User talk:Thewolfstar



= please someone get Cool Cat = '''I'll try this again. I am asking Cool Cat to help me unblock.'''

Cool Cat Can you help me get unblocked. They are not listening to reason or any attempt at reconciliation. I am trying to be civil. I have snapped and yelled nasty things to people. They have provoked me and others. I don't believe I am the threat to the community that they are accusing me of being. Please help me get unblocked. I promise to behave myself. Maggiethewolfstar 02:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

my archive page 1 please don't delete this again
archive page 1

your comments
'''Please leave comments at bottom of page. It's easier for me to find them. thanks'  Maggie''thewolfstar

Messages to Jimbo Wales
Maggie, please address concerns of the nature that you've posted to Jimbo's page recently to Administrators' noticeboard. Jimbo's role in day-to-day issues such as blocks is very, very minimal, and it's once in a blue moon that it's necessary for him to intervene in a case like this. While I understand your concern, Kaspersky Trust has had ample instruction on the procedure to follow in appealing the block - Jimbo will have no more desire to circumvent the process that any other admin. ''' Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@''' 08:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * But of course I remember... I'm still looking forward to hearing more about humanistic anarchism. If he's concerned about openness, may I suggest that he carbon copies his email to the blocking admin to other addresses (perhaps yours?), so proof exists? I haven't checked to see who blocked him, but I should mention that 99% of the admins here are great people that have good reasons behind what they do. Let me know if you try that out, and keep me up to date on how you've been.  Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@ 09:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey Tijuanna, It's good to talk to you again. I'm gonna be honest because it's the only way I know how to be anymore. It hasn't been my experience that 99% of the admins are good people never mind great people. I have seen some great ones like Lord Valdemort and Pongo and Asbestos seems cool. I'm not always sure who is and itsn't an admin because I don't check that very often. This is mostly on account of I don't care if they are admins or not. People are people to me and if they cannot take an insult without weilding they're power..well then it shows a lot and is on them. Now, I expect I will get blocked for saying this and it will be called a personal attack. What I see here is a huge power game for controlling articles. What I see is admins secretly listening to spies or responding to requests to those who brown nose them. Double talk and double think are everywhere, not to mention double standards. People get hung up in rfc's to have rocks thrown at them. The policies are misused and abused. Wiki rules, written to protect the victims of witch hunts and to protect newcomers, are not followed. People are banished forever, never to be seen again. Sort of like Dubya does to his terror suspects which are guess who? You and I. The enemy combatant..The U.S. citizen. But I suppose what I just said will be considered a rant. I will go the way of so many others. Here it goes. Maggiethewolfstar 09:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm... well, I'm sorry that your experience hasn't been the most pleasant. There's a lot of policies to get to know at Wikipedia, and I've often mused over ways that can make it more accesible to newcomers. I get the feeling that there isn't a single active user here that didn't start off confused, what with all the guidelines on NPOV, notability, verifiability, fair use, reversions, consensus, etc etc etc. Sometimes, the policies can seem overwhelming... but then, if they weren't in place, you can imagine how fast the content here would go down the tubes. You don't need to hear any preaching from me, of course, but I've found that in the end, WP:AGF is the most important guideline of all here. After all, if there's no trust, even among parties with totally different points of view, nobody gets anywhere. At any rate, I'll get off my soapbox for now. Best wishes -- see you around.  Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@ 05:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't worry about posting anything that may be mistaken as offensive on my talk page. It's not much good for me to talk about how important I think assuming good faith is if I don't do the same.  Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@ 07:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks! Never got one of those before. I really appreciate it. You're giving me that warm tingly feeling over here. ...um, but not that warm tingly feeling.  Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@ 05:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Kaspersky Trust
Hi, Thewolfstar! I removed the help notice you put on this user's userpage&mdash;I'll be personally dealing with the situation. The user is now unblocked (lest I screwed up and missed yet another autoblock), and his talk page is unprotected. Please contact me if you have questions. Thanks!&mdash;Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 12:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Police State
I didn't make the "police state" userbox. I lifted it from someone else (and modified it). Feel free to use it. Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 13:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

see my talk page
wassup? Merecat 04:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

hey, Merecat
Are you around? I need to talk to you bad. please? thewolfstar 03:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm here. Wassup? Merecat 03:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * hey!... are you still my mentor? thewolfstar 04:13, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

yes Merecat 04:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merecat are ya around? thewolfstar 04:16, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

yes Merecat 04:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * hey. big sigh. I thought you were never gonna really talk to me again. thewolfstar 04:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't leap to conclusions. Merecat 04:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * But were you..pissed at me? thewolfstar

No. Merecat 04:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Merecat, can you please answer in more than monosyllables? thewolfstar

Possibly, yes. Merecat 04:38, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I have an idea. I believe between the 2 of us, we can start a grassroots movement against the oligarchy. thewolfstar 04:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I mean a quiet calm nice one. One that could not hurt anyone, only help Wikipedia and lots of people thewolfstar 04:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... there already is a grassroots movement. It's called patient NPOV editing, polite reparte and WP:AGF. Stay focused on editing, not "fighting the system". The system is not a Borg it will not subsume you. Merecat 04:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * That's not grassroots movement. I tried to edit today and yesterday. I'm asked for reasons and references. I supply them. They are dismissed and confused with double think. The edits are so hard to make because of the abused system. You of all people should know this. People get blocked and banned for flimsy reasons all the time. It's exhausting. thewolfstar 04:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * you still there? thewolfstar

You will only get exhausted if you go about things the wrong way. Expecting too much of other editors is enervating. If you do that too often, you'll get exhausted. It's your own mindset which makes you tired, because you get frustrated. You wouldn't get frustrated with ELIZA if you knew your were talking to a computer program, right? POV warriors focus only on their understanding of things and for that reason, it's very slow and difficult to pursuade them. Your job is to make a cogent talk page record of your arguments. If your views are pursausive to enough people, you will eventually advance the issues. Patience, grasshopper. Merecat 05:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * ok. yeah you're right. I know I made a lot of changes happen to the dumb dem party article. True, too, though is that it took reams of work and repeating the same thing over and over. Then again, you are right in the end. People are walking around spiritually dead. They can't seem to think. They don't see what's directly in front of them. It's scary, Merecat. This IS 1984. thewolfstar 05:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm gonna get a peanut butter and marshmallow sauce sandwhich, a thing you could get lynched in some circles for. thewolfstar 05:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Good night for today. Merecat 05:24, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Night Merecat. sleep tight. thewolfstar 05:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

= warning: don't spam me again =

80.57.35.153 you left this here and then deleted it. I don't care who you are. Don't do it again. thewolfstar 16:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:37, 2 May 2006 80.57.35.153 (Talk) (atention)

thewolfstar 16:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC) I signed in the wrong spot then put the signature where it belongs. thewolfstar 22:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

atention
dear wikipedian i urge you to vote on jimbo he was named

Congrats on TIME 100
Congratulations Jimbo on being named one of TIME's 100 Most Influential People.Felisberto2 may2006(UTC)

attention
dear wikipedian i urge you to vote on jimbo he was named  on TIME 100 one of TIME's 100 Most Influential People.Felisberto2 may2006(UTC)

= hey from the grasshopper = Hey, Merecat. just saying hey. I am learning a lot here at the Wiki. I mean a lot. For that I am grateful..to you, to wikipedia, to the many and myriad mindless androids that walk the planet and the streets of wiki-land, and for all that I am learning. both here and in my life and projects.. Thank You, and with humble apologies to everyone who I did not thank personally for this.

And a special thanks to you, Merecat, the only one that I completely trust here at Wikimania, and to whose indomitable spirit I owe a renewal of faith in Wikipedia as a whole, sort of. Maggiethewolfstar 22:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

=time magazine article re: Jimmy wales=

examples of how dumb this Time magazine article is [|TIME 100: The People Who Shape Our World] and how dumb Time magazine is and how meaningless this survey is concerning who the most influential person is.

example of magnitude of article dumbness http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1187350,00.html

specifcally please see full list of nominees http://www.time.com/time/2006/time100/

like this holy cow need air

Heroes & Pioneers

Meet some global icons&#151;actors, politicians, athletes, entertainers and others&#151;who are using their influence to do the right thing

  Bono

Michelle Wie

Wynton Marsalis

Angelina Jolie

Bill Clinton & George H.W. Bush</li>

<li>Steve Nash</li>

<li>Orhan Pamuk</li>

<li>Elie Wiesel</li>

<li>Jan Egeland</li>

</ul>

I for one am not voting for any of these assholes. If anyone feels like banning me for this bold comment, feel free, and make another statement about your own lack of intelligence, judgement and ablity to think. thewolfstar 23:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * We're actually quite a bit less interested in banning you than you seem to think. You might also check out the difference between a block and a ban, if the topic interests you. Take it easy. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I came to thank you for the comment you just left on my talk page, which seemed to be friendly. I'll assume it was said as a friendly gesture. Thanks for that. Then I saw what you said to me (above) concerning my block day, and got irritated again. (I never read that comment before.): '''You really made good use of those links, I see. I predict a short career at Wikipedia for you, I'm afraid. -Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:07, 25 April 2006 (UTC)'''

What did you mean by made good use of those links? and I predict a short career at Wikipedia for you, I'm afraid.?

You, along with Swatjester are the ones who actually propelled my getting blocked to begin with. What I said to Merecat on his page was nobody's business but Merecat's and mine. And yet, it was known in an instance by all these people. You provoked me by saying this: '''The above rant is offensive in the extreme. Bishonen is one of our most-trusted users, and the amount of goodwill you burn up by comparing her to a Nazi Stormtrooper is... amazing. Then later you said: I suspect people have shown you these links before: Wikipedia:Civility. Wikipedia:No personal attacks. meta:Don't be a dick. You really need to read them. -Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)''' My response was a natural one under the circumstances. I got blocked. You walked free as a bird. If you don't know the circumstances of something then don't make igonorant comments about it.

There has been a lot of deleting done on my page recently not done by me. I'm not saying you did the deleting. But it was done by someone who is trying to tear me down by tearing my comments down, and make you and others look good.

I'm not sure what your game is Bunchofgrapes, because I don't you personally very well, and I'm just beginning to learn about wikiland.

I stll find you hostile and mostly distasteful. Please feel free to comment on this comment and to answer my questions. thewolfstar 03:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * First let me ask what deletions on your page are you talking about? I have your talk page on my watch-list (don't take offence -- that's considered normal around here, to keep an eye on the pages of people you've interacted with) and I haven't noticed anything like that. Do you know how to use the history tab, to see who has done what to any page?


 * Second, I apologize for saying "You really made good use of those links, I see. I predict a short career at Wikipedia for you, I'm afraid." The first sentence was sarcasm, and the second was uncalled for. I was a bit riled up by your visual metaphor of diarhhea coming out of my mouth.


 * What else? I don't have a game. Regarding "If you don't know the circumstances of something then don't make igonorant comments about it", Wikipedia is a public environment where people can look over what you are doing and say something about it if they want. And, really, ask 100 users who know of Bishonen and 90 of them will say she's a pretty good egg, while probably not one will stick up for your right to characterize her as a "patrolling Nazi storm trooper". Even the ones who may not like her. Why? Because we have a culture of no personal attacks. You may criticize what someone writes, but levelling insults at the person themselves is out of bounds. Is referring someone to WP:DICK a personal attack, then? Well, yes, it's questionable. I suppose long-time editors have become somewhat inured to references to that page, and don't tend to think upon it carefully enough. So, I apologize for that too.


 * OK? Again, take it easy, I meant that sincerely. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

=Wow from thewolfstar= Bunchofgrapes, thank you for the apologies. That shows honor. And thank you for making me laugh, you have a sense of humor, and that is always commendable in a person. And thanks also for reading what I wrote, and answering it honestly. That in itself shows courage and integrity.

I apologize to you also. Not so much for what I said, but for the opinion I had formed of you. This opinion was obviously unfair because you have shown yourself to be a worthy person, and a good hearted and funny one.

I feel friendly to you now and wouldn't mind if we remained on a friendly basis, if that's alright with you. Thanks and peace Maggiethewolfstar 04:29, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Friendly is good. I'm glad we could resolve some of that. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * There's no way to just undo all deletions made to a page, unless if the deletions are the most recent edits, in which case you could simply revert the page normally. (Go to the history, click on the date link that shows the version you want to revert to, click "edit this page", and, ignoring the warning that you are editing an older version of the page, hit "Save page". &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

your voted needed
Please go here: Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). I voted for delete. You may also want to, but please don't leave any harsh comments. A simple delete vote (if that's your preference) will suffice. Merecat 08:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

RE: Lock on "Democratic Party" Page
Hello. You wrote to me, "Hey, Bjsiders, they put a page protection on the Dem Party article page. What happened? Do you know who did this? If you know can you leave me a message on my page?"

No, I don't know anything about it. That particular page has had a number of very insistant editors who had changes they wished to make that rankled the existing pool of editors for that page, so I'm not surprised if it has been locked temporarily. A number of articles have been lately. The Rush Limbaugh article was recently locked after all the "arrest" activity last week and early this week, for example. Most a number of very impassioned people are making edits to get what they feel is the "real truth" out there, and there's much head-butting and little discussion. I haven't seen much activity on the talk page, anyway, so I presume it's either being vandalized excessively or there's a revert war going on. Most likely, it'll sort out in a day or two.

Bjsiders 18:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Legal threats are not permitted
Please don't make legal threats against other editors, or Wikipedia. Leveling such threats is a bannable offense. Thanks, and sorry for the interruption. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 21:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Besides, legal threats aren't in the spirit of Esperanza. -- E lkman - (talk) 21:43, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize that Wikipedia "crimes" were hanging offenses. Were you really threatened by this?  Please explain the threat to me.  --Tbeatty 04:21, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours
I have blocked you for 24 hours for making what appear to be threats of off wiki legal action against other editors. I need to you to explain to me that you are just kidding, which you can do here and I will monitor you page. If you can't convince me that you are kidding, I will extend the block to a longer period. See: WP:NLT--MONGO 01:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The actual text was "I have enough dirt on them now to hang them in a court of law." I didn't read that as a legal threat but rather as a guage of the quantity of evidence that Thewolfstar appears to have amassed for an RfC. Amassing strong evidence for an RfC is not a legal threat.  No legal threat was actually made and it fails to live up to what a threat is.  A threat has two components: 1) a target of the threat and 2) consequences if the requested action is not followed.  Since wikipeida "crimes" are not hanging offenses in any court and since "Them" was never identified or actually the recipient of the message, this fails even the most rudimentary test for a threat, let alone a legal threat.  If she would have said "hang them from the nearest tree" or "hang them from the yardarm" there would be no question.  Her colloguial use of "court of law" does not rise to the level of WP:NLT and she shouldn't be blcoked for it.  Please WP:AGF, apply common sense and unblock.  --Tbeatty 04:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the reasons for this block are justified...the full comment is rather threatening: "They're not going to get away with any of this. I have enough dirt on them now to hang them in a court of law." "Them" certainly means some Wikipedian. I have a zero pain threshold for harassment. Had the comment been of the nature of: "I am taking you to court", then the block would have been indefinite. I only blocked for 24 hours and this editor can explain themself here on this page.--MONGO 05:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


 * sure thewolfstar 11:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

=Mongo= "Enough evidence to hang you in a court of law" was a way of saying I had enough cited evidence, to show clearly that terrible things go on in here in Wikipedia. It was not aimed at any particular editor, but rather at a large number of editors who sometimes work together in a collaberative effort and sometimes work alone to drive unwanted individual editors out of Wikipedia.

Like Tbeatty said "hang" is not a serious threat as: It was a generic threat to bring a number of editors to justice through the dispute system. I personally loathe rfc's and would not use them myself no matter how heinous the offense.
 * 1) hangings don't happen legally in America. and
 * 2) death would not be the consequence of a court action., as no Wikipedian does something that warrants death (in or out of legal court.)

Okay? thewolfstar 11:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Stay away from these types of comments. I suspect that if this keeps up..and I mean no insult...that there is the likelihood of either more blocks or even a banning from editing here. Do all you can (and I know it isn't easy) to argue about the message and not the messengers. I'll remove your block, but a lot of eyes are on you, so be nice.--MONGO 11:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Looking at your block log, I am now the fourth Wikipedian to block you. Again, it is going to take some work on your part to restore good faith...you can do it. I recommend figuring out what it is that you can work on that won't bring you in contact with editors you may have been having arguments with...when I am not in the mood to deal with some issues, I head off to articles related to land management. They are benign and there is little or no friction...so perhaps you can find a target area of articles that you have personal knowledge of that you can contribute.--MONGO 11:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

=Mongo=

I said "sure" a few minutes ago. My comment was removed sure thewolfstar 11:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Then you added more comment (above)

Am I unblocked or not? thewolfstar
 * You should be...I must have overridden your comment...sorry.--MONGO 11:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. Thanks for unblocking me. thewolfstar 11:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay...play nice. Happy editing.--MONGO 11:54, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The link
Sorry, I couldn't find the vote you referred to -- can you send me the article title or a link? Thanks. Morton devonshire 00:18, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
You've been warned and blocked for personal attacks before. And yet you call other editors "nazis" and invite a block. Keep it up and you'll find yourself facing blocks of increasing length. This encyclopedia isn't the place for your playground namecalling. Dmcdevit·t 02:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The link you just pointed to (in full) reads.."Man, there's some nastiness going on this place. You nazis (up above) never give up til you hurt everyone possible. Is that right? Go ahead block me again, and get your rocks off." What is your problem with this? thewolfstar 02:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me explain - to some people, being called a Nazi is a personal attack and an insult. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 02:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * There are many editors (myself included) who have become increasingly bitter about the way Wikipedia (and Wikipedians) handle things. I feel this editor was "blowing off" a little steam and should not be punished.  Relax guys.  Thanks!  Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 03:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey Jerry G. Sweeton Jr., thanks! I appreciate your comment and your support. I really do. peace. Maggiethewolfstar 03:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your explanation Ryan, it is ever so elucidating..as swamp muck.


 * 1) Who invited you into this conversation?
 * 2) I was asking my blocking admin who hasn't had the courtesy of identifying himself yet. Who is my blocking admin? I asked you a question. Can you kindly answer the question? thewolfstar 03:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Maggie, you should be able to go here and see all you need to know about your blocking. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Bunchofgrapes, Thanks. I do know this. I still think it is at least civil if not more under policy guidelines for a blocking admin to indentify him or herself at the very least. And then to answer questions about why he or she has blocked someone. thewolfstar 03:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * At least Killer Chihuahua had the decency to announce the block in a formal manner and answer my questions...like this

KillerChihuahua?!? 18:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

= ??? =

The link you just pointed to (in full) reads.."Man, there's some nastiness going on this place. You nazis (up above) never give up til you hurt everyone possible. Is that right? Go ahead block me again, and get your rocks off." What is your problem with this? thewolfstar 03:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Indeed, you've managed to pinpoint the personal attack. Don't call people Nazis. That's a personal attack. Dmcdevit·t 04:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

is anyone out there?
This is really just unfair. I am sitting here in the pokey, all alone and I can't even get an answer to a simple question. Is this legal? I don't think so, sir or madam. --- This is a great page. Caution to sensitive editors especially those engaged by the reigning Queens that be. (And kings also in all fairness.) This page lifted up my mood 180 degrees. Thank you for that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rictonilpog/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Political_fallout_from_seperation_issues thewolfstar 03:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC) ---

Don't Quit
When things go wrong, As they sometimes will, When the road you're trudging seems all uphill, When the funds are low and the debts are high, And you want to smile, But you have to sigh, When care is pressing you down a bit Rest if you must, But Don't You Quit!

Life is strange with its twists and turns, As every one of us sometimes learns, And many a fellow turns about When he might have won had he stuck it out. Don't give up through the pace seems slow You may succeed with another blow.

Often the goal is nearer than It seems to a faint and faltering man Often the struggler has given up When he might have captured the victor's cup And he learned too late when the night came down How close he was to the golden crown.

Success is failure turned inside out The silver tint of the clouds of doubt, And you never can tell how close you are, It may be near when it seems afar So stick to the fight when you're hardest hit It's when things seem the worst That You Mustn't Quit!

~unknown~

Brought to you by Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. 03:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

'''Thanks Jerry. I was going to say, you don't know how good it is to get your support right now. But I believe you do know how important it is. Am I right? It can get lonely here in my jail cell when the guards just don't bother to reply. But hearing you calling down through the window, is a big comfort. Did you vote on the off-wiki control editors speech thing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Poll:_Off-wiki_Personal_Attacks Can you make sure no one moved my comments. Someone moved them to a small ==== discussion place and I had it in a big = category of it's own where I believe it belongs. Thanks. Can you tell Tbeatty I am in here again and Morton Devonshire? I think Merecat is too busy at home to deal with this now.''' Maggiethewolfstar 03:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

= to Dmcdevit·t = In what way is this a personal attack? Personal to who? thewolfstar 04:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you answer me please? Who was I personally attacking? Thanks for answering this question, Dmcdevit·t. thewolfstar 04:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You called a group of editors, "up above" on the talk page, nazis, and knew it was wrong when you did it (saying "Go ahead block me again"). There's no way calling someone a nazi the way you did can be construed other than as a personal attack. Dmcdevit·t 04:15, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

No. Actually I didn't refer to anyone in particular. Up above could be up in the heavans, up in a pig's brain, or up on Wall Street. Is this the thought police, like Tijuanna Brass mentioned earlier? Maggiethewolfstar 04:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Can you respond please? thewolfstar 04:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Cute, but more incivilities like "is this the thought police" and I'll just protect this page. You have no right to abuse it. Funnily enough, this is actually an encyclopedia, where we expect people to collaborate and interact cooperatively and maturely. Dmcdevit·t 04:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I honestly don't know how to respond to that. Obviously, you can do that if you like, but I believe it would sort of be a bad idea, if you know what I mean. You know what I mean? I mean, I don't believe it would increase your popularity or anything. Also, tactically for the cabal it would  kind of not be a good move. But you having the power right now and the upper hand..well...I don't know. --- Can somebody get Tbeatty and Jerry Sweeney or Morton Devonshire or Sam Spade or Hogeye or Mercat, if he's around or the ungovernable force or Tijuanna Brass who undestands about mind police and thought police. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Poll:_Off-wiki_Personal_Attacks thewolfstar 04:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

___

Tijuanna Brass commented this on the off-wiki attack talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Poll:_Off-wiki_Personal_Attacks

Keep it, but temper it with common sense. People are going to disagree at times (and should be free to); admins aren't the thought police. Perhaps the guideline should be whether an off-site affect is judged by a number of admins to be of significant magnitude to cause on-site disruption. Wikiwatch would fall into this category, of course, but somebody venting on their blog really isn't that big of a deal. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 00:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

--Is Tijuanna bad, too for mentioning thought police? Should he be blocked for saying this? NO, he shouldn't. Block Tijuanna a well loved editor on Wikipidia and I really believe you're popularity will plummet.

Thanks RJII and Tbeatty for your comments. Here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Poll:_Off-wiki_Personal_Attacks They made a lot of sense and told the truth. mggiethewolfstar 04:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

And thanks again, Jerry. And everyone who gave me encouragement and support. The battle is far from over for me, whether they can me or not. but if they do, please keep fighting the corruption. You're all the greatest. And huge thanks to Merecat, my best friend on Wikipedia and Tijuanna Brass a great friend, too. Maggiethewolfstar 04:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

=npa Wiki Policy Amendment by Ed Poor=

~^~

Wow! This is great! From the official Wikipedia poloicy page..Please read this Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks [|no personal attacks amendment]

Specifically, please go here (to 24): [personal attacks discussion]

<font size=3 color=#115109>''24 - not only is such a rule exteremly unlikely to be fairly administered by a clique, but frankly, someone committed to a particular approach to editing or collaborating or not is not going to give a damn about "shaming" or even "outing" (much more serious). Handing over banning-power to be used again people who simply offend others as part of a two-way semi-abusive discourse is a sure route to groupthink - and the end of any serious pretense of the project to "neutrality". That said, ad hominem attack generally contributes little to discourse as people defend their positions reactively, and anonymous parties with little at stake except a disposable identity should be relatively more conservative about such tactics than those who are using the same names that are attached to their bodies. However, those gloves should come off the instant someone is "outing" or "framing" anybody, i.e. if someone tells me I'm Mikhail Gorbachev and should "know better", then they deserve intense ad hominem attack in return from infinite anonymous parties until they learn not to "out". Those who wish to put their own real-body names up in a one on one mud wrestling competition with disposable anons (IP numbers, pseudonyms) who might as well be programs or many people posing as the same character, are not going to survive this millennium anyway, so let's not bother pretending that their opinion can matter. Also, there are many who consider this process, or the role of the "troll", to be constructive and necessary, like the "devil's advocate" or "shaitan" or "defense attorney" or "opposition leader" or "Supreme Court minority opinion author", to reduce [|groupthink] and identify values divisions across which people cannot cooperate constructively anyway, and can only ever agree to just disagree. I'm confident that the record shows that I never attacked or insulted anyone who didn't attack or insult me first - if they object to getting the diseased end of the stick thereafter, well, tough. Finally, let's not pretend that those ideological or ethnic conflicts in the "real world" that people are dying and killing for, are going to lead to anything less than verbal or emotional simulacra of violence here. Blunt brutal argument between Arabs and Israelis, Communists and Capitalists, Globalists and Localists, Greens and Golfers, Gollums and Gandalfs, is the only way we're going to get to this "NPOV" God that some here want to worship - or, for that matter, talking people out so they come at least to an exhausted truce.''

<font size=3 color=#115109>I, User:Ed Poor, generally believe that personal attacks aren't going to improve the Wikipedia. In the few debates I've followed in which participants spill a substantial amount of ink questioning each other's integrity, intelligence, and (probably) taste in clothes, I've noticed that no fruitful plans tend to develop for the improvement of the article under consideration.

<font size=3 color=#115109>Occasionally, I myself have been such a participant, and I judge the exercise to be a waste of time for all concerned. Now, I might try to lighten the gloom with a wisecrack (as in "my dear lab rat"), but since other parties have informed me regally that "We are not amused", this leaves me no other recourse: I'm going to have to start writing politely! Ed Poor, Wednesday, April 17, 2002

Thanks for reading this wonderful policy amendment by Ed Poor." <font size=3 color=#0E5776>What they are doing is illegal even by their own policy. Don't let them make new even more abusive policy.  He's a power of example to us all. Long live freedom from the mob. Down with Big Brother! Maggiethewolfstar 05:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

~^~ -

=please leave all comments here=

Take your medication you raving paranoid nutjob. 65.11.139.66

---

Revision as of 06:14, 6 May 2006 Sifaka (Talk | contribs) (Reverted vandalism by 65.11.139.66 to last version by Thewolfstar. Please do not compromise the integrity of pages.) ← Older edit

'''Sifaka, Please leave comments made on my page...on my page. This is my page and I am old enough to know whether I want them here or not. You're intentions may be good, I honestly don't know, whether they are or not on account of..I don't know you.'''

That sure looks like a personal attack to me. Sifaka, can you please block this boy or girl? That would be a whole lot more helpful. Thanks. thewolfstar 06:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Uh, oh well looks like Sifaka is a fake editor.

If no admin does something now to rout out 65.11.139.66 you are really showing yourselves to be exactly what I and many other editors are saying you are. I believe nazi is the term many of us has used. Or was it socialist pig, Stalinist, totalitarian dicatator, Mao Tse Tung? Indira Ghandi? Attilah the Hun? Gerorge W. Bush? How about Franklin Delano Roosevelt? Oh my Gosh. I just committed left-wing blasphemy. Now I'm dead, for sure. thewolfstar 06:43, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

please don't forget
to read this. thewolfstar 06:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Earth Open Network
Hey, I really enjoyed looking at your website. I was especially interested in the article you found about the telephone charges to New York prisons; I follow prison ministries and related issues, and that's something that I'll look into further, so thanks. Some of the other stuff, such as aerial wolf hunting, would be laughable if it wasn't true... I mean, really, airborne hunting? Hey, I'm from Texas and spent the last year in North Carolina - so I'm around plenty of hunters - but... dang. Even my most pro-NRA, pro-hunting, pro-shooteverythingthatmoves friends would think that's crazy. Thanks for an informative site. ''' Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@''' 07:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, Tijuanna, thanks for visiting my site. I'm glad you like it. The issue about the prisoner family telephone abuse was a request from the organization for me to help them out. My site is an environment and social justice action and news network. I have gotten requsets from everything from the Bill Moyers now show to Greenpeace and many others. I have even talked to Mick Hume of the London Times. And yes, it does feel good to be part of such a great network. Not that I'm a big fan of Mick Humes but he seems like a nice guy. (Humes is not par of my network.)

Are you still here? thewolfstar 07:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I don't always check my watchlist very frequently (and am about to turn in for the night). Bill Moyers, eh? That's great. I happened to have met him about a month ago when he gave a lecture in Winston-Salem. Nice guy.  Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@ 07:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, Tijuanna, thanks for visiting my website. It's Earthhope Action Network http://earthhopenetwork.net/. I'm glad you like it. The issue about the prisoner family telephone abuse was a request from the organization Campaign for Telephone Justice for me to help them out. My site is an environment and social justice action and news network. I have gotten requests from everything from the Bill Moyers now show to Greenpeace and many others. I have even talked to Mick Hume of the London Times. And yes, it does feel good to be part of such a great network. Not that I'm a big fan of Mick Humes but he seems like a nice guy. (Humes is not part of my network.) Long live the intarweb and long live freedom of speech and freedom of everything on the intarweb. Just think what the alternative would be!

Are you still here? thewolfstar 07:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, thanks for what you said on the off-wiki policy page about the thought police. That was awesome and so true, Tijuanna. peace I need to go to bed and get some sleep, which is probably what you just did. Night Merecat, if your out there on the Wiki~insania Maggiethewolfstar 07:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC) I just wrote this above and then you edited at the same time. Can you stop the cabal queens from killing forever? Thanks thewolfstar 07:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

JS ? Do you read me? Please come in. over and out. and roger dodger. I am on edge to know what you are going to tell me thewolfstar 20:49, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello
Is there any way I could help you out some? I think your misunderstanding the applications of some of the rules here. Purpose I can help prevent you getting banned again? You keep calling wikipedia a nazi organisation, but I think that's highly unfair. Lets talk some. ---J.S (t|c) 19:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

hey
Thanks for offering to help. I would be glad to talk to you. Maggiethewolfstar 19:36, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Are you still here J.S (t|c) ? thewolfstar 19:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Can somebody get JS back here. I missed his comment because I was off the Wiki doing seomthing else. Thanks! Maggiethewolfstar 19:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm around. I left the message and took a shower. (Today's my day off)
 * Would you be willing to listen to constructive criticism? I spent about an hour and read though most of you talk page and some of the diffs/links posted by people. I'm not an admin, but I have experience here and I know how policy usually applies in different situations. ---J.S (t|c) 19:48, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, I think it would be a good idea if you read my edit contributions on main articles and their respective talk pages. At least the Dem party U.S. article has a lot of talk and article changes due to my debate. Thanks thewolfstar 19:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * but that's ok. What did want to tell me? thewolfstar 19:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * JS are you still around? thewolfstar 19:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Please forgive me for formatting this conversation a little bit. It makes it easier for me to read.  As for reviewing your contributions... I can scan the recent ones a bit.  I've looked over the last 100 edits you've made and I have only seen 2 article edits.  Why even bother being here if you dont' want to help build the encyclopedia? Anyway... do you want to hear my constructive criticism? If not I'll go away and you won't need to be bothered by me any further.  ---J.S (t|c) 20:17, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah sure thewolfstar 20:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Can you please tell me what you were going to tell me? Thanks thewolfstar 20:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * JS are you there? I'd like to hear what you were going to say? Please tell me. thewolfstar 20:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, of course... please give me a few min to write it out so it doesnt look like gibberish! :) ---J.S (t|c) 20:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, ok. thanks thewolfstar 20:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Thewolfstar, may I leave you some helpful advice? I've noticed from your talk page, that you seem to get impatient with waiting for other users to respond to you. I know how that feels: I'm very fast with typing, but other people are not always as fast, or have slow connections, or maybe their attention is being distracted away from wikipedia due to offline issues. It sucks, but you'll just have to wait for a response. Adding multiple messages asking if someone is there won't help: If they're not there, they won't see it anyway, and if they are there, then they've obviously seen your first message and are taking the time to formulate a response. Hope that helps. &rArr; <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> SWAT Jester   Ready    Aim    Fire!  20:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the input, Swat, I believe you are correct. thewolfstar 20:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm still here. Is anyone out there? Roger Dodger. Over and Out yes impatient yes still here yes still frustrated. Maggiethewolfstar 20:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

JS ? Do you read me? Please come in. over and out. and roger dodger. I am on edge to know what you are going to tell me thewolfstar 20:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm here. I sometimes take a few moments to compose my response to make sure my meaning is clear . No worries, I haven't forgotten you.  But sometimes if you keep posting "are you there"? messages a bunch it can lead to edit conflicts and make things a little slower :-) ---J.S (t|c) 20:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

My long-winded constructive criticism
Ok… Like I said, I reviewed most of you talk page and scanned though your recent contributions. Also, like I said, I’m not an administrator…

That having been said, I’d help you become more of a constructive editor here on wikipedia by bring up the problems I see with the way your doing things. Possibly even the root of the issue.

What I have been seeing from you in your interactions is high amounts of aggression. I’ve read a number of highly insulting comments you’ve made. That’s a problem. Are you surprised that it got you banned? You’ve been making a ton of personal attacks all over the place. That’s totally against the rules here. There is no defense. The argument that you used of “you attacked me so I attacked back” doesn’t hold water. That is not a valid defense for making a personal attack.

One of my observations from screwing around with the Internet over the past 10 years is that when the face-to-face aspect is removed it lets our baser instincts take over. It becomes very easy to forget that there is a living, breathing person on the other end who, in the end, is likely to be just as sincere in their intentions as you are.

In addition, you’ve made a number of comparisons of Wikipedia to Nazism. I think that comparison is totally unfair and a little bit insulting to myself. I don’t want to send Jewish people to death camps. Nor do I think Jimbo or the Wikimedia foundation would like to see it happen either.

So here’s how I see thinks happening if you don’t change what your doing:
 * 1. You’ll continue to act the way you are.
 * 2. You’ll get banned one or two more times for WP:NPA or WP:POINT
 * 3. An ArbCom case will be started.
 * 4. You’ll lose, resulting in a long-term ban.

I’d rather you stuck around. The more diverse the background the better the project will be… but disruption can’t be tolerated if we are to get anywhere. That isn’t fascism, that is simply management.

If you wish to contact me off-site I have activated my wiki-mail thing. If you want to exchange phone numbers to talk about this further or whatever, send me an email. ---J.S (t|c) 20:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

JS Call me anytime, 845-626-2815 thewolfstar 20:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC) I'll call you back if it's too expensive. The most it'll cost me is a dollar or two. thewolfstar 21:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

= please read this and your threats of banning me don't scare me =

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thewolfstar#joshing_comment

Where my obvious joke was referred to a "fascist thing to say"

Let's not have anymore references to personal violence...seems a bit fascist to tell someone they "ought to be shot".--MONGO 19:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I found this remark irritating in the extreme.

Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse&diff=prev&oldid=39968216 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:202.177.246.3
 * 1) because of it's show of complete igmorance of gun use.
 * 2) because of it's complete ignorance of fascists.
 * 3) because of it's implication that I would even remotely say something that could be construed as fascist.
 * 4) Mongo himself funnily enough can be shown to be fascististic in his attitude toward American  domination, his treatment of this young Iraqi boy, and his general demeannor at times. (in other ways and other times he also shows that he is deep down a decent person. thewolfstar 21:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

This is a horrible way to treat a young boy who has obviously been shown terror and extreme violence by the U.S. government.

Please this. It is highly intelligent dsicussion concerning NPA and whether it is wrong to implement it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Ammendment|no

Plus links above to Ed's article about the NPA thing and how he is against it. Maggiethewolfstar 21:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Also this concerning NPA by Ed Poor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thewolfstar#npa_Wiki_Policy_Amendment_by_Ed_Poor thewolfstar 21:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

= Js said one thing that almost made sense =

''I’d rather you stuck around. The more diverse the background the better the project will be… but disruption can’t be tolerated if we are to get anywhere. That isn’t fascism, that is simply management.''

This is true. It is how the Wiki is being managed that I and many others object to. thewolfstar 21:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what the problem with banning personal attack is. How can a project survive if everyone acts in-civil? I'm talking about your behavior. Just because someone is in-civil to you don't make it ok to be in-civil back.  You seem to think that it does.  Your response to my critisim was a whole section about what someone else was doing.  That's not part of this conversation.  If we are to get anywhere, we need to stay on-topic. ---J.S (t|c) 21:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

= haven't gotten any phone calls yet = 845-626-2815

You asked to talk to me JS. Where are you now? thewolfstar 21:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

= please help Sam Spade =

There is a rfa on him now and he needs support. Please go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Sam_Spade thewolfstar 21:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

js
Democratic Party (of the United States)

see version before I started editing and contributing to article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29&diff=prev&oldid=48316245 the huge change since I joined the editing and debate process http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29

the change can be found in
 * 1) opening paragraph
 * 2) date party was founded from 1792 to (1820ish 1824-1828 to someone's giving up on exact date and entering 1820's)
 * 3) Jacksonian Democracy and Manifest Destiny: 1828-1854 (party's beginning with Jackson)
 * 4) Democratic Party stances Patriot Act
 * 5) This article needs a lot of work. Although it has improved greatly, and no longer reads entirely like an ad for the U.S. Democratic Party it still is loaded with unverified statements and original content.

I can use help with this if anyone interested in bringing back neutrality into articles will join in this effort, I would greatly appreciate it.

(after much debate and as much editing as I could do) the version became much different (since my strong involvement it has been altered a number of times causing a lock to be put on it. The lock has since been taken off. my debate with main editors of article began: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29 and especially http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29/Archive_4

A sample debate between Griot and myself (who strangely deleted later apologies we made to each other) Whether Jefferson's ideas are "represented well" in either party is a POV question. Jefferson's siding with the poor against the mighty, his belief in the separaton of church and state, and his belief in equal rights all jibe with the ideals of the present-day Democratic Party; his believe in states' rights and an independent judiciary are more in line with modern Republican Party thought. Whatever Jefferson would think of the modern political parties, his Democratic-Republican party is a precursor of the modern-day Democratic Party in that the party's heritage can be traced throught Andrew Jackson directly to Jefferson. Griot 20:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Then, do so. thewolfstar


 * WP:PAIN - Personal attack intervention noticeboard. ---J.S (t|c) 22:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

hey to everyone
I am actually pretty calm now. Maggiethewolfstar 01:18, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

can someone get my jailor
Dmcdevit·t, are you around? Maggiethewolfstar 03:18, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You should be unbocked now; are you getting autoblocks? &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Bunchofgrapes, just a sec! thewolfstar 03:23, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey I am unblocked! Thanks dude. thewolfstar 03:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't do anything; the 24-hour block expired after 24 hours, like it was supposed to. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. Well,  thanks for telling me about it. Sometimes I am dumber than dirt and don't think to just check things. thewolfstar 03:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Archiving
While browsing WP, I came upon your talk page. Congratz, this is the absolute largest talk page I've ever seen :D. 192KB is an absolute whopper. Please archive :D. GofG undefinedundefinedundefined Contribs 19:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Your edits
Wolfstar, I'm seeing a lot of aggresssive talk-page posts from you, but very few edits to the encyclopedia. Interiot's tool shows only 53 edits to articles, but 434 to user and article talk (338 to user talk). This is up to the beginning of May and the ratio since then looks even worse. If you don't start to reverse it soon, this account may be blocked. SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 23:23, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I am sending this to SlimVirgin in a second.


 * SlimVirgin, I got your comment yesterday. The only problem is I looked at my contributions from the beginning and:


 * 1) What you say is not true.
 * 2) What are you calling aggessive?
 * 3) If this a rule (with obvious subjective interpretation to it), why is it that I have never been informed of it?
 * 4) What happened to the entire dispute resolution process?
 * Funny enough I left you one or two comments a while ago, both of them friendly in nature, because my friend Merecat recommended you to me, and I liked your page, and you never returned the favor to me.
 * Can you please verify your accusations, show me where this rule is, and explain to me why I cannot have the normal dispute resolution that Wiki policy clearly states? thewolfstar 07:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there is any rule against "not contributing enough." I don't know what the edits in question are though, but as long as you havn't been flagrantly making any Personal attacks, you'll probably be able to get the help of a third-party admin to resolve this.--DCAnderson 16:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey from thewolfstar, I don't know how to thank you enough for responding to my predicament. I have left several comments with various editors and gotten no response, up until yours, now. Your reaching out to help me is deeply appreciated. Although I am a fast learner and managed to catch on to certain things early on here, I still need help and support in doing certain things. I have made some personal attacks in the past, always in direct response of the harassment of others, right or wrong, and have already been blocked four times as a result of them (the PAs). SlimVirgin's comment was out of nowhere when I was doing nothing wrong and a quick look at my logs will show that her accusations are false. Can you help me with a request for mediation? (The mediation request is not just for SlimVirgin who I don't even really know) I need all the help and support I can get at this point. Thanks, in freedom from the cabal. Maggie

Howdy. A couple things. First off, there is no policy that says you must contribute a certain amount to any namespace. It might affect any RfA you make, but not your membership status. So, don't sweat it. Be civil, and others will be civil to you. Secondly, I noticed you have a decently large talk page. Would you like help archiving it? Thirdly, on behalf of decent Wikipedians (and believe me, there aren't a lot of them left) and Esperanza, have a *hug*. Wikipedia can be a cruel and mean place sometimes. Talk to me if you ever need help. Corbin  ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude!

Grow up
Your on Merecat's talk page is a personal attack. Moreover, it's not even that clever. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 23:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Trouble
Trouble tends to come to those who attract it. I counsel you to follow SlimVirgin's excellent advice. Make constructive edits, ignore things you don't like but don't affect your ability to make constructive edits, do not approach Wikipedia as a venue for politicking or conflict. I see all the signs that you are doing the latter and you'll get burned if you keep it up. Contributors who just put content in articles hardly ever get the wrong end of disputes here. Bear that in mind. Grace Note 23:37, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Block
You've been temporarily blocked for this post. Please heed the various warnings you've been given. If you're not here to contribute to the encyclopedia, you're misusing your editing privileges, and when you post on talk pages, you must avoid personal attacks. Please review WP:NPA and WP:CIV. SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 01:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I could have sworn that Ryan Freisling was personally attacking Merecat by hanging around and taunting him like that. I don't believe what I said to Ryan was a personal attack. I was telling to back off of my friend. thewolfstar 01:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * You called him a "vigilante boy" and added that he should wipe the snot off his nose and the front of his shirt. If you believe that's not a personal attack, your time as a Wikipedian is going to be short indeed. SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 01:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Could you have the decency to answer my responses to your accusations? thewolfstar 01:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * No. I gave you a breakdown of your contributions. The numbers are accurate until the beginning of May, and show that you make very little contribution to the encyclopedia, but that you post a great deal to talk pages, and make lots of personal attacks. SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 01:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I was told early on by jersyko that I should talk about it on the talk page of the article and then make changes. So I did was I told. thewolfstar 02:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Then I debated with them and no matter how I debated they could not understand what I said, which was pretty simple/ The Dem Party article is a giant ad for the Dems. This is an encyclopedia not a campaign for the Democrats or for socialism. thewolfstar 02:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

He WAS acting like a SNOT. I was defending my friend. YOU are BREAKING YOU'RE OWN RULES, WIELDING POWER UNFAIRLY AND ACTING LIKE A FIRST CLASS TYRANT.

THERE IS NO RULE THAT SAYS I HAVE TO HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF ARTICLE CONTRIBUTIONS. MY USER PAGE EDITS ARE MY BUSINESS. IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY SAY. TOUGH.

BECAUSE THEY DON'T AGREE WITH YOU DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MAKE THEM AGGRESSIVE.

YOU ARE SHOWING YOUR TRUE COLORS NOW AND WILL ONLY MAKE YOURSELF UNPOPULAR TO A LARGE NUMBER OF EDITORS.

PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO PUT UP WITH IT.

Is this a socialist publication? Just wondering? thewolfstar 02:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

SlimVirgin
Can you respond? I told why there's a lot of talk on the Dem Party talk page, and you never answered this; 2. What are you calling aggessive? 3. If this a rule (with obvious subjective interpretation to it), why is it that I have never been informed of it? 4. What happened to the entire dispute resolution process?

Funny enough I left you one or two comments a while ago, both of them friendly in nature, because my friend Merecat recommended you to me, and I liked your page, and you never returned the favor to me.

Can you please verify your accusations, show me where this rule is, and explain to me why I cannot have the normal dispute resolution that Wiki policy clearly states? thewolfstar 02:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Indefinite block
After reviewing your contributions and the block log, and after getting no objections on WP:ANI, I have blocked you indefinitely under the blocking criterion "users who exhaust the community's patience". The link to WP:ANI will expire in a few days when the thread is archived, but here is a permanent link to the first post in it. Feel free to use your talkpage to protest the block, for instance by posting the template. Please click on the links in this message, they contain information you may wish to consult. Bishonen | talk 16:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC).

FYI
The quote above which you attribute to Ed Poor came from FreeNode. KillerChihuahua?!? 16:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey KillerChihuahua, I am unblocked. Didn't know that. Thanks for your comments, etc thewolfstar 16:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe you are still blocked. Blocked users can edit their own page. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh. They just unprotected the page? thewolfstar 17:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * User block has nothing to do with Page protection. Users who are blocked can edit their own pages. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * SlimVirgin had in fact protected this talk page yesterday; it's been unprotected since then, perhaps to make sure Thewolfstar had a chance to respond to the new indefinite block. (See section above). &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I protected it for a few hours because of the nature of the comments posted here during the block, then I unprotected it. SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 17:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks. thewolfstar 17:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey thewolfstar 18:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

= before you permablock me =

I know what I said to RyanFriesling was a personal attack.

Can I have an advocate? But first, before the advocate, can I talk to one of the following editors?

Can somebody please contact one or all of these editors, and ask them to come here so I can talk to them?

''' Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@'''

Tbeatty

Merecat

Corbin  ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude!

DCAnderson

Jerry G. Sweeton Jr.

given below

I've looked at what the posts that you have been blocked for are. I believe it is silly to block people for "not contributing enough" and that SlimVirgin should not have used that as an argument for blocking.

You have however made posts that come across as pretty much snarling and vitriolic, and have chosen to attack the user instead of his ideas. Whether "they started it" or not is not the issue. When they unblock you, I highly reccomend that you respond civilly to other users posts (no matter what kind of tone they used in the first place) or just not respond at all. If they are making personal attacks themselves, you should inform an admin, rather than sinking to their level.

Frankly, there are a lot of people on Wikipedia who are "dicks," much like there are a lot of people in real life who are also "dicks." If you don't like that there are dicks in the world, there is one obvious way to reduce their numbers by at least one: don't be one yourself.--DCAnderson 19:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

hey
Thanks, DCAnderson. Your points are well made and well taken. I came to that conclusion later last night my self, as well. However, SlimVirgin said I only have 43 article contributions. It looks like I made thousands of article contributions.

Bishonen, SlimVirgin and others have attacked my contributions - please my Dem Party artcle debates here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29/Archive_4#Comments_from_thewolfstar A nasty attack by Jersyko and John k and more of my debates here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29

my article edits are not POV. They strive to end POV and bring fact and neutrality into an article
 * I got the Dem Party start date changed from 1792 to 1820's (no one could agree on exact start date)
 * I got better clarification the first president to be jackson
 * One can only make 3 changes a day. Article editing is slow
 * I was told by Jersyko that the correct way to make an article change was debate it on it's talk page.

I made article edits to the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_state#Arguments_against anarchist

Common Dreams was changed back

Alex Jones

My edit was removed. I exposed his anti-sematism, his selective envitonmentalism, his hatred of homosexuals and his other personal agenda which is anti-abortion. Maggiethewolfstar 20:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Is anyone there reading this? thewolfstar 20:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 20:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, what do you think of what I just wrote? thewolfstar 20:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you've made nowhere near 'thousands' of edits. You've made hundreds of talk page edits, and only a handful of actual article edits. Your contributions on article pages are ultimately what matters. Check the edit count tool for more info (but bear in mind if you can the risks of editcountitis). And as you've been advised dozens of times, lay off the personal attacks. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 20:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * You've made about 95 article edits. That means "main" namespace edits, not talk: user talk: or wikipedia:. You can see them here. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The en.wikipedia.org data is no longer updated. To get an updated edit count, you'll need to use an external tool. This is not a reliable tool. My article contributions can be found by going to contributions and then selecting (main). There are many article contributions.


 * Another thing I would like to say to Mongo (in response to his comment on my ani) is to Mongo
 * I was listening to your advise and getting ready to contribute to the Bluegrass article. I am a bluegrass musician. I also am slowly learning how to do correct editing would like to write some of my own articles. Maybe one on Bill Keith who started melodic banjo picking.


 * Another contribution was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Community_Justice#Civil_tags


 * Another was the strong opposition to the off-wiki comments (my main arguments were moved by Wikimol to discussion) I believe it is a bad idea to monitor off the Wiki because it is potentially dangerous for all involved. Both the persuer and the persued are open to all sorts of privacy and harassment charges. This is not said out of threat or meanness to anyone. I am merely saying it is a bad idea for all involved. thewolfstar 20:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

= to anyone who may be reading this = Thanks to DCAnderson who I don't know but seems like an all around nice guy.

 Can someone please get one of these other editors?

''' Tijuana Brass ¡Épa! - E@'''

Tbeatty

Merecat

Corbin  ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude!

Jerry G. Sweeton Jr. Thanks. Maggiethewolfstar 21:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I really appreciate the help I am getting here in contacting one of my friends. Can somebody, anybody please get one of these people? thewolfstar 21:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Bishonen already notified TB, your 'SOS' messages are already on JS and TB's pages, Merecat is away from Wikipedia. They'll be here when they have a chance. MilesVorkosigan 21:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Where did Bishonen notify TBeatty, can you show me> thewolfstar 21:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think through an edit conflict a comment may have gotten blocked out. Did someone leave a question about Jimbo's page? thewolfstar 21:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

'''Those are old SOS comments. I need to talk to someone now who knows I am being threatend with indefinite banning. Where did Bishonen notify TBeatty, can you show me?''' thewolfstar 22:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

MilesVorkosigan will you help me? thewolfstar 22:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, my fault, too many initials. Bishonen left a message on TijuanaBrass' talk page (not TBeatty) requesting comment at AN/I. Remember that anyone who has posted here probably will have your page on their watch-list as well and will see that there is activity.
 * I'm not sure how I can help you, but I'd be willing to try if you have any ideas. MilesVorkosigan 22:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * MilesVorkosigan make comments defending me on my ani page thewolfstar 22:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

<BR>

indefinite ban?
Tell you what, I'll give you the same advice back when I gave Ed Poor, back when he first got in trouble for the so called "abuse" of his administrative powers, in blocking known troll and his sockpuppet, a blatent apologist for all things mainstream media, and mainstream "science". Long story short, other people got invloved, over turned Ed's block, and let a known troll back into the editing business.. Ed Poor did the only thing he could and resigned his adminship, and left to deal with his disgust towards wikipedia.. and I'll give you, the same advice I gave him oh so many months ago.. If they ever try to get in your way create armies of sockpuppets who you can use to enforce your will against your enemies, edit anonymously if you have to, just don't let these idiots get you down, and if you keep at it long enough you can have an army of friends, all sockpuppets if need be, supporting your unblocking, maybe even adminship, just don't give up hope--Freind0fEd 22:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Also if you wouldn't mind, could you anonymously vandalize the "esteemed" Mr. Schroeder's Talk Page, show him what we think of the current wikipedia rulership, I'd do it myself, but they seem to have banned my IP from editing his page--Freind0fEd 22:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Needless to say, this advice is the exact opposite of WP:DICK. Following this advice will do little except immerse you in unhappiness, and bury you in petty little troll battles that will ultimately leave you unsatisfied. Trolling on Wikipedia is pretty much hands-down the most pathetic thing one can do online. I offer you sincere advice WP:DICK not to be a dick, as this person suggests.-- User:RyanFreisling @ 22:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey Mr. Schroeder's Talk Page thanks for the great advice and for giving me a good laugh. I thought Ed Poor was a bureaucrat in the old days..no? thewolfstar 22:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not schroeder, schroeder was the name of the troll that attacked ed, my fault a little too wordy a post--Freind0fEd 22:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

= this is an example of incivility = <font color=#37127A> (Not trying to get help for me by finding one of my friends and not answering me more often than every other half hour.) To SlimVirgin, This is the third time I am saying this. Yes, you are right calling RyanFreisling a snot was a personal attack.

No, I shouldn't attack visciously, even when I or one of my friends is provoked.

You all said I only had a very short time to defend myself. I am trying to no avail. If you don't hear what I am saying or respond to my pleas or even answer my questions or my responses, I guess this is all pretty futile isn't it? Is that what you are trying to relay to me here..the furility of all of this? ---
 * All this reminds me of a story my man came home and told me one day. He went out with a few of his friends who had just caught a coyote in a steel-jaw leghold trap . You know one of those traps that digs deep into the animal's paws and will often incite him to chew his paw off in order to stop the pain and get free? He told me about how the coyote snarled at them when they approached and about how viscious it was. I said to him, "Well, I guess if you were that coyote, caught in that trap, you might snarl a little bit and show some visciousness, too, now wouldn't you?
 * Now we can blame the coyote for bearing his teeth and reacting visciously, we can blame the hunters for their part, which is in all fairness considerable, or we can all get back to editing Wikipedia in a constructive manner. I am ready to settle down now and continue editing constructively. Does anyone have any objection to this?
 * Please answer me. Making me wait is only wasting the prescious little time you have given me.

Okay? Maggiethewolfstar 22:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Freind0fEd, why is your page deleted are you banned now? thewolfstar 22:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

= Miles V = You can make comments defending me on the ani page. please? thewolfstar 22:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think it would take more than that. Check out JS's note: Constructive criticism  I think it is helpful and more clear than I can be in a hurry.
 * I'm certain that you are telling the truth about feeling attacked and that you don't feel that you deserve to be blocked, but it won't be productive to argue about that. To persuade at least a couple of admins to unblock, you would need to make it clear that you understand why people are concerned about your posts and that you will moderate them in the future and make a case that you will help us write an encyclopedia.  That's why people were mentioning the number of your edits that were to the main article space.  Most of the edits seemed to be part of discussions, not improving the articles.
 * I hope this is helpful. Sorry it took so long to finish, I was trying to make sure it didn't seem like I was attacking you.  I probably won't see any replies until tomorrow, but I'll definitely check back then.  Stay well.  Think of this as a short break to let your wiki-stress level drop.  MilesVorkosigan 23:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

No, you are blocked/banned indefinitely
You seem to misunderstand my block message, though I tried to make it as clear as I could, as well as containing the links you'd need for complete understanding. You're not being threatened with an indefinite block/ban, as you say several times above. You have been indefinitely blocked. If you clicked on my links, you will know what "indefinitely" means, and also what kind of situation a user is in when they have, finally, "exhausted the patience of the community". I have advice for you: stop trying to edit other pages than this. It won't do you any good, you won't be able to, because you really are blocked. And every time you try, the autoblocker blocks your son from editing. We don't want him to be blocked, but there's unfortunately nothing we can do about it, as long as you and he use the same IP and you keep activating the autoblocker by trying to edit. I've been trying to keep the site open for him, I've undone two autoblocks (one of them only a couple of minutes ago), but you soon create new ones. Please stop it. As long as only he edits from your IP, using only his own registered account, he'll be all right. Please let him edit. You can do that by editing only this page. Bishonen | talk 23:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC).


 * Bishonen, I'm not trying to edit anything but this page so I don't understand what you mean. Oh. I did accidentally click the edit this page button when I meant to click the history button.


 * I do make good constructive edits to article pages as I pointed out earlier in this block.


 * I was told by Jersko that I should discuss issues on the article talk page when I was completely new. I followed his instruction and did this. I also made a lot of main article edits. They are good edits. They remove POV. I've explained this already.


 * I agree that I can be overly viscious sometimes and I need to stop doing this. I am really trying now. What do you want me to do? Maggiethewolfstar 00:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

my main page article contributions http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?offset=&limit=50&target=Thewolfstar&title=Special%3AContributions&namespace=0 Maggiethewolfstar 00:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Bishonen you said to see this Users who exhaust the community's patience

There have been situations where a user has exhausted the community's patience to the point where he or she finds themselves blocked. Administrators who block in these cases should be sure that there is community support for the block, and should note the block on WP:ANI as part of the review process. With such support, the user is considered banned and should be listed on Wikipedia:List of banned users (under "Community").

The community is a well rounded assortment of editors pro and con, not just ones that will uphold one point of view.

I have agreed to behave, which I was doing when SlimVirgin left a threateinig comment on my page. I was relaxing, chilling out and leaving awards on some of my friends pages..Merecat and Tijuanna Brass.

What do you want me to do? Maggiethewolfstar 00:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I just did it again
Sorry. I accidentally clicked the edit this page button instead of the history button 'again added "again" thewolfstar 00:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

this is what you said on my an/i

''Has Thewolfstar (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) exhausted the community's patience yet? She's currently blocked for the fifth time in two weeks for this sally. I might add that if she'd been blocked for every foul personal attack and other disruptive post in that time, it would be more like fifty than five. She's been a subject on ANI several times already, compare the thread "Wolfstar legal threats" above.[64] SlimVirgin, the latest blocker, has made some interesting observations on her lack of edits to the mainspace. Besides the personal attacks, thewolfstar daily expresses her politically motivated hatred of the project and the community as a whole. What are we, masochists? Indefinite block, anybody? Bishonen | talk 05:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC).''


 * What point do you want me to contest? I can easily contest any of them. And already did contest most of them.) I really think, though that the best thing is for the coyote and the hunters to all take a serious chill, aplogize for wrongs that we did to each other and then move on to work on the encyclopedia. thewolfstar 00:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I apologize, Bishonen for jumping on you in one of our earlier dialogues. I was much too hasty and much too angry. I assumed much too much. I also apologize for calling you a nasty name later on (on Merecat's page). Maggiethewolfstar


 * Bishonen I appreciate your telling Tijuanna about my ban thing, whatever. But this is what you wrote

Indefinite block proposal on WP:ANI

''Hi, TB. I was wondering if you might wish to share an opinion here. Bishonen | talk 11:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC).''

Could you tell him it's about thewolfstar? That might help. Thanks.

And can somebody say something? You know this is unfair. thewolfstar 01:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

next time you have someone you want to drive away, try this first :

Dispute resolution Dispute resolution processes Negotiation: Current surveys Requests for comment | Third opinion Mediation: Mediation Committee Requests for mediation Arbitration: Arbitration Committee Requests for arbitration Mentorship and Probation Mentorship Committee Member groups Association of Members' Advocates The Mediation Cabal The Advocate Cabal


 * This is exactly what people are talking about. "next time you have someone you want to drive away".  That's the sort of thing that was getting people p.o.'d at you.  Yes, you're bitter, but it's still no excuse.  It doesn't assume good faith, in fact it downright accuses people of being against you right from the start.  Me?  I'm pretty thick-skinned, I let stuff like that roll off my back usually, but most Wikipedia editors are not as willing as I am to overlook incivility.  After you take your wikibreak (see below), please come back cooler & calmer and stop starting off discussions with negativity like that.  One of the traits people look for in an editor here is the ability to handle adversity without getting bitter, uncivil, or mean.  Kasreyn 03:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

they think you have an 18 year old son using the same computer as you
use this to your avdantage, log out, create a new account and pretend to be your son creating a new account on the same IP, ask them to unblock your IP so you can create your new account--EdOfFreind 01:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Say what? I do have an 18 year old son on a lan network at home. And I don't understand what you mean? Can you explain it again?
 * If you are for real send me an email. thewolfstar@gmail.com or contact@earthhopenetwork.net thewolfstar 01:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * TB will know that the blue word is a link for him to click on and that I wouldn't message him like that if it wasn't fairly urgent, don't worry. The reason he hasn't responded is that he hasn't been around, click on his contributions and see. What do I want you to do? Nothing. I'm familiar with your "contesting" things, with or without understanding them, yes. I know it comes a long way before listening in your book. I appreciate your apology but I'm afraid I won't be drawn into another of those surrealist dialogues. The block is in any case up to the community, not to me or any one individual. Oh, and nothing EdOfFreind has told you has been designed to genuinely help you. His Ed Poor story didn't have a true word in it. That last message isn't really for you, it's for me: his intention is to make me believe you don't really have a son. He's malicious. But you're not the world's greatest judge of character, are you? Bishonen | talk 01:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC).


 * Maggie, if you seriously want to prove your good intentions, the first thing you need to do is to stop associating with users who were blocked for very good reasons. (You know, just because you feel you were unjustly blocked, doesn't mean you can't agree that some others were very justly blocked!)  They only want to use you as a tool to annoy the admins with.  Stop saying anything except "go away" to people who come on here with nothing better to say but "lolz i hats wikipeedia 2".  All they can do is drag you down and make you look bad by association.  Get rid of them.  And, honestly no offense intended, but leave Wikipedia for a while.  You're not winning any converts that I see.  Give it a couple weeks, and make your case again.  Take care,  Kasreyn 03:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I am an excellent judge of character. thewolfstar 01:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * by contest, I mean defend myself. You are accusing me of untrue things at least most of them. I am looking at my part. Are you looking at yours? thewolfstar 01:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

next time you have someone you want to drive away, try this first :

Dispute resolution Dispute resolution processes Negotiation: Current surveys Requests for comment | Third opinion Mediation: Mediation Committee Requests for mediation Arbitration: Arbitration Committee Requests for arbitration Mentorship and Probation Mentorship Committee Member groups Association of Members' Advocates The Mediation Cabal The Advocate Cabal Maggiethewolfstar 01:53, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

= please someone get Cool Cat =

'''I'll try this again. I am asking Cool Cat to help me unblock.''' Cool Cat Can you help me get unblocked. They are not listening to reason or any attempt at reconciliation. I am trying to be civil. I have snapped and yelled nasty things to people. They have provoked me and others. I don't believe I am the threat to the community that they are accusing me of being. Please help me get unblocked. I promise to behave myself. Maggiethewolfstar 02:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Bishonen, Can I have an advocate? Like Tijuanna, Cool Cat or Tbeatty or Merecat, if he's recovered from the last deluge of incivilities done to him? thewolfstar 02:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

anyone around
Can someone talk to me? thewolfstar 04:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm here. They're still blocking you? - Corbin   ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude! 04:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes and for good or a real long time thewolfstar


 * please don't go away. ok? thewolfstar 04:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Um, I'm here for ~20 minutes and then I must leave. Sad, huh? Do they have a reason for blocking you? - Corbin   ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude! 04:15, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

They say they have a reason - I am disrupting the entire community there nvere has been any mediation at all and now they are thratening a long ban. I need an advocate. Cool Cat could help me I think. Can you get him or keep trying if he's not online now? Please Corbin I really need some help here. It's a long story of unbelievable dirty tricks. thewolfstar 04:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

All kinds of harassment, lies, deleting my edits to make themselves look better. harassing other people. It's outrageous and they are saying I don't have enough article contributions. I have tons of contributions to main pages. check it out, please. Thanks thewolfstar 04:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't have the clout &mdash; less than 1200 edits for me, sadly. Cool Cat could definitely help you. Here, I do have something to say before I leave &mdash; hopefully it will not vanish! ~C


 * To any administrators
 * The charge leveled here is decently serious. What you are doing is only a few steps away from impartial arbitration. Have some food for thought.
 * Did you know that a person's stance on human rights reflects their assumption of good faith? Supposedly, liberals assume more good faith, while conservatives reflect bad faith. That amuses me, especially in the face of the comment above, asking for more American administrators.
 * Anyway, it looks to me like you all have been rather aggressive. I can see the politics running through all of your comments, interpreting her edits as politically motivated and responding according to your votes. I can understand bias &mdash; only the ignorant masses do not understand bias! But, I can't sit back and just let this happen without standing up and saying something.
 * Hah, silly to think that my words matter. You all are administrators, warriors charging into battle against the vigilant vandal, the persistent POV pusher, and the unctious usurper. You bravely go into the history and block logs, looking for places where the bureaucracy's policies tell you to block or ban. Above all, you do not question, especially when it comes to policy and opinion. You do not care anything for nothing, unless it is in the page or in your heads. That is you.
 * This is me. I'm an average editor. I've made roughly 1200 edits, according to Interiot. I usually don't do a lot of radical things. I'm not stupid, like the masses are. I'm well aware of your love of the block button, your tendencies to quote policy, your official bearing and high stature. I'm even aware that at the moment, your finger is moving towards the "Block Corbin" switch while you prepare to quote WP:NPA, saying "Your post at WP:ANI was considered a personal attack. You have been blocked for 24 hours," leaving me with a note on my talk page and a day of no edits or contributions.
 * The sad thing is, you would think that what I have just said is a personal attack. After reading your posts, I am not so sure anymore whether or not any of you would be capable of leaning back and assuming good faith from me. I am not so sure whether or not you could look at my words and think of them as a critique of the administrator system as a whole, rather than as an attack on each administrator individually.
 * Coming full circle, this is where we reach Thewolfstar. I'm not sure what to say about her. After all, I've only come to know her personally as a result of seeing a fellow Esperanzian under attack. I can't think of anything in official policy that can help her. These words, assuming they are not deleted, mean nothing when compared to the weight of the administrative community's judgement.
 * So, here is what I'd like. This may seem arrogant, and will certainly fly in the face of all the community has ever done or seen. I'd like to try something liberal (*gallery collectively gasps*) for a change. Let's have a talk. Not an attempt at concensus, not an arbitration, not a request for comment, not a plea for unblocking, but just a talk. All I want is for people to bring forth their grievances, and for us to see the entire issue laid out on one page. No attacks, no revenge, no anger, just talking. I want to see how much of the community really believes in the assumption of good faith.
 * After all, I assume that there will be no reprisals for me voicing my view of the issue here, where it stands for all to read and ponder. This is posted on User talk:Thewolfstar, as well as WP:ANI. - Corbin   ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude! 04:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Indefinite block
After reviewing your contributions and the block log, and after getting no objections on WP:ANI, I have blocked you indefinitely under the blocking criterion "users who exhaust the community's patience". The link to WP:ANI will expire in a few days when the thread is archived, but here is a permanent link to the first post in it. Feel free to use your talkpage to protest the block, for instance by posting the template. Please click on the links in this message, they contain information you may wish to consult. Bishonen | talk 16:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC).


 * Corbin, you can see the reason at AN:I.


 * Maggie, people are listening to you, it's just that yelling about how wrong this is isn't helping. Think about what people are saying, don't just assume that everyone is wrong.  If you feel like a coyote who is caught in a trap and is snarling then you *need* to take a step back from wikipedia for a little while and think about things.  It's just an encyclopedia.  Come back in the morning after you and your friends have had time to think about things.  That will give them time to see the block and check in. MilesVorkosigan 04:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Miles, But did you read the ANI? thewolfstar 04:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I know a lot of eyes are watching me. If I disruped anyting it is the infernal bullcrap that goes on in here. I'm starting to seriously wonder if I want to continue editing in such a hostile place. And please don't tell me it isn't. I don't need to hear any more lectures or any condescention. But thanks for talking to me. I do appreciate that. thewolfstar 04:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Corbin, are you still around? thewolfstar


 * Yes, I did. You don't need to keep reposting things, remember this isn't a chat.  If you need to link to the block notice you can use this:  Indefinite_Block.  Reposting makes it very hard to keep track of who is saying what and where the new comments are.


 * I saw the note in AN:I. This isn't an illegal or out of process block.  You can appeal it, but the ArbCom or admins would want some kind of assurance that you aren't going to violate WP:NPA.  Remember that you have called us (or at least the admins, I'm not one) thought police, Nazis, and a number of other things.


 * I think that people can see that this happened when you were very upset and felt attacked and not out of malice, but it's still not helping to write an encyclopedia. Slow down for a while and think about things.  You can still post here and after you give it a day or so you might be able to talk to some admins about how to fix things and find a place here.  Most of them will be pretty sympathetic if they think you are here to help.  MilesVorkosigan 04:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

XD. Let's see if anything happens to me for that comment I left. Anyway, I've done just about all that I might be able to do for you. All I can give you for now is a *hug* and I hope that things are brighter tomorrow. - Corbin   ∫   1   ɱ   p   s   ɔ   ♫  Rock on, dude! 04:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

wrong
Try again, Miles it is all illegal. I don't use chat rooms, so I didn't need that reamark.

'''Corbin, are you still around? thewolfstar'''

Here's a link to my article contributions. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?offset=&limit=50&target=Thewolfstar&title=Special%3AContributions&namespace=0

Not that it'll do any good because it doesn't really matter what you do or what you say. If they want to run an editor out of here they do. Look at Merecat and the harassment he has gotten. And there have been plenty of nice gentle people they have driven out of here through a campaign of harassment. And you have others like RyanFriesling and Kevin Baas and Jersyko that can do any underhanded thing they want and get away with it.

'''Now that I have said that I will remind the admins and the many other cabal editors that I have a lot of resources outside of Wikipedia. The important thing here is the propaganda that is being pushed and the lies that innocent readers all over the world are reading. I won't stand for it.'''

If you decide to long term block me and page protect me, you are making a real bad move. thewolfstar 04:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

______
 * I'm sorry you feel that way. But remember that threatening wikipedia isn't going to help.  You are providing ammunition for the people who don't want you here.  MilesVorkosigan 04:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I looked at the contributions. I saw some fairly compelling evidence that you have little desire to adhere to our WP:NPOV guidelines. I've also read this talk page. I'm not surprised people lost patience with you. We are trying to make an encyclopedia here, not run a day care. --Fastfission 17:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Corbin
You can come back tomorrow and see if I am blocked and get Cool Cat. Why can't any of you geniuses like you Miles do that and really help me? Sorry if I was rough just then but honestly thewolfstar 04:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I have protected this page
Based on the threats above. Wikipedia will not provide a venue for you to launch threats of that nature. Any further communication you need to do should be done via e-mail. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)