User talk:WormTT/Adopt/Jenova20

Big Thanks
Thanks for this space, it was a good idea. =]  J e n o v a  20 14:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep. If you have a brain fart or want to moan, it's not exactly public. Though it can be found, remember that.  Worm    TT   14:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, the only trouble i attract is from trying to add to Daily Mail or Mail Online, and i'm not the only one there either. What's the deal with barnstars? Are they badges or do they have any other use? Thanks  J e n o v a  20 15:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I never answered this! I think we've moved on a heck of a long way since the comments about the Mail, I honestly think you could manage a similar situation without letting it get as bad as it did, so hopefully we won't have to worry about trouble.
 * Barnstars are "wiki-awards". They're just a way to say thank you or well done on wikipedia. There's more about it on WP:Barnstar. I've actually designed a brand new barnstar for this course - so I dropped the two I had given you. Hope you don't mind that, you'll have a nice 9-in-1 star when you're done :) Which you can display proudly.  Worm    TT   13:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * That's good to know.
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 14:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Good job...
...on the car articles, just been looking through your contributions and I'm impressed with the improvements you are making! cue cheesy american tv music I'm proud of you, adoptee. Worm   TT   10:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, it's easy.
 * Just thought it was something worth adding and couldn't believe no one else thought of it.
 *  J e n o v a  20 15:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Christian
I'm going to try not to get involved. I was going to ask you to have a chat with Christian as part of your final test, but since he's aggressively come to you, it looks like that's been moved forward. I know you'll have responded by now - but see if you can focus on not escalating - I will consider this a pass if you diffuse the situation without taking it to the admins - Since he came to you aggressively, I would also consider it a pass if you decided to walk away and not engage. If it helps remember the following
 * Wikipedia doesn't matter. Whatever they say doesn't matter. Try to keep cool.
 * Remember the pyramid. If you can refute what their central argument without aggrevating them you will be better than them.
 * Don't forget they are people too, try not to hurt feelings.
 * I believe you can do this.

Good luck  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 08:00, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Well in all honesty i would think this "argument" was over now, not that i couldn't deal with it but Bennydigital became a great stepping stone out of there. Any response by Christian now would just look immature. And after all this time now i think the best way of dealing with him is to ignore him as anything else gets twisted or just makes a bigger problem of something. Refuting his argument doesn't work, that's been shown twice already as he tried using what i "thought" against me rather than what i wrote when it was proved that the Mail Online do edit/delete comments. That to me shows a bias against either me personally or one to protecting the Daily Mail. It also shows me that every edit made by me on that article will need a third opinion because of that. I'd also say the pyramid is useful only in theory aswell and not in an actual situation like an argument with someone like Lionelt or Christian as they don't assume good faith and actually assume bad faith and harass in Christians case.

That's my 2 cents and it's extremely unlikely i'll respond again after Benny stepped in. Thanks  J e n o v a  20 11:33, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it's fairly likely Christian will reply again - see WP:LASTWORD. BUT, if you can ignore him when he does, you're clearly the bigger person :) I'm very impressed at how you handled it all though.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:41, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Must be the new meds =]
 * Just don't seem to really get bothered or give a crap really at the moment lol.
 * But...if it's making me a better contributor then maybe that's a reason to stay on em.
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 11:55, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Tis how I see wikipedia. I've got someone with an immature grudge against me (no idea why, I think it's User:Mikeymand), and I'm really trying to care, but I just... don't.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I would ignore it, if mikeymand was actually interested he would open a new account and not leave it logged in like last time.
 * Seems to me like it was just an excuse to cause trouble and get away with it after stringing you along.
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 12:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Could also be a possibility that he created the 4 copy accounts like yours as it's too much of a coincidence right now.
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 12:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I am pretty sure that when Mikey went on his spree just before being blocked - that was him, not friends. Any good faith I had for that excuse stopped there. Whoever it is who's trying to get up my nose appears to be User:Worm that Turned 1 - 4, User:Worm that Turned (Doppelgänger) and most importantly the IP with User talk:89.242.88.227. He seems to think I hacked his account - first I've heard of that. The IP has demonstrated very Mikey behaviour, and I don't think he's finished just yet, I'm just regretting leaving User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Vandalism around, as it's a bit WP:BEANSy... Ie, I told him how to do some damage.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 12:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes but by the same logic of WP:BEANS me and Bennydigital are doing fine, it does work both ways here.
 * Besides, he'll get bored eventually and give up (hopefully).
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 12:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * In future i'll have to use WP:HERRING or WP:Hitler when these arguments happen ;]
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 13:27, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

WormTT, I feel you are being unfair. I did not 'aggresively' approach Jenova. I confronted him because he was abusing and slagging me off again. This is what you fail to notice, he keeps hurling wild accusations at me and insulting me but then you call me 'aggressive'. I would like very much for Jenova to have a chat with me as part of his final test. Christian1985 (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I have no reason to talk with you Christian, if you feel you are being accused of being "aggressive", then stop trying to argue with me on as many talk pages as possible and acting in an "agressive" manner.
 * And i'm assuming i passed this test since i didn't get a reply or reply to the last "argument".
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 17:59, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Christian. I can see how my word 'aggressively' could seem to be unfair, and for that I apologize. I used the word to express the unprovoked nature of your comments and the confrontational stance you took. As such, I do stand by the word aggressive, as I feel it is appropriate to the situation.
 * Quite simply, you two are unlikely to ever "get along", your attitudes are very different and I expect to see sparks fly when you clash. If circumstances were different, I would be recommending an interaction ban. But looking at the comments made in the section in question, I am afraid I do not find them as insulting as you do. I am extremely proud of the fact that Jenova has managed to not escalate the situation.
 * As for a conversation as part of the final test, I will defer to Jenova. Whilst I would probably enjoy conversation, with popcorn, Jenova has more than met the requirements I would expect from an editor, he has had a conversation with an editor he disagrees with and realised that continuing the conversation would only prolong the drama. So he's stepped back. In my eyes, he's passed with flying colours.
 * So, Christian, if you want to take my advice, I'd suggest you back away from the horse, and remove Jenova's pages from your watchlist.  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 21:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply WormTT, I feel you are very wrong to call me 'aggressive' and I stand by my views that Jenova has a serious attitude problem. I find his attitude very aggressive like accusing me of 'stalking' and he refuses to apologise for that very rude and abusive remark. They certainly have made progress since day one but the bad attitude is still there and Jenova still feels compelled to hurl wild accusations at me at every opportunity, this is what I take issue with. Like when he says things like 'Christian finds hidden messages in my comments to stop me posting them' and 'he clearly works for the Daily Mail and is protecting it from the truth'. Surely as a balanced editor you must agree these statements are out of order and unecessary and that Jenova needs to keep these wild allegations to himself. Christian1985 (talk) 07:27, 16 April 2011 (UTC)


 * If i'm such a vandal with a bad attitude then i suggest you stop trying to speak with me Christian.
 * I've told you countless times and this must be harassment by now, so i don't feel stalking is an inappropriate word to use.
 * And in reference to the "wild Accusation" that you keep making:
 * I posted an addition to the Mail Online article.
 * You incorrectly called it vandalism and deleted it.
 * It was reworded and got a better source in line with consensus.
 * You still disagreed.
 * You tried making things up and claiming i was meaning something other than i put in the addition to the article.
 * It didn't work and the addition was again reworded and added with you still disagreeing with it.
 * That's not a wild accusation, that's the truth you can't seem to understand/accept.


 * There is no benefit from speaking to you at all, it just wastes time and you see what you want.
 * So i'm going to warn you just once more to stop assuming bad faith, stalking, and harassing Christian, and leave me alone.
 * Thanks  J e n o v a  20 20:39, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You're at it again, you are hurling wild accusations, you are not speaking the 'truth' at all. You are the one who sees what you want. I did not make things up at all, I simply stated facts, you were the one twisting things trying to accuse the Mail of 'doctoring' people's comments. There is no benefit in speaking to you because won't listen to reason and you just prove above what an appalling attitude problem you have. I am NOT 'stalking' you at all and for you to use such a term is very offensive. You need to stop using that offensive term and apologise. But you are too arrogant to admit you are wrong. Until you realise you have a bad attitude you will never make a good editor on Wikipedia. You are the one assuming bad faith by hurling offensive and insulting accusations at me. I am NOT stalking or harassing you. There is no need for such language. There is just no reasoning with you. You state on your talk page 'All are welcome to comment' but yet when I do you are constantly rude to me and bully me. Christian1985 (talk) 21:32, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


 * That's right all are welcome to comment, but...
 * If that comment then becomes harassment and bullying then i have the right to ignore it or respond.
 * Rather than "telling" on me to Worm That Turned, how about you actually read and stop messaging me completely because all you do is try and cause trouble and start an argument.
 * I will never work with you on any project so quit harassing me.
 *  J e n o v a  20 10:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You just never learn, you do it there again hurl accusations at me. I am NOT 'harassing' you stop saying that. It is very insulting and very rude. You have a bad attitude and I don't think you will ever change. But remember when you post edits on any articles I am perfectly entitled to critique or question edits without you accusing me of 'sanitising' articles. Christian1985 (talk) 22:11, 21 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't deny you can comment on articles aswell, what i have a problem with is your harassment of me on my talk page and here.
 * You're the one who keeps involving himself and demanding apologies for your bad faith and insulting manner.
 * You have the bad attitude here Christain, now leave me alone.
 * Another comment here and i'll seriously consider getting admin involved for your constant harassment.
 *  J e n o v a  20 10:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * There is no need to take that tone. Now you are threatening me. Why is it so hard for you to be civil? I am not 'harassing' you and you need to stop saying that. I have not insulted anyone, you are the one who has insulted me hurling wild accusations at me. You have no right to contact admin and no right to threaten me. I have done nothing wrong. If you don't want to respond to my comments then fine, don't reply, but don't start threatening me and accusing me of allsorts there is no need for it. My last comment was intended by my last comment to you but you insist on having the last word and start threatening me and I felt I had to reply. I will not be posting anymore replies to you so please give it a rest and don't be so aggressive. Christian1985 (talk) 12:07, 22 April 2011 (UTC)