User talk:Mhannigan

Attribution of recent climate change
Please see Talk:Attribution_of recent_climate_change William M. Connolley (talk) 21:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

False Sockpuppet Accusation
Because User:EvanBlass forgot to post this, I am now:



You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/mhannigan. Thank you. Just an administrative notification. Thanks. -- L235 - Talk Ping when replying 23:55, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

For the record, I won this. Mhannigan (talk) 04:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Accusation Scandle
Mhannigan, are you laughing about this as much as I am? :) I have no ill will toward EvanBlass (even though he once threatened me on Wikipedia), but the fact he's so insistent we're the same person is hilarious to me. ;) Wikigeek2 (talk) 08:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikigeek2 I sure am! I had my first really good laugh in a while, actually, when I saw I was charged with Sock Puppetry. It's the most benign sounding thing anyone could ever charge someone with. Who comes up with this stuff? All I could picture was logging into Wikipedia and being greeted by the King, who with an thick English accent says, ''Michael Hannigan! You have been accused on one count of thock puppetry! What say you on this count of thock puppetry, Mithhhhhhter Hannigan?'' EvanBlass Threatened me a while back through email. I called him out once on one of his "Leaks that wasn't a leak". And he immediately fired back by blocking me and then threatening to kill me while my kids watched. He threatened to go to their school, too. He's one sick puppy. He's been hammering me with emails, thinking I am you. I think the count is up to around 200 by now. This guy is totally convinced that we are the same person. He's been chasing this thing for at least a couple of months with his "friend" Lixxx235 and because I made an edit, he thinks it's proof. He lives in his own reality. Here is one of yesterday's emails from him.

''On Dec 12, 2014 1:51 AM, "Evan Blass" EvanBlass wrote:

''LOL, you must think that the investigators don't actually read your comments.

''Evan, stop this with the mean spirited allegations. This is absolutely silly - you are making a fool of yourself.

''Mean-spirited allegations, like calling someone a fool? Or accusing a disabled man with chronic pain of being a drug abuser -- with no evidence? I'd be willing to place a wager that you will be found guilty in this investigation now. How does that saying go, "he who doth protest too much"? That last edit is so inflammatory I want it to stand without any rebuttal. I really know how to rile you up -- you're like a Pavlovian dog.

''P.S. My memory must be getting really bad, because either I am forgetting this threat you keep alluding to, or you are using some of that hyperbole you are so famous for. And remember, you are the one under investigation, not me. Only your deranged emails to me regarding this incident are relevant to the Wikimedia execs.''

and another good one:

''On Dec 11, 2014 11:54 PM, "Evan Blass" EvanBlass wrote:

''...But even if not, I will escalate this issue to the Wikimedia Foundation with much longer, detailed explanations, and copies of our entire email history -- along with your eBay scams, purchased followers, and offensive Tweets. Thankfully, Wikipedia gets lets democratic and more authoritarian (and less tolerable of bullshit) as you move up the food chain.'' Mhannigan (talk) 19:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

PS. Have you noticed how nearly impossible it is to format a Wikipedia page now if you don't do it every day? It's nuts. I used to be able to do it - now I can't get a quote (or anything for that matter) to format consistently. Mhannigan (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Wow, this is really scary stuff. The funny part of it is, though, I had actually gotten bored of editing the article and had given it up until EvanBlass filed the investigation. If he wanted me to go away, this sure wasn't the way to do it! :) Wikigeek2 (talk) 09:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikigeek2 Don't forget, in his mind we are the same person. So, from his perspective, you did edit the article after he poked and prodded me, all but forcing me to make an edit. Does that make sense? I'm starting to think I'm "simple". My mind doesn't do that much work in day to day operations.Mhannigan (talk) 02:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Talk2

OH SNAP, the CheckUser test was completed and it failed to match us! OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE WE'RE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE! LOL (cc: EvanBlass) Wikigeek2 (talk) 06:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Oh no! I think that is bad! Didn't Evan say that it the technical evidence shows that we cannot be the sane person, that thusly that proves we must be?Mhannigan (talk) 08:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it is a little disturbing. Not just how far Evan took it, but that he got a handful of people to say that our BEHAVIOR was the sane based basically on us both being human and making edits on Wikipedia. I'm going to coin a new WP policy to go next to No Chilling Effects. It will be "No Lord of the Flies"Mhannigan (talk) 08:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

[Inappropriate comment by me removed] Mhannigan (talk) 09:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Mike V, I removed my comment because after  Mike V  mentioned it, I read it and realized it was every bit as rude as he had indicated. He had every right to be upset by it. I was really out of line. What I wrote was out of some level of anger that I don't carry around and should not have had at the moment. I sincerely apologize to Mike V  for writing it. Mhannigan (talk) 04:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Initiation of dispute resolution
Courtesy notification to inform you of involvement in this discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Evan_Blass — Preceding unsigned comment added by EvanBlass (talk • contribs) 13:08, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't care/really couldn't care less.Mhannigan (talk) 13:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Conduct Concerns
Hello,

I recently saw the message that you had left for me. Being an admin forces you to develop a thick skin so I'm not really offended, but this style of communication is not appropriate for Wikipedia. It's a collaborative website that expects users to treat each other in a civil manner and to avoid using personal attacks. I hope that you will read the links I've provided above and reflect on your previous comments. As I cautioned in my previous message, if this behavior continues it's likely the issue will be brought to the attention of other administrators. Unfortunately, this may result in possible sanctions. I hope that this won't be necessary and that we can move beyond this incident towards peace and constructive contributions. If you have any questions, please feel free to let me know. Best, Mike V  •  Talk  19:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC) P
 * Mike V, Plese read up on chilling effects. No more threats from you, please, or I will be forced to take action. You don't consider calling my behavior "childish" to be a personal attack? You don't consider your disparaging remarks about private emails to be a personal attack? Your repeated threats against me are a clear violation of policy. I will not tolerate it. I was personally attacked over and over in this SPI that I had absolutely nothing to do with. If you genuinely wish to make this a better place, you need to focus on the source of all this - I have been dragged through the mud and harassed by you and others. Being an admin does NOT give you the right to threaten people. Being an admin, you have much more at stake here and really should be more concerned with what is "right" than trying to manipulate my behavior. Everything up to and including your last message is a threat meant to control my behavior. I have been brutally attacked here, starting with the SPI. You are trying to drag me back into the myre with Blass' most recent "bad faith" allegation. Timing is everything. Play your politics with someone else. I've been here a long time, I contribute to Wikipedia, and it wasn't until this baseless SPI that admins started to attack me - even when, to their dismay, the technical evidence proved that there was no truth whatsoever to it.


 * Remember, I was charged with something when I was doing nothing, and I was presumed guilty, even AFTER being provOed innocent (not to mention the other user, whom I do not know). This is a time when admins should be saying "Mike, sorry you were dragged through this", not "I just saw this, and BTW, you're in big trouble if you offend an admin". How "offended" do you think I am that every admin who had something to say about the SPI was of the "opinion" that I mist be guilty? If Evan is your friend, that's fine, but don't exercise that allegiance in the form of threats to me, please. This "peaceful" environment starts with Admins. I was minding my own business and following the rules. And I believe that you think you are doing the right thing, but take some time to realy reflect on what I'm saying. You can be offended by it or take it as constructive criticism. I would suggest the latter. If you have any questions let me know.


 * If you plan on taking any action regarding my account - if it's warrented do it. But threatening to do it serves only one purpose - to change my behavior through intimidation.Mhannigan (talk) 20:31, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * if I am reading this correctly, you are responding to a so-called "threat" from him -- really, just an acknowledgement that your conduct on Wikipedia, in edits and comments, is not appropriate behavior -- with your own threat to take some undisclosed action; I would consider this a helpful warning from someone whom you just viciously attacked in a comment even Wikigeek2 called inappropriate. P.S. I am not friends with Mike V. I am not friends with Huon. I am not friends with Josve05a. I'm only friendly with Lixxx235 after meeting him in IRC and getting a lot of useful assistance. So your assertion that there is some cabal out to get you is simply off-base. All these experienced users and admins are looking at your activity through neutral eyes, and they see someone who is not abiding by the standards of conduct that Wikipedia operates upon. EvanBlass (talk) 01:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * EvanBlass, why don't you just stop harassing me - stop filing SPI's, and mediation requests, and complaints. Stop trying to stir things up and instigate misunderstandings Wikipedia is about content. If you have an issue with any of the content that is a result of one or more of my edits, please take it up on the page related to that content. That's really all you have to do. It will work itself out. If, on the other hand, you wish to discuss something with me that questions something about my integrity or character, you have my email - feel free to use it as you have so many times in the past. I fell for it - I made the mistake of allowing you to cajole me into responding to you here with the SPI. Wikipedia is not the platform for either of us to air dirty laundry. I'll be happy to humor you in private as time permits.  Thank you. Mhannigan (talk) 03:13, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * if you truly felt that this was a private matter, you would not be grudge editing my Wikipedia bio. You made up an allegation of drug abuse out of thin air, for instance -- against a person with a debilitating disease who requires them just to walk, no less. There is no explaining that away, and it should be adjudicated as publicly as the shameful accusation was made. The fact that you are harassing other users by way of personal attacks (calling me a fool, a knucklehead, referring to me as Blassmeister, telling me to shut it, telling an admin to grow up, to "grow a pair") only further cements the need for escalation of the issue of your conduct as it relates to your content and commenting. To present yourself as the victim of harassment is a disingenuous claim that has been soundly rejected by the few outside observers who have taken an interest in this case thus far; Wikipedia is all about consensus building, so you should take no issue with my attempt to do just that. EvanBlass (talk) 03:32, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * EvanBlassEdits were made to add completeness to the article. There were no allegations of drug addiction. There was only mention of what you, yourself stated. That you were blacklisted at CVS pharmacies in Pilly and Allentown. There is no judgement passed, nor is it trying to be passed.  I believe that to be relevant because, according to your argument, such policies make it difficult for people with such afflictions to get the treatment they need.  The "blacklisting" of a any patient from pharmacies based on arbitrary parameters makes it impossible for some to get the proper treatment.  I'm sorry if you feel that being "blacklisted" is something shameful.  That isn't the impression I received from reading your statements about it. As I understand it, the "blacklisting" policies are a problem with the pharmacies, that needs to be corrected.  If I misunderstood or misinterpreted the spirit of what you were trying to convey, feel free to edit the content accordingly. Mhannigan (talk) 09:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * EvanBlassIf you have an issue with any of the content that is a result of one or more of my edits, please take it up on the page related to that content. If you wish to discuss something that relates to my integrity or character, or anything personal, please use email - Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform - I'll be happy to humor you in private as time permits.Mhannigan (talk) 03:44, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Please stop leaving messages like Seasons Greetings and pictures of cats on my Talk page. EvanBlass (talk)


 * EvanBlass, If you have an issue with any of the content that is a result of one or more of my edits, please take it up on the page related to that content. If you wish to discuss something that relates to my integrity or character, or anything personal, please use email - Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform - I'll be happy to humor you in private as time permits. Mhannigan (talk) 09:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


 * "There were no allegations of drug addiction" Actually, you said point blank in this edit summary, "More specifics on drug abuse allegation." You just made that up, out of thin air, and it's the very definition of a grudge edit. EvanBlass (talk) 22:29, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * EvanBlass, You might be confusing "comments" with "content". Comments are an optional way to provide the reason for an edit, but aren't meant to be part of the article content. The choice of wording of a comment does not dictate whether the associated content is accurate. By design, comments cannot be changed, so there is no point in discussing them specifically. If you have an issue with any of the content that is a result of one or more of my edits, please take it up on the page related to that content. If you wish to discuss something that relates to my integrity or character, or anything personal, please use email - Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform - I'll be happy to humor you in private as time permits.Mhannigan (talk) 01:35, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * As much as I enjoy being humored, when I do engage you over email about this topic, there is little humor in your responses. You'll no doubt recall the single-line email I sent asking about the drug abuse edit:
 * "Why did you make that edit, Mikey?'" (Since you outed yourself above -- "...with an thick English accent says, Michael Hannigan!" -- I see no harm in using your real name from now on).
 * Your response, redacted here to remove the profanity, makes such interaction a bit difficult:
 * "'You want me to make more edits? Then shut your [redacted] mouth. It's that mouth of yours that got you in trouble in the first place. You have been begging me to edit your page for months, [redacted]. Now you have a taste of what an actual Wikipedia edit by me is, so you won't confuse it with all other things you accuse me of doing with your precious page. You know, I gave you every opportunity to appreciate my gracious gesture of petitioning for protection of your page, but you're either [redacted] stupid or [redacted] stupid.'" EvanBlass (talk) 01:53, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * EvanBlass, is there a reason why you want to keep posting selected excerpts from my private emails publicly? The reason I suggest private discussion is to not litter Wikipedia with our pointless arguing. What will pasting it here accomplish? I've responded to well over 100 of your emails last month alone - more than any other person with whom I have cotact. If that isn't sufficient to convince you that I respond to your emails, I'm aftaid you can't be convinced. In any case, Wikipedia is not the place for resolving your personal curiosity. If you have an issue with any of the content that is a result of one or more of my edits, please take it up on the page related to that content. If you wish to discuss something that relates to my integrity or character, or anything personal, please use email - Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform - I'll be happy to humor you in private as time permits. Mhannigan (talk) 17:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * This was a pointed response to your continuous suggestion that you are willing to humor me over email -- I was simply pointing out that, in fact, you seem unable to have a reasonable email discussion. I have many more examples, if you don't concur. And you'll notice that you have posted several of my own emails on this very Talk page, just to have a laugh with Wikigeek2, it would seem. As a wise man once said: Read, read, read. EvanBlass (talk) 17:46, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * EvanBlass, please don't take offense to what was said between two people falsly accused by you of substantial policy violations. It wasn't meant as a personal attack against you. It wasnt addressed to you and it wasn't meant to be read by you. Please understand, we are two people that were accused of being one. We really don't know each other, and therefore we have no way to discuss the investigation privately. In this case, discussion between two entirely different people of being accused of being one person necessitated the use of a Wikipedia talk page as the most "private" way we could communicate. It would otherwise have been a private discussion. Please respect that. My exchanges with the other accused is public only by necessity and is not open for discussion as far as I am concerned. Thusly, you should disregard such communication between the two accused parties. However, if you have an issue with any of the content that is a result of one or more of my edits, I encourage you to bring it to bring it up for discussion on the content page. If you wish to discuss my integrity or character, or anything personal, please use email - Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform - I'll be happy to humor you in private as time permits. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. Mhannigan (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments on User talk:Lixxx235 were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved by another user. In the future you can use the "New section" link in the top right. For more details see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. -- L235 - Talk Ping when replying 03:53, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the third section in a row...
... but it's probably not a good idea to send holiday greetings right below someone else's holiday greetings ;) Especially on like five different people :) Happy holidays! -- L235 - Talk Ping when replying 04:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * L235 . Oh. Sorry. I thouht it was like being nice to people and wishing then well for the new year, etc. I seem to have a special knack for doing things that aggravate people on Wikipedia even when trying to be really nice. I just learned how to do it and got too excited. Mhannigan (talk) 04:23, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

December 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- L235 - Talk Ping when replying 22:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry. This regarding . -- L235 - Talk Ping when replying 22:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Psychogenic shivering moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Psychogenic shivering, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Britishfinance (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Aerial display


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Aerial display requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Veggies (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Aerial display for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aerial display is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Aerial display until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Veggies (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Are you ever planning on creating an MFD discussion page?
It's the third time you add the MFD template without actually nominating the page for deletion. The MFD has instructions on how to do that. I'll give you half an hour, otherwise I'll just revert this again as an incomplete nomination. If you need help with this let me know, although I can tell you the end result will very likely be to keep it, unless you have a very strong rationale for deletion.

Cheers. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:58, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Not likely since I have no idea how to do it. The Wikipedia elite make it extremely difficult to make any changes whatsoever with their insane labyrinth of rules. Maybe you could just create that for me and tell me what to fill in. Thanks.

PS. Why would my rationale have to be stronger than any other rationale for deleting an essay?

Please read "A cautionary note" under the Snowball Clause you threatened me with. "Likely" isn't good enough for you to vandalize my edits. You guys have a "clause" for everything. Those clauses are there for individuals to use as their own guidance, NOT to be weaponised into tools to get what you want.

Mhannigan (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Looks like I've been blocked from editing by the Wikipedia elite with absolutely no reason given. I'm sure this violates chilling effects or one of the 10,000 other Wikipedia rules used against people you don't like. Unfortunately, those rules don't apply to admins. Mhannigan (talk) 21:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You have a clean block log, no one blocked you for anything. &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 10:20, 26 July 2019 (UTC)