User talk:Jehochman: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:19, 4 December 2009

This is Jehochman's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24: 7 days

Please leave a new message.

I generally prefer to keep conversations on the page where they start.
Please follow Strunk & White's advice, "Omit needless words!"
Unblocks: If I block a user, any administrator is free to refactor the block unless I have specifically requested contacting me first.
I may remove comments posted here if no response is needed, or if I respond elsewhere.

Tothwolf's user subpages

User pages do not belong in mainspace categories. Since you are friendly to him, you can make the edit. He's reverted everyone else. Wikipedia:BADCATS#User_pages. Miami33139 (talk) 22:12, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of dispute de-escalation, I suggest you point out any such problems to a third party editor, and let them deal with it. You could post at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks to get help. As a party to the case, I'd rather not do it myself. Jehochman ^Talk 22:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cf. User talk:Blaxthos#mainspace categories on a user's page and User talk:Blaxthos#Leave me alone. I want all 4 of these editors (Theserialcomma, Miami33139, JBsupreme, and Blaxthos) to leave me alone. --Tothwolf (talk) 23:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An answer

More like... a hamster that is a sandwich. In panis, veritas! Best regards, and good luck in the upcoming election. (Even though you're a "Yalie," I'll probably lend you my support anyway!) Hamster Sandwich (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I just noticed the Strunk and White quote above, I'm compelled to omit "Probably" from the preceeding post. Best regards, Hamster Sandwich (talk) 23:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a friendly hamster! Thankfully yours, Jehochman ^Talk 15:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Signature

Hello! Thanks for the heads-up, but I actually fixed it awhile ago. But for future times, don't hesitate to leave me a message. Thanks! --Addihockey10^{(review me!)} 04:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 07:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[Jehochman reaches for the Brussels sprouts] Thank you very much. I hope you had a pleasant holiday. Jehochman ^Talk 14:01, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit at your case request

Was this supposed to do something other than add a header? Dougweller (talk) 14:26, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe my intent, and the committee's, is clear: there's not going to be a case. I'd very much like to drop the matter, as I've stated several times, and am hopeful that the other parties will drop it as well. Thank you for asking what I meant. I am not exactly sure of the best way to deal with the residual content. I sought to minimize the risk of further disruption to the community by collapsing the discussion and placing a header on it. It was my request, and I hope nobody is offended by my taking small liberties with it. Perhaps you could speedy archive or remove the request. I'll leave the final disposition up to you. Jehochman ^Talk 15:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black Hole

I wanted to wish you the best in your efforts to bring that article to FA status. I'm sadly unqualified to assist; mostly I just monitor for vandalism and the occasional chuckle about things that turn up on the talkpage : ) Doc Tropics 20:30, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some articles attract more than their fair share of unconventional views. Hopefully none of them will try to disrupt the work. Thank you for keeping an eye out. In a while I'm going to do some pretty brutal reorganizing and pruning. Best regards, Jehochman ^Talk 20:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That messy thing

Excuse my commenting on this, but this re-opening of the resolved mess by erasing the "resolved"s is not a good idea. It is not my place to undo that, but someone ought to (or do something more fitting) ... Someone whose voice will not be questioned. (No reply necessary.) Proofreader77 (talk) 02:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It will be simpler to just not post anything else to that thread. It can end naturally. I am not going to block anybody over an unretracted personal attack of the form "you did X wrong", where clearly X is false and everybody sensible knows it. If the accusations appear on other fora and continue to be repeated, then maybe, but not yet. The person making the accusations is damaging their own reputation, but causing no harm to Cirt. Jehochman ^Talk 03:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciate your response/insight. The "wave dynamics" seemed not to be trending toward "damping," but will trust your experienced eyes/gut. Oh and, happy holidays. Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 04:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think you are right. I've sprayed some flame-retardant foam on the thread. Hopefully that will be the end of it. Jehochman ^Talk 04:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Jehochman, I appreciate your input and sound judgment in this matter. Cirt (talk) 04:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Jehochman ^Talk 04:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jehochman, I agree with the summary you made in your closing of the thread as resolved and archiving it. But Redheylin (talk · contribs) has yet to retract anything or state that he will refrain from his inappropriate behavior of attacks in the forms of unsupported claims against other editors in the future. How can this be remedied? Also, will you monitor the thread to make sure it stays archived as is this time? :P Thanks again, Cirt (talk) 04:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will watch. I assume Redheylin will take the good advice that's been given, or else we'll deal with any failures when they happen. Jehochman ^Talk 04:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give Redheylin (talk · contribs) a warning at his talk page similar to the one left in the "resolved" close of the thread? Or is that redundant and not necessary? Cirt (talk) 04:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant, and possibly unhelpful. He's already been warned by GWH, two or three times. Piling on may only make him feel cornered and he might behave worse rather than better. Jehochman ^Talk 04:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, agreed, that sounds reasonable. A side note, Redheylin (talk · contribs) has placed tags at the top of articles I subsequently improved, North Carolina v. Alford and Alford plea. A third-party editor stated the tags should be removed [1]. And then we have the comment about the quality of my research and sourcing by Brumski [2]. Can those tags be removed? Cirt (talk) 04:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not for me to decide content matters. Go to the appropriate noticeboard and ask uninvolved editors to help form a consensus. Jehochman ^Talk 04:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good idea. Cirt (talk) 05:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jehochman, please see [3]. Recent comments by Redheylin (talk · contribs), after your close of the ANI thread, seem to go against the warning you had left at the top of the "resolved" portion of the ANI thread. User continues to make unsupported attacks. What to do about this? Cirt (talk) 11:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New, but related issue: At article Rajneesh movement, Redheylin (talk · contribs) introduced WP:WEASEL wording [4] and then completely unsourced material [5]. So apparently, Redheylin (talk · contribs) feels he can make unsupported claims about editors, and also add unsourced material to controversial articles? Cirt (talk) 12:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moreso concerned however with that former issue. Cirt (talk) 13:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could start an RfC on them. I don't see much chance of a long term block or ban until we develop a consensus that they are more trouble than their contributions are work. Jehochman ^Talk 14:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Jehochman, he is still making unsupported attacks, eg, [6]. Can you take some sort of action here? The user has already received numerous "final warnings" about this from other admins. Cirt (talk) 14:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, can you start a discussion at WP:ANI, leaving diffs and especially diffs of the warnings. I'll check on it. Jehochman ^Talk 14:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Can you have a look? Cirt (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the midst of another very hot dispute (that appeared to have been resolved, but just exploded). I will definitely look, but I might not act until the other dispute is resolved, or until we get some input from uninvolved parties. Jehochman ^Talk 15:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you wish... :( Cirt (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even I can only handle so much drama at a time. Jehochman ^Talk 15:47, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If only you had worked in "inconceivable" into your response. Shame on you, Jehochman. xD --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that word means what you think it means. Jehochman ^Talk 15:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've made my day. xeno's a Star Trek fan, you like The Princess Bride... I like this site's admins. :P --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 16:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Note

You will already be aware of my views about Die4Dixie's comments towards you today. I just wanted to reiterate my abhorence of his appalling calumny against you (and Slrubenstein) and share with you my view that no editor should ever be the target of such hatefulness. I might add that I am greatly saddened by those who would attempt to rationalise what he has done. My best regards, Crafty (talk) 08:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The sheer number of apologists is appalling. Maybe things will get better when people wake up in a few hours. Jehochman ^Talk 08:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I earnestly hope so. Crafty (talk) 08:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When a disruptive editor is confronted, their friends are often the first to respond. In time, the thread achieves a sensible balance. Jehochman ^Talk 08:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that and I'm certain commonsense will prevail as more reasonable editors read the thread and share their views. That said you have conducted yourself with commendable restraint under these trying circumstances. A most creditable performance in the finest traditions of WP administrators. :) Crafty (talk) 08:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this page is reserved for criticism only. ;D Jehochman ^Talk 08:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just chimed in; I'm on that damn page today, anyway. Really, there's nothing but trouble with this 'anyone editing'. This is what 50kg banhammers are for. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Some people get an unfair deal, but this guy seems to have been given more than enough chances to shape up, and he has no apparent intention of doing so. Jehochman ^Talk 08:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I considered your original 1 week block appropriate but lenient given the history. After reviewing the editor's contrib history I would fully support a community ban. When I sat down at the computer with my first cup of coffee and logged in to WP, I was hoping to find something that would make me smile; y'know, one of those amusing comments left at Evolution or Black hole. Needless to say, I'm not amused. Doc Tropics 16:05, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry this spoiled your morning. I think we need to draw a line in the sand that attacking other editors based on race, religion or ethnicity is out of bounds; the same as making a legal threat. Block until the remark is retracted. Jehochman ^Talk 16:10, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that idea in general, and would even expand it to include nationality, gender, and sexual orientation. However, any policy that touches on "motive" would require very careful wording. Once the current issues have been resolved I think it would be a very useful to initiate a community discussion. Good luck, Doc Tropics 17:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Werwalt´s talk.

You have a message there.--Die4Dixie (talk) 01:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied there. Jehochman ^Talk 04:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, wasn´t watching his page. See you there.--Die4Dixie (talk) 05:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Care to explain?

Would you care to explain why you collapsed the subthread at ANI calling it a "tangent"? I'm interested in your reasoning.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 04:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was a disruptive, retaliatory tangent that did not have a proper basis. That thread has been horribly disrupted, and I predict that the matter will end up at ArbCom, and several parties may be sanctioned as a result. Jehochman ^Talk 04:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Cut down on unwanted drama.--Sky Attacker the legend reborn... 04:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. If there are issues with an administrator, those should first be discussed with the admin directly. Then find a neutral party to provide a third opinion. If that fails, consider starting an admin conduct RfC. Jehochman ^Talk 04:22, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

High ethics and integrity

A propos of [7]. Jehochman, FT2 possesses high ethics and integrity, but you have to realise he needs a clear desk and a more appropriate venue before adding more explanation of the difference between October and August. Bishzilla has asked me to remind you that any explanation by FT2 of the timing of your action needs to fit round his work and others' work, real life, and other historic matters, and to coincide with a family season, a new arbcom season and the start of the working year. He could also need to check various large archives, with review item by item where a search cannot be specified, to ensure accuracy, and to ensure the balancing of that with a few overriding issues, if applicable, such as privacy of users, WMF requirements, ability to cite emails and getting permission if needed, and so on. Since he doesn't have the necessary detailed information about the difference between October and August, he can't change it with any precision, so he's overall going to let it stand. Don't fuss, now. Bishonen | talk 16:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Wikivoice interview

I removed several Wikivoice interviews from candidate statement pages because they do not appear to be neutral and they were not added by the candidates themselves. However your interview seems more neutral and you have added it to your own user page so I assume you approve of it. Will Beback talk 20:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am happy to leave it. Jehochman ^Talk 22:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jehochman - me again. While I admit to having some issues with some of your edits on WP, I did listen to your interview. I strongly suspect that we could be great friends IRL. I thank you for taking the time to do the interview, it did allow me to feel that I got to "know you a little better". I wish you the very best in the real world, and offer enjoyable holiday wishes for you and your family. Hugs and kisses to that new little addition to the family. All my best, Ched. — Ched : ? 21:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ched, thank you for your kind remarks. Disagreeing is not a fault. I've never thought of you as a bad guy ([8]), and I hope you enjoy your holidays too. We've got a lot of wrapping and decorating to do. Best regards, Jehochman ^Talk 22:05, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taking the bull by the horns

Other than citing the diff as rationale for changing from support to strong support, what do you suggest I do with this post? /me resists urge to call you "Cowboy" or employ compound noun formations of "bull" Durova³⁷¹ 22:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Much obliged, ma'am. [Tips his 10 gallon hat] You may keep it forever and ever. Yee ha! Now I gotta go find me a bull to ride. Jehochman ^Talk 00:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(sotto voce) With bad guys and 10 gallon hats ... sounds like a Western. :-) Perhaps a Wikipedia musical. (Gallops away humming.) Proofreader77 (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy trails to you 'til we meet again. Durova³⁷¹ 00:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 153: / Line 153: @@
 : Much obliged, ma'am. [Tips his 10 gallon hat] You may keep it forever and ever.  Yee ha! Now I gotta go find me a bull to ride. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 00:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 ::(sotto voce) With bad guys and 10 gallon hats ... sounds like a Western. :-) Perhaps a Wikipedia musical. (Gallops away humming.) [[User:Proofreader77|Proofreader77]] ([[User talk:Proofreader77|talk]]) 00:16, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
+:::Happy trails to you 'til we meet again. <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]</font><sup>''[[User talk:Durova|371]]''</sup> 00:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)