Jump to content

User talk:GoodDay: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Banned means banned: Please, let my archiving bot carry out its functions.
Line 107: Line 107:


[[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] Au revoir, You have my sympathy and best wishes. You'll be missed. As will your contributions. {{cite web |url=http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Thanks+for+the+fish&mid=55C5B336BB476307316C55C5B336BB476307316C&view=detail&FORM=VIRE6 |title=Thanks for the fish |format=video |accessdate=April 27, 2013}}. <span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:7&amp;6=thirteen|<b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b>]] ([[User talk:7&amp;6=thirteen|<b style="color:#000">☎</b>]])</span> 19:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
[[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] Au revoir, You have my sympathy and best wishes. You'll be missed. As will your contributions. {{cite web |url=http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Thanks+for+the+fish&mid=55C5B336BB476307316C55C5B336BB476307316C&view=detail&FORM=VIRE6 |title=Thanks for the fish |format=video |accessdate=April 27, 2013}}. <span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:7&amp;6=thirteen|<b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b>]] ([[User talk:7&amp;6=thirteen|<b style="color:#000">☎</b>]])</span> 19:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

== Banned means banned ==

GoodDay per [[WP:BAN#Site ban]] you are "''forbidden from making any edit, anywhere on Wikipedia, . . . under any and all circumstances''", this includes your talk page. My suggestion would be to take a one year break from Wikipedia and not to even look at pages in your userspace. If you continue to use this talk page you may have your talk page access removed, and/or the page blanked and replaced with the banned user template. Please stop editing and comply with your ban. Thank you, '''[[User:Callanecc|Callanecc]]''' ([[User talk:Callanecc|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Callanecc|contribs]] • [[Special:Log/Callanecc|logs]]) 05:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:46, 6 May 2013

This editor is a WikiGnome.

Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC).[reply]

This user has been on Wikipedia for 18 years, 9 months and 1 day.

You may be wondering why my archives only start at August 2007. The reason: I didn't archive my pages before that date, I merely deleted them (as I didn't know how to archive). Therefore, if anyone wishes to see material before August 2007? check out this talkpage's 'history'.

Awards

I've an Awards page, where I keep a list of Wikipedia awards bestowed upon me.

RFAR amendment request

Hi GoodDay. Please be advised I have filed an amendment request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_GoodDay that requires your attention. Thanks. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 14:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That hurts, big time :( GoodDay (talk) 14:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I reached out to the admin who delegated me the ability to lift and apply your B&I topic ban to see if there was any flexibility for me to make changes to it, but they advised the only course of action would be to go to RFAR, so that's what I've done. If you're topic banned in one area the solution is not to continue similar behaviour somewhere else. I've thought about it for a while but I think it'd be wise for ArbCom to look over this and decide on what the best course of action is. The worst case scenario is you will be banned. It's a horrible thing to happen - I've been there. I was banned back in 2008 for six months, and it was an awful experience, but I came back and my perspective of things changed, and eventually I turned into what I am now. The evidence is pretty strong, so I would suggest you make a statement at RFAR and see what they say. Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 15:08, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm too tired to argue 'here' or 'there', Steven. GoodDay (talk) 15:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just fixed another one for you. Quite right to self revert that highly controversial, pov-riden, white space removal. Nevermind, it's okie dokie now. SixtyNineSixtySix (talk) 18:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

;) GoodDay (talk) 18:52, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Sunset

I don't know what's going to happen to me on Wikipedia. Will Arbcom site-ban me? Will Arbcom hand my case over to the Wiki-community? Whatever they choose, I won't protest.

As for me, I'm going to continue to do here, what I love best, --gnome edits-- like 'reducing white space', 'adjusting image sizes', 'fixing spelling mistakes' etc etc. Things that rarely get noticed. GoodDay (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is consider WP as a learning experience. Contrary to what my detractors maintain, I've changed a lot of my views since starting to seriously edit on WP and taking the time to properly research topics, that is, read real books by authors acknowledged to be experts in their fields, not just to look for spot quotes to support my predisposed or simplistic notions. Whether you choose to bury the hatchet properly or to hang on to it to assault your editorial opposition is your choice, no one else's. VєсrumЬаTALK 00:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As to my own advice, GoodDay, if this is going to be your sum response to what is happening, then the end result will be a one-year site ban. If you want to continue gnoming, then you need to be willing to step up and accept the arguments made about how your behaviour in these debates is counterproductive, and you need to simply step away from the drama realms entirely. My advice, if you do this and elude a ban now, is to take any page that has drama off your watchlist. AN, ANI, Jimbo's talk page, Komarov, etc. You just get yourself worked up when you go into these areas, and you just get yourself into trouble. There's a lot of gnoming to be done, and for someone like you, it can be a relaxing and useful activity. But not if you keep going into these controversial areas. Resolute 02:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry dude, but "I just want to continue on with my gnoming & nothing more" wont be enough this time. The arbs are going to be looking for a statement where you acknowledge why your behaviour in these areas is problematic, and probably how you will avoid it in the future. That's your only path to an opportunity to continue gnoming and nothing more. Resolute 02:15, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
GoodDay, I think you have about a day to write something which shows you understand and accept the various issues. Its not longer enough just to say you won't do it again under threat of a block. If you want help then I'm happy to try - phone call if you want, email me or here. ----Snowded TALK 16:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A request to Arbcom

Please allow the Canadian flag to remain on my Userpage, whenever you place the 'banning template' there. GoodDay (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, is this for real??? Pull yourself together GoodDay!! I told you the best course of action but you deleted it. 86.23.69.66 (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I won't breach WP:CIVIL. I wish Steven would've taken his request to the Wiki-community, but he didn't. The Arbitrators can only rule by what they're given. I've peeved too many editors, too often. In otherwords, it's all my fault. I did this to me. I f--ked up. GoodDay (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well there are some real drongos who impose their pov on Wikipedia in the B&I area to such an extent that the articles they attack are now useless. This means that Wikipedia can't be trusted to provide accurate, unbiased information. And I guess it's the same in loads of other areas. These drongos get away with it, and are even thanked for their efforts (you know who I'm talking about. I've got two really difficult cases that immediately come to mind and several other jackasses who are not much better), and on they go, riddling the place with disgusting pov and innacuracies. Do they get a site ban? No. The hyenas over at that arbom page (what sort of moron hangs around there?) leave them be. They pick on you, with 100k plus edits to the good. That's why you should fuck 'em off, right now. Walk away this very minute, and reincarnate yourself - clean start, what! - in a few months. One thing that will really piss off these bottom feeders is if they suddenly get no further response from you. You owe it to yourself. Don't listen to those other stupid fuckers and follow my advice, cos you're going to get site banned, or I'll show my arse on national tv. Do it now! Good luck. 86.23.69.66 (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will not evade (via sock-puppetry) any ban that comes my way. I'm an honest editor. GoodDay (talk) 21:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are being a bit hasty and letting your immediate emotional reaction get the better of you. My advice would be to request a month's delay during which time you will adopt a self-imposed ban. After the month, you can come back and if you still feel the way you do now, so be it. Otherwise, you can open a dialogue with the Committee to see if there is another way to address the issues short of year+ ban. From my reading of the discussion there, they seem ready to have that discussion, but your current attitude (again, the result of your current emotional state) leaves them little choice. Self-imposed exile might do you a world of good. And the worst they can say to this proposal is no. -Rrius (talk) 23:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've presented your Self-imposed exile idea to the arbitrators. GoodDay (talk) 01:29, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per my other comments I think you need to add something to that to indicate how you will behave at the end of the month. You might offer to have anything that might be considered controversial checked first by mediators (you can probably get 2/3 people to agree to do this, myself Jeanne etc). The real problem is that you are not evidencing any learning from what has happened. You need to directly address the specific question asked by NewYorkBrad and avoid the one off comments (like the one you just posted) ----Snowded TALK 05:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I need yours & many others help, if I'm given a chance by Arbcom to continue on Wikipedia. I neeed more help & patiences from all of you, now more then ever. I need all your support, to succeed at this. GoodDay (talk) 05:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, you will need to reflect everytime you make an edit, even gnome-like ones. Stop and think whether it would be controversial or disruptive. Reading respective article's talk pages before editing would be wise just to see if you might be going against consensus. I would be willing to help you. Deep down GoodDay, I feel you need to be on the creative end of the project. I have offered in the past to help you create articles.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Creating articles is a huge challenge for me. But, I do come across 'red-links' & so I can start from there. GoodDay (talk) 11:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps above all, you would need to stop making comments - on anything - that are based on your personal opinion, whether it's about UK / Ireland matters, diacritics, hockey, Baltic states, or anything else. That is what drags you into responding, and into trouble. Even when you think something is obviously right, or uncontentious, it often isn't, and you need to recognise that. If you are content to be a gnome, removing whitespace, etc., where it is uncontentious, you will need to limit yourself to that - and not get drawn into discussion that spirals out of control. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In agreement.. GoodDay (talk) 11:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching the Amendments page, and I read about your situation there some days ago. I came here to say I bear you no ill will for all our disagreements over diacritics. I was sorry and a bit surprised, but a quick read of the comments above is enough for me to understand why you are so deep in the brown stuff. Seeing your difficulties here, I suspect that you may be experiencing similar issues in real life. My suggestion to you, if you seriously wish to improve yourself in real life and some day return to WP and edit productively, is that you would benefit greatly by learning first and foremost to listen. That doesn't mean you bow down to everyone who you come across, but that you carefully evaluate what they say and why they are saying that. The world doesn't change to suit us, and we all need to find ways and niches to fit into life. Perhaps trough listening (to others as well as yourself) you will find your niche. Challenge yourself into realising which part of your world view needs to change. You will find what makes you truly happy; you will become a better and happier person. You will be more productive when you return to Wikipedia. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 14:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I peak in for roughly an hour per day. It's not nice to be wiki-exiled, but I'll survive. GoodDay (talk) 03:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it hurts. Hopefully you will come out of this experience a better individual and better editor. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 08:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration amendment request

An Arbitration amendment request in which you were named as a party has been closed and a motion passed, you can view the final amendment request and motion here. The Abirtration Committee has resolved to ban User:GoodDay from the English Wikipedia for a period of no less than one year. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 00:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Banned by the Arbitration Committee

The Arbitration Committee has resolved that:

In remedy 2 of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay, GoodDay (talk · contribs) was warned that "in the event of additional violations of Wikipedia's conduct policies (especially of the nature recorded in this decision as findings of fact), substantial sanctions, up to a ban from the project, may be imposed without further warning by the Arbitration Committee". It is apparent from the submissions in this amendment request that GoodDay has engaged in further violations of Wikipedia's conduct policies. Accordingly, GoodDay is banned from the English Wikipedia for a period of no less than one year. After one year has elapsed, a request may be made for the ban to be lifted. Any such request must address all the circumstances which led to this ban being imposed and demonstrate an understanding of and intention to refrain from similar actions in the future.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 00:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I still able to edit? GoodDay (talk) 01:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Callanecc isn't an admin so can't do the block themselves. I have taken care of that for them, good luck GoodDay. Spartaz Humbug! 01:17, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify. My 2 post-ban edits, weren't a breach, but rather a test to see if I was blocked. I had suspected a Wiki-glitch & wanted to point it out. I had assumed that such bans were accompanied by automatic blocks. GoodDay (talk) 02:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see this

I was sorry to learn that you have been banned. I don't really know anything about what led to this happening and also don't want to know. I hope you will be able to make a drama-free return to editing when you are allowed to ask for reinstatement. Regards, AutomaticStrikeout (TCSign AAPT) 17:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fully accept Arbcom's decision & have already resolved to reform my behaviour/conduct. GoodDay (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is clamping down on all us veteran editos. All my photos are being nominated for deletion. This place is turning into Stasi. Fuck them all.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Best thing for ya to do, is remain calm & cooperate. GoodDay (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry that this has happened. You are a very good person, honest, forthright, and kind. I wish you the best. The Un-Named One. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.94.55.98 (talk) 23:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thankfully, I'm still able to sign-in & enjoy reading articles. GoodDay (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes a break is a good thing. Best of luck in your year in the woods. Resolute 14:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Only the Wiki-community can persuade Arbcom to reduce the ban to six-months or repeal entirely. Oh well, at least I can still peak in, on the goings on. GoodDay (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you will find other interesting pastimes, whether away from the computer or possibly in other online venues. You might enjoy participating in various Internet bulletin boards, for example, or perhaps you'd like to start your own personal blog, or set up an account on a social networking site. Good luck in your future efforts! isaacl (talk) 15:13, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm content. GoodDay (talk) 15:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect inner tranquility and contentment will take quite a while, don't be discouraged. And you may realize some things are more, not less, complicated than you would like to believe. Best of luck. VєсrumЬаTALK 20:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not discouraged for myself. GoodDay (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributions are invaluable and I am sorry that it has all come down to this. Good luck in your future endeavours! Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:37, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I still peak in on a daily basis. GoodDay (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good Luck to you. As user Jeanne Boleyn said above... it's a different wiki today and the new blood, with their different ways of thinking, have little tolerance for the old ways. If I'm still around, I'll keep my eyes open for you in the future. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of our English-only readers, I wish you good luck in your fight for accuracy on English Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Until atleast April 2014, just call me Mitchell Chaplin :) -- GoodDay (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You were a good adversary, I'm sorry to see you go. 117Avenue (talk) 05:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's always sad to see a long term editor getting blocked for so long. 92.41.251.244 (talk) 12:14, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GoodDay Au revoir, You have my sympathy and best wishes. You'll be missed. As will your contributions. "Thanks for the fish" (video). Retrieved April 27, 2013.. 7&6=thirteen () 19:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]