User talk:Jeffwang/Archive 3

Renames
If I am requesting to be renamed on any wiki, here is the confirmation. --Jeffwang16 (talk) 15:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC) And here is my confirmation -- Jeffwang  (Talk)   (Contributions)  15:31, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Usurpations
Hello. Could you please stay away from WP:CHU/U, as your edits there are generally not constructive. For example, today's: there exists no need to expedite the first rename you commented on, and as for the one your removed, it is plausible the requester will update their request, so there was no need to blank it. Thanks for your cooperation.  Maxim (talk)  01:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * NO! I WILL NOT STAY AWAY! YOUR MEAN ATTITUDE TO A GOOD FAITH EDIT IS UNACCEPTABLE! BLOCK ME IF YOU WANT, BUT NOW I UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS TO BE BULLIED ON WIKIPEDIA. I WILL STOP DOING IT, BUT I MIGHT AS WELL FIND THE PAGE TO REPORT YOU! AND I WILL YELL BECAUSE YOU ARE HORRIBLE! HORRIBLE!! -- J   (t)  03:33, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And you know what, that is worse than one of Xeno's comment. He apologized, and hopefully you too! -- J  (t)  03:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * After looking at the edit,
 * Sometimes a person makes a series of ineffectual edits that break the page/etc. It is okay for one Wikipedian to ask another to cool down on editing for awhile. Even if the person has good intentions, we want a Wikipedia that is functional. A person editing in good faith can simply start a draft page and/or begin a dialog.
 * The way to respond to Maxim is to ask "How do I contribute constructively to the page?"
 * Remember that Maxim has no more authority over you than you do over him, BUT if a conflict escalates he can ask others to look into the matter, and you can too. You have to work out the issue on one one first. If that doesn't work you use the Dispute resolution
 * In many cases threatening de-adminship is not effective and makes the dispute sound less credible on your end.
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 01:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll be more blunt even if it means you're going to move my comments to Archive 0. It seems you've made some constructive improvements to articles in the past. This is a good thing. However you also have to appreciate wikipedia is a collaborative edit. If people can't make polite suggestions to you without you taking extreme offensive this is a problem since it makes it very difficult to collaborate.
 * We also do have various rules and guidelines intented to guide our content and make it easier to work together. It's often not expected that you will be aware of these rules but when someone makes you aware of them and offers suggestions of how you can follow them then you should think of that as a good thing as as part of learning to work on wikipedia rather then taking offence. If you don't understand the reason for the rules or guideline then you are free to seek clarification either in the talk page of the rule or guideline, at WP:Help desk or from the person who mentioned it to you. Of course if you want to be able to contribute to the maximum potential it's usually a good idea to get some familiarity with the rules. This is particularly true when you are involving yourself on a technical page that people come for help and where you call yourself a clerk which caries with it a degree of authority.
 * Please remember that while it's a good thing you are trying to contribute constructively to wikipedia, if you are making problems, you are still making problems which often it will fall on someone else to fix. In other words, while an edit may be in good faith, it doesn't mean it was a good idea. We all make mistakes, but if someone is making a lot of them, it is resonable to suggest they improve before they contribute further. This is particularly true if those mistakes including removing a request from someone who came seeking help but failed to provide all necessary info at the time (but which they may have provided later). Do remember that in a case like that it's not just the regulars on the page but the person who made the request, who may be even less experienced then you who is may be affected.
 * Finally as WTM has said, remember that an admin has little authority over you. Do note Maxim didn't mention they were an adminstrator nor did they threaten any action. This strongly implies they did not intent their comment to come across as an administrative order which rarely exist on wikipedia, but as a polite suggestion of an experienced wikipedian actively involved in the page who was having to fix some of the problems they felt you were causing. Calling this admin abuse or asking for the person to be desysoped seems a little extreme.
 * We all want you to be able to help make wikipedia better. From your history, it appears you have potential to do so. You just have to be willing to learn how to do so in the cases where you don't already know and be willing to accept suggestions and constructive criticisms without taking extreme offense.
 * Nil Einne (talk) 02:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice.
I discussed the notice you posted on my talk page with an administrator, and having reviewed the policy in question, I can see where a reasonable mind could have the concern you mentioned, but I was assured by the administrator that the context of my editing behavior and userspace makes the issue clear, so that there is no policy violation. I have removed the notice (by reverting your edits to my talk page) as the template said I could do. Thanks for visiting my talk page to express your concerns. Any administrator looking on here or there is welcome to provide further perspective on the issue. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 04:04, 26 June 2011 (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. MSJapan (talk) 21:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Censorship user pages
Two pages in your userspace have been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Miscellany for deletion/Jeffwang and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of these pages during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Black Kite (t) (c) 21:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)