User talk:Theresa knott/archive14

archive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Welcome to my talk page. ''If you've come to complain, whine, moan, question my judgment, my intelligence, my sanity, or tell me off in any way, that's fine. I'm a big girl who can take it. If you've come to chat, compliment me, have a laugh, or discuss articles that's even better''.

Stop leaving obscene comments on my page
I don't agree with you on your Holocaust Denial, I'm Jewish. Please just leave me alone, I've been pretty tolerant about all of this since half my family was killed in the Holocaust. I am going to delete all your offensive comments from my talk page, please do not revert the changes or make any further changes to my talk page.

--TheEmoEater 19:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The point of trolling is to be funny and clever. Coming up with something as lame as this (unless you 10 years old) makes you look a bit stupid I'm afraid.I see you've been blocked already, saves me the bother. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 20:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

MISS THERESA KNOTT, PLEASE DO LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "ITS" AND "IT'S." SOME OF YOUR POSTS MIX THEM UP. BY THE WAY, YOU MIGHT LIKE www.IHR.org and www.NationalVanguard.org. You are clearly lying that you are Jewish. Jews know how to spell and they all know "its" from "it's." Anyway, we should talk. How old are you? You seem quite young. Lancelot (27 April 2006)


 * Yeah I know my standard of writing is terrible. If I ever said I was jewish then it would be a lie because I'm not but i fail to see what that has to do with spelling. Never ask a lady her age (yes i know i'm no lady) but I'm not young unfortunately! I removed your email address. Leaving it visible is a spam magnet. Also it's generally better to post at the bottom of talk pages rather than the top. cheers! Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 08:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Darren Ray
I have not met Ben Cass or Alex Chan, but I know they are real people. I have no direct knowledge of who created which User names. I am fairly certain that Unitypigdog is not Darren Ray. I believe that a possible explanation for the shared IP address is that all these people are friends who edit from the same building, which has what I believe is called a wirless LAN system, but again I have no first-hand evidence on this. Adam 00:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Adam Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Block in error
Thank you for taking care of the sock puppetry issues. Really strange (and unrelated), but there must be a 5-minute delay in the page history updates right now. Best regards, Hall Monitor 18:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Copy of Message at User talk:Mushroom
I am the wife of User:Danny B. (usurped), as he advised the Wikipedia Welcomer User:Wiki alf and we log in from the same office computer. We don’t contribute all that often and so it came as quite a surprise to Danny to find himself blocked by you and this message on his user page:


 * This user is a sock puppet of Ted Wilkes, as established by Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser/Archive/March 2006#Ted Wilkes (talk • contribs) and related accounts,

Because you provided no explantion for your actions on his talk page, it took me some time to track it down. At the Administrators' noticeboard you wrote:
 * "See this request for CheckUser: Ted Wilkes, Danny B. (usurped) and Karl Schalike are the same person." Mushroom (Talk) 06:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I note that this statement by you was posted immediately after Danny complained on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents about vandalism by Onefortyone which you did nothing about.

However, at Requests for CheckUser/Archive/March 2006 User:Sam Korn who did the checking said only:
 * "Ted Wilkes, Danny B. (usurped) and Karl Schalike appear likely to be the same."

Your action appears to have been based on a message left on your talk page by User:Onefortyone, someone on probation who I see has been banned by User:Stifle from editing certain articles for a time as result of his repeated violations of his probation and someone that numerous others have complained about. (User:MrDarcy, User:Arniep, User:Lochdale, User:Func, User:DropDeadGorgias and if I looked a little further, I'm swure I would find plenty more).

Mushroom, I think it is right to assume that a Administrator has the responsibility for stating facts, not making quick guesses to spin there own version of what User:Sam Korn who did the checking said. Your rush to judgment has forced me to do a lot of searching all over Wikipedia for no reason. I will unblock my husband and place copies of this message on the talk page of each member of the Arbitration Committee.

Just for the record, because my husband has an interest, I am the one who pointed him to the non-encyclopedic material being pushed by User:Onefortyone after I came across a nonsensical contradiction in on of the articles he edited. I also come from a small city with one of the highest number of writers per capita in Canada and where Wikipedia has a high profile and where I know from the local newspaper(s) and business/social associations that there are a number of Wikipedia editors. - Cynthia B. 19:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * In my opinion, Cynthia B. is identical with User:Ted Wilkes alias User:DW alias User:JillandJack. Both Cynthia B. and DW/JillandJack or Ted Wilkes contributed to the following articles:, , , , , , ,etc. This suggests that DW alias Ted Wilkes has created many more sockpuppets, as DW did in the past. Onefortyone 23:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Societal Attitudes Towards Homosexuality
The article "Societal attitudes towards homosexuality" is being used, not for the benefit of the reader, but to promote the agenda of a well-organized group of gay advocates. I can provide you with many examples if you would like. I have gone through all of the proper channels to raise a red flag about this.

The first item on the "workshop" page is a request to "remove the article". But, so far, that option has not been added to the "proposed remedies" section of the "requests for arbitration" page.

I hope that you will seriously consider adding this remedy to "proposed remedies" section, as that is the only remedy that will actually correct the problem.

Best Regards, Lou franklin 03:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps apropos of nothing, but this is the second page I've visited where I've seen this same complaint.SteveB 02:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar, OTR & PUA Review
FYI. You may want to look and comment here: Barnstar and award proposals/Proposed Changes. For your reference, the guidelines are referenced here: Barnstar Proposal Guidelines. Thanks -- evrik 18:28, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * An update is here Cool as a Cucumber Award. evrik 16:10, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Images for my pet Article
Hello Theresa,

I seem to recall reading a few months back that you helped articles with images, sometimes using Excel. Could you please explain how to do this? I just got this crazy idea when I saw the portuguese, french and finnish versions that I might improve my pet Article Discourse on Method that I started years ago to become a featured article, and I thought I might start with some fun images, since that always cheers me up.

One of a histogram was on my next stop, so I made one in Excel, and ... how do I get it to wikipedia? DanielDemaret 13:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You need to save the histogram as an image. I can't off the top of my head remember how to do this in excel, it might be one of the "save as" options or you may be able to copy and paste into paint. If that fails you can always my old faithful method of using the print screen button.


 * 1) Get the histogram image clearly on the screen and a sutable size.
 * 2) Press the "PRINT SCREEN" button on your keyboard (mine is above the " Insert, Home, Pageup: Delete, End, Page Down" group of keys but I'm in the UK and your keyboard may be different). This will copy the entire screen into the clipboard.
 * 3) Open up a graphics program such as Microsoft Paint and paste the contents of the clipboard into a new file by selecting "edit" then "paste". You may get a dialogue box pop up stating that the bitmap is bigger than the the canvas and asking if you want to expand the canvas to fit (or words to that effect) click yes.
 * 4) You should now have a screenshot of your histogram. Use the select tool (it looks like a dotted rectangle in paint) and click and drag over your histogram.
 * 5) Select cut, then new file (choose "no" when it asks if you want to save changes to the old image) then paste.
 * 6) You will now have an image file that just contains what you want.
 * 7) Save that file with a .png extension (portable network graphics) into "my pictures".

Of course if copy and paste works you don't need to bother with all this. Just copy and paste into paint and save as a png.

Once you have the image file saved where you can find it go to Wikipedia and hit the "upload file" link which is in the "toolbox" on the right of the screen. Browse your computer and locate the file and don't forget to select a licence (such as GFDL) and put that you made the image yourself in the summary box. Click OK and the image is uploaded.

Let me know if you have any problems. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 20:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Saved it as HTML and got a gif from a subfolder.DanielDemaret 16:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Two questions: Why is png preferable to gif? Is there a vector format I can use instead? The gif does not scale very well.DanielDemaret 20:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Licences. png is a free licence gif isn't. (same reason we prefer ogg to mp3 for sound files)
 * 2) Yes svg support has recently been enabled. See SVG image support . I have no idea how you produce a svg file from excel though. Theresa Knott

Agapetos Arbitration
I'm sorry to spam your talk page, but this seemed serious enough to directly put on your talk page. I have evidence that AiG has actively had employees push their POV on the AiG page and possibly on related pages. I have added a new evidence section in the Agapetos arbitration to that effect, explaining the evidence. Due to the very serious nature of this accusation and its possible implications for Wikipedia, I decided to directly alert all of the ArbCom members. JoshuaZ 01:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


 * JoshuaZ retracted this in evidence because it was erroneous, but failed to mention it on your talk page. agapetos_angel 07:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * That's highly inaccurate. I qualified the evidence in question. The user wasn't an employee but was specifically asked by an employee. See my evidence section and Standon's for details, and Agapetos, please don't put words in my mouth. JoshuaZ JoshuaZ 13:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Alexander Fleming
I have this pet article of mine, Alexander Fleming, that I would like to get suggestions on how to improve from people. Since the main source is a book that I have by Kevin Brown, the (cite ref) is sparce, and since a dense amount of (cite ref) seem to be a criteria for FA status, I shall not aim that far, but I would still like to get some kind of review. How does one go about it?DanielDemaret 09:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, I have more pet articles like the one on Discourse on Method, Charles Berlitz and Felix von Luckner, all of which could use a review.DanielDemaret 11:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Hong Kong
I have created a WikiProject dedicated to articles related to Hong Kong. Do you agree with my WikiProject? Cheung1303 06:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The dreaded Justin Berry article
I didn't want to open another can of worms in the Justin Berry talk page, so I thought I'd take a detour to your talk page & converse with you here. I think I understand what you're getting at when you say "if you claim to be a pedophile it would be better if you did not edit articles like this one." However, I don't want to assume what you mean when I could just ask you, and I realize that if I asked the question in the talk page, that would be like shaking the beehive. So, I'm here instead. My perspective on the Justin Berry issue is tempered by both knowing victims of child sexual abuse and knowing people who would have been tempted to give their credit card numbers to a Justin Berry. I think a rational, NPOV article about Justin Berry would serve everyone's interest. I'm talking here because I think there's already about 10x more disagreement on the Justin Berry talk page than is really useful. On a related note, do you have a perspective on what prompted the WP:OFFICE. How often does that get used? In what kinds of situations? I'm not quite new around here, but I'm not quite an old hand either, so I'd like to better understand how the situation with this article got to the place it's in now. It's hard to see how the article can be fixed up without knowing what was "wrong" with it in the first place.

Just to humor you, I'll take a moment to complain, whine, moan, question your judgment, intelligence, & sanity, and tell you off in every way. There, I've fulfilled your expectations. :-) SteveB 03:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #2
I hope your vacation was good for you. After reading everything on the Justin Berry site and comprehending some but not all of it -- today is my first visit to Wikipedia -- I wanted to compliment you on the way you handled this situation. You were firm in your opinion but respectful of your critics'. KayeT

Wikipedia talk:Vote Stacking
You may want to continue commenting here on your return. There appears to be a level of concern among some people. -- Cool CatTalk 15:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Institute for etc. etc...
Please keep the tag on this article. The quotes seem to be entirely one-sided, and there have been some complaints to the Foundation (via the OTRS system) regarding the article in questions. Please allow us to maintain this least until we've been able to develop some consensus as to the article content.

It's frustrating.  &#08492;  astique &#09660;  par &#08467; er  &#09829;  voir  &#09809;  23:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The Round toit
I have a friend who does this :D. He has a website on my website. Except his is rather bland.  Will  ( E @ )  T  21:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I first saw one years ago. Lord only knows how old the joke is. BTW I hope you don't mind me pointing this out by the file format on your websire is wrong. It should be png or gif not jpg. JPG is for photographs. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 21:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

1WW Refactor
Please see Refactor and New discussion.

You were gracious enough to comment on 1WW; as you may know there are now seven competing proposals. On April 6 I suggested that I be permitted to refactor the proposal page into a single, unified proposal. It's my belief that most of us are tending toward the same or a similar restriction on wheel warring. I think it's unwieldy, though, as it stands. A fair number of editors have commented on these distinct versions but (precisely because they are so similar) no single one has gained undisputed consensus. I suggest that a single, improved version may fare better on its way to policy.

Just as I proposed the refactor, an editor brought to our attention yet another competing proposal, which I merged into the others, using the same format. Still another proposal has since been added, bringing the total to 7. The two new proposals are encountering an indifferent reception but they, too, have some merit.

At the time I suggested refactor, I also put myself forward as the editor to write the initial draft, based on the plurality of support for "my" version. Since the two new proposals have been added, this plurality has held.

I don't for a moment feel that this gives me any special right to dictate terms; rather I hope to draft a proposal uniting the best features of existing proposals. Unlike any of the seven currently competing versions, this refactor will be open to editing immediately by any editor. I will ask editors to refrain from supporting or opposing the new draft for the time being; instead, to edit the proposal to reflect their specific concerns. I believe the true consensus policy will then emerge, in true wiki fashion. After all, we're not so far apart.

I come to your talk page today to ask for your comment on this refactor. Clearly this will be a major change to the proposal page and I don't feel comfortable being quite that bold without some expression of interest in the idea. Once the new draft is in place, I hope also for your participation to polish it into a true expression of our values. Let's move forward with this complement to WP:3RR. John Reid 04:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Music Master's Sockpuppetry
Kudos on the handling of the AFd Articles for deletion/Juan Manuel Abras (second nomination) and sockpuppetry of Music Master. I wonder if perhaps the sockpuppet Perelli should be blocked as well as a formality, as that was the account that originally made the legal threat. Either way, thanks --AbsolutDan (talk) 18:40, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Classic Rock
Hello. I was wondering if you would like to participate in my classic rock survey. I'm trying to find the most like classic rock song. There is more information on my user page. Hope you participate! RENTA FOR LET?  19:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Legal threats from another Jeffrey Merkey IP number
Thanks fot blocking two sockpuppets of Jeffrey Merkey. We have a new one. It's (another COMSAT IP number from Utah, as all previous IP numbers used by Merkey but one) who made legal threaths (most probably libelous) which are direct continuation of previous Jeffrey Vernon Merkey's antics on Wikipedia. I believe this IP number should be blocked. I the past one months blocks on the IP numbers Merkey used were good enough (he never returned to the same IP number after a block). Thanks in advance. Friendly Neighbour 08:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I see he has been blocked by somone else already. Let me know if he comes back. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 08:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I will keep a tab on this IP address. Friendly Neighbour 20:29, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Jeff Merkey returned today as to vandalize the pages about himself, about his block and some others. I posted the details on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. His edits helped me detect another sockpuppet of himself which is the name of Merkey's company and whose April 14-15 input was linked to some articles by today's sockpuppet. Friendly Neighbour 12:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Wiki-Theresa
Hi. I placed myself up for constructive critisism on WP:ER. I'd appreciate it if you could comment there. As a senior member of the community, I think your word would be good for me.-ZeroTalk 19:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Old Skool Esperanzial note
Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Cel es tianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

IRC
TK, if you have time pleas log onto #wikipedia-esperanza within the next half hour. Thanks. -JCarriker 09:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Clone_brush_in_action.jpg
Image:Clone_brush_in_action.jpg Hello nice to meet you. There is no "THE" clone brush. The filename should include the name of the software, i.e. PSPclonebrush_action.jpg Personally, i do not include words like "at, in, this, of, is" into filenames (omitting obvious information). I have noticed several "images in red" (deleted), probably you are the author, i do not know it. Basic_bitmap_image_editing alex 10:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

wikibooks identity confirmation
Hello Theresa knott,

I am one of the wikimedia sysadmin. Derbeth on IRC contacted us regarding an account on wikibooks with the same name: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:Theresa_knott. Seems it is your account on wikibooks and you lost its password.

Unfortunatly, we are unable to recover the password which is encrypted. But, as the wikibook user pointed you as being the same personn, if you confirm it too we will know you are both the same personn. I could then update the email address for the wikibooks account to be the same as your enwikipedia account so you could ask for a new password (and later change it).

If you are not the same person, you can probably ignore this message.

Please confirm on my talk page.

cheers,

20:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Done Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 04:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Great, enjoy editing wikibooks :) Hashar 17:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

fromthewolfstar
Hi Theresa, please don't take offense at what I say sometimes. I don't know how else to talk. I just say what's on my mind most of the time. I also get frustrated because of an obvious communications barrier between myself and other people. I say straightforward simple kinds of things and so often, especially here, people tend to start analysing and picking everything apart, instead of just relaxing and taking things for what they are.

Anyway, thanks for talking to me, I'm sure you mean well. peace Maggiethewolfstar 09:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't worry I'm not taking offense. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 12:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Arb Case Mistake
Hi, im confused about something said in a report on the Arbirition case against me.

In this report, it states that i had warred on Gothic Metal, and been placed on Probation. It also says i violated WPCITE. I want to know how this came about, when both myself and User:Parasti provided diffs to me citing sources. It also says this as a 'finding of fact'. In which case, here is the speficic sections which falsly accuse me of not providing sources, and the evidence that supported this, and the accompnying diffs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Leyasu#Failure_to_cite_sources_and_original_research

Inaccurate Report] [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2006-03-13/Arbitration_report|Finding Of Fact Contrary To Provided Diffs

Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence, taken from Parasti's Evidence. Diff from Evidence, taken from [|Leys Evidence] Diff from Evidence, taken from Leys Evidence. Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence taken from Leys Evidence Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence, taken from Leys Evidence

I even went as far as to quoting and explaining the sources on the talk page,.

I got all these diffs from the archive of the Arbirition case, Here.

I just want to know why all eight claimed i provided no sources, even though another involved party provided diffs of me providing sources, and i repeatedly gave diffs of me supplying sources. Im not having a go, im just confused how 8 Arbirrators managed to claim a 'finding of fact' despite over 10 diffs from two different users =\ Ley Shade 14:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

physics page mistake


Theresa: I happened upon your drawing of a simple series and a simple parallel circuit in the pedia. Unfortunately the arrows which you say represent the current are pointing the wrong direction. Right now they are showing electron movement; charge is opposite. To your credit, the battery anode is correctly labeled with a "+." -Matt 05:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually they are the right way round. Current flows from positive to negative, electrons flow from negative to positive. The arrows were put in automatically by the software involved . Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 22:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I second this. The graphs are OK. Exactly as the convention we've had since 19th century, before electron was discovered, tells us to do. Friendly Neighbour 07:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

regarding "civility"
I was disgusted, but not terribly surprised, to see that six members of the Arbitration Committee -- Dmcdevit, Fred Bauder, JamesF/James D. Forrester, Sean Barrett/The Epopt, Charles Matthews and Jayjg -- condone hate speech and hateful epithets directed at the mentally disabled, and consider condemnation of that hate speech to be unacceptable behavior on Wikipedia -- behavior, in fact, so unacceptable that they say they find it a compelling reason to punish me.

I was a bit more surprised when an earlier form of this letter (differing only in describing the status of the pending arbitration, aside from this paragraph) was banned without explantion from the Wikipedia mailing list where such topics could supposedly be discussed. But I was appalled when discussions on that list, regarding a named editor, turned to open derision of the editor's supposed emotional/mental impairments, and that one Arbitration Committee member participated in the abuse.

As someone who has been involved for more than thirty years, professionally and nonprofessionally, in attempting to protect and to advance the rights of the mentally disabled, and as someone who for many years has served, and continues to serve as a guardian for such disabled members of my community. I find the use of such epithets grossly offensive; they are clearly inconsistent with Wikipedia's supposed commitment to civility. They form no part of civil discourse in any circumstances. They are particularly deserving of condemnation because they are directed toward, in very real terms attack, and have the greatest tendency to injure, a class of people who are less able, sometimes unable, to defend themselves, to resist the impact, or to respond on equal terms. [And, as a note to the politically correct, it is for that reason that I will not use the abominable term "mentally challenged," because it denies (sometimes grossly minimizes) the imbalances of social power that inhere in the relationships between the mentally disabled and the "unchallenged" elements of any community.]

It should be no secret, no obscure facet of social fabric, that the mentally disabled, particularly the mentally retarded, are at greater risk than almost any other segment of a society. More likely to be the victims of physical attacks. More likely to be neglected by governments, particularly when their needs are greatest. In the relatively rare instances when they have substantial assets, they are more likely to have their assets stolen, particularly at the hands of those actors on whom a government has conferred power over them. They are more likely to be degraded and exploited by industries which purport to protect them and to serve their interests. More like to be the victims of sexual assaults, particularly of organized, group sexual assaults.

The casual use of such hateful epithets does not only harm the individuals it targets. It causes pain, often great pain to many others. It regularly inflicts pain on those with brothers and sisters, with parents, with children, with friends, with acquaintances, even with clients, who are abused and dehumanized by such behavior. It regularly inflicts pain on so many of those who deal, day by day, with lesser mental and emotional impairments, whether they choose to acknowledge those impairments, publicly or privately, or not.

I am quite proud that a self-styled community which apparently condones such behavior and condemns opposition to it finds me such a danger to it and its values that it is preparing to forcibly separate me from it. Nothing I have contributed to this curious place makes me more proud, and I doubt anything else could.

Monicasdude

Not licensed, no rights released

User Jayjg's revert war at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel
This is not a formal complaint, but I would like to informally draw the attention of some members of the arbitration committee to the behavior of user Jayjg, an arbitration committee member at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel and its talk page. There is a dispute about the inclusion of a description of a translating group. Jayjg has removed the description I added on (10:12, May 8, 2006), (10:19, May 7, 2006), (23:19, May 5, 2006) Jayjg and other times. While the article is not heavily edited, there is certainly no consensus that the description should be removed, nor has Jayjg supported his reasoning for removing it after being challenged to do so by myself and another editor. I think that as a member of the arbitration committee Jayjg should be held to an even higher standard than at-large editors. TopRank 02:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

'books
I don't have emailuser. I think this would suffice, wouldn't it?

Sorry for the late reply. Dysprosia 09:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

User talk:JaysCyYoung
He removed warnings which is vandalizm. Ardenn 00:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't talk bollocks! And stop playing games. look at your own behaviour here. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving. Ardenn 00:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

OK 00:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!
This is just a quick notice to thank you for freezing edit of my page. This is said with no trace of sarcasm and I am genuinely thankful that you prevented further vandalism of it. The thing that upsets me, and I'm not trying to be disruptive (as I am a long-time contributor on Wikipedia), is that the user Ardenn is merely removing information from the Queen's University page without group discussion or consensus. He also ignored three sources or citations that I had provided to validate the veracity and notability of the information that myself and others had written on the page. It seems that he/she may be an administrator and, seeing as you appear to be one Theresa, I would like to express my disappointment at the behaviour of an individual in charge acting in such a manner.

Is there anything that I can do in order to reach an agreement? I have tried to be civil and, while I am upset at the changes Ardenn has made, his one-liners and refusal to co-operate (or even ENGAGE in any meaningful and productive discussion) have merely further incensed myself. Please help if you can. It feels like I have tried everything but I'm not sure why he/she is acting in this manner. Thank you very much once again!

Warmest regards, Jameson.

JaysCyYoung 00:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Citations and plenty of them. I'd be very surprised if he were an admin let me look into that. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No he is not an admin. my advice to you is 1) take a break. The article will still be there tomorrow or next week or next month even, Edit it then. 2) Never edit when upset and 3) go through our formal disput resolution methods if all else fails. A request for comments will generate a wider community view on the matter. BTW I have to unprotect you talk page in the morning so that people can talk to you. If i forget please remind me.Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Sexual harassment article
Thanks for your help. Aine63 and his/her sockpuppets have reverted three times in the past couple of hours, prior to your intervention. You might want to take some action about this if you haven't already. I'll also put a note on the notice board in case you don't want to get involved with blocks. I am unwilling to block this user myself, as I feel I have too much of a conflict of interest. Metamagician3000 02:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I was thinking that there was already a breach of 3RR, but technically it will take another revert by Aine63 before that happens. Metamagician3000 02:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a lot more to this than Meta is telling you. I myself have put in a notice to the admins about the deletions in the article today. I'll be surprised if this situation is viewed as a simple 3rr considering Meta's history at Wikipedia. He has been vandalising the Sexual harassment article for months, continually deleting and rewriting useful information--all of it factual and backed up with references--and trying to rewrite the article to fit his own personal point of view. When called on his behavior and informed of the rules regarding vandalism, he scoffed, and resorted to personal attacks. I've reported him several times. Contributions to the page are welcome (I've been an active contributor to this and other articles for over a year now) but not at the expense of the contributions of others if they contain factual information or are backed up with references.

BTW: I've never intentionally tried to use a "sockpuppet" revert. I don't always log in when I edit, but there has never been any hidden motive in doing that. Frankly, I didn't even know about a 3rr and that this was a way to get around it. Aine63 03:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm prepared to believe that this person is naive rather than malicious, but you can see the difficulty. There has been a fourth revert, btw. Metamagician3000 04:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Interesting Meta since you seem to always have been only malicious from the beginning.

Teresa, the references have not been removed, they remain. Aine63 05:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No they don't look further down the page, you removed two. Also you failed to provide references for your text. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 05:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)