User talk:ThatPeskyCommoner

This user is a member of the Kindness Campaign.

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

TUSC token 0c2b2b5745fc32950bafe2e327e3edeb

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

follow up on discussion on handling copyvio

I responded belatedly at User Talk:Moonriddengirl [1] to a discussion in which you participated a little while ago at [2]. Just to let you know. DGG ( talk ) 02:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 09:17, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Separated by a common language again

Hi Pesky, we have a friendly chat going on at Talk:Equestrian facility over what to call stuff and if any articles could be merged. Some of it is sorting out UK vs US English, some stuff is probably not-sort-outable, but it's a friendly, good faith discussion that could use the help of someone who is both anal-retentive and OCD. Interested?? Montanabw^(talk) 19:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Oooh, you soooo know how to tempt me! Yes, I'll wander over and take a look, probably kinda intermittently. My stupid neuro problems are getting to be a bummer now - compression of nerve root at C6 is affecting motor function in latissimus dorsi - and the muscle's now begun to atrophy, so I end up lopsided if I sit for too long at a time, plus, delightfully, compression at C5 is affecting the rhomboids on that side, which means my left arm ends up hanging like a lead weight when I get tired, which the LD muscle can't straighten up ... the joys of life, eh?! At least my sense-of-humour nerve hasn't gone yet! But yes, I'll remember to stroll over and poke around there. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 19:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Generic "you are wonderful"

		The Original Barnstar
		You are, without exception, the nicest person I have met on this wiki.  Chzz  ►  22:53, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

• [blushes] ... wow! From someone with as many edits and as many editor-contacts as you have, that is quite overwhelming. Thank you :o) Pesky (talk …stalk!) 08:18, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Request for feedback on User:Timeport101/Verax NMS

Hello Pesky, thanks for a great feedback you gave me on User:Timeport101/Verax NMS. I've implmented your suggestions and found additional references. I'd like to ask you about your opinion on this. I'm not sure if I cited refrences 100% correct (research papers and workshop materials).--Timeport101 (talk) 13:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Whoooo-heeyyyy! That's looking great - well done :o) I've slapped one {{cn}} tag (citation needed) for the version number, get that one in, and I reckon it's good to go. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 14:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Enviousness

Typos... ? :-) [Enviously: ] Ah, what it is to have tact! Bishonen | talk 22:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC).

[muted chuckles] sssshhhhh! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 22:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Block protocol

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Block protocol. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)  Done

kent holtorf for deletion again

Pesky, could use your help! Another editor (duffbeerforme) has nominated the kent holtorf page for deletion. Your input would be much appreciated since you helped me get it back live!!! Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent Holtorf 76.164.84.41 (talk) 16:03, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

References all fixed now; I also found and added the ref to his being an examiner with ABAAM. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 20:03, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Ely, Cambridgeshire

Thank you for your additions to Ely, Cambridgeshire. Just to briefly explain my sensitivity to sourcing. During my one and only FA, my sources, admittedly largely blogs and local web sites, were torn to shreds. Ever since then I have been more aware of the quality of sources and have probably leant too much towards the other direction. So yes, I should chill. Stearne (1648) is a primary source but I believe your use of this source is uncontroversial. In addition, I removed some nonsense about Hereward the Wake from the Ely article a month or so ago. He is a folk-hero and legend that should be described as such and yet it was stated as fact. He will go back in at some point, correctly described and sourced. If you wish to do it cool. In any case, despite what may seem like a complaint above, I am very grateful for your input and welcome your support. Thank you so much. Sincerely, --Senra (Talk) 16:43, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

No probs, really! One thing about being a granny is that one's learned that nothing on t'wiki can hold a candle to Real Life in terms of angstifyingness. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 17:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Contingent Self Esteem Page

Hi, Thank You for your suggestions. I added more citations, but I keep getting an error message. I asked for help on my talk page so I am waiting for responses. What exactly is the main issue with my page? I have been filling in the citation box at the top of the edit box, so I don't quite understand what this issue is. Ka01851 (talk) 22:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I can't visualise what you mean by the citation box at the top of the edit box, I'm afraid! Maybe your layout is different from mine. Your citations (references) need to go within the text, between ref tags.

So it would look something like this:

The earliest horse remains found, in the area that today is Britain and Ireland, date to the [[Middle Pleistocene]]. Two species of horse were identified from remains at [[Pakefield#History|Pakefield, East Anglia]], dating back to 700,000 BC.<ref>{{citation |title=Exotic world before Suffolk |author=Tony Stuart |date=January 2006 |publisher=British Archaeology | accessdate = 2011-03-22 | url =http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba86/feat1.shtml }}</ref> Spear damage on a horse shoulder bone discovered at [[Eartham Pit, Boxgrove]], dated 500,000 BC, showed that early humans were hunting horses in the area at that time.<ref>{{citation |title='Man the Hunter' returns at Boxgrove |author=Mark Roberts |date=October 1996 |publisher=British Archaeology | accessdate = 2011-03-22 | url =http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba18/BA18FEAT.HTML }}</ref>

and then you need to have the references section like this:

==References==
{{reflist}}

Have another look at the info I gave you before, and work in your sandbox until you've got the hang of it. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 23:34, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Adding: having taken a look at the page, it seems that the references are all appearing correctly. Is the error message you're referring to the box which says:

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page

It may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. Tagged since November 2011.

Very few or no other articles link to it. Please help introduce links to this page from other articles related to it. Tagged since November 2011.

? If so, that's what we call a 'tag', just indicating to you and other editors that the article needs some clean-up work. I thin you could expand the lede / lead section (the introductory part) a little; it's supposed to be an overview (ideally) of the article as a whole. Other than that, I think it's looking pretty good. I'll remove the current tag and replace it with one a little more descriptive for you. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 11:47, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Learning

Hi!

Please read the documentation of templates before you use them. In particular, you misused the hidden archive template in several ways.

Of course, learning from mistakes is a great method of improving our game. :)

Finally, you seem to be writing a lot on many pages, lately. I suggest that you consider your comments to be like the cavalry in an important battle---they should be saved, fully rested, for the decisive moment. :)

Thanks,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:13, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey there! I've never attempted to hat anything before, so I just looked for a hat, and copy->edit->saved it! (Being a wrinkly, I learned "the old way" .... see something useful, hack it, re-use it ... old habits die very hard, I'm afraid. And, having been dragged up on a manual tripe-writer, yes, I can't quit the habit of two spaces after a sentence. Ho hum. I wrote all my earliest web pages in a text-editor, and did pseudo-classy things by copying text from a "view source" and then hacking it about. :P) Comes of being an obstinate granny. Would you care to re-hat that one for m e, so I can then go look in the edit window and see how to do it properly? Ta! And, by the way, I drop words all over the bloody place - always have done. (You should see some of my earlier "conversations" ranting about lab-rat geneticists who have no idea about the influences of basic animal behaviour on what turns up in the next generation!) If I had some current motivation and energy, I would be doing NPP, but at the moment my health-life is total shite, can;t sit at a computer for very long, so I'm just blue-link surfing and dropping the odd comment here and there. Take good care of yourself, and have a beer on me. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 20:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Kiefer, be nice to Pesky and don't be such a snark, (smile) Some of us use things like complete sentences and paragraphs, not Twitter-speak! As for the templates, I've been here five years and syntax is a particular minefield to us non-programmer sorts. I can read the documentation and it is still complete gibberish to me! So how about just fixing our errors with a friendly, SPECIFIC "next time do it this way" instead of the "you screwed up in too many ways to count and I'm not going to tell you what they are" schoolmarm tone? We older sorts can copy and paste with the best of them, but when it comes to syntax of wiki-markup, original creation is not something we were born doing! Montanabw^(talk) 20:17, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I think KW was actually complaining that I was "involved". Ney probs - uninvolved people have dealt with the situation. Thanks anyway Montana! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 21:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

First, the hidden-archive templates (hat/hab) are reserved for administrators. Second they are reserved for uninvolved administrators.

There should be no confusion that you are an administrator. If you were to attempt an RfA, your candidacy would be summarily defeated, of course.

There are other templates, e.g. "collapse" which you should consider if you are less involved in the future.

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Even having read the template information, I hadn't realised it was admin-use-only! D'oh! I don't ever want to be an admin (made that clear in oh-so-many places for ages now), as I have far too many commitments in Real Life anyway. The only tool which would actually be useful to me is delete / undelete, mainly for copyvio's I encounter in npp. I wish CorenSearchBot was alive and kicking! I'd much rather just gnome around in npp, and do the odd bit of creative stuff here and there. And help newbies out from time to time. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 11:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

vindictive

well, i was trying to be general, in order to avoid personal attack, but if you look at User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), and User talk:Rich Farmbrough, you will see who i had in mind. disagreeing without being disagreeable is an uncommon virtue around here. very troubling, hence my suggestion of a process of civility enforcement. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 01:48, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I must be being unbelievably thick this morning! (Not enough sleep, I guess!) Those talk pages (especially the second one) were a bit sad-making for me, but I didn't spot any particular "offender" there who's particularly noticeable on the RfC/U page. If I could wave a magic wand over the 'pedia and just make people feel more kindly towards others, I would. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 07:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

i try to stay away from "vindictive" which implies motive (although i might think it) rather use "badgering" which is conduct. there's a lot of history there with ANI; blocks; etc. those individuals are symptomatic; we have a much larger problem of defining civility down. people think i'm joking when i talk of training. we need a culture change, if you have some ideas i will support you. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 00:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

How to deal with a situation where gross incivility is considered to be "civil", and trying to remain civil and follow policy is considered to be "uncivil" - even blockably uncivil - is beyond me. Somebody, somewhere, needs to do something. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 00:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

sue gardner in her blog: "I loved how multiple random people in the assembly took personal responsibility for its success. Consensus decision-making can be frustrating, and a couple of times I saw angry people try to circumvent or ignore the process by interrupting or starting up side conversations. Every time that happened, someone in the crowd near the disruptive person would patiently, but firmly, explain the process and ask the person to respect it." [3]. kindness campaign is a start. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 13:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

I wouldn't normally do this (it seems a little sleazy), but I was expecting either little response or negative, and am simply shocked. Thanks!  fredgandt 09:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I positively leaped on that one! The lack of sufficient edit points has been something that's wound me up forever! In a long (multiple screenfuls) thread or article-section, attempting to find the one part I want to insert something is an absolute bleedin' nightmare, frequently leading to edit conflicts owing to the time it takes to get sorted! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 09:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely. I share your enthusiasm. I'm likely going to alter/update the proposal since thinking about it a little more. I believe it would be far simpler to create the function if each EDITPOINT were simply a copy of the editlink applied to the section heading of the section that EDITPOINT is in. Then when clicked, the raw text in the edit window is scrolled to that point. This was my alternative suggestion but I think it's better as the primary suggestion. It's technically easier to create and provides that we can access the whole section (and subsections), not just from that point onward, so in the event we want to edit just above an EDITPOINT, we could. I just have to work out the best way to word it. The technical difficulty with my prime proposal is that the EDITPOINT would need to be an entirely new invention (not just an adaptation). The idea to cut down on edit conflicts by having this create more sections and subsections (not visible but practical) is great as an idea, but would require huge changes to the software. I think that makes that functionality an almost guaranteed "NO!" (unless the devs were open to the idea). The one way it will cut down on edit conflicts is by making each edit quicker to make (since we can actually find the damn thing we're trying to edit!). Thanks again for your support so quick off the line. As I said, I only responded through shock. I'm so used to ideas being squashed or ignored, it's bordering on depressing. fredgandt 01:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

That's the real point - making editing faster to avoid ec's. Scrolling through huge walls of text to find the bit you want to edit just takes too long in some cases. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 11:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

ANI Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Monty₈₄₅ 18:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 18:52, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

You have mail. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:10, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Read and (hopefully!) absorbed! Thank you. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 11:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar of decapitation

Not constructive
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Driving a writer off Wikipedia For driving the productive writer Badger Drink off Wikipedia, Scott MacDonald and ThatPeskyCommoner earned this Barnstar of Decapitation.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC) William M. Connolley (talk) 14:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC) :o). 14:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC) At least your reply was elegant.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC) Thanks! I really don;t want to get into an argument with you, KW. Due to neuro problems, I can hardly sit up, and my back is killing me. Can't wait for the neurosurgeon to fix my neck, before any more damage is done there. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 14:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC) I'm sorry that you have pain, especially spinal pain, which is notoriously hard to treat and whose surgery is notoriously variable in outcome. I wish that your prognosis and surgery is better than can be expected. You must be quite a comfort to your mother and the rest of your family. Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For keeping a stiff upper lip under a hail of abuse and invective while defending Wikipedia against incivility. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:41, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

As a consolation, I have volunteered to maintain all of Badger Drink's articles - time permitting. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your kindness. I suppose I may have to keep an eye out for disruption on mine, now! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 11:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Don't stop being nice to people. It's folks like you that make Wikipedia a more pleasant place. Ϫ 09:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Aww, thanks! I want a magic wand full of niceness to wave over the wiki. Fat chance! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 11:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Baiting

When somebody is upset, you ought to leave them alone. [4] I do not like it when vulnerable individuals are picked on by a gang. The purpose of Wikipedia is to write high quality articles and too help each other, not to provoke the downfall of other editors. Jehochman ^Talk 12:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to "bait" - I was trying to stick absolutely to WP:CIVIL, do what was suggested there, and actually help the guy not to drop himself into it, bearing in mind his RfC/U. But to believe that, people would need to assume I was telling the truth. I appreciate that your comment here is very well-intentioned, but my one actual message to BD's talk page was nearly a month after the notification, and as he refused to participate at all in the RfC/U (even to read it, apparently, or he would have known weeks ago that I was a granny, and not a petty little juvenile shithead), he can't honestly have been affected by anything that anybody posted there. Including me. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 12:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Just adding - I would really appreciate it if you would strike your comment about checkuser being needed. I appreciate that you probably hadn't seen the replies when you added that, but striking it with a comment that it was mistaken would probably be a good idea. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 12:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I untemplated the request, because it's inappropriate on many levels. No CU is going to go for it anyways. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I do wish people would leave just a little room for good faith. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 14:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I do think Jehochman's added comment above was unnecessary and I've left a message on his talk page about it. I've never heard of him before and it won't endear me to my fellow admins, but now perhaps you'll understand why I'm not keen on letting all and sundry get hold of an admin hat. There seems to be an odd atmoshere of support for Badger Drink as the downtrodden party, and a general acceptance of incivility as a standard means of communication. I get the impression that some people just enjoy flaming, and read everything between the lines deliberately to see if there is something they can interpret as uncivil or a PA and have something to complain about - and there's a story about that too behind two of the oppose votes on my RfA. Even pointing out obvious cases of bad faith is considered an act of bad faith - but usually by the sanctimonious ones who live in glass houses and throw stones all day long. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

It's best that everybody focus on editing the encyclopedia or developing new editors or helping future administrators, or whatever is productive, for a while, okay.

Nobody is excusing BD's incivility; you should read what I and others have written with more care.

Sincerely, 17:00, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Try to look at the bigger incivility picture Kiefer and stop throwing stones - nobody has hand-held BD and protested his 'innocence' more than you have. Also, consider signing your posts please. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I should like to think that I behave nicely to any editor who could use support, and some who are behaving badly but whose humanity I recognize. I have never claimed that BD is innocent, as I clarified above. I am not throwing stones. I suggested that you do whatever you do on Wikipedia. There are 1000 administrators who can prosecute evil doers. Give BD a rest, now.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

To offset the verbal beatings you've received for leaving one message on a talkpage when in reality a hell of a lot of others things contributed to the editors departure. I still think you're awesome, definitely my favourite granny (aside from my own). :)

^OohBunnies!Leave a message :) 15:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Awww, kitteh! thank you; much appreciated. Comes to something when caring about civility makes someone suspected of sockpuppetry! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 16:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Concerns re copyvio

It appears to me that you reviewed closely [5] and [6].

</sarcasm> Pesky (talk …stalk!) 16:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

The first of those two edits stated that it was removing "possible plagiarism from okstate.com."

It turns out that that edit did, in fact, remove blatant and obvious copyvio from okstate.com that existed in the article for almost 6 years. That edit was reverted by this identification of vandalism. It was obviously not vandalism, and I've left the appropriate strong wording for the abuse of twinkle, edit summaries and what not (the second edit was reverted by the same user, deceptively. I've warned him for that as well.)

I am concerned that you are unable to recognize copyvios, and inappropriate use of "vandalism." Please review WP:COPYVIO and WP:NOTVAND and confirm that you will remain cognizant of those policies going forward. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 16:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Pardon? I've pointed out "over there" that I've personally been responsible for tagging over 100 copyvio pages as CSD G12, whcih were removed; plus others which have now been re-created as non-copyvio articles, plus others where I have "ccleaned" sections. Since the beginning of September (yes, this year). I never once questioned the validity of BD's actual edits themselves - just the wording contained in his edit summaries. Per WP:CIVIL, as quoted "over there". And I have no idea what you're referring to re the vandalism thing. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 16:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Is this an appropriate edit summary? Why or why not? When you became aware of that summary, why didn't you do something about it? Hipocrite (talk) 17:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

ANI Request Concerning Badger Drink

Please let this serve as an admonishment for your (admitted) actions as discussed at length in this case. I am assuming you meant well when leaving the message but given all the other actions that led up to that I hope you can understand how that could be perceived as hounding. It's not necessary to monitor the behavior of other users, if it spreads other users will take note and report as warranted. While your warning had polite wording it had the tone of condescension and that wasn't helpful at all, as I hope your will agree given the ensuing firestorm. --WGFinley (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I hear what you're saying, but I'm not responsible for other people's (over)reactions. When requesting comment on another user's long-term history of intransigent violation of one of the five pillars of Wikipedia is regarded as "hounding", how are we supposed to uphold (consensus-built) policies? If an editor were to leave, not a warning, but a politely-worded suggestion on the talk page of an editor who had been violating, say, the copyright policy for nearly four years, and flatly refusing to address the issue despite several people having asked them to, there would have been no firestorm.

Quoting from WP:CIVIL:

• "to treat constructive criticism as an attack, is itself potentially disruptive, and may result in warnings or even blocks if repeated."

... and from m.dick:

• "Remember that your perception can be wrong. If the other person is writing in an unfamiliar language, or has a different cultural background, you may misunderstand their intentions."

My cultural background is that of an English granny. Even assuming the best of good faith that I possibly can, your "admonishment" of me is wholly unjustified here, and little short of an attack on the civility policy itself - let alone on me. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 17:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I understand and I'm not disputing his overreaction. However, you have a responsibility at some point to realize further comment is not going to be productive. As an admin wholly uninvolved in this incident I've looked at all the comments there and your actions and chosen to admonish you as future behavior along those lines could lead to sanction. Consider it constructive criticism intended to help you avoid future difficulties as you were purporting to do with him. --WGFinley (talk) 17:28, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Which actions in particular did you consider I should be sanctioned for? And how would you feel if someone decided that they could "admonish" your grandmother for the manner in which she was brought up to communicate? Pesky (talk …stalk!) 17:42, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

His complaint that you had followed him from various venues and then left that talk page message. His reaction was entirely inappropriate but his claim was not without merit. What if he were brought up where it was completely acceptable to use the language you are chiding him for? I'm certain you wouldn't find that acceptable and the same standard applies to you "old English granny" or not. --WGFinley (talk) 18:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

"future behaviour along those lines could lead to sanction"? Sanction for what? An error of judgement? Pesky's message to Badger had exactly the opposite intended effect, truly, but she's only human. Nothing she did was in bad faith or intended to be malicious - quite the opposite. Since when do we sanction people for making honest mistakes in communication? She apologised straight away, too, I don't see how vague threats of sanction are in any way helpful here. This is a bit like rubbing salt in the wound. ^OohBunnies!Leave a message :) 18:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

		The Angel Heart Barnstar
		for equinimity, when resistance to civility becomes personal attack Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

What if he were brought up where it was completely acceptable to use the language you are chiding him for? sorry, i have to call BS, at the Born This Way (song) defense. i'm all for cultural diversity, (even the cultural diversity to insult each other), but we need a minimum threshold of civility, and then we need to enforce it. when will it happen? until you enforce the pillar, it does not exist. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 19:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I shall add that scar to all the many, many, surgical ones :P Pesky (talk …stalk!) 19:32, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

@Slowking If you are going to call it BS then you also must call Pesky's "old English granny" BS, you can't have it both ways. Thanks for making my point, "born this way" is not a defense. --WGFinley (talk) 05:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

• The best way to enforce civility is to identify instances of incivility and politely ask the user to refactor their remarks. I have never seen a situation where blocking improved civility; often quiet the opposite. Jehochman ^Talk 05:23, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Indef blocking certainly reduces a source of continued incivility, especially when the subject is not prepared to respond to suggestions of non-blocking solutions. Civility is also helped when admins lead by example and help enforce it. What's going to happen here eventually is that the constant hounding of Pesky will cause the loss of a truly industrious contributor. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

HUMOUR ALERT, HUMOUR ALERT

NOTE: The following message is intended to be humorous attempt to alleviate unnecessary pressure.

PLEASE read it in that way. Whoop Whoop. Humour alert. Whoop Whooop.^{Anyone who has a problem determining appropriate use of humour might be well-advised to consult a medical practitioner, although of course, we cannot give medical advice. Or, apparently, any other kind.}

<Begin alert text>

Warning: by clicking 'Show' you are accepting that the following material is intended as humour only
Slowking4, I find the term "BS" to be entirely inappropriate and offensive. Now kindly stay the fuck out of this.

<End of alert>

 Chzz  ►  20:12, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

"Angry young men"

I hate to change the tone of all these barnstars and kittens, but I hope you'll accept this comment as a constructive suggestion from a (bemused) observer of the ANI thread. You've said twice now that you're a British granny. Whilst it's always good to know the background of our peers, especially as we rarely get to meet them, what you said on ANI - that "we aren't all angry young men" - was out of line. Nobody has stereotyped your background or age, and you should not do so in turn. Such a principle should apply especially where the discussion was about professionalism when dealing with other editors. Just my two pence, AGK [•] 11:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Will you be making a similar suggestion to User:Malleus Fatuorum regarding what's at the top of his talk page - or is he not quite so easy a target? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 14:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)