User talk:SirFozzie/Archive 3

Barber
See if you can add anything here please? Thanks. One Night In Hackney 303 23:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. The problem is that with the checkuser backlog he's probably moved on already though, so it's not achieving much. One Night In Hackney 303 00:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, bearing in mind the last fiasco I had with WP:BLP, can you take a look at Seán Ó Muireagáin? The problem isn't necessarily the subject of the article, more that the whole story revolves around him being mistaken for another man with the same name, who is being accused of criminal offences. One Night In Hackney 303 00:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thought as much, but people don't like me stubbing articles! It's got major POV problems as well, like made international headlines and led to considerable criticism of Israel in the Irish and British media - anyone for a soapbox? One Night In Hackney 303 01:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * After finding a couple of sources I definitely think starting from scratch is the way to go anyway. In my opinion it's always a complete nightmare trying to source articles like that, the best way is always just to start all over again. I'll put the sources on the article talk page, that way someone else can do it if I can't find the time. One Night In Hackney 303 01:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well he's not exactly difficult to spot right now! I wish he'd find a new hobby, like suicide or something.... One Night In Hackney 303 21:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:ADOPT input
Hello, SirFozzie. The Adopt-a-User program is looking for new ideas and input on the program. If you are still interested please stop by the talk page and read some of the ideas being floated and give a comment. If you want to update or change your information on the adopter's list page, now would be a great time! Thanks!  V 6 0  干什么？ · VDemolitions 03:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your support
I also want to thank you for your quick answer. If it's not asking too much of you, I would really appreciate some advise as to how to take my petition to the next level. I realize now that this board will create consensus, but no action, correct? What would you recommend? And, what's going to happen?

Thanks again! Jrod2 23:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks to you I see how it works now. It makes sense. The idea to contact Jpgordon is good. However, Biggy P used the "girl" sock puppet account User:ProperManner, to continue making accusations, I felt for it and the bickering resumed, this time right there on Jpgordon's talk page! He really got pissed off about it (Se: ) I don't think I can't even ask that man what time it is.Jrod2 00:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

SirFozzie, please read this.
Respectfully, before you decide that I have made a spam, please see what I posted on February 28, 2007. That's all I can find. I erased everything. There is no "spam" after that date. And, If I had wanted to spam WP, why would I leave the name of the person who wrote the article on? Or, even sign my own username? See:  Is this behavior consistent with someone who spams WP? It was a mistake, Why can't you believe me? Yes, I had Evinatea, but after that, I had to stop using it, please check contribs, notice that I used the Evinatea account one more time just to give thanks a kind supporter. If you find time I beg of you to read the incident report. Thanks for your attention —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jrod2 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

One more thing you should know about Mike Sorensen. I gave him a chance for the second time (As Jrod2) to explain why the article had always the same interviewer so, I asked Mike Sorensen if he could provide more interviews, not by The G-Man, but by other known and reputable journalists, supporting Art Sayecki views on the subject of "Artmastering" (See ), he accused me of making a personal attack against him and Scott G, "The G-Man” (See: ).

He next accused me of being a "sock puppet account" of another user. This unknown user came in that day to apologize to Mike Sorensen for being rude to him in the past (See: ) and to respectfully request that article not be included on the mastering page again. (See: )

Believe me, I was not attacking anyone. I was only making inquiries to establish that the mastering engineer and his studio, Art Sayecki, has proven notability and not placed on the page for pure financial gain. he unleashed his puppets and attacked me. Did he acted in good faith? You can read the whole story about this article he wanted in the audio mastering page here See: ). I apologize, I won't be ranting on your page anymore.Jrod2 16:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

A break from sockpuppets
Despite Burntsauce's slightly sledgehammer approach at times, it can be frustrating dealing with some members of the PW project. See Ballpark Brawl and the corresponding AfD, when they ignore guidelines and policy it can be quite frustrating especially if quite a few turn up and it somehow becomes "no consensus" or worse still "keep", unless the article is improved to show notability of couse.... One Night In Hackney 303 04:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well on that note, I've seen a couple of times lately where an article (see Bob Backlund for example) has been stubbed and protected, and a member of PW has posted the entire article on the talk page for sourcing, which is just asking for trouble. All it needs is this link posting on the talk page, most people use tabbed browsers anyway. Look at the old article in one tab, and create a new sourced version on the talk page piece by piece in the other tab. Or is that too logical? One Night In Hackney 303 04:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I tried doing just that yesterday and it's fallen on deaf ears, and TJ is seemingly one of the smarter editors over there, so I doubt some of them have the capacity to comprehend anything I have to say.... One Night In Hackney 303 05:03, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * TJ isn't one of the smarter ones, anyone who uses sockpuppets to push an agenda and constantly engages in edit warring isn't really the person people should look up to. I've tried to solve the issues with Burntsauce diplomatically, but the only time I've gotten a response from Burntsauce was on an admins talk page in which he appeared to defend himself. –– Lid(Talk) 08:27, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Meh, I didn't want to check through pages and pages of contributions, he's much better than a couple of the members of the project I run into on a regular basis. Also Fozzie, check the AfD again.... One Night In Hackney 303 19:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That doesn't really address the underlying problem though. Regardless of how long something has had a tag on, it's the length of time something has been unsourced that is the important thing. Knowing the ongoing problems the number of articles that aren't sourced (90%+ when I started my tagging), I would have expected someone from the project to tag the articles themselves, and make a list somewhere in project space of all the articles that need doing. Their priorities are all over the place, just look at the collaboration of the week fiasco. Erm, hello? You've got hundreds and hundreds of unsourced articles yet you're trying to get one article up to GA status, yet complaining when someone stubs an unsourced article? Then there's a certain editor who thinks we should have a stub on every wrestler ever. The project know exactly which articles need sourcing, they can be found in Category:American professional wrestlers. I haven't even looked at the various similar categories for Canadian, African American, Mexican etc etc but I shudder to think what I'm going to find. One Night In Hackney 303 02:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * And it would actually be quicker to list what I didn't tag as well, as most of the rest were already tagged. I've just been through Category:American professional wrestlers under 'R' and 'S', over the last 24 hours. One Night In Hackney 303 04:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Burntsauce
I noticed on the Professional wrestling project talkpage, you have asked Burntsauce to possibly give mention on whenever he intends on deleting content (something along them lines!). Unfortunately, Burntsauce seems to have ignored your comment, and has blanked at least 10 wrestling articles, including Adrian Adonis. Neldav 17:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Small fry
I got this speedy deleted earlier, and it had existed for about a year as well! One Night In Hackney 303 18:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Free Solo Processing
I am always amused by editors who create inappropriate articles and then, when caught, say something to the effect of "What about this one ____..." When, truth be told, the other one simply was not caught the first time around. I really bristled at this message because of the accusation of bias. Thanks for your message. ---Cathal 18:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd noticed
I was thinking about it myself, but I tried to get JzG to rouge it up the other day and delete it, despite it surviving AfD, and he never replied. One Night In Hackney 303 17:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Edit war ensuing. One Night In Hackney 303 18:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Or rather other people making points you disagree with. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 18:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No, just editors ignorant of policy. One Night In Hackney 303 18:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oooh, how cutting. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 18:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Suriel, I have posted evidence to the Talk Page of that article showing that EVERY major editor of that article is a JB196 sock. SirFozzie 18:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not turning pro-JB here. I know how disruptive he's been and I respect and am very grateful for your efforts in combating him. I'm just in favour of keeping informative articles and deleting a well sourced one seems like cutting off our noses to spite our faces. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 18:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It is, in a way. However, leaving that article up to be edited makes a LOT more work for us (As ONiH suggested, look at the IP Check Archive on WP:RfCU.) The admins have had to block TEN open proxies and over SIXTY sockpuppet accounts. And it's all be cause of this JB-created, JB-maintained article. Deleting it (and hopefully salting the ground till he goes away) would give a sign to JB that he is not welcome. His edits are to be deleted on sight, not just the bad ones, but every. single. one of them, till he gets the point that he has lost the right to edit here through his actions. SirFozzie 18:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I understand where you're coming from. However I think it a shame for positive contributions to all be automatically wiped out. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 18:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I do understand that side as well, it is a lose-lose situation. Hopefully once JB gets the point and stops disrupting WP, the article can be independently recreated (Although I'm not 100% in love with some of the sources being used, for example, a Google Groups posting?) SirFozzie 18:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Randomly changing the subject before I forget, are you the same SirFozzie quoted in the www.baloney.com section on page 13 of May 2007's issue of Power Slam? ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 19:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * ??? Got a quote for me? Then I can tell you if I said it or not. No one has asked me for any quotes... As far as I know, I'm the only wrestling fan to use the nickname SirFozzie... SirFozzie 19:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * They just use quotes from all sorts of forums. Normally they use funny or intelligent ones, so don't know why you're in there.... ;) One Night In Hackney 303 19:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * (Whackneys a Hackney with a ball-peen hammer) :D SirFozzie 19:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * "He's back! Jeff Jarrett has returned. And he got cheered." (from either RSPW or Death Valley Driver). ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 19:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Used to read it. I've probably got the biggest collection of 90s puroresu of anyone in the UK, just there's that many people editing wrestling articles and that few people editing Irish republicanism articles, my time is better spent on the latter. Contrary to popular belief I'm not anti-wrestling, I'm anti-non-notable wrestling.... One Night In Hackney 303 19:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah I never knew that. Fair enough. Can't go wrong with puro. I have to credit the enthusiasm of Mo Chatra from Power Slam for getting me interested in it. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 20:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Not many people do. I just prefer to see long, comprehensive articles that are a credit to a WikiProject instead of four sentence stubs with a list of titles, if only people would realise where their time is better spent everything would be much easier. One Night In Hackney 303 20:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * (out-denting again) Yeah, I said that. I just found it funny that after being so hated by the TNA fans that they created the Fans Revenge match and solicited people to smack Jarret with straps, three months later he comes back.. and gets cheered??? Like, total WTF-Ville, man! (Great Ghu, if I ever talk like that ever again, smack me hard?) SirFozzie 21:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * And Suriel, I know we disagree with terms of notability and stuff, but I honestly think that a lot of this stuff is as ONiH says, not meeting Notability and Reliable Sources. There are degrees and I think that it's too bad that the two sides can't sit down and make each other see their side. As is said above, a four sentence stub with a list of titles and a generalized "See OWW" or other wrestling site "source" does more harm to the efforts of WP:PW than good. If it can't be expanded beyond that, then it probably doesn't reach Notability.  SirFozzie 21:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That's pretty much my point. Wikipedia shouldn't be a directory of every wrestler that ever existed using fan sites and title history sites to create poor stubs that serve no real purpose. Quality over quantity, but the level to which some stubs with no potential for improvement are being defended is just ridiculous and not a worthwhile use of anyone's time. One Night In Hackney 303 22:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * When one has a hobby or is a fan of something it is only being human to overestimate its importance to the rest of sentient life. Also, being a wrestling fan also is not especially easy. When you have everybody and their cousin's dog telling you that pro-wrestling is fake/immature/gay/etc. then it does tend to result in ultra-defensive behaviour (which, to be fair, is sometimes justified on Wikipedia). There is a general feeling at WP:PW that we are singled out for treatment that Projects relating to other less fake/immature/gay/etc. subjects do not receive. I understand the importance of verifiability but when numerous bios on world-famous current figures have barely any sourcing whatsoever then it curious that professional wrestling receives so much attention. The atmosphere creates is not conducive to diplomacy, hence a lot of the aggro. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 10:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair point, but you're also including me with Burntsauce when I haven't done anything similar. Yes, I have stubbed articles which were previously stubbed by administrators per WP:BLP (rightly or wrongly), simply because restoring the article without sourcing them is asking for problems for members of the project. If you'll notice I've spent a significant amount of time tagging articles for sourcing, despite them being unsourced for a significant amount of time when I could easily have stubbed them. One Night In Hackney 303 10:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't include you with Burntsauce. You've made a lot of contributions to Wikipedia whereas (to my knowledge) Burntsauce has never contributed as much as a single word to an article. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 13:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Your decline on Steve Rizzono
If I make a mistake at least notify me politely. I'll review it now. Malla nox  23:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I've run it past another admin who agrees it should stay. There would be no benefit to Wikipedia in its deletion and it would only serve to punish the other non-banned users who have, in good faith, worked on it also. You can, of course, take this further if you want to contest my decision or you could begin an AfD and gain community consensus. Malla  nox  23:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

That told them
See here. On an unrelated note Real IRA is now a good article, looked like that before I got near it.... One Night In Hackney 303  18:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Very much so. Despite it being said every time he broaches the subject he always forgets that my sig referred to the Irish Republican Army, who did fight the British Empire to a standstill and were an undefeated army. Anything more than that is just an unfortunate coincidence. One Night In Hackney  303  23:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * As I said in the MfD, I've no intention of indulging him any further anyway. VK does need to chill based on recent events though. One Night In Hackney  303  23:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard
Thanks for sticking up for me on the above board this morning, It was unexepted and appriciated. regards--Vintagekits 23:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:CN
Yep, good call. Nothing was going to be accomplished there other than mudslinging.--Isotope23 19:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Isotope23 beat me to it... I was just coming here to say exactly the same thing. --YFB ¿  19:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If they want to RFC battle royale... so be it. IMO, it's basically going to be a gigantic slugfest with no chance of producing any real actionable improvements or solutions, but let them have at it.  Given the history here I really don't see anything useful happening short of an WP:ARBCOM.--Isotope23 19:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * As the filier of the RFC, my goal is not a battle royale. My goal is to get JVM to segregate his troll followers from users who are here to edit an encyclopedia, and to treat the latter with the assumption of good faith. As such, I will remove the endorsement of any user who I believe to be acting in bad faith. Finally, filing an RFAr without any attempt at dispute resolution is frowned apon. It is my hope that if JVM can realize the problems and correct them that no further action would be required. I welcome your views on the RFC. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 19:23, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Closing was right but...
I would like to be perfectly clear that I have had zero off-wiki interactions with Mr. Merkey, ever. Hipocrite - &laquo; Talk &raquo; 19:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Good call!
Your edit to the RfC was a particularly skilful bit of mediation, in my opinion. Time will tell if it does any good. --Aim Here 21:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Ugh. Jeff went and spoiled it by demanding a block for no reason. Oh well --Aim Here 21:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Worse than that, there is an edit war in progress. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_comment%2FJeffrey_Vernon_Merkey2&diff=133327935&oldid=133327303 --Nyet 03:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * One revert doth not an edit war make. I'm going to bed now, I'll check for emails/talk page messages/nuclear winter in the morning. Bloody hell. --YFB ¿  03:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * "Bloody Hell" was my view point on it last night when I saw it as well. I held my peace because I wanted to think of what I should say about it. Perhaps I'm reading into his words, but his latest offers, while on the face look noble, the hidden meaning behind it, I cannot support. SirFozzie 19:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Have no fear, he'll be back in 2 months looking "noble", and all his history will have been forgotten. He'll have a whole new set of naive, well-meaning simpletons and  Merkey sockpuppets defending him, all clamoring to cry  "stalker!" and "troll!" at anybody with any knowledge of Mr. Merkey's modus operandi. Anybody daring to refer to Mr. Merkey's history will be dismissed as a troll. I already feel dirty for stumbling on to this horrifying mess in the last few days. - Nyet 00:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, Nyet, you did not stumble upon this mess "in the last few days." Most of your edits troll Merkey, with a few random ones thrown in to disguise this.
 * Might your username refer to the GNAA conversation? Please. I agree with Merkey that your account and others with the same purpose should be indef blocked.Proabivouac 06:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Absolutely no relation to GNAA (having just googled it, thanks for nothing). Google for me on http://forums.audiworld.com/ if you like. I also run s4wiki. If you insist on my full name, I will email it to you and you are free to google that as well. The first time I encountered Merkey was from the LKML. I confess it left a bad taste in my mouth then, and then this whole thing popped up again (in the last few days). Again, if there is any suggestions you have for me, I am willing to learn. I am trying to be as impartial as possible given the circumstances. -Nyet 08:03, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Don't be disheartened; you're setting a great example. If more Wikipedia users upheld your standards of conduct, it'd be a much more pleasant place. --YFB ¿  20:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I completely agree. Of all the people involved in this mess, SirFozzie showed the most amount of maturity, restraint and understanding. I, for one, am impressed. -- Nyet 00:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Barber
How come you get an award and I don't? *sniffles* I don't remember you reverting his spam to the point of tedium on a regular basis! One Night In Hackney 303  19:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll have a look through the awards and see if I can find a suitable one for you, seeing as you're in the thick of it elsewhere right now. One Night In Hackney  303  19:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Ric Byrne
I was wondering why the page for the pro wrestler Ric Byrne was deleted? I did not put it up, but I have checked back every so often for close to a year to see if one was up, and to read it. And not I find out I just missed it by a few days. Ric was part of the team to write the WWE Role Playing game, has a CD with his band, worked as a Booker, as well as wrestling with WWC and HWA and others. BoyofSteel

Bla bla bla
Cheers :-) --YFB ¿  03:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Reverts
Do you want to handle his earlier edits? One Night In Hackney 303  23:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well ahead of you there ;) One Night In Hackney  303  23:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well at least we don't have to go through all the warning levels the way I used to any more.... One Night In Hackney  303  23:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Sports Club
No I never edit anonymously. I've already put 3RR warnings to both users' talk pages.--   Avg     21:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)