User talk:Mistress Selina Kyle/Archive1
Important sections to read regarding ban and recent events leading up to it:
Harassment and bigotry by malber(p.s. to readers, I haven't changed what I said near the bottom of here in the reply to meagamanzero, I will be consciously making much more effort to try ignore nastiness from other users and not retaliate as well as confining facts about corruption to outside sites, the replies below are just related to a previous issue and the conversation will not affect my edits outside this page Hi. You sent me a message to my IP address after I edited the Asperger's page. I actually do have an account here, but sometimes I edit without logging in. You seem really cool and I think we havea lot in common. I also play the bass very well and have asperger's syndrome! Is there any way to send a private message here? Electricbassguy 01:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC) Are you ever going to talk to me? You seem cool... I'm interested in talking to other aspies... Electricbassguy 10:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
When is she coming back... when did she get banned? I got some message from her only a few weeks ago when I mentioned Asperger's somewhere. Electricbassguy 23:25, 5 February 2006 (UTC) Please don't increase the block as I already said (see near bottom) the above things, and if you read below what malber said it should be clear to see that the bigoted comments he made would be enough to get *anyone* angry [as an example imagine someone saying that "gay people are just perverts trying to hide their bad behaviour behind a false sexuality [e.g. the bigoted view by some that "gay people are just straights that need to be cured"]) - in future I will not react to such nastiness though --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 11:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC))
Why is he, the one that personally attacked me, not banned and only me who as should be quite understandable got angry with vicious personal attacks like those by malber? This is sick and I would have thought better from you of all people to go along with this bigotry by malber, Essjay (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA).. -Selina
My responseThank you for your concern for this issue! [1]: Please don't lie and make slimy attempts at misinformation and fudging the facts: A paraphrase of what you said is no less true. Here's the direct quotes from the link above:
I'm not offended at ideas, I'm offended by the vile bigotry you spout on the administrator's noticeboard and get away with it. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 22:46, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
That I spend a lot of time trying to make progress in Wikipedia itself and getting rid of some of the rampant corruption going on is no less important than your editing on comic books, kiddie television shows, lord of the rings and music colleges most people have never even heard of. Get off your high horse, you're not so important yourself, and it's laughable looking at your contributions to accuse me of "not making important edits". --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 22:46, 14 January 2006 (UTC) I find it truly touching that you took the time to go through my contributions, but I feel that your habit of misconstruing the facts has followed you in this endeavor. Because you've shown that you're so concerned, I've decided to make this easy for you. Here is a condensed list of all of the articles I've edited, both minor and extensive:
Again, you seem to think I was talking specifically about you. Nothing could be further for the truth. I see that you've stricken out some of my comments above. This is your talk page and it is your right, but it is quite rude. If you were to post on my talk page, I would show you courtesy there. But I imagine at this point, it is a bit much to have these kinds of expectations about you. A wise person once told me, "Don't argue with the Tellarites." I think it's high time I took his advice. --malber 02:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Sections regarding previous ban by Sean Black for talking about SlimVirgin's copyvio:
Goodbye.You have been blocked indefineitly for trolling, personal attacks and general dickery. WP:AFG only goes so far, and I've had enough of this garbage. Goodbye--Sean|Black 07:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Why I was really bannedI found this while looking on google for mentions of me:
I have never criticised either unjustly, and never made anything that could be perceived as an attack that wasn't actually referring to actions undertook on their part.. Pointing out misues of admin privileges and copyviolations is not "trolling"..
This is a lie, I never supported the "right" to fair use images on user pages and I have removed fair use images from user boxes before (example: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AUser_AI&diff=33512788&oldid=33511054 ) and have NEVER said that fair use images should be allowed to be used on user pages: (Assuming good faith:) It sounds like he's got me confused with someone else. I DID disagree with Kelly Martin's deletions, but that was, as I said all along, on grounds of allowing people to show what their POV is on user pages and nothing to do with the images (I personally think she should have just removed the images like is the standard for anything else, it would have been a lot more sensible). I am sorry for arguing too often but if you look at the list of example good edits you can see I'm not a vandal and only wish good for Wikipedia, especially with regards to the "community" section below.. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 17:00, 12 January 2006 (UTC) A list of some positive contributions:Because of some people claiming I don't make them, who obviously aren't looking properly if you read below.. (the fact that I tend to make lots of little edits one after another which kinda ruins the diffs when people are only looking at contributions and not checking the individual articles' history probably doesnt help I know but oh well..):
got to go out (college) will fill in more later... this is really is a joke, I like Wikipedia and I do much more good than harm... I really do try my best and have been getting better a bit, I rarely actually insult people now.. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 08:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
In answer to MSK's speculation, I'm actually a user of Debian and Ubuntu systems and use neither Apple nor Microsoft products. That is not to say that I condone the abuse of Wikipedia resources to attack either company or their customers, however. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC) Why she was bannedJust for a bit of history, check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AN/I#User:Mistress_Selina_Kyle And yet this is the reason why she was blocked: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Mistress_Selena_Kyle_blocked Notice the "neutral" view of Kelly Martin. Wait on, she wasn't the one that was unfairly blocking MSK was she? Or one of the 2 corrupt admins that MSK was trying to expose? No, no, obviously not. KM would never pretend to be neutral when she's actually directly involved... Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 00:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC) Kelly Martin is one of very few users on this wiki who are entrusted with checkuser privileges. This means that she can examine IP numbers of users. In her note on WP:AN/I, she notes that "On a "lark" I ran a CheckUser on the dear departed Mistress Selina Kyle. It turns out that she shares an IP address with a veritable nest of program vandals. Two of the IPs she has used, including the one she shares with the squad of vandals, belong to a company not engaged in the business of providing web connectivity (they are actually a hosting provider). I suspect that "she" is in some way involved in the program vandalism we've been seeing for months. Given this, I see absolutely no reason why she should not be banned permanently, and the earth salted in her footsteps." [5] This is pretty serious stuff, and coming from Kelly it is not something to be taken lightly or described as the activities of "corrupt admins", lest one be mistaken for a troll. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:25, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
That would be believable--we do sometimes make mistakes--if you had not revealed in your edits your pathological propensity for troublemaking. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
If they were interested in justice, they'd check out your story. It's plausible -- much more plausible than suggesting you're connected with Willy on Wheels. But I'm afraid you've already been hanged. Probably best to rise from the dead and keep your nose clean. -- Grace Note. Blocked for personal attacksI have blocked you for four hours for not respecting the no personal attacks policy I've placed on my user page. Your comments were a personal attack of User:Ambi and will not be tolerated. You were warned by the warning at the top of my page, which I also seem to recall you complaining about, so there's no excuse for not being aware of it. Please refrain from personal attacks in the future. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Derry/LondonderryThanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Kiand 20:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you were just trying to experiment, then use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Djegan 21:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
If you know anything about Northern Ireland, you should know that this is a difficult subject. The BBC uses "Derry" and "Londonderry" alternately in the same news item and begins each alternate story with one, then the other. Wikipedia can't do that easily - the article has to go somewhere. So we have ended up with a compromise that is equally unfair to both points of view. We all have to accept that shouting louder at people doesn't resolve a dispute, it only makes it worse. Before you leap in making wild accusations, please read Derry/Londonderry naming dispute and then the discussions at talk:Derry and talk:County Londonderry. Truth and reconciliation commission might help too. On Wikipedia, we use the term "vandalism" when someone destroys a consensus text that has evolved as the most neutral way to describe the issue. Inevitably, people on each side with very firmly held views will continue to believe that it is disgracefully biased towards the opposing point of view. The texts of "Derry" and "County Londonderry" have been attacked repeatedly by Republicans as being Unionist propoganda. --Red King 21:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC) "Vandalism"If I gave the impression that you couldn't improve existing text, then I agree that this is quite wrong. "Vandalism" was a lazy way to describe waht you did and the term really applies to wholesale blanking or over-writing with obscenities. A more accurate way to express it is that we aim for neutrality (NPOV = neutrality) A blatantly "(partisan) point of view" or "POV" - which should be PPOV - will get reverted. That goes for Sinn Feiners as well as DUPers. --Red King 00:48, 18 December 2005 (UTC) Hello and welcomeYou seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot a little bit. First of all, let me give you the official welcome: Welcome! Hello Mistress Selina Kyle/Archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Secondly, I should point out that the posters above are quite mistaken--none of your contributions should have been considered vandalism. That said, do try to interact on talk pages before making significant changes to controversial pages. Oh, and one more thing--your user page currently claims you're an administrator. You should remove that template--it's not a good idea to give a false impression about yourself. Please let me know at my talk page if I can be of any assistance. Chick Bowen 21:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
User worldThank you for that o mistress - your wish shall be done :) Grutness...wha? 00:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
World citizen?Out of interest, where did you see that I was a "world citizen"? I don't remember writing that. Regards — Dan | talk 00:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
ReplyGod bless you for your kind words miss! I've now added myself to the wiki punk rockers list which I never previously knew about! quercus robur 02:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC) (PS that pic was taken 22 years ago...)- This is me as well (lying down...) [6] Sorry...I apologize if I sounded grumpy, but it's very suspiscous when someone does that. Sorry again, but that was not something I could take lightly. I didn't want to offend, but it's very dangerous for someone to impersonate an administrator, and needs to be avoided. Sorry again.--Sean|Black 02:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
OleI don't think i can reconcile Prodigy with techno, sorry. I might have to assert my POV there...Anyways, read this: "happiness not money - money is just a tool for helping it along for both yourself and others" Would you be suprised if i stated that happiness will buy you money? Just read an article in the WSJ or the Times a few days ago, citing recent research that attests for that. So, be happy, and more likely than not, you'll end up loaded :) Cool friend template, by the way.Dragonlord kfb 08:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC) Counter vandalism unitGreetings, mistress; I hope that thou don't matter that I took thy advice on User:Rama's talk page for myself, and the big pic from thy user page. May I hear from thee how can I join thy counter-vandalism unit? HolyRomanEmperor 17:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC) ArchivesHi, sorry for moving the page. HolyRomanEmperor asked me to - he's been having some trouble with his connection lately and can't make large edits. Izehar (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion - I'll have to make my own version, as you can see from the many userboxes on my page that I don't like to share and I don't like bright colours. World citizens like us have to stick together :-) Izehar (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC) ImpersonationDon't worry, I can handle this myself :) - User:Automnial will be blocked from editing indefitely. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Kind regards, FireFox 22:14, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
In Love with BatmanI'll show you show drug free hedonism, baby... besides, Batman and Superman are already a couple, see below! Dyslexic agnostic 02:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC) Panels from World's Finest #289 Panels from World's Finest #289 Ownership of Sci Fi Channel (UK)Hi, I notice you edited Sci Fi channel (United Kingdom) to change the ownership. I have started a discussion of this at Talk:Sci Fi channel (United Kingdom)#Ownership, as I am not 100% convinced you are correct. Feel free to join in and welcome to Wikipedia. Regards MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 12:19, 19 December 2005 (UTC) Re: my talk page Damn. My secret is out. So is yours. ;) Seriously, though, I'm not much like him - I just happen to like the name, and it's usually not occupied. Sam Vimes 15:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC) A UK registered charityI spotted your note about this on Jimbo's talk page and thought I'd reply. If you look at m:Wikimedia UK you'll see that a group of us are trying to do something very similar to what you suggest. A UK charity should be fully registered by the middle of next year, jguk 21:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC) re: World citizenship boxSorry, there's no space for that on my userpage. :) I might rearrange it in a while, but until then I just can't figure out a good place to put that template... perhaps it should look more like the Babel templates so it'd fit in with them...? - ulayiti (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
I thank you. VandalismPlease refrain from vandalising the Freemasonry article, or any other articles, in the future. Willy Logan 02:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC) Deletion of 'green wikipedians' categoryHi. I saw you're (like me) listed in this category which is up for deletion. Hoped you'd like to vote in favor of keeping it... Thanks! Larix 02:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
WikiMedia UKWe aim to incorporate soon. Do you want to be a Trustee or a Member? LoopZilla 12:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
What?Merry Christmas? What about Hanukkah? Hanukkah is on the 26th December this year - aren't you going to add Hanukkah to your talk page. What ever happened to political correctness? ;-) Izehar (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Was Christmas really around long before Jesus? I should probably read the article on Christmas, but I can't find my glasses ;-) Izehar (talk) 18:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC) "User freespeech" templateI like it! Good work hun! Tom 18:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC) Selina, I bet you'd love to be a member of the Welcoming committee. I am, it's a very easy job. Izehar (talk) 18:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC) Free speech templateThanks for telling me about the template. I've switched the userbox on my page to use it. Arbcom ElectionWe're not sure yet how the election will be held, but I'll be sure to let you know when it happens, thank you for your vote! Us Aspies have to stick together, so please let me know if I can help you with anything. You made my day! karmafist 02:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC) Poetlister blockThanks for your message, I've commented on the noticeboard. Arniep 02:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC) I think this warrants an ArbCom against Lulu of the Lotus Eaters et al. I think it has gone too far now, what with this spurious block as well, as apparent "resolution" of this problem lol. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 05:12, 22 December 2005 (UTC) Well, this is a case of "you're right but you can't win anyway". I have zero confidence in the arbitration committee doing anything. Really, I recommended for the affected parties to just quit Wikipedia and never come back. And as for everyone else involved, well, we should pray that we won't get banned ourselves for daring to question admin decisions. You don't want to end up like User:Lir now do you? He was someone who took on admins over a similar issue. It is, quite simply, hopeless. Admins can do basically whatever they want to here. I've seen this kind of thing many times and I guess its not really worth fighting. No doubt the ban was used to try to push forward the argument that, in spite of evidence to the contrary, Lulu was actually a good guy, since the person that they abused is now blocked because of it. Then they will demonise Poetlister and everyone involved. Its just not worth it really. We should just sit back and say that no, the Jewish Year Book is not reliable, what just because its an official Jewish publication listing the names of all Jews and who they are doesn't mean that we can use it. We should also say that just because someone is a judge of the Supreme Court of Israel doesn't make them Jewish. Just so long as we can allow ourselves to agree to things like that, and accept admin corruption, then we are fine. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 05:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC) Hi. Thought I'd write in here to let you know that I've made a page going over the whole Poetlister block issue, with lots of evidence. See here: User:Zordrac/Poetlister. Enough to go to Jimbo over? What do you think? Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 17:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Thanks for fixing things up. I asked Poetlister to have a look too, and she suggested me removing her first name from it and didn't want me to list the contents of her e-mail to me for privacy reasons. I still think that the contents of her e-mails actually help this case, but that's her choice. I noticed that you got rid of the pic from there, and you are right. It was vandalised. It seems to have been vandalised to try to infer that Rachel Brown and Taxwoman were friends, when they don't seem to have known each other. Thanks. Feel free to edit other parts of the article, but please be respectful that it is my user sub page, hence I actually do "own" it (i.e. its not like a normal article). Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 18:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC) That last edit was really good. I wonder who owns that IP address. Someone involved in this dispute perhaps trying to manipulate things to make it look like the block was deserved? Thanks again. :) Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 18:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Poetlister blockPlease do not revert a sock puppet notice again. If you object to the block, by all means discuss it with the blocking admin, who knows what the evidence is, but in the meantime, please do not interfere with her decision. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 02:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC) EminemI realize you have AS, but you don't have to take it out on us. You're being incredibly annoying. Stop putting back my own words when I do not wish them there. Also, why on Earth did you have to a.) report the great picture everyone had agreed on, and replace it with an ugly one, which, of all things, isn't even a personal shot. You claim to have found the source, but it's ALL OVER THE WEB. It's everywhere. Do an Eminem google search, non-image, and that's the first thing you see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelic Wraith (talk • contribs) Sorry for butting in here. But one of the misunderstandings about Asperger's Syndrome or autism generally is that it is not something that is somehow "caught", that it is curable or somehow controllable. It is a condition that defines who you are. Someone with Asperger's Syndrome can no more stop having it than someone without it can start having it. Whilst it is possible to pretend not to have it, you can't stop having it. It is difficult for AS people to cope with others, just as it is difficult for neurotypicals to cope with AS people. So I hope that there is a bit more understanding all around. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:30, 22 December 2005 (UTC) Thanks!I try. It's an uphill battle, even when it seems that a majority of Christians are willing to accept logic and agree that their God was probably born in autumn sometime. (Personally, I think the bulk of the evidence indicates that he either didn't even exist or was so different from what people think that it doesn't even matter, but I'd never try to force that POV into an article.) elvenscout742 12:27, 22 December 2005 (UTC) Template: User SocialistHi Mistress Selina Kyle. I've reverted your change to the userbox User Socialist. I note that you do not use this userbox yourself; therefore you are imposing your views on the dozen or so people who do use it and making unilateral changes to a dozen user pages. If you'd like to get a consensus (of people who use this userbox) for change, please go ahead. But please don't change a box without getting that consensus, especially when you don't use it yourself. It's not fair. Thanks! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 18:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC) As the creator of this userbox U second that. If you don't like it, don't use it (and you don't use it), there are plenty of flag waving versions around. Bartimaeus 22:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC) Um, it symbolises communism not fascism these are two completely different concepts, if you are having trouble understanding this please read the related articles on wikipedia for clarification. As for dictatorship, though many communist countries are or were dictatorships this is not fundamental to communism. Just as the USA's right-wing bible-bashing government is not a requirement for democracy. The more important part of the hammer and sickle is what it symbolises; the strength of the masses, that we Drones have power and will not be slaves, the symbol expresses for me and the others who use it what socialism means to us. I suggest you learn more about the subject before you start telling people what symbols mean, since you can't even tell the difference between communism and fascism. Bartimaeus 13:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC) LOL. Sorry, if I can just butt in here, but um you do realise that Australia and Sweden are both socialist democracies don't you? I mean, you can be both at the same time you know. I am Australian and I am proud of our ability to combine capitalist economies with communist equality. Australia, for example, has the lowest proportion of poverty of any country in the world, and has the most equal distribution of wealth. I for one am proud of that. "No child shall ever starve" is our philosophy. A lot of Australians are shocked and horrified when they visit USA because of the existence of beggars and homeless people who simply don't exist in Australia. In Australia, the only poverty is related to either drug addiction, career criminals and runaway children. We get huge amounts of money from welfare and you can get it for your entire life. Its actually enough to live on. And no, that's not fascism. Australians like everyone, both Russia and America. That's why we have no enemies. :) Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 13:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi there, I see you reversed my edit to Category:Wikipedians with World Citizenship. What I was trying to do was change it so that, in Category:Wikipedians, it appeared under W and not at the top; I don't see that any category in such a broad category as Wikipedians has a particular claim to be jumped to the top of the list. (Whereas it does make sense to put it at the top in Category:Wikipedians by location.) Perhaps you haven't got the hang of how the "pipe trick" for categories works—you can see this page for that. The point is, whatever goes after the pipe (i.e. the "|" character) is what the category is listed under. Thus you used to have it listed under "*" (at the start), I switched it to listing under "World Citizenship" (at W), and you switched it to space (at the start). Let me know if you have any questions/comments on this; if I don't hear from you, I figure I'll switch it back to the way I had it eventually. -- SCZenz 01:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
LatexJust a couple of things:
I'm not even convinced those gloves are latex, by the way! ^_^ I finally got permission to use another image. It's been placed at: Image:modelwearinglatex.jpg --DaiTengu 04:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC) A quick noteJust a quick note to say that you rock. Had to tell you. Ifnord 04:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Oh. Why do you rock? Nothing specific; I don't think you can just do one thing, no matter how nifty, and get the stamp of coolness. But as I was nosing through your talk page, comments people have left about you, and your replies - I was struck by how you came across. It's good. Ifnord 04:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Please note, that I just recently posted to her talk page, and my comments along with another comment that was critical of her were quickly removed and not responded to... which makes me suspect that there's a reason she "came across" well. Themindset 08:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Themindset reminds me of a Happy Bunny sticker that reads, "You suck and that's sad." Ifnord 18:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC) User:Poetlister sock puppet notices etcHi Selina Kyle. I have noticed that you kept removing the sock puppet notice. I think that this is a bad idea. Normal Wikipedia protocol is that if a user has been banned for being a sock puppet, then the sock puppet notice has to be placed there. Notice that it is just a "suspicion" of sock puppetry and has not been proven. Thus it is okay for it to remain. Whilst SlimVirgin's removal of the bios is inappropriate, it has been agreed that the sock puppet notice should remain. This in fact points out the injustice, as we can then see what happened there. Also, by the way, Poetlister and Taxwoman weren't friends. They didn't even like each other. Its great that you're supporting Poetlister in this, but I would have thought Taxwoman was the more appropriate person. I think that Taxwoman is the thinnest link to User:RachelBrown and the one with the least evidence of sock puppetry. There is actually enough to suggest that perhaps Poetlister and RachelBrown might be sock puppets. The issue then is that if they are, did they do anything wrong by doing so? They were apparently friends and did visit each other and use the same computer. The other 3 were not friends. It seems that they may have all used the same ISP, something that they undoubtedly shared with thousands of other people. The case for Taxwoman to be unbanned based on not being a sock puppet is much stronger than the case for Poetlister. However, with Poetlister the issue is more the reasons behind the ban. You might want to look at this here: User_talk:Kelly_Martin#User-check_request. That's why Poetlister got banned - because of an edit war with SlimVirgin and Lulu, who wanted her to be banned so that they could win the edit war. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 11:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC) World citizen flagThanks for clarifying. However, this means the image descriptions are misleading; they should describe where the flags are used and acknowledge the original designer. Are you as well allowed to place the design in the public domain? Fredrik | tc 11:53, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
cuuuuute kittyOk. :) --Phroziac . o º O (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 15:08, 23 December 2005 (UTC) JimboI don't think that its right for me to contact Jimbo. I suggested to Poetlister to contact him if Mindspillage doesn't write her an e-mail or call her. I noticed that Mindspillage didn't respond to my e-mail either. I think that Jimbo would be very intersted in corruption of this magnitude, as it seriously puts Wikipedia in jeapordy. However, I don't think that I am the right person to contact him. It is really up to the affected users. Maybe Taxwoman could contact him as well? I suggest Poetlister because she is the one that e-mailed me about it. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 18:55, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Wikipedia:Userboxes/Mental HealthYou are perceptive. I actually just created Wikipedia:Userboxes/Mental Health and the two userboxes for providers/consumers. I also note your quick addition of the specific disorders. =) As to your question, the answer is indeed, "something". Ifnord 19:13, 23 December 2005 (UTC) Bans liftedI thought I'd let you know that User:Poetlister, User:Taxwoman, User:Newport and User:Londoneye all had their bans lifted, thanks to your help! Thanks so much for helping me to edit the User:Zordrac/Poetlister subpage. Your work was wonderful. P.S. I am very sorry that you got a 24 hour block for 3RR. I wouldn't worry too much about it. Sometimes people break 3RR by accident. Its no big deal really. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 20:56, 23 December 2005 (UTC) HelloHello. I must say, going by your userpage and your edits, I like you! (I really like the Einstein quote, that's quality). But you've really got to stop running into the 3RR! Have a look at WP:ROWN. I'd also like to offer my services - if you ever get into situations like the one at latex again, drop me a note, and let's see if we can head off any problems before they start. Please, feel free to e-mail me with any questions or comments seeing as you can't edit for a while. Dan100 (Talk) 21:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
emailed you backcheck & see. :-) Tomertalk 10:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC) User:AlMac|(talk) plagarized youHi. I been visiting pages of other people with lots of cool user boxes, and copying those I like the most. User:AlMac|(talk) 12:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC) Izehar's RfAHi Mistress, My RfAHi MSK! Thank you for your kind support on my RfA. -- Szvest 17:29, 25 December 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up™ I noticed that you have one of those user boxes where it says you are against censorship, and so am I. But I could not help being a bit amused by that in light of your attempted deletion of my notice on the GLBT board. It is neither fair nor true to conflate pedophilia with pederasty, and the last person I would expect that of is someone with a certain degree of sensitivity to gender issues, which you certainly seem to possess. If any disgreement remains between us on this topic and you wish to resolve it, please let me know. Haiduc 16:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
AnarchyHi there. I'm not quite sure how I got to your user page, but I did. I'm glad you're my friend, and I'm also pleased that you don't use U.S. Customary units (meaning, I take it, that you prefer SI units, which begs the question of where you live). Anyway this rambling prolog, like your userpage, is fuelled by the secular consumption of alcohol, but still leads me to beg you to reconsider your stance on anarchism. I am with you in agreeing that anarchism as it is currently packaged by the extreme left will not work, because it's just YAPS (yet another political system) where someone's gonna be at the top and someone's gonna be at the bottom. Anarchy is, as I understand it, a system in which there is no government at all, and no politics. There is no top and no bottom. The hitch is that for such a system to work, every citizen must accept responsibility for the daily operation of the affairs of state, whatever those might represent in a government-free land. I believe anarchy is the best form of government because it offers the greatest number of freedoms to its citizenry. It is, however, the least attainable form, because it requires a degree of responsibility from each individual far beyond what modern humans can commit. Perhaps in a thousand years, we will have evolved to the point where we acept others as equals, where we accept the divergence of ideas, and where we are prepared to accept the huge responsibility which is required to live in a state where the only rules are those we set for ourselves. Denni ☯ 21:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC) meow?you sound hot mistress selina but i guess that goes without saying.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.97.249.17 (talk • contribs) Speaking of WikistalkingKindly refrain from leaving nasty remarks on my talk page for other people. I don't care for it, and I think it's really quite nasty of you to do so. Kelly Martin (talk) 23:43, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
The point of the userbox was not to display that this person is or was an alcoholic, but to suggest that the person drank alcohol (as opposed to Coke, Pepsi, or the like). Will you please explain your reasoning behind this on my talk page? Thanks, Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 03:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
It was sort of sarcastic ... when you read... "This person drinks _____" userbox after userbox after userbox... it may get on your nerves, until you get to the bottom and you find something that makes you laugh like "This user drinks. Period." No "This User Drinks....", Just "This User Drinks." Thanks for your understanding and time. Ian Manka Questions? Talk to me! 04:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC) Liking things that go BANG
Ad hominem remarksHi MSK, please tone down the comments you're making about other editors. Your edit summaries of e.g. "Revert vandalism by POV-warrior X," and "Stop fucking trying to censor every fucking thing that criticises Islam without even discussing," and comments on talk pages like "it's a blatant falsehood, and the fact that only Muslims are reverting really does show something" are not acceptable. Please concentrate only on content. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 20:16, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Fireman/LatexI think fireman to go outside and get some fresh air haha
Re:.What missing pictures? εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:07, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
What I am trying to say: Here is a barnstar for being so kind! Spanish and Portuguese are wonderful languages, and very similar. Am I writing [Greek] correctly? εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 22:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC) Whitewalls blockedI have blocked Whitewalls for 48 hours for vandalizing your user talk and user pages. David | Talk 01:09, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
IRC logsPlease do not post public logs (or portions of logs, or conversations, etc.) of conversations on the wikipedia IRC channel. I've deleted the portion you posted on Kelly Martin's RFC (personally I don't care, but...) - if you restore it, I know several admins who would probably block you on sight for "trolling" or "privacy violation" or "being a jerk" or whatever... Cheers! – ugen64 17:30, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
RFCYou might want to check out Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Snowspinner 3. Firebug 17:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC) Dyslexic wikipediansThanks for fixing the User dyslexic template to point to Category:Dyslexic Wikipedians. Should the old Category:User Dyslexic be removed entirely rather than being a redirect? --Pfafrich 21:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
HeyGood to know there are others here that are aspies and like things that go bang. :) Jwissick(t)(c) 23:44, 1 January 2006 (UTC) Salute!Take care, fellow bass-wielding punk rock warrior... ;) -- Cjmarsicano 00:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 'User freedom'Hi Mistress Selina Kyle! I've contacted you before on the proposed deletion of the 'green wikipedians' category - perhaps you remember. Since then I saw you supporting the freedom of users to express their beliefs and (dis)likes using userboxes and other things on several places. I also noted your userbox against censorship. Therefore, I've awarded you a self-created barnstar. :) Perhaps you would be interested in this template {{user freedom}} and in this debate (Wikipedia:Proposed_policy_on_userboxes)? Regards, Larix 09:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Blood fetishRegarding blood fetish: please don't suggest to people that:
Using a blood donation organization as a proxy STD test is highly irresponsible; if the testing is not 100% perfect (and in never is), and the person trying this is positive (and presumably anyone who is considering doing this considers this to be entirely possible), they will almost certainly (because of pre-test blood pooling, and the very large blood volumes involved) infect one or more unwitting third parties with a potentially lethal disease. Instead, they should get tested at their local sexual health clinic. -- Karada 20:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
People unjustly blocked?Hi Selina. Just saw your (quickly deleted) remark on WP:AN/3RR#Snowspinner. If there's anyone who has been unjustly blocked, and that block still stands, leave me a message on my talk page and I'll look into it. -- SCZenz 00:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
User:Morgan695 is likely a reputable user as (s)he has been here over a year and has 1000+ edits Prodego talk 22:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC) UnblockI will, if only because Kelly's trying once again to silence those who disagree with her. However, please just don't talk to them. You know as well as I am that they're not listening, and getting angry will just make you look bad. I know it's easy to say and hard to do, I've been in your shoes before, and I wish I could take it back. Just remember, Kelly wants you to get all angry and uncivil towards others so she can just dismiss you. karmafist 16:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
It's the autoblock. I personally think that thing causes more trouble than its worth. Anyway, I don't know about you, but i'm trying my best to stay away from that IRC Channel personally, it's usually just a bunch of trolls and aristocrats trying to silence people they disagree with one way or another. karmafist 17:03, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Neither do I, kiddo. Me and Snowspinner got in a wheel war over what you're saying last night. At this rate, it's going to take alot more of this though before anything happens. Just be nice and keep to your principles and you'll be ok. karmafist 17:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
To Mistress Selina KyleDon't worry about being blocked, you're still new here and have the potential to become a good editor! --Sunfazer 22:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC) sockpuppetOk, so you've stated that you aren't a sockpuppet or a returning user. I am prepared to present several pieces of evidence that will immediately contradict that undisputably. It would be much better if you would come forward and admit to any and all other accounts you have used, because nobody here is a fan of sockpuppets created to act in bad faith. You can either continue to be scrutinized or you can can admit that you've made mistakes and genuinely show that you're sorry. It's time to grow up. -- Netoholic @ 01:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
You and Slim(and others, but let's start with Slim)Ok, you guys are invited to here, hopefully I can step in as a third party and settle this. karmafist 05:02, 4 January 2006 (UTC) The new incarnation of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kelly Martin - also, userboxes?Dear Selina: To be perfectly honest with you, I'm quite ashamed that I've participated in this fist-fight (and been so roundly arrogant) regardless of whose side I'm on, and I'm starting to get a bit worn out of it. Incidentally, you've persevered well on it, although I think I lack the energy to have anything else to do with the wretched affair. However, here's my last penny's worth: I know that I suppose the RfC shouldn't be about the userboxes, but to face facts the admin conduct issues and the userboxes are inexorably entwined, and indeed the RfC itself makes no distinction between the two issues. Thus, as a consequence, I disagree that all matters regarding the userboxes should go to the proposed userbox policy, since there clearly are further conduct-related issues which need addressing. However, I'll leave you to it, and won't revert again. :) I hope any injuries that you sustained through this ordeal, regardless of whose hands they were caused by, will heal in time; I am certain mine will. All the best, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 09:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello, you seem niceI'm sure there's loads of stuff we don't agree about (I researched you a bit, I admit it), but I find myself not only agreeing with you regarding recent particulars, but also coming under the impression that your a nice person. Thank you, Sam Spade 09:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, ambi is friends w Kelly Martin as far as I know. I'd be a downright monster of someone was going after my friend, esp. w/o reason (which is how she see's things, I fear). Fierce loyalty is something I can respect, but deleting / refactoring honest attempts at communication while citing irrelevant policy... that sort of thing tells me the wiki has far too many of the wrong admins. Sam Spade 09:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC) ThingsThe only way we'll stop the Kelly Martins of Wikipedia and the Kelly Martin mindset is by being nice, sticking together, standing for what we believe in, and inviting others to join us. If we are alone, the best we can hope for is both sides losing.
UsernameYour...username... It sounds familiar, like I've heard it somewhere before in the past.. Is it based of a famous person's..? Just curious, as I am somwhat intriqued. Nice to meet you, BTW. -MegamanZero|Talk 16:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Unsigned CommentWhen replacing an unsigned comment with the unsigned tag, leave the timestamp as it is important to know the context in which a comment was written. Pepsidrinka 20:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC) P.s. You talk page is >150 kb, you may want to consider archiving.
Oh Mistress! :-P I don't know if you've noticed, but the userbox purge template had been protected deleted. As far as I know this hasn't actually gone through TfD (correct me if I'm wrong), but I was wondering if you'd trek over to the talk page and help me gat a debate going. Tom 19:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC) Cold Fusion RfCHello, There's currently a controversy at Cold fusion that I would appreciate it if you could look at. The article is about to fail a Featrued Article Removal Candidate vote. There are at least 3 fairly different versions in play: one based on the original Featured Article dating back to 2004-08-20 and tossing out all edits between now and then [10] ("FA version"), one which was the current version up until that [11] ("current version"), and a proposed new draft written originally by Edmund Storms (a retired Los Alamos scientist) and edited by me [12] ("Storms version"). At the moment the article is being rather agressively edited by a few people who support the version from a year ago, and if this stands, a lot of good material will be lost. Frankly, I can't entirely support any of the versions; the article just needs more work and more different perspectives. Hence this invitation. I hope you can help. I'm posting this to you because I've seen you on various physics-related pages, and/or because you've worked on the Cold fusion page before. Thank you for your time. ObsidianOrder 06:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia:Counter Un-civility UnitWikipedia:Counter Un-civility Unit is a new wiki-project I have thought up. I was wondering if you thought it was a good idea and if you wanted to join up. I need some users backing me before I construct a wikiproject, and you seem to share my views on subjects such as concensus, civilty, etc. Reply on my talkpage if you're interested. Thanks, -MegamanZero|Talk
Speaking of Scientology
Enjoy. Rogue 9 07:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC) NameActually.... — Seven Days » talk 18:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC) Blocked user (SuperButchBitch)I've replied on WP:AN, so I'll wait for comments from other admins. NSLE (T+C) 12:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
User/userHi - I noticed you've been going round the location pages altering the readable link to read "user" rather than "User". We agreed in the below discussion that all boxes should be illustrated with a capital - obviously you might not have noticed that given all the other nonsense that's been going on. Anyway, just thought I'd bring it to your attention. I've reverted any of the pages that were on my watchlist. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes/Archive 2#User or user? Cheers,
Thanks for the invitationThanks for inviting me to join the world citizen group. Greetings. T6435bm 00:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC) ResHello, Mistress. Are you being nosy going through my personal messages and telling me that I am rude? The utter cheek of it! I was conversing with FayssalF in his langue maternelle, how is that bad? In my opinion, he/she who uses profane words and/or phrases (such as f*ck) is rude. Care to comment ;-) Izehar 11:07, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Re: Discworld AspiesGreat minds think alike, I suppose. ;) - User:Asarelah From User:StaeckerQuite a note on my talk page. I've responded there, in case you're not watching. Happy to hear your reply, if you'd like to. And I hope you don't mind if I remove your welcome note. I've been here a little while, and I cleaned out my first one (dated March 2005) a couple of months ago. Staecker 21:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC) LogoThanks for finding the Black Mesa logo! 'ppreciate it :-) Rusty2005 21:56, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
However well intentioned...I think your revision of {{User antiracist}} was wrongheaded and mean. First of all, please read the entry for Malcolm X: he fell out of the Black Muslim movement (long before it became popularly known as the Nation of Islam), and was purged from that group because of his uncompromising approach toward racism (e.g., the "chickens coming home to roost" comments, condemning Kennedy as the racist who had aided the assassination of Patrice Lumumba). Then later, in turn, the NOI had Malcolm assassinated. I should also mention, Louis Farrakhan has always been suspected of being of that group (in the Black Muslim movement) that had Malcolm assassinated. Second, to clear Malcolm X's honor: he wanted black freedom and independence, not simplistic "separatism." Equating that to apartheid is disingenuous - especially when apartheid's greatest fighter (Nelson Mandela) himself cites Malcolm X as an inspiration! Last, while I respect the group for its work, I dislike linking the template to Anti-Racist Action. This is a group that, as its area of focus, tends to prioritize organizing better minded whites to confront white supremacists. Racism on Wikipedia, on the other hand, is not just a matter of white supremacist vandals; it's also about systemic racial bias, such as using the "white" take on history as the authoritative one. And I find, as a person of color myself, it's also about a certain timidity to address the problem by people of color on Wikipedia. So I'm reverting the userbox back. Feel free to make your own "Member of" or "Supporter of" style userbox, but I feel strongly that my take was the correct one. --Daniel 21:58, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Please copy your lie-truth-lie-turth comment on Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion to Template_talk:User_antiracist_mx_admirer, in order to keep it close to the template for when the whole TfDeletion circus act is over. -- ActiveSelective 05:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC) Um, thanks. Have you read John Piper? I actually had thought about writing an article about it. (Or, were you kidding when you said that, meaning that hedonism+Christianity couldn't go together?)--ViolinGirl♪ 22:39, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Homophobia by othersThere is a vote here where some users to try to overturn WP categorisation policy (whereby categories and subcategories cannot be placed on the same page) and force a subcategory (LGBT organisations) onto the North American Man/Boy Love Association page. Some of the comments made are distinctly homophobic and rather disturbing. Personally it gives me the creeps even mentioning NAMBLA but your vote on the issue would be welcome. FearÉIREANN
I have noticed a large number of reverts going on at this page, and would like to help you resolve this dispute. First of all, I am not an administrator, however I know some administrators who would be able to help if this situation got out of hand. I would like to know the reason you reverted to the template with 14pt text. What about this is better then the 10pt text? Not just that it's ok as is, but why 14pt font is actually better. Prodego talk 23:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Copy-and-paste movesWhile copy-and-paste moves are not recommended, they are not considered vandalism. --cesarb 00:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Re: Your message on my talkWhat does the fact that it's "not a real religion" have anything to do with it? It's still a stupid attack on contributors, potential contributors, and a large group of people, and as such has no place on Wikipedia.--Sean|Black 08:43, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
's ok. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 05:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Scientology / appalling / meMy goal was not to get the template deleted "out of process". My question was why does a different process get taken for the Jewish one than the Scientology one. Undeletion would have worked. It should be uniform process O_O! gren グレン 10:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank youThanks for your constructive comments on my request for bureaucratship. The final outcome was (70/5/0), so I am now a bureaucrat. If you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as a bureaucrat then please leave me a note. -- Francs2000
Why did you change it? I see no discussions about it. In the meantime, I have revered it to redirect. Renata 00:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Request for edit summaryThank you for your contributions. And I have a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries more often when you contribute. An edit summary helps others understand what you changed when checking the watchlist or the recent changes, and often times complements studying the diff. Think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. I hope you don't mind. :) Cheers – Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Asperger syndromeThanks to u now I know that i'm an Aspie.. and what tha hell u r rite i'm not funny at all... Jfreyre lol i didn't sign Re:Flag of TaiwanI have posted my reasons for keeping the redirect at Talk:Flag of Taiwan. Please respond there.--Jiang 05:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC) user against scientology has been speedily deletedI have requested undeletion at WP:DRV#Template:User_against_scientology. Regardless of whether or not this template has any merit it should be undeleted until the tfd has run it's course. Your vote at the tfd counts for nothing if the speedy deletion stands.--God of War 06:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Goodbye.You have been blocked indefineitly for trolling, personal attacks and general dickery. WP:AFG only goes so far, and I've had enough of this garbage. Goodbye--Sean|Black 07:11, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I haven't been following closely, but I always maintain a healthy skepticism about these things and try to hear both sides of a story. Can you summarize this situation you're in for me? I'd like to feel comfortable unblocking you, at least for an interim period, but I'd need to get a good idea of what's going on. Everyking 08:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I feel responsible for thisI first met MSK when I found out that Poetlister was banned just moments after she had written me an e-mail asking for help to resolve a dispute revolving around SlimVirgin and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters. That ban, as I soon discovered (and have documented) was grossly unfair, as there is no evidence of sock puppetry, no transparency, and not even any attempts to try to justify it. What made it worse was the discovery that SlimVirgin herself had requested the ban by asking Kelly Martin for it. And what made it worse again was that Kelly Martin was lying and going around different places pretending that she was not involved and was "neutral", that she had provided a "neutral review of Mindspillage's ban and decided that it was legitimate". Of course, that wasn't the end of it. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters went around different places accusing me and others who questioned the decision of also being sock puppets and called for us to be banned. He then started harassing us and lying about different things. When I asked for someone to do something about his behaviour, nobody would do a thing, and instead I got similar threats and harassment from Antaeus Feldspar, who had been previously harassing me in relation to his obsessive hatred of Daniel Brandt. It just got too much, and so I quit, on Christmas Day actually. I had tried my last ditch effort to make peace, asking Slim Virgin to help to broker peace with Lulu, only to have Lulu engage in perhaps the worst ever attacks on me, which are still on my user talk page. Still not a single person would do a thing, and these 2 abusive users with lengthy documented histories of abuse, were not only allowed to wander about harassing people and threatening to get people banned who stood in their way, but they were encouraged to do so. I saw with horror that someone who had written to support me in relation to Antaeus Feldspar got permabanned because of it. Oh and on top of that Kelly Martin was going around threatening me for "not assuming good faith" because I dared to question the actions of an administrator. Now, most people would be scared off by this kind of thing. I was, Dan100 was, Arniep was. We all were. We couldn't handle the abuse. Whilst I'd dearly love to start a Request for Arbitration against Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, Antaeus Feldspar, SlimVirgin and Kelly Martin in relation to it, its just not worth it. I don't have the strength to go through with something like that, not with the abuse and corruption and all of the rest. But Mistress Selina Kyle does have that strength. She is a hero, and has kept the fight on, kept fighting the good fight, kept trying to right the wrongs. And because of her work, a lot of users are beginning to see a ray of hope, that things might change. And maybe, just maybe, with thanks to MSK, I might eventually feel safe enough to use this thing again. And maybe even have some kind of faith in the process which seems to be being polluted by these few who abuse it. I know that MSK is not always terribly polite. Some of her edit summaries and comments are very direct and other users take offence at it. But that's just typial Asperger's Syndrome behaviour. Its not a personal attack, and just represents an inability of some Wikipedians to understand people who think a little differently to how they do. You could even call it discrimination for her to be banned for being herself. I was horrified by SlimVirgin's note on the Administrator's Noticeboard to try to get MSK banned, pretending that she was a sock puppet of a "banned user" User:Chaosfeary (note: the user is not actually banned - but had been banned for 2 weeks at one point). Whilst I could not find his behaviour patterns, I would be quite surprised that they are similar. ChaosFeary seems to have been some kind of a political activist, whilst MSK is not. Now, I don't know if MSK started doing this because of me, to try to help me out, and that she, like me, discovered the wealth of corruption as part of her investigation. Maybe she had been doing this beforehand. I don't know. But I would dearly love to see MSK promoted to Administrator, even Arbitrator, as I think that she is incredibly good for Wikipedia. She is tireless and has great internal strength. She is technically brilliant, with getting diffs from out of nowhere. She is calm under fire. Her response to the ridiculous claims by SlimVirgin on the Administrator's Noticeboard were just amazing. Oh and from what I can gather, MSK started this because of her adoration for User:Taxwoman, who quite obviously is not the same person as User:Poetlister. Anyway, so if this is my fault, I suppose I should say sorry. Except that I think that what MSK has done has been incredibly good for Wikipedia. Getting rid of her would seriously hurt Wikipedia. We can replace people like SlimVirgin and Kelly Martin and the like, but I don't think that we can replace MSK. She is 1 in a million. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 15:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC) She'll be backIf I were a user who gave barnstars, I would give one to her for her tireless efforts to fight admin oligarchy and return wikipedia to users. I am sure I will soon be reading the notice board about a "suspected sock-puppet" of Selina Kyle. May the winds be with you.--12.221.139.214 23:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC) Of course she'll be back. It was rather evident all along that she was a reincarnation of some other banned troll. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:24, 11 January 2006 (UTC) Really? Wait, do you actually believe that nonsense from SV about it (that was proven to be false)? And how do you define "troll"? Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 01:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC) your ability to appealIf you wish to defend yourself by making an appeal to reduce or remove your current block, and should you show you can be constructive, I am informing that should you show the interest, you can make an appeal for your block at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. If you choose to do so, I will file a request on your behalf, but you have to write your own statements which I will forward. Affirming this choice means the block will be technically lifted should injunction follow, depending on how the process turns out. However, despite the lifting of this technicality, you will still be considered banned from all articles and talk pages, templates et al., except your userpage, your talk page, and the arbcom pages. Should this be violated during the temporary injunction, the block will be automatically reinstated, and your chances for appeal ruined. This is a genuine chance for you to demonstrate that you are a Wikipedian, that you have the capability to act in good faith, and a capability to change. If you truly have Wikipedia's interests at heart, do not take advantage of other editors' willingness to make a case for you, nor mine. Consider yourself lucky. That said, do you want to appeal? Elle vécu heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 00:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
request for arbitration has been filedA request for arbitration for your appeal has been filed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#User:Mistress Selina Kyle. Please craft your own statement here, preferably as politely as possible, so I may post it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natalinasmpf (talk • contribs)
What are you saying? That you want the RFAr to be withdrawn? Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I see, Dschor has left a note of that at the RFAr page. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:09, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Arbcom requestWell, you may wish to work on your request and discuss your future appeals with other users here. I have withdrawn my motion and cut and pasted it to here, and cut out comments since they wouldn't apply for the future appeal. Feel free to deal with this as you wish, you may or may not like this to exist on your talk page, or have people modify it. Cheers.
Involved parties
Mistress Selina Kyle accepted my offer to file an appeal on her behalf. [16]
User was indefinitely blocked without any steps taken in the dispute resolution process. Mistress Selina Kyle wishes to appeal this block. Statement by proxy NatalinasmpfI wish to only become involved in the case to act as Mistress Selina Kyle's proxy because she is currently indefinitely blocked and cannot make this request herself. Mistress Selina Kyle wishes to appeal her indefinite block. Please treat me as a representative, not as an involved party. I am currently listing her as the only involved specific party at the moment, because I do not know who wishes to pursue the case against her. I am therefore only currently replacing the second party with a generic "users who advocate an indefinitely block for Mistress Selina Kyle". Pardon me. I request the temporary injunction that Mistress Selina Kyle's indefinite block be technically lifted, but she remains effectively banned from articles and other pages except for her user page, her talk page, and the arbitration pages. Statement by ZordracI first met Mistress Selina Kyle when I was asked for help with mediating a dispute between User:RachelBrown and User:SlimVirgin/User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, which User:Poetlister (largely a neutral party in the dispute) asked me for an opinion on. Poetlister and 4 other UK users were banned as a result of daring to question SlimVirgin. I investigated, and discovered that Kelly Martin was behind it. I was threatened with being banned over it, by Kelly Martin and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, and so was Mistress Selina Kyle, who helped out. I think that MSK is a hero for her work on that dispute alone, and I know of hundreds of Wikipedians who adore her for her work in this. If MSK was a common troll, she wouldn't have hundreds of messages to her praising her for her efforts. She is no troll. She is a hero. Her work in delving deep in to the editing habits of Kelly Martin and Slim Virgin has been exemplary, and, through people like Firebug, it has also exposed Snowspinner, as well as others involved like Ambi, David Gerard and Sean Black. What we have here is someone who is criticising Wikipedia. But she isn't aiming to destroy it. She is aiming to create it. What she wants here is for everyone to be here in a happy, community-happy, relationship, where everyone can edit freely. She isn't out here to destroy Wikipedia - she is here to make it good. Rather than MSK being banned, she should be promoted. The instant that he is unbanned, I will post an RFA - Request for Adminship, and I am sure that she would get in. She is one of the most loyal, devout supporters of Wikipedia that you could imagine. As for MSK's editing habits, oh sure, she is rude, abrupt, to the point, direct, and sometimes offensive. In other words, she is an Aspie. She has not engaged in a single personal attack. Some people have misunderstood her edits to suggest that she has, but they are wrong. Just take a look at what Asperger's Syndrome means before making such comments. She is accurate. She is highly technical. That makes her *IDEAL FOR AN ENCYCLOPAEDIA*. With people like MSK on the books, we can ensure an accurate encyclopaedia free of errors. That is what we want, ultimately, don't we? On top of that, she is brave enough to put her life on the line (or at least her online status) to get rid of corruption. You cannot get more loyal than that. If there is an administrator, or any contributor to Wikipedia who is more committed to its success, then I'd like to know who they are. Mistress Selina Kyle is the most loyal and dedicated contributor in the history of Wikipedia. Getting rid of her, and people like her, will be the death of Wikipedia. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 10:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC) Comments
I have marked these replies as a separate section since this request is supposed to be a copy and paste arbcom request when it is done. Elle vécut heureuse à jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC) Cheerful greets from near the Pacific OceanHello Mistress Selina Kyle, here's a photo of some of the chickens and ducks in my yard. I live in a small town near the pacific ocean. Have a nice day, hope to talk with you sometime.Terryeo 03:36, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Abusive BlocksI see that you are another victim of the cabal. Welcome to wikipedia. I also have been subject to blocks (though not an indefinite one, that's just daft) for attempting to point out the rampant cronyism and corruption of some administrators. These admins enjoy vandalizing user pages, blocking users who attempt to inform others of the abuse, and generally wasting the time of dedicated editors. You are a valuable member of Wikipedia, and I hope that you will be unblocked as soon as possible. It only takes one intelligent administrator to remove the block and restore your user page - hopefully there is still one left. --Dschor 11:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
=(I also feel you have been delt an unfair hand here, I hope everything works out. =( Mike 13:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Looking at my contribs, the last edit I made was merely to Half-Life 2: Aftermath so couldn't have been what got me blocked, but before those edits I left a message regarding SlimVirgin's use of an image that was tagged as fair use (when the message was left) on her user page, see Image talk:Kamelia shojaee.jpg (link to diff with message): I admit I was a bit terse but hardly a personal attack or whatever. She had [[17] previously aggressively deleted a message I left about it on her talk page twice] (in an edit marked as a minor edit) and ignored it. I didn't try putting it back after that and pretty much dropped the issue for a while until other people began talking about it. It seems more than anything I was blocked by Sean Black for implying that SlimVirgin could simply write an email, making it "From: museum" or something and forward it, which is a valid point because it would be easy for anyone to do --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 15:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Overall I really don't know what to do, it seems a lot of people have a personal interest in having me blocked. Many users have done similar things at times that are bad but aren't blocked: I think an indefinite block is definitely unjustified and it seems, against blocking policy too. It was done by Sean Black a little after the message about SlimVirgin's use of fair use images on her user page and Cryptic (who has banned people for merely linking to Kelly Martin's RfC on Wikipedia:Userboxes before (later overturned)) --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 17:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to thank Ms. Selina Kyle for identifying a few more open proxies for us so we could block them. Due to the high volume of vandalism that comes from open proxies (and the very low volume of legitimate edits), it's a general presumption that anybody who (a) edits through one and (b) generally acts like a shit, is a vandal. Ms. Kyle meets both halves of that condition. I don't recommend that she be unblocked any time soon (I really don't see any evidence that she has ever substantially contributed to the encyclopedia, and I have no reason to believe that she would start doing so were we to unblock her), but I may have been mistaken in identifying her with the program vandals she shared an open proxy with. She is still a very disruptive user, and her current block is totally warranted on that basis. I must say that using an open proxy in combination with her persistently combative and unfriendly attitude definitely has not helped her case. Kelly Martin (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
:(... Jfreyre UnblockedI've unblocked you from your indefinite block because I am not convinced you merit a banning. However I don't think I will be able to unblock you again. Please be exceedingly cautious in your future comments during this period. I believe there does need to be an Arbitration or at least an RfC about you, your behavior, and other users response to you. I think you are wise to want to wait until the new ArbCom is seated. Please do not remove anyone else's comments from any Talk page, for any reason. That is seen as exceedingly rude. Best wishes, Ëvilphoenix Burn! 00:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems that Administrators with personal reasons to ban this user have taken advantage of their position to impose an improper block on MSK. In the interests of Wikipedia, MSK should be unblocked immediately. Tony Sidaway reinstated this block after it was removed, and provided absolutely no reason for doing so. This entire episode appears to be a personal attack on MSK for attempting to reveal cronyism and corruption that may be negatively impacting the project. --Dschor 20:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Notice on your User pageI hope I have not overstepped my bounds by recreating the notice on your User page that refers to your ongoing block. Tony seems to think it is silly to take responsibility for his actions, but I thought it would be in the interests of full disclosure to place the notice. Let me know what you think of the messagebox. --Dschor 01:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
RfC:KMYou commented on Kelly Martin's second RfC. it is up for archival. you may vote at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Kelly_Martin#Archiving_this_RfC. CastAStone|(talk) 03:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Concrete stepsWhat sort of concrete steps can we take to get this user unblocked? To me, the block clearly doesn't have admin consensus, so it shouldn't have been done. How about we arrange a poll about this? That will give a little bit of process and legitimacy to the outcome, and I suspect it would be the right one (I don't think supporters of the block could get consensus). Everyking 10:27, 14 January 2006 (UTC) UnblockPer discussion on WP:AN/I it's clear that there is no consensus on whether this block should stand. In this case, by default, the user should not be blocked, pending consensus on the topic. As such, I decided to unblock this user for the time being, providing her with the opportunity to improve. I appeal to other administrators to not reblock her immediately, provided that she:
If you think reblocking is appropriate, consider following formal procedure (WP:RFC or WP:RFAr), instead of acting unilaterally. Grue 11:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC) ArchivingYour talkpage is becoming quite immense; you might want to consider archiving. -MegamanZero|Talk 12:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
messageSorry. What's that game tho? Never heard of it so I don't get the reference --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 14:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
And other things...Mistress, I don't mean to be offesnsive or anything when I say this, but you've got to stop. That editor's summary of your edits was somewhat uncalled for on the administrative board, but calling him a prick and screaming at him will not solve anything. Absolutely nothing. Its also extremely easy to precieve that "defense" of yours as a personal attack. Were you not just blocked for this...? Please, take consideration into what you say, and think before you type. In the meanwhile, I suggest you reword your thesis concerning your edits less offensively on the Admin board, and explain yourself better. You are cruising for trouble, and I really don't want you to get blocked again, as if that happens, I'm afraid there's no coming back. Please take my advice into consideration. -MegamanZero|Talk 15:12, 14 January 2006 (UTC) BlockYour recent comments on AN/I are a clear violation of the no personal attacks policy. Since you have a long history of being blocked for disruption, and have not reformed, I am issuing a 24 hour block for disruption. Please refrain from further personal attacks if you choose to return after your block expires. -- Essjay Talk • Contact 15:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
RE: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Asperger syndrome: Why is he, the one that personally attacked me, not banned and only me who as should be quite understandable got angry with vicious personal attacks like those by malber? This is sick and I would have thought better from you of all people Essjay (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA).. -Selina
Ok, but why is it ok for people to insult me but not for me to do the same back? Why the double-standards? It seems it's nothing more than certain administrators seeing it as perfectly fine to insult and be abusive towards me.. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 15:36, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree that you did the wrong thing, purely by saying "You prick". However, I disagree that that is as bad as what User:Ambi said earlier in the same article, where she said "The Black helicopters are coming for you". "You prick" is insulting, but it is not a personal attack - talking about helicopters is. Also, I think that User:Malber was demonstrating clear discriminatory bias, not just against you, but against Aspies in general. However, I do not believe that Wikipedia has a policy about bigots. I suppose that they are needed so that we can have experts on such things as the Ku Klux Klan and what have you. Also, it might be (although a huge stretch of WP:AGF) that Malber was just totally ignorant as to what Asperger's Syndrome is, and mistakingly thought that you were trying to use it as an "excuse". Just the concept of that is ridiculous. You might use a broken leg as an excuse, because its a temporary thing. But Asperger's Syndrome is a lifetime thing - hence you can't use it as an excuse. Its who you are. And of course, not once did you try to use it as an excuse. Of course, in saying that, I am not sure that it's a good idea to tell people that you're an Aspie. I don't even like the term, myself. I think that autistic is good enough, and I don't agree with Asperger in his definition. I very rarely tell people that I'm autistic, because of all of the discrimination and irrational hatred that it brings. And of course, that's got nothing to do with why I like you. I like you because you are a hero. But, in saying all of that, I can see how a 24 hour block for saying "You prick" might be reasonable. But I think that Ambi should be blocked too, and Malber. Perhaps that is up to an administrator though. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 20:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems it's for not being nice to malber after he said that Asperger's Syndrome was a fake disease/"social construct" and that I was pretending to have Asperger's Syndrome as an excuse/"hiding behind my aspergers" and that "she needs to accept that she's just a jerk" As bliss2yu said over there: So its okay for Malber to discriminate and offer bigoted hatred against an entire group of people, yet its not okay for me to call him a "prick" for saying that? --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 21:14, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
FYI Blissyu2 = User:Internodeuser, a 1-year blocked user (expires July 2006) so is already blocked, if that's what you mean. And as for Malber, I agree that he should have been blocked. He did call MSK a "jerk", which should have been dealt with before MSK responded. Of course, ?MSK shouldn't have responded by calling him a "prick". But which is worse? In terms of words, they are equal. But the issue is that Malber was offending an entire group of people, while MSK was just stopping one person. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 04:45, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I think it is pretty clear he is merely saying that people should be accountable for their actions, regardless of whether they have a medical condition, pathology,Psychosis troubled background, or if they are simply having a bad day. If someone is a pathological liar,would we excuse their vandalism of articles with made up facts? What if they were delusional? I submit that we would not. Everyone must take responsibility for their actions. Johntex\talk 05:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
ThankyouJust want to say thankyou for the good work on the flag and the kind words on my talk page. It's been a month now - things have died down a little but there's still bad blood. Erath 01:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC) Mistress Selina Kyle for admin!I think that Mistress Selina Kyle has demonstrated brilliant skills for adminship and would be a real asset to the community in that capacity. I would like for some administrators to work towards this with her. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 04:45, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Award!I would like to give you an award, just for being still here, (you may or may not be blocked at present, I've lost track), even when there are editwars among admins over blocking you: (This does not mean I endorse your actions). Ian13ID:540053 10:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
MSK should get the comedy award too, for what happened with the Masonry page. That was pretty funny. SkeenaR 04:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's pretty funny too:) Here-[23] SkeenaR 22:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC) Just to let you know that I got banned for supporting youJust like how you got banned for supporting User:Taxwoman, it seems that I got banned for supporting you. I am sorry. Zordrac Stop revertingDon't do it. You'll most likely just get blocked again. Grue 17:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC) Yeah I won't don't worry I know well about 3RR now This is the kind of thing that BYT and his friends seem to get up to though, making false claims of me "being abusive" when I was polite as utterly possible and engaging in "pack reverting" behaviour.. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 17:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Please don't strike through other people's commentsDear MSK, could you please refrain from striketrhough in someone else's comments, as you have done with Malber's comment, above. Doing this is likely to give someone the impression that Malber has struck through those comments, which is false. This is tantamount to quoting Malber as retracting things he did not retract. Thank you, Johntex\talk 03:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC) User:Sean Black did the exact same thing to me though... [24] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.122.230.206 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 17 January 2006.
Civility on Talk:IslamofascismAccuse another editor instead of giving civil discourse on your disagreement on this page, and I will block you for 24 hours for disruption and poor conduct. Is that clear?--Tznkai 21:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC) You agreed to have NO personal comments [25]--Tznkai 21:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
BlockedYou clearly had an opportunity to see this warning, and you have failed to comply. You have been blocked for 24 hours.--Tznkai 21:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Userpage change - for the better I hopeI have (perhaps ill-advisably) done some editing to your userpage which was in some dire need of shape. I haven't given it much of a overhaul but I tried to tidy up the userbox area which was in a sorry state and a bit messy with <br> tags everywhere. If you find the changes to be too much to take, then please accept my apologies and revert the changes. Also, if you feel adequately offended by my good intentions, I invite you to vandalise my user page appropriately! :P Or, simply leave a comment on my talk page! Either way is good! Have a good one!--Dan (Talk)|@ 22:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC) SlimVirginSelina, it's very possible to disagree with someone without disliking them or feeling that they are badly motivated. I have often disagreed with SlimVirgin, sometimes very strongly, but I have no doubt that she is a decent person, doing what she thinks is right. You know, I do believe you have a good heart. I have a bit of a reputation for being a trolls' advocate, but the truth is, I like to think the best of people. Maybe you could give the same thing a go. Try to like people here. Give them the benefit of the doubt and try to understand that even if they do the wrong thing, they are not trying to. It's not good vs evil. You hate it if people dismiss you in simple terms, don't you? Try not to do it to others. "Artists" was in quotes on my user page because I'm using it in a broad sense to mean people trained in the arts, rather than people who paint. I do paint, but very badly. And I'm happy for people to have any picture of me they like, male or female, so long as it's a goodlooking one. Happy editing, Selina. Try to stay out of trouble. Grace Note 03:33, 19 January 2006 (UTC) {{TWN}}Hi! I understand why you want to use the Taiwanese independence flag in this template, however, there is one big problem: TWN is the ISO code for Taiwan. For the same reason that {{GBR}} must produce
BarnstarThank you for the barnstar! You really should archive your talk page, by the way. Prodego talk 15:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC) BlockedI've blocked you for 24 hourse for your continued vandalism of Image:Flag of Taiwan.svg. Your last edit there was the latest in a string of unhelpful edits related to the use of this flag. I will assume that most of them were initially due to you not fully appreciating the implications of this rather sensitive issue. Drawn-out, nasty debates have raged over the Taiwan/ROC issue in the past, and there is now a general set of recommendations at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), which represents the de facto consensus. As I've explained on Talk:Half-Life 2: Aftermath, there is little room for debate about which flag to use, due to real-life facts which we have to respect, regardless of whether we think the real-life situation should be changed. While you're entitled to your opinions, you're not entitled to vandalizing the collective work of others by repeatedly removing useful content without discussion. Labelling others as sockpuppets and their productive edits as "vandalism" isn't helping much either. You have to consider the possibility that, if it seems everyone is against you, this may be due to the fact that you're actually wrong about something. There's no point in digging in and proclaiming that conspiracies are at work; you need to accept that you can't be right all the time. Look at this block as a chance to cool off, so that you can resume productive editing when it expires. And if you're thinking of getting more deeply involved in the Taiwan/ROC issue, I'd urge you to review the guidelines and conventions first, including the talk page discussions that have already taken place on this issue. Cheers, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 01:17, 21 January 2006 (UTC) Rationale for Move of Blood sport to blood sport (hunting) ?Howdy, MistressSelinaKyle! There are some fireworks today over at blood sport (hunting) and since you seem to have been involved in this move I was wondering what the original thinking was on that. I'm guessing, based on the history of both articles that the idea was to disambiguate blood fetishism from the Jean Claude Van Damme movie, but now I'm wondering if it would not make more sense to move most of blood sport (hunting) back to blood sport with the top disambig links keeping their current position, much as is the case currently with stalking. If you have any insights or thoughts on the subject, they would be most welcome over at Talk:Blood sport (hunting). Thanks from Rorybowman 03:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC) ummmmon my talk page you posted: The material on that site is, as it says, a reproduction of the text at http://www.religioustolerance.org/scientol.htm - it is not necessarily the views of the US Navy. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 12:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Islamofascism (term)Hi, thanks for your message on my talk page. I would encourage you re-read the definition of vandalism and assume good faith, if you still consider me to have vandalised (as described by the policy) your comment I would appreciate it if you could help me clarify which part of Wikipedia policy defines what I did as vandalism. WP:RPA is not a policy as you rightly point out, it is a guideline. I believed that your comment describing another user as racist did not add to the debate and was likely to inflame the situation causing even more extraneous discussion. I provided a link to what you wrote. I didn't find that part of your message offensive, I don't even know if it was true, the term racist is bandied about a lot, a bit like fascist in that respect. I think a reading, and practicing of WP:CIVIL would perhaps help you to edit and discuss more harmoniously within the Wikipedia community. I see that you have restored the comment, as is your perogative. I shall not remove it again and I feel that you probably consider that I asked in a rash manner in removing it. I really didn't intend to cause offence and my apologies if I have come off in any way rude or patronising. To help me in improving my future conduct would you recommend that I leave a talk page message detailing possibly inappropriate comments rather than deleting them and providing a link? - FrancisTyers 19:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
"Strap It On" article moved to "Strap It On (album)"If you're going to move an article (without even attempting discussion first), please at least have the courtesy to check what links there and update as appropriate. — Lazytiger 14:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Edit warringIf edit warring continues on this talk page I will deal with it by freely blocking those who seem to be responsible for it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC) ThanksThanks for the kind word, I hope things are going better for you at least.. --Winter 00:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC) And to answer your question there is a javascript tool that users can use for rollback, hope that helps --Winter 00:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
UDUIWI, Shell (DotShell), would like to personally invite you to join the UDUIW. You can do this by adding our userbox or simply adding yourself to our category. Thank you for your time. --Shell 02:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC) Selina, there's no reason to dab dictdefs. Wikipedia is not here to teach people what English sentences mean. Besides, your definitions were entirely circular and POV. You didn't mention for instance strapping on a sword, strapping on a backpack, strapping on shoes and so on. BTW, you quoted Wikipedia:Disambiguation in moving the page. Can I draw your attention to this from that policy: "Dictionary definitions Dictionary definitions don't belong here. However, there are templates for linking to Wiktionary. (See Wikipedia:How to link to Wikimedia projects#Wiktionary.)" Happy editing, Selina. Grace Note 01:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Block warningVandalize the clerk's office again [26] and I will block you Raul654 17:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Against my better judgement, I've decided to unblocked you, so that you may participate in the discussion on the talk page. If, however, you engage in further revert warring, you can expect to be reblocked. Raul654 18:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Why does it all have to be accompanied by threats of blocking? Everyking 23:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
hiyahey, thanks, dont worry bout it! nice userpage btw ;) wots up? at the sec im making a pizza - how u doing? x XYaAsehShalomX 17:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
ah, ok :) see ya round i hope, you seem really nice...hope your not letting stuff get to you :( Take care, yeah? xx XYaAsehShalomX 21:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia is an encyclopædiaPlease don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Please also consider archiving your talk page – it's excessively large. Thanks, --cj | talk 12:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
"Don't be a dick" is a guideline, in fact, which all Wikipedians need to take to heart. You're being pedantic when it suits you, which really doesn't advance any cause you may have. The pair of you need to grow up, or get another battleground. While I'm here, let's stab a fork at the root issue. You're misguided insofar as to the purpose of the Arbitration Committee elections, which were specifically worked out following a lot of discussion and a straw poll, which stated how things would go. The reasons we can't hold a full-blown democratic election are that Wikipedia is not a democracy and the Arbitration Committee are classed as appointed agents of the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation; that is, their position is recognised by the board, and is considered to be official. The community has little power to influence these sorts of external decisions. The compromise Jimbo Wales made was that he would largely follow the trend in the community's wishes, but also exercise his right to use his brain cells. Refer to dictatorship, totalitarianism etc. Also consider the usual implications of the term fuhrer, popularised in English to refer to Adolf Hitler. Now consider the connotations of your use of the term and consider that certain of our users might take mild to considerable offense at what could be interpreted as likening someone to that man. I've followed few issues arising over your usage of Wikipedia, but what I can see is the general trend that you don't understand completely What Wikipedia is and what it is not. In addition, the feeling from some of our more experienced users is that you misinterpret the value we place on consensus. You've been rude and abrasive to a multitude of users, many of whom were merely trying to correct your mistakes or help you see what I've spelled out above. You've been blocked several times, and have yet been unblocked. Why? Because our core principles include the assumption of good faith? Because we're nice people? Because you shouldn't have been blocked? Maybe. Or maybe it's because we're giving you the chance to prove your point; that you are here to help us write a free-content encyclopedia written with a neutral point of view, licensed under the GFDL. Please think about it. On an unrelated note; your signature produces some five lines of wikitext. This is unreasonable; please alter it. Rob Church (talk) 14:24, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
HiWould you consider moderating your comments on User_talk:Tony_Sidaway/Jimbo's_request? Many of them look to me like personal attacks. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 04:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC) About timeI was getting sick of all of this pretence of people treating you well, when really they clearly wanted to boil you in oil so as to hush up all of the problems. Now finally they've done it. It makes them all look like shmucks of course, but finally they've done the unfair ban and we can get on with something else. Wonder how long before they ban Malber and Antaeus Feldspar though? Or do they like disruptive users? 203.26.136.138 01:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC) Seeking Explanation of BanUnfortunately the indefban courtesy of Sean did not include any reasoning whatsoever. What gives? Curious wikipedians would like to know. --Dschor 07:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
This is being discussed on WP:AN/I. The proximate cause was vandalism on Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and ensuing discussion on this talk page. The history of this user on Wikipedia has been problematic since the first few days (more than two weeks before the userbox kerfuffle).
byei havent done any editing at all since the block ("for calling wikipedia fascism") and don't want to. whatever. wikipedia is obviously a waste of my time, too many egotistical people who can't take constructive criticism around who enjoy bullying others to compensate for their lack of power in real life. people like malber and co as well as the admins who support people like that will let wikipedia rot and die from disease in the inner core - it's already well on its way there it seems. :| [30] (someone has sneakily omitted this from his talk page archive I notice to try hide how I helped, the whole section has been deleted) [31] (referenced on #A list of some positive contributions: but these links actually work as they're diffs and the stuff linked to got moved) --- do those look like the edits of someone who doesn't like wikipedia? shouldn't, because I don't, I want the best for it and I don't think it's currently being ran in away conducive to a good encyclopedia with power mad people working for their own nepotic interests and taking out personal issues on others who they would have no power over in real life. as for tony sidaway's bullshit one-sided page on his opinion of "why the blocks were made", I already answered most of these and pointed out the actual facts on wikipedia review - he has made these pages so as to try keep only his and his clique's point of view in the picture. See here for where there's already been debate about this kind of garbage: http://wikipediareview.proboards78.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1137433578#1137435407 the main objection seems to be that I pointed out the obvious dictatorship here ("democracy? oh, that's "evil". everyone knows totalitarian states are better for everyone!") with Jimbo at the head of it.. and blocked for saying it - which is pathetic. goodbye and good luck to those who deserve it.. but slimy manipulative corrupt people like tony sidaway, mark sweep, tznkai, zoe and all that lot, well, for wikipedia's sake I hope you die early - there really will be no loss to the world, and syncophantic weasels like you truly deserve it so much. sczenz I thought you were better than this but from WP:ANI you're obviously just another fanboy to jump on the bandwagon of hate if anyone so much dares as criticize Jimbo in any way. --Mistress Selina Kyle (Α⇔Ω ¦ ⇒✉) 18:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
UnblockI unblocked you. The indefinite block was not justified. However, you seem to have made a significant number of enemies, and I would suggest that in the future you not change guidelines to say Wikipedia is Fascism. It's not Wikipedia, it's a select group of admins. freestylefrappe 17:59, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:Black_mesa_research_facility.svgThanks for uploading Image:Black_mesa_research_facility.svg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}. If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 08:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC) 24 hoursIts been a good 24 hours now and the powers that be haven't banned this IP address. Will they bother? Well of course they can't ban all of these IP addresses, because there are too many of them. I will just let them go through and ban them one by one. I don't really care. While Antaeus Feldspar remains unbanned, its irrelevant anyway, because I can't do a thing while that evil minion roams around. He needs to be banned first before I even consider coming back. >>Removed banned user comment<< Rx StrangeLove 15:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
BlockedYou have been blocked for posting someone's personal details, in line with Wikipedia's blocking policy. [32] I'm letting you know because the admin that blocked you, MarkSweep (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), apparently failed to notify you of the block. (For the record, I don't agree with the block, but feel you should be informed of the block and the reasoning for it). See block log. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) | (contribs) 11:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC) I have appealed your ban and I hope that Mark or another admin will be kind to you. I think it is harsh for what you did but you have to try to understand that you are not considered a constructive user and admins will treat any breach of policy harshly. Grace Note 11:28, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Unblocked, but please...You have been unblocked, but what Grace Note said above is true. Your best contributions to the encyclopedia lately have been very minor. That is in itself not a problem. It is a serious problem that you have engaged in egregious incicility and personal attacks. It is a serious problem that you hand out personal information about people's identities on the internet. This, coupled with your activity at the Wikipedia Review board has worn the patience of several longstanding contributors here very thin, if not away altogether. Also, I know userboxes can be fun, but are really not very constructive to the encyclopedia. Effort is better spent on improving articles than on improving userboxes. Please, if you wish to continue contributing to the encyclopedia, contribute to the encyclopeidia and not the heated policy discussions or userboxes. Please, if you must contribute to the policy discussion fora, do so in a non-accusatory tone. Please, if you must criticize another admin, do so with the same assumption of good faith so many have now shown when they have unblocked you. Sjakkalle (Check!) 15:52, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Islamist POVThanks Selina, I actually was in effect aware of that... the intention of my posting that editorial comment was moreso to bring the other editors on that article in on what's occuring. Cheers! Netscott 17:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Before reverting reversions to your additions that have been reverted by multiple people, please look at the discussion page. There may be a relevant discussion going on there. If not, try to start one! Avert reversion wars before they start. Give peace a chance. 204.69.40.7 21:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Desperately Seeking SelinaWelcome back. Send an email my way when you get a chance, yes?-Disposable0008 23:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC) Block durationI convinced Raul to reduce your block by half. See you in a month. El_C 02:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Image Tagging for Image:Eminem303.jpgThanks for uploading Image:Eminem303.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. For more information on using images, see the following pages: This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 18:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC) Accidental template useYou have posted the following markup to a number of user talk pages: {{)}} While I suspect you intended this as some sort of smiley, it is actually a transclusion call to a deprecated template. Please don't do this. Thank you. John Reid 05:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC) |