So this would be a discussion page? As far as I can tell, it's an article. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 23:19, August 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh, I forgot about that. Well, I fixed an interwiki link. Big deal.  ‡   Jarlaxle   23:43, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Sandbot malfunction
That was caused by a page move. Please be aware that Sandbot is a valid bot, and any concerns over hiccups and such should be directed to my user talk page. Thank you. --AllyUnion (talk) 23:10, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

About translating
Hello, you welcomed me the other day and I thank you.

But I have a question about style in the Wikipedia and I didn't found in the Manual of Style, and I don't know where to ask someone else, so you are the one closest.

Right now I'm working on a project to have info about bands from Latin America in the Wikipedia, but I don't know where I should translate and where not, can you explain me?

Should I translate the name of the band? I saw some bands with their names translated, but I also saw others without it translated.

Should I translate the name of the albums and songs of the band? I haven't seen any bands with this translated, but in the articles I made I translated them.

Thank you very much and sorry for bothering, and sorry for forgeting about signing my message. --Nicanor5 23:18, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Revert button
So sue me. Give me a good reason why the revert button is used strictly for vandalism. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 21:04, August 22, 2005 (UTC)


 * Better yet, come on IRC (irc.freenode.net #wikipedia) and discuss it with me face to face. Or would you rather just coward out and post my e-mail address and let :other people fight your wars? Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 21:13, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * And if you read the original post from here, it was being discussed with edit wars, not strictly vandalism. The suggestion is that it is only used for vandalism, but there is no wrong with using it to revert illegal edits. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 21:17, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * And you're not getting the point either. Don't try to turn this around on me. Ever hear of a thing called WP:RFC? Seems to me that's the place to discuss admin abuse. If you've got a problem, go ahead and post it. You're defending yourself by trying to place blame on me, which is a normal human defense mechanism and in a sense expected. However, you also a.) e-mail bombed me, b.) were offensive to multiple users, and c.) have violated a temporary injunction four times. I'm telling you: I'm willing to defend you iff you are willing to cough up an apology. Come on IRC and we'll chat. Don't try to pretend you're the victim in this case, Jarlaxle, because you're not. The only chance you have of avoiding a year-long ban is by getting someone on your side, and I'll be honest: I can help you. Don't be stupid by passing up this opportunity, because it won't save you anything by just playing victim. I'm open to discussion, but only if you show any signs of remorse. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 21:30, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * And if you haven't noticed, your ArbCom case is getting really close to the grindstone. Either show some signs of redemption or I will continue my efforts in seeing you off of this encyclopedia. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 21:32, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
On User talk:Linuxbeak, you wrote:
 * You reverted edits that weren't vandalism. You probably reverted a lot of other people's edits that weren't vandalism as well, but you can get away with it because you're an admin. I'm just a lowly user.

I think you misunderstand how Wikipedia works. As stated on Administrators, "Administrators are not imbued with any special authority, and are equal to everybody else in terms of editorial responsibility." Thus Linuxbeak is not "getting away" with anything. He's just as accountable as anyone else here and is answerable for his actions via RFC and/or Arbitration. (Feel free to instigate a case against him if you feel it is necessary.) Administrators are simply those editors elected by the community to perform housekeeping tasks. Any editor can become an administrator with the support of the community; feel free to nominate yourself at Requests for adminship. After all, you're already listed as a prospective candidate at List of non-admins with high edit counts. —Psychonaut 13:19, 23 August 2005 (UTC)


 * You just want me to start an RFC, Arbitration, or Request for Adminship so you can further humor me.  ‡   Jarlaxle   19:14, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

New and improved
From my talk page:

Lord Voldemort  <font color="#3D9140">ę  How's that for a signature? <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> ‡ <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> Jarlaxle   19:41, August 23, 2005 (UTC)


 * It's not too bad, except I like having a bigger link for my talk page. I'll stick with what I have for the time being, but may opt for something more like your suggestion in the future. Cheers. --Lord Voldemort <sup style="color:#3D9140;">(Dark Mark) 19:45, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Temporary injunction violation #5
JarlaxleArtemis, I note that for the fifth time you are breaking the terms of your temporary injunction on editing articles unrelated to your arbitration proceedings. I have made a note of this on the Administrators' noticeboard. —Psychonaut 09:38, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * As such, you have been blocked for one week, as authorized by the ArbCom. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 14:13, August 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Like I give a damn, you fucking robot. And anyway, moving pages is not a violation of Arbcom. The only thing I violated was editing my own article. <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> ‡  <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> Jarlaxle   22:17, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I wasn't aware that you "owned" any articles here. If you don't intend for your contributions to be edited by others, then you may want to reconsider participating on Wikipedia. —Psychonaut 10:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Also, Linuxbeak is a major hypocrite. I thought that personal attacks were not allowed on Wikipedia. Maybe I was wrong. Look at the block he made on 18:31, August 27, 2005: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Linuxbeak&page=. <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> ‡  <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> Jarlaxle   22:28, August 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * And furthermore, does Linuxbeak have any proof that this lengthened block is authorized by the ArbCom? <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> ‡  <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> Jarlaxle   22:36, August 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Jarlaxle, Linuxbeak was well within his rights to summarize the block reason as "bitch" for Love Virus and reincarnations of it such as the User: with the invisible name. That wasn't a personal attack because the user wasn't a person, it was a highspeed vandalbot. (I helped clean up some of its page creations.) Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 22:48, 27 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Proof? Like, coming from Raul654 himself? Sure. I'll get right to it. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 22:50, August 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * While the arbcom never explicetely stated how Jarlaxle was to be punished for violating the injunction, blocking him for a week is a perfectly reasonable response. &rarr;Raul654 06:40, August 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I see no problem.
 * James F. (talk) 08:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

You know something, Jarlaxle, it's disappointing you didn't take up my offer to hop onto IRC and try to hash it out with me. It's too late now; I'm not going to make so much as an attempt to save your rear from the fire. You needed an ally, Jarlaxle, and I was willing to offer help. Instead, you more or less ignored my proposition. Good luck getting out of this mess solo. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 13:28, August 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * What mess? This is just some stupid website. I don't give a damn if they ban me. You should all be grateful for all that I have contributed. I don't see Linuxbeak contributing a thing. Almost all of his edits are reverts. <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> ‡  <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> Jarlaxle   22:44, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * So Linuxbeak doesn't contribute a thing? I see. Bishonen | talk 10:02, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * JarlaxleArtemis, if you think that Wikipedia is just a stupid website and don't care if you're banned, then you could do us all a favour and simply stop contributing to it. I acknowledge that you have made many helpful edits, but your failure to abide by policies set by the community, and in particular your exposure of Wikipedia and yourself to legal action through your harrassment, libelous remarks, and blatant disregard for copyright, are very disruptive.  You've furthermore demonstrated an inability to learn to abide by these policies and to control your temper.  So honestly, if Wikipedia isn't that important for you, please just stop contributing to it and find another project more commensurate with your skills and abilities. &mdash;Psychonaut 15:00, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Psychonaut has a point. There is no question that you have made more than your share of helpful edits, especially in the realm of fantasy. However, I will once again dispense of the diplomacy and tell you the solid facts: you've made some piss-poor decisions on this encyclopedia. While you have been an active editor, you have also made life incredibly difficult for those who have had to perform damage control on your disruptive edits as well as those who have had to monitor your actions. That's not helping anyone, and time and energy that is wasted making sure you're staying in line could be put to better use creating and editing articles and doing what Wikipedia is all about: making an encyclopedia. I suggest you find yourself a better outlet for both your anger and your abilities, because Wikipedia doesn't need editors who make life difficult. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 17:54, August 29, 2005 (UTC)