User talk:Rockpocket/Archive 6

E-mail
E-mail for you, Rockpocket. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks!
Greetings Rockpocket and thank you for adopting me! I will probably have lots of questions for you in the future, but for now do you have any tips as to how I can get better with this editing code Wikipedia uses? I think I have the basics but I don’t really know how to use the templates or how to work with photographs. Thanks again! S.dedalus 23:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Rockpocket playing with legal matters
The Irish Government has been informed of the terms used and of your edits regarding The British isles. This is not just a matter of opinion but a legal matter as stated in the edits regarding the Irish Government's standing. All forms of media are under scrutiny by the Irish Government and the Irish Embasy of London for abuses of the term "British Isles" referring to Ireland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billthekid77 (talk • contribs)
 * There goes my plans of a weekend in Dublin, then. Will they be sending the Garda round? Seriously, though, i have no problem with an explanation of the Irish Government's position on the term. However, the lead paragraph of the article is not the place for it, and it must adhere to Wikipedia's neutral language policies. Oh, and while it doesn't bother me, be aware of WP:LEGAL - some editors would not take too kindly to suggestions that you may have precipitated legal action against them. Rockpock  e  t  08:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The user Frankdeano has no relationship to me..and is not a WPSOCK....before you start making false accusations, you should get some evidence...also..there seems to be a lot of people favouring the account of clearly stating the Irish position on this. Billthekid 06/11/2006
 * Hello Bill. If you read my message carefully, you will notice I purposely avoided accusing you of sock puppetry. I pointed out the possible co-incidence that could be interpreted as such (see WP:SOCK), noted that it could easily be confirmed one way or the other (see WP:RCU). I then advised that if you had been using two accounts then it would be better to stop now. As for evidence: I could request a CheckUser which would settle the matter definitively, but i would rather simply inform you of how it appears and let you proceed as you choose. If you have not been using two accounts then you have nothing to worry about, however, If the co-incidental co-operative editing continues to give the appearance of avoiding 3RR, then it will inevitably be checked out and the evidence provided one way or the other.


 * Irrespective of the number of people favouring your position (even though i can only find you and doing the reverting currently), the content you wish to ad is simply not appropriate per WP:LEAD. As i have said before, I have no dispute with you adding the information, but please don't add it as the second sentence of an article. Thank you.  Rockpock  e  t  05:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

More Questions
Hi, thanks for all your help with the editing code. Looks like I’ve got lot’s to learn! ;-) I recently did some editing to the Works section in the John Coolidge Adams page, and in doing so ran into a string of commands obviously used to space text on the page. Like this! I figured out how to use it from context, but I wonder if you could tell me what page to look at to learn more about this. I couldn’t find this addressed in WP:EDIT. Also what is “my watchlist” for? Thanks! S.dedalus 23:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

My Rfa
If you have questions, feel free to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! Essjay ( Talk )  06:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Rockpock  e  t  06:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Congrats
Cognrats on your successful admission to the admin club. I am glad you didn't take my mild opposition personally. I wish you well with your Wikipedia endeavors.

Ludahai 07:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Congrats! Thanks for the pretty flower, too, I shall treasure it always. :) Daveydw ee b ( chat/patch ) 08:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Good to see that you are now an admin. Hope it doesn't turn you into a mad axe (read delete) weilding madman :D -Localzuk(talk) 09:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No more of a madman than he is already. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 00:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Where to start... Bite Back, Vlasak or Avery... *sharpens axe* ;)  Rockpock  e  t  00:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Enjoy the vegetarian paté. This time next year, you'll be begging for the vegan version. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! Jayjg (talk) 14:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on your new mop and bucket! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 07:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! May you wield the mop with grace and equanimity. ≈ jossi ≈ t &bull; @ 15:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Contratulations on your RFA Rockpocket! (I'm Miri, not Mike!) -- M P er el ( talk 04:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Typical! I thank the wrong person. My apologies ;) Rockpock  e  t  07:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations Rockpocket. No, it was a pleasure to put in a word, since you were already in my sights at User:Blnguyen/RfA. So it's a pleasure to see you get through. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Help
Hi,

Since you're offerering to help:) I'm trying to install navigational aides but haven't had any success getting my monoskin to work. Any suggestions? --Duke of Duchess Street 01:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations
Nevermind, my monobook seems to be working now. Thanks for your note, my opposition wasn't based on anything personal I just thought some of the things that a few other people raised might be a problem. Congratulations on your adminship! --Duke of Duchess Street 02:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Thank You
You're welcome. =) —Lantoka ( talk 08:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on your promotion, and you're very welcome! Best of luck, Merovingian ※ Talk 22:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Also, congratulations on your promotion. :-) -- Hús  ö  nd  20:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Late Congratulations
Hi Rockpocket! and congratulations on becoming an administrator! No one deserves it more then you. I’m just sorry I didn’t see your request in time to add my support. Cheers S.dedalus 01:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Dalbury's RfA
My RfA passed with a tally of 71/1/0. Thank you very much for your support. I hope that my performance as an admin will not disappoint you. Please let me know if you see me doing anything inappropriate. -- Donald Albury 03:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Animal rights
You are wholly correct. I apologise.--Anthony.bradbury 18:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I appreciate - in the company of likeminded people - that one can say things one might normally say. You are a strong editor, Tony, and I know at least one current administrator is pondering nominating you for adminship. If this is something you would be interested in, and if I may offer additional advice, it would be to be careful of associating too closely with DocEss. He too is a skillful editor, but clearly has problems working in a manner the community finds civilly acceptable. While his zeal is admirable, WP is not the place for zealots. Rockpock  e  t  02:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

A Good Admin
Rockpocket:

Thank you for being a "true to heart" Good Admin who genuinely helps, edits and, without the overinflated ego, guides in a subtle welcoming way... Just a sincere word of thank you...

Lcnj 21:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for de-vandalizing my talk page. And congrats on becoming an admin!  Nrets 02:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, Nrets. Let me know if you ever need administrative assistance. Rockpock  e  t  07:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Help on Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University
Dear Rockpocket, I am user riveros11 /avyakt7. I am contacting you because you are an Admin who had some connection with Jossi. In Jossi's talk page you will see the following:  Dear Jossi,

Thank you for clarifying in the article. I need to point out that at least 3 days were given for a final attempt to provide reliable resources. Note "3 day drill" in the talk page for every single part of the article. Needless to say, the previous editors have never produce a single reliable resource. User TalkAbout and the IP address ending in .244 (user known as .244) were the main editors of that article. Since previous notification was given, when do you believe I should erase those parts without reliable resources? Thank You, avyakt7 21:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

"Three days is quite minimal. Be generous and wait a few more days. You can place a note that 'unless sources are provided by such and such date, the material in secton X and sction Y will be removed.' That way it is transparent and you give notice. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 21:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)"

Admin Rockpocket, I have been waiting until November 18 to make the changes. User:195.82.106.244 In the meantime was blocked and he insisted in changing the page without previous discussion. I have not heard from Jossi about this. His support is required in this case. There is an "outtside" user who has been watching the page his user name is Sethie, you may obtain unbiased information from him.

There is a need for a prompt action on this. In a way I am defending my faith, Brahma Kumaris from ex members who started this article to begin with the only aim of defaming a fine religious movement. The page has been changed by user .244 and all the suggestions by admin Jossi and tags, have been removed by this user.

Thank you for your attention to this and certainly look forward to your reply in my talk page. Best Wishes, AVYAKT7 /Riveros11 72.91.4.91 19:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Replied on editor's talkpage. Rockpock  e  t  07:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Jaber
Hi Rockpocket:

A friendly note to report Jaber. After I gave him a friendly warning to address our dispute on the discussion page of the article List of Lebanese people as I am doing to obtain consensus, he rudely lashed out in a vicious personal attack and threat telling me "Never ever warn me. Know who you are talking to" and, without discussion on the article page nor consensus, he ignored my dispute and played the second party and the jury and insisted on making his changes without consensus. In order to avoid Edit war, perhaps you can coach better than me in civil communication on Wikipedia (something I had to learn the heard way) and encourage him not to be the sole judge of a dispute and do what he wants withour consensus. Thanks for your time. Lcnj 02:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know you are on "wikileave", so I hope you will be able to address this when you return tomorrow (or perhaps an eavesdropping Admin may be able to move to block this person before you return). Jaber has continued his uncivil disruptive mass delition and has continued with Personal attack which now has become flagrant and extremely offensive . I tried what I can to remain civil but it is getting to be extremely hard so I move from just reporting him for a warning to an actual Request to block him for violating Wikipedia's Personal attack.
 * Rockpocket: I welcome you back when you read this message.  I think I gave Jaber the undeserved benefit of the doubt when I simply requested a temporary block for a Personal attack. A friendly Admin Ars Scriptor issued him a simple "warning to block" because I did not include Jaber's prior violations.  If this was Jaber's first time, then a simple temporary block or a warning would have been appropriate... However, by reviewing "just a little section" of his diruptive history on Wikipedia, I was horrified by the dark history.  He obviously has not changed nor learned from his indefinite block.  As recently as last month, he was blocked indefinitely for spewing hatred, insults and unconscionable racist remarks against another user Ryulong.   .  I am not sure how he got unblocked but his recent violations of the three revert rule, his violation of the Personal attack rule after an indefinite block was lifted only last month, totally justifies my request to block Jaber indefinitely from Wikipedia.  I am sure there are other justifying factors that you can easily find by browsing his User page and its dark history.  Please let me know if you need any further assistance from me in blocking him permanently. Lcnj 04:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have responded on your talkpage. Rockpock  e  t  05:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I have done nothing wrong in this matter so far, besides calling Lcnj an idiot. Most of the people he was adding had no articles written about them. I then agreed to keep these names if Lcnj removed the politically-motivated remarks he has added next to each politican's name. I don't like to deal with such people. I was trying to make the article look better and more neutral. I ask you to compare the edits and if you see he gives Lebanon a better name, I'll stop reverting the edits. As for the anti-semitic matter, I don't think you know what happened. I also apologized to the person I insulted. Please look into the list, and try to talk to this person, Lcnj, as I see he is not the kind of person I can have a proper discussion with. He complained to many people about his edits being reverted, and he kept adding that what I did was vandalism. I think you should warn him about being blocked. Jaber 09:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Rockpocket, I trust that anyone can easily see through Jaber's falsifications and smoke screens above and, as hard as it is to remain civil, I will focus on prviding you with the necessary facts to block him once for all. As part of the dispute discussion, I started making the effort to add sources to support my discussion the Wikipedia way.  Instead, he did not make the effort to "discuss" on the Article Discussion page but rather "dictate" to me on my Talk page.  What he did today, after you gave him one more undeserved chance whereby you expressly issued a Final Warning "to reinstitute his indefinite block", was:
 * 1) He continued to ignore discussion and consensus and just insisted, once again, on making his own changes that I am still disputing up until this moment.  He simply "dictated" to me "I'm going to remove the useless and/or biased remarks next to each name"  and, knowing that I am still disputing his changes, he just went ahead and made his changes without regards to my dispute, discussion or consensus after he was specifically asked not to do so by me and Admin Ars Scriptor.
 * 2) An Editor should remain civil and refrain from personal attacks and uncivil language... By looking at his history, he was ALREADY given a second chance from an INDEFINITE block and enough warnings, yet he continued his disruptive behavior vis-a-vis Wikipedia rules all throughout this dispute, the latest being today AFTER you issued him the Final Warning... add to that he is still calling my edits useless and still "bragging" that he called me names while offering me NO sincere apology...
 * 3) In conclusion, I request reinstuting a Final block on Jaber once for all. Thank you. Lcnj 18:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Rockpocket: thanks again... I think I know exactly what you are doing vis-a-vis a Final ban on Jaber by giving him one last chance after the one last chance considering his history of last chances. To date, he has not apologized to me as a civil editor would have, nor did he stop being uncivil and disruptive (he is still bragging how he called me names and insisting on making his changes without consensus). Adding verifiable facts with sources about how many notable people were assassinated is not biased. It is factual and verifiable and he should not dictate the removal of verifiable and well sourced facts. I am sure you mean your Final Warning very seriously after all these chances and and will reinstute his Final block if he continues (now or in a few months) to be distuptive, uncivil or violate rules. Lcnj 18:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to step down, and I'm sorry Wikipedia turned out to be like this, with people being aloud to do whatever they want with an article and add their politically and religiously-motivated remarks. I was trying to do some good to an article that concerns my country and that now looks ridiculous. Warn me as many times as you want, you can see that all the edits prior to Lcnj intervention looked good and neutral. I'm sorry I had to deal with this sort of person, there really isn't any hope for Lebanon. Jaber 19:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC) I also ask you to view the last edit I made in the article and compare it with the current version and see which is better. I kept the names except for one, and removed some remarks in the politicians section. If you find it is appropriate, please ask Lcnj to stop reverting it and revert to whatever is more worthy of being posted. Jaber 19:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * To Jaber: Enough with the false accusations already!... I am making a good faith effort to provide sources on the assassination references that you want to remove "just because you don't want to see them".  Prove on the Discussion page that such assassinations did not take place and obtain consensus BEFORE you remove them again.  Do NOT patronize Admin Rockpocket by syaing "Warn me as many times as you want". This is, at best, extrememly rude. He has already warned you more than once and you continue to act in an uncivil manner.  Rockpocket has done his best to issue you a Final Warning and then give you one Final chance and another Final chance.  Please show him and show me respect.  He was courteous enough to let you know that he is not familiar with notable Lebanese people.  I recommend that you give sources directly on the article Discussion Page not on the Admin Talk page as to justify why you keep insisting on deleting "factual and well sourced" information about assassinations.  Also, enough already with the personal attacks and condescending remarks about me.  You were warned not to engage with such antics.  Please do not refer to me as "that sort of person".  As hard as it is to keep my cool considering your actions and history, I have been civil with you.  One VERY IMPORTANT thing... I request that you apologize SINCERELY to me for your unnecessary Personal attack and repeated condescending reference to it and ask you to be civil on Wikipedia?  Thank you... Lcnj 21:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok gentlemen, I'm going to write this here so you can both see it. Let me be clear. I cannot and will not comment on whose version of this article is "better". Even as an administrator, my opinion on each version carries no more weight than either of you, infact less so, as I have less specialist knowledge than you both. All I can do is ask that you assume good faith in other editors contributions (in other words, stop suggesting they are politically or religiously motivated) and continue to provide reliable sources for your contributions. Since you appear unable to reach agreement by discussion, to resolve this aspect of your dispute, I suggest you post a request for comment to build consensus or move for mediation.
 * What I can do is ensure editors behaviour does not disrupt Wikipedia. Jaber's behaviour was incivil and disruptive and this is why I issued a warning. However, WP does not permit punitive blocks, therefore I will not block Jaber as "punishment" for past actions. Now, while I agree an apology for his personal attack would be honorable thing to do - and go some way towards fostering good relations - I cannot block someone for failing to apologise. I can only block him if he continues to disrupt Wikipedia or try the community's patience with his behaviour. The ongoing content dispute does count in either of these conditions, unless an editor is acting against as clear consensus (and I don't see a consensus forming around either version).
 * So here are my suggestions to you both to best solve this content situation: instead or reverting and re-reverting form a consensus around your preferred version by WP:RfC. To move forward:


 * Jaber, be aware that any further personal attacks will result in an immediate block and try and be a little more gracious of other editors' motives. When you have attacked another editor, consider that an apology goes a long way to getting your reputation back.
 * Lcnj, I appreciate you are frustrated, but be aware that campaigning to get another editor blocked will not influence administrative decisions. You should simply report editors when they violate policy, not suggest what their punishment should be. Continue to remain civil in dealing with other editors, as you have been doing, but try and not take it too personally when other make incivil suggestions about you.
 * I will continue to observe the article in question and will act should I see any personal attacks, but please take the content dispute to the correct forum, not my talk page. Thank you. Rockpock  e  t  23:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You got it, Rockpocket... and you're right... the content dispute belongs on the article discussion page where a dispute can be addressed in a civil, intelligent, insightful and courteous manner. Lcnj 23:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

One last thing to say. Many people this person added to the list had errors. However, most had articles written about them on wikipedia. He just didn't bother to search for them, only adding his remarks to express his opinions. I fixed the article because an editor should do so. I think Lcnj should have apologized to me, as I try to make the article look decent, he does does the contrary as you can see while comparing the edits. I do not need your opinion. There is flagrant bias. I will, however discuss it with those who have previously contributed to the article, an article that looked normal before Lcnj interfered. Jaber 11:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Whether this is the case or not, it gives you no justification for such incivil behaviour. This is my point. Rockpock  e  t  18:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Life is good!
Hi Rockpocket, and thanks for your vote of confidence! I’d still like to remain as your adoptee for awhile if your willing though. I have much to learn still.

I haven’t been doing much lately mostly because I’m working on a major expansion for Samuel Jones (composer). As this is a living person and I realize this is a touchy issue I’ve been really trying to get all my fact right the first time. Would it be best to write Dr. Jones for permission before posting, and is there a standard Wikipedia form letter for doing this? If the verdict is post I’d still love it if you could look through my draft to make sure all is well.

Have I been putting enough sources in my articles lately?

Also how many friendly warning do blatant vandals usually get before they get the LAST WARNING template?

Thanks! S.dedalus 07:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Asher
Hello. My name is Asher Heimermann. I live in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. I am online from about 4pm until 10pm CST. I am in 7th grade. I study Politics and Government. I used to study History. Asher Heimermann 23:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)