User talk:Jrfoldes/Archives/2010/July

You Can't Do That On Television
I have reverted your edits to this article because you inexplicably added back years old uncited content (from July 2007!), removed valid categories, and added a fairly unneeded chart to list cast members, some of whom only appeared on the series once. Please be aware that Wikipedia isn't a fansite and we cannot cover every detail about every show. I see you've had issue with this article before, so I will advise you to discuss any changes you'd like to institute on the talk page before editing the article once again. Further, edit summaries are rather helpful to the those of us who can't read minds. Thank you.  Pinkadelica ♣  00:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes last time your moderator removed all my references, and then went back and removed all pages and edits under the guise there was no edits. If it's just the one cast member who only appeared once then I'll just remove him and replace the chart. I'm not creating a fan-site, more a site for informatics entries like it should be as per your requirements.Jrfoldes (talk) 00:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * There you go as per your request I have removed the individuals who were in one episode. Let me know if there are further concerns. Jrfoldes (talk) 00:33, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have a moderator as I am a singular person. I asked you politely to talk about the changes you'd like to make before making them. You have blatantly ignored that request by reinstating those changes yet again. I see you also took the liberty of undoing redirects to biographies that fail notability standards. That is not acceptable. As before, your behavior is becoming disruptive. I strongly suggest you stop editing topics related to this series for the time being until you have a better grasp on Wikipedia policies.  Pinkadelica ♣  00:38, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * First I think you should be a little more respectful, I did offer to work together. I did go to the talk page, and actually I think we are on it right now, so I did not disrespect you. If you are not a moderator then what right do you have to go and make changes and enforce Wikipedia law? You also never mentioned anything about biographies and many of those were on Wikipedia long before I jumped in. What issue do you have with the chart? it's clean and makes things easier for the reader. Also that last sentence of yours seems like a threat. Jrfoldes (talk) 00:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to debate the content you're attempting to add yet again as it is apparent you've been told why it's not acceptable. The content is unenyclopedic. Period. Further, no one here has to be a moderator to enforce "Wikipedia law". Anyone who knows policy can enforce it. Finally, my suggesting that you stop editing a topic that you obviously feel strongly about until you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia procedures and policies was not even near a threat. In fact, I'll bet you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who even thinks it remotely resembles a threat, but nice try.  Pinkadelica ♣  01:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No need my uncle's a lawyer and two of my friends are finishing up law school, they all agree it's a threat. Jrfoldes (talk) 01:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

ANI Notice
Since you are back and at the same disruptive behavior all over again, you are also back at ANI all over again. It is long past you got over this obsession and stopped your edit warring, inappropriate reverting of AfD consensus, and continued spamming of the YCDOTV article with fan-sites and unsourced OR and BLP violations. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 00:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 00:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually I think you need to start practicing what you preach. So you want to be childish let's see if can put you on ANI notice, as you have been deliberatly harassing me.Jrfoldes (talk) 02:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC) Ambox notice.svg There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

Blocked
You have been blocked 3 days for persistent edit warring and harassment. (blocked by –MuZemike 07:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC))

You may contest this block by adding the text below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Only Warning
If you again start your attempts at undoing the redirects, based on consensus and policy, and undoing the clean up of the You Can't Do That On Television articles, you will be reported to ANI yet again. You've had more than enough warnings from myself and others above, and in your being blocked, to get that you are being disruptive. This is NOT a fansite for the series, if you want to make one, go over to Wikia. Articles here will follow Wikipedia guidelines and policies, and your continued attempts to circumvent them is only going to end up getting you permanently blocked. You seem to be capable of good editing when you stay away from those articles, so please do yourself a favor and head all the well given advice above to just stop trying to work on articles where you are clearly incapable of being neutral. --  AnmaFinotera (talk  ~ contribs ) 22:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Um I wasn't in the You Can't Do That On Television article today. I was in the Amyas Godfrey article earlier today but that's only because I wanted to verify how I did something. If for some reason that went up I might have hit the save button in error, possibly out of force of habit. On another note can you please refrain from being rude and demeaning. First the Amyas Godfrey article I wrote is neutral (if that is what we are talking about), second I'm not in this to create a fan site. With respect you do need to talk and communicate with others in a more respectful tone, before you piss off the wrong person. Maybe if you done so to begin with instead of behaving like the Wiki-police, and offer proper advice on how to make articles to the standard, we wouldn't be at each other's throats. Jrfoldes (talk) 00:45, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I said articles, as in plural. It includes all of the cast articles you have continually tried to revert back from redirects. Please refrain from insulting anyone's intelligence by claiming you did it by accident or trying to suddenly act as if you have attempted to correct your behavior at all. You have done the same revert no less than 3 times since this began, it is hard to believe it was just an accident. You also received plenty of warning, polite and stern, over the last few months. Its all above for the world to read (or in your talk's history if you decide to erase it). You are the one who has continuously ignored it to try to get your own way, and made absolutely no effort to "make articles to the standard." And please don't try to blame me for your disruptiveness. See your rejected unblock notice above. It doesn't fly here. Take responsibility for your own actions. You are the one who committed the actions noted in the ANI threads, you are the one who was warned by numerous editors about it, you are the one who choose to just keep doing it over and over again. We aren't at each others throats. I could care less about you beyond wishing to end the inappropriate behaviors you have committed on those articles. And FYI, some folks consider stating something like "before you piss off the wrong person" to be an implied threat, though I'm sure you didn't mean it that way. --  AnmaFinotera  (talk  ~ contribs ) 01:03, 17 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Anma seriously you really have some issues that need to be addressed. Although I have spoken to other editors, they have been professional and helpful whereas you have been incredibly insulting, plus your behavior is considered harassment (even if Wikipedia defines it differently, I know and trained in these matters and this does qualify, and at the end of the day that will overrule any website). Somehow you always seem to be on top of things should a change be made on the YCDTOTV page. Which leads me to think you are indeed watching the page, and you are probably the original author and a huge fan of the show, and you don't like the idea of someone else coming in and editing or adding on to your work. I'm sorry but you are behaving like a bully. You're right my comment was not a threat, but it is a warning not necessarily for Wikipedia but for the real world. At some point someone will put their foot down and say enough is enough this behavior is inappropriate and there will be consequences. You can't act like this it is called a power trip. Also think about it for a second if you look at our past disputes it normally is because I have made multiple changes on multiple pages, so maybe the Amyas "update" was just a small snafu as I did not touch anything else. No one has insulted nor intended to insult your intelligence, but you are on the rather stubborn and defensive side of this matter that you refuse to see the gray. I have told you before to leave me alone, and yet you persist in going after me, again that's harassment. Jrfoldes (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The editing history shows clearly that I am not the original editor who created the article, nor the one who wrote the article. Random insults and false claims really do not help in discourse. You have, in fact, not asked me to "leave" you alone, but if you want to play the victim and make such claims, that is your choice. And your training is irrelevant here. Wikipedia's definition is the only one that matters here, and it quite frankly is not harassment by any sense of the word in the real world either. The articles are on my watchlist, of course, because of the issues caused by you. I came to them because of a call for help by another editor because of your edits. Trying to claim that there is some nefarious purpose is ridiculous and seems to be a rather poor attempt to somehow make yourself seem like a victim. Its funny how you continue to ignore that I am not the only editor who has reverted your, nor am I the only editor to warn you. You were also blocked by a neutral admin who simply looked at the actual editing behaviors and concluded YOU, not I, was acting inappropriately. You were not unblocked for the same reason. Thus far, no less than half a dozen editors have tried to correct your behaviors. Your unhealthy focus on "me" is not helpful either. The "Amyas" update was not a snafu, as there was nothing for you to update in undoing it. And you have not, in fact, told me to leave you alone, but as you have now requested it, I will not bother responding here again. I will simply reiterate that any further disruption will be reported to administrators, again. Have a good evening. --  AnmaFinotera (talk  ~ contribs ) 02:24, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry I just need to point out that in this case requesting to stop the behavior is the same thing as telling. I requested you stop harassing me, however you persisted. I will be working with J Greb as at least he's shown professionalism and is willing to help, I invite other admins and editors to help and offer their expertise, and hope things can be changed and altered in a mature manner and discussed to form a consensus. Taking power trips is certainly not going to gain an individual any fans or friends. Yes this time I have reposted the articles, but they should be discussed first. Oh and I want to point out that the Adam Reid article was already up long before I came. Yes I made a few alterations, but Anma still removed it in order to spite me. Jrfoldes (talk) 02:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Bullet point 2¢ from an editor not involved with the article set in question and based on looking at this page including the last block: - J Greb (talk) 02:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Baiting another editor is never, ever a good thing.
 * If consensus has resulted in article(s) being deleted or redirected, leave them that way unless:
 * You can show that consensus has changed without attacking editors that disagree with your position. or
 * You can show that an article without the issues that resulted in a merge or deletion that meets Wikipedia's standards can be put in place. This can be done in a sandbox but should not just be done to "save" the old version.
 * As a general observation: Returning to a a method of editing that resulted in a block shortly after the block naturally expired is a quick way to get blocked again.
 * It is fairly easy to prevent accidental save - setting the preferences to require and edit summary. This would require a hitting enter twice to save without an summary. A side benefit is you're reminded to actually provide a summary.
 * Thank you J very informative and I will keep those in mind. Although I know the last one applies to me, I'm just having difficulty understanding your third bullet point, would you be able to clarify? Anma I highly advise you follow the first two points as you have unnecessarily remove references, then deleted the page in the name of no references, thus I reposted. I'm assuming that was meant by "baiting".  Second at no time did we ever reach consensus as you just came in and removed things instead of working with me to get this right. J thank you for your professionalism and take the time to give your 2 cents, I hoist a goblet to your name.Jrfoldes (talk) 03:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Edit warring over the redirected article. Based on the information at hand that was part of what percipitated the block. That gives you three options:
 * Leave the articles alone, period.
 * Work through the article talk pages and the relevant project talk pages to show that the content of the removed/redirected meets the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. But accept that the consensus may not change and that you may have to drop the topic for a protracted time.
 * If you do absolutely have to edit or look at an old version of the articles, be very careful of what you are doing.
 * If you are "just looking" make sure you don't "save" the page. And check immediately with the redirects in those cases, it gives you the option to self revert with an apology in the summary.
 * If you are editing to fix links or spelling, leave an accurate edit summary of the changes you made.
 * - J Greb (talk) 03:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Beauty I think I understand. If I have any questions I'll be sure to ask you.Jrfoldes (talk) 03:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay I think I fixed what Anma was complaining about. I also asked that consensus be reached first. Would you care to review? Jrfoldes (talk) 02:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

You were warned. This is the only remark I will make here, as required by policy where you want me to post here or not. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --  AnmaFinotera (talk  ~ contribs ) 03:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't you say you were not going to post here anymore? Also I believe I am well within the guidelines as posted by J Greb and that each page would be discussed until consensus is reached. You are well out of line at this point Anma. Discuss it on the individual pages. Jrfoldes (talk) 03:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * He's required to post that notice, Foldes. --erachima talk 03:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Jrfoldes, if you please. Either way they gave me their word (I was under the impression Anma is a she, but could be wrong) they would no longer be here. I'm working with someone as stated above and Anma has no business being here anymore, as the situation is being handled in a professional manner. Jrfoldes (talk) 04:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)