User talk:SarekOfVulcan/Archive 20

And I still love this user name! ;-) Live long and prosper!--Mark Miller (talk) 23:06, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• DeGruyter: 1000 new accounts for English and German-language research. Sign up on one of two language Wikipedias:
  • English signup
  • Deutsch signup
• Fold3: 100 new accounts for American history and military archives
• Scotland's People: 100 new accounts for Scottish genealogy database
• British Newspaper Archive: expanded by 100+ accounts for British newspapers
• Highbeam: 100+ remaining accounts for newspaper and magazine archives
• Questia: 100+ remaining accounts for journal and social science articles
• JSTOR: 100+ remaining accounts for journal archives

Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--

The Wikipedia Library Team

23:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the

Mass Message to the Book & Bytes recipient list

.

BLPN

		A beer on me!
		Good point sir, and excellent use of Nirvana to make it. Ivanvector (talk) 23:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion is needed

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this consensus discussion? I know you did this last month, but it wasn't a formal consensus discussion, but now it is. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:32, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration and have not been listed as a party. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Evidence. Please add your evidence by 3 December 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/DangerousPanda/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:36, 19 November 2014 (UTC). Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

Hello, the image you removed was the actual image generated by the program when the DRM fails, I have sources for this as well.^[1] Can you please discuss this further on the talk page as I do not want to add the image again and continue edit warring, thank you. BlitzGreg (talk) 18:41, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I was watching EdJohnston‎'s page and recognized your name as the first blocking admin for Blastikus (talk · contribs). Would you be able to weigh in on the site ban proposal for him? The only comment so far has been a rambling "lol doesn't matter", so I am anxious to see meaningful input. Regards, Manul 20:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't think my input is needed, pretty clear what should be done. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

It's not quite clear to me; I've never made a ban proposal before. I assume you mean the ban should happen, not "lol doesn't matter"? Regards, Manul 21:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

At first glance, I can't see any particular argument against the ban. I didn't dig deeply enough into contributions to confirm that, though, which is mostly why I'm not opining there as well. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:21, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

please explain? How is closing something as "speedy keep" when the issue in question is not covered by the deletion policy an issue, especially when half the votes are in favour of that, and the rest keeps? --Mdann52talk to me! 17:24, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:SNOWCLOSE, I probably would have left it alone. --SarekOfVulcan (talk)

20:42, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I'd argue that this comes somewhere inbetween points 2 and 3, especially as it is a redirect, therefore is the wrong venue. However, I have reclosed as per

WP:SNOW. Thanks, --Mdann52talk to me!

08:18, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Wikimedians!

The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for, free, full-access accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for:

• Elsevier
  - science and medicine journals and books
• Royal Society of Chemistry - chemistry journals
• Pelican Books - ebook monographs
• Public Catalogue Foundation- art books

Other partnerships with accounts available are listed on

our partners page

. Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--

The Wikipedia Library Team

.00:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can host and coordinate signups for a Wikipedia Library branch in your own language. Please contact Ocaasi (WMF).

This message was delivered via the

Mass Message tool to the Book & Bytes recipient list

.

Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello SarekOfVulcan, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

You recently closed a closure review for America:Imagine a World Without Her, prematurely. Another editor unarchived it because there wasn't sufficient discussion and this is proven by the fact that the arguments made were not refuted. I even supplied examples of how this issue was forumshopped which is directly expressed as a reason a RFC should be overturned. Please explain your closing decisions and the WP policies that support it.Scoobydunk (talk) 08:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

The question that was asked in that RFC was "Is Breitbart.com a reliable source for its own film review?" There was clear consensus in that discussion that it was, so the closer made no error. The question you apparently want answered is "Should that review be included in the article, or is it a fringe view that is not sufficiently relevant?" That is a different question, which you are free to raise elsewhere.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

That is simply not correct. The very last part of the RFC says "The dispute isn't about the proposed quote's content, but whether the source is allowable here." Multiple participants in the RFC and the closer ignored WP policies that explicitly state that questionable sources should ONLY be used on materials about themselves, thus not making questionable sources allowable on any article not about the source itself. Furthermore, your response doesn't address the aspect of forumshopping, which is enough to nullify a RFC by itself. Also, thank you for fixing whatever it was on my talk page. I was unaware of a formatting error, but I appreciate you taking the initiative.Scoobydunk (talk) 06:36, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I just wanted to inform you that I'm still looking forward to hearing a response to this rebuttal or being informed of a reversal to your closing. WP policies say that closers are suppose to respond to inquiries about their closings in full and thoroughly. So I'm sure you're taking the time to reconsider and evaluate the part of the RFC that you and others have overlooked which is also the most important part.Scoobydunk (talk) 09:10, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:ANRFC "All closers should be prepared to fully discuss the closure rationale with any editors who have questions about the closure or the underlying policies, and to provide advice about where to discuss any remaining concerns that those editors may have." Since you either don't know the responsibilities of being a closer and/or blatantly ignore them like you did when closing the RFC review.Scoobydunk (talk

) 16:20, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		for taking multiple hits to defend Ellie Harrison (journalist) DOCUMENT★ERROR 15:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Change of name

Hi, I changed my first name(s) from "Mehmet" to "David Ezra". As you may have noticed, I edited the page "Mehmet Okonsar" to reflect my new name "David Ezra Okonsar". Is there a way to change the title of the page? thank you

(talk page stalker) Happy holidays Sarek. David Ezra, I went ahead and moved the page to David Ezra Okonşar to reflect the name change after checking the official webpage. Calmer Waters 06:37, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability.

emphasis mine. A7 is not a runaround to avoid AfD because there's a decent chance an article will be kept. WilyD 16:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I've deleted it per BLPE1 and IAR. If the IAR doesn't stick, I'll AFD it. I interpreted your more recent edits as having second thoughts on its creation, and that you support its deletion; if I misinterpreted, please let me know. Do you have thoughts on salting it too? This poor schmuck is going to be made fun of for a few days, so I expect it will be a repeated re-creation target. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I had only created it as a redirect to the government article he was mentioned in. I admit I was curious to see what would happen... Salt might be overkill, but on the other hand, it's pretty much guaranteed to be recreated soon. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

My mistake, I was moving so quick I didn't pay careful attention to what was on the page you created. I salted it, maybe you're right and a fully protected redirect makes more sense? --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't know. That will just move the editing to Frederick County, Maryland -- but as long as his name shows up there, it's going to happen anyway. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I've semi'd that page, and will just leave off for now and see what happens. Cries of "censorship" in 3...2...1... --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Stalking/lurking by, as I saw this in the news and was curious to see if an article had been created. I'm a pretty strident BLP1E champion, but the guy has basically Streisand'ed himself into a flood of news coverage. I wouldn't want the project to join in on the "hee hee he says don't so now we will" that the Boing Boings and others are apparently doing, but it may be too much to ignore soon. Tarc (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Because it's an image of the person making the edit? Even if accidentally or incidentally biasing/promotional, it's still biasing/promotional. We could simplify this by just illustrating with the image of someone dead. Ironholds (talk) 18:28, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I still disagree that it's an actual conflict, but your point is well taken. George Washington looks like a reasonable substitute.... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure; screenshot and upload! :). Ironholds (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Almost did, but decided not to deal with having to write the NFUR. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Added one myself, of Edmund Gettier (hey, at least that's funny). Ironholds (talk) 19:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I goofed that up on my mobile phone right when I needed to head out the door for work. I appreciate you cleaning things up. Thanks. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:26, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

My pleasure. After all, it's not like I haven't been on the other end of that... :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:28, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Why did you close this thread after 14 minutes? Now no-one can point out the options of starting an account or filing a change request. This short period could confirm the OP's idea that there is some sort of conspiracy here. Britmax (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

It did not appear to me that the OP was here to improve the encyclopedia. Blocking them appeared excessive to me (unless they're evading a block on another IP), but there was nowhere that discussion was going to go that would be useful. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

See Black Kite's reclosure of the thread for more info. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:39, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

In January 2013 there was a "

Thanks for the heads-up. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:21, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

You reverted my edits, claiming that the edits were "dubious". The edits are in the referenced source. The source is available at several places on the web, e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh_0KUt-wGQ (see the first 40 minutes). 109.150.113.37 (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

It may have been a referenced source, but for a contentious BLP claim, it has to be a

reliable source. --SarekOfVulcan (talk)

20:34, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe it is reliable. I have now included a new section to discuss this on Talk:Mike Tyson (as per a recommendation by another editor). 109.150.113.37 (talk) 21:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Good. Discussion is how we settle things here, after all.... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, what would be the right category to put a "homophobic" man in? deisenbe (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

There is no appropriate category for that, just like there is no Category:Racist. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you direct me to the policy statement on that?deisenbe (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Defining should cover it. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

My oldest live edit that isn't a redirect appears to be exactly two years old. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I would like to apolagize for my edits to

Thanks, but I'm not sure there's enough there to use. If you can find more than I did, please add it. I created it because I found a passing reference to her being one of the most respected early female TV writers, and was fairly disgusted that we had nothing yet. I was also disgusted that I couldn't do a better job than I did -- I'm looking forward to seeing what people come up with. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I linked to your user page in a COI discussion: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Greta Berlin and Free Gaza MovementCptnono (talk) 05:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the heads-up. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:23, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

if you read the article, you'll find he raised Cornish game hens. He appeared on

It's not a

WP:BRD cycle. --SarekOfVulcan (talk)

14:35, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

19:51, 2 February 2015 (UTC).

New England Wikipedia Day @ MIT: Saturday Jan 18

NE Meetup #4: January 18 at MIT Building 5

Dear Fellow Wikimedian, You have been invited to the New England Wikimedians 2014 kick-off party and Wikipedia Day Celebration at Building Five on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus on Saturday, January 18th, from 3-5 PM. Afterwards, we will be holding an informal dinner at a local restaurant. If you are curious to join us, please do so, as we are always looking for people to come and give their opinion! Finally, be sure to RSVP here if you're interested. I hope to see you there! talk )

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited!

New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Wikipedia edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston, Northampton, South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page. Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk )

NE Meetup #5: April 19th at Clover Food Lab in Kendall Square

Dear Fellow Wikimedian, New England Wikimedians would like to invite you to the April 2014 meeting, which will be a small-scale meetup of all interested Wikimedians from the New England area. We will socialize, review regional events from the beginning of the year, look ahead to regional events of 2014, and discuss other things of interest to the group. Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested. Also, if you haven't done so already, please consider signing up for our mailing list and connect with us on Facebook and Twitter. We hope to see you there! talk) and Maia Weinstock (talk )

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

You're invited to the Peabody Essex Museum Edit-a-thon Spring 2014

On May 3rd, the Peabody Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusetts will be hosting a Native American and Chinese Art edit-a-thon from 9:00-5:00 pm. You are more than welcome to attend, as there will be free food and drink, and an outing afterwards. If you are interested, please sign up here, as we would love to see you there!

If you have any questions, please leave a message at Ed Rodley's talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.

Adrianne Wadewitz edit-a-thons in Southern New England

As you may have already heard, the Wikipedia community lost an invaluable member of the community last month. Adrianne Wadewitz was a feminist scholar of 18th-Century British literature, and a prolific editor of the site. As part of a worldwide series of tributes, New England Wikimedians, in conjunction with local institutions of higher learning, have created three edit-a-thons that will be occurring in May and June. The events are as follows: May 21st at Northeastern University's Snell Library, in the Digital Scholarship Commons on the second floor May 22nd at Brown University's Rockefeller Library, in the Digital Scholarship Lab June 25th at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (exact location TBA), where we will also be hosting a "how to conduct an edit-a-thon" session beforehand We hope that you will be able to join us, whether you are an experienced editor or are using Wikipedia for the first time. If you have any questions, please leave a message at talk page. You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list .

The Jetboil article has devolved into near edit warring again; I would like to invite other editors who've previously participated in editing the article to join discussion on the Jetboil Talk Page] to help resolve two issues with the article: that it is overly detailed and that it reads like an advertisement. The article has been crafted largely by a single editor, who remains stalwart in their contentions. It would be helpful to have wider participation that narrower participation. Please join the discussion if you feel so inclined. Thanks. 842U (talk) 11:24, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BagBalmOblique.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for your responses to my questions so far.

While you are of course welcome to answer (or not) at your discretion and time frame, I just wanted to let you know I would probably be finished sifting through your history at some point tomorrow (11 years is a bit of time : ) - though I am obviously more focused on more recent edits.) And I'll probably comment at some point after that.

Thanks again. - jc37 18:48, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and while I'm here... I tried to find what you were talking about concerning "santorum", but I only found what was apparently a SNOWish afd close, and some talk page entries. Could you clarify what you were referring to? - jc37 18:53, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

In

indicating I didn't consider it a final move either. Turned out it was, though...--SarekOfVulcan (talk)

20:00, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Responding at opposes at your own RfA in any fashion is frowned upon, but if you must respond, use the best tone possible, and never show any form of bitterness. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 20:51, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SarekOfVulcan. You have new messages at Talk:Erik W. G. Leidzén.
Message added 21:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just for some light relief, since you mentioned it! :) DBaK (talk) 21:20, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I've added a followup to question 10 ... some of the opposition may be looking for clarification here (and I'd like to know, too). It's optional, but I think it will help you. - Dank (push to talk) 03:46, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me about this. I hope my clarification helped make sense there. Sometimes I internalize things to a degree that I don't think to spell out. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, that looks good, best of luck. - Dank (push to talk) 04:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

at least you'll make the

I hope you don't take it too personally although I wouldn't been surprised if you did, and for that I apologize. I don't have any personal grievances against you or dislike you or anything of that sort. What I'm hoping will be an outcome for this, despite having low hopes, is that some RfA/toolset reform will happen so that the archaic system we are using and loosing new users as a result. I hope you accept my apologies and would like to work with the next generation of editors for some positive reform. I think you'd do well with a more specialized set of tools, and look forward to nominating supporting you in such cause. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 02:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you saw the response on my user talk... I'd love it if you could finish the answer to my question. I won't hold it against you (it was an "optional" question after all), but reading your views would help me tip over the line to support. Thanks either way and good luck. Whichever way it goes, I admire your guts - you must have known you'd receive a fair amount of criticism all over again. --Dweller (talk) 14:16, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I saw it, but I'm having trouble figuring out how to answer it. When you ask for my current perspective, you're obviously looking for more than "I handled that badly, and I'll take steps to make sure I don't handle things badly again", but I'm not sure which of my views you want to hear. (Obviously, I don't want to tell you what you want to hear -- if I were going to do things like that, I would have promised a strict adherence to INVOLVED back in RFA2 right off, instead of giving my honest opinions at that point, which moderated over the course of the RFA...) I don't want to waste your time by answering the wrong question, after all. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Erm. Actually, that'll do. --Dweller (talk) 14:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Sarek! Welcome back to the admin corps. Glad to see you back. So, how'd you like to don your admin hat and take a look at some edits by

Can you stop putting words in my mouth, I have no "POV to push" whatsoever. That's is an entirely untrue account of what has happened. I most certainly DID discuss it, both on the edit summary repeatedly (COMPLETELY ignored by you repeatedly), and on the talk page (again, COMPLETELY ignored by you). Instead you patronise me there that the guideline was somehow not what I quoted, and quote some made-up American article usage thing that doesn't apply for the edit I was making; PER THE

MOS:ABBR guideline I quoted repeatedly, that EVERYONE including you and the other editors on there should be following. Comments like "he clearly thinks he's going to make a pronouncement and everyone will do as he says" is just a plainly needlessly rude way of trying to win over the user to your favour, instead of following the guideline I quoted, per WP policy. Jimthing (talk

) 17:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Both articles protected at WP:THEWRONGVERSION. Now settle it on the talkpage before someone faster on the block button comes around. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

That depends on the other editor discussing in good faith. The last few hours doesn't suggest that will happen, but we'll see. --Drmargi (talk) 18:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you stop being so rude. I have discussed it quite calmly. You instead keep attacking the man and not the argument. Ad hominem attacks only make you look bad. Jimthing (talk) 18:59, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed your RFA and looked it over. Not flattering you but I think it's impressive to be able to have repeat successful RFAs. A lot of admins that lose their status, it's an impossibility to regain it because they've acquired, wrongly or more often rightly I think, people that know them and oppose it vigorously. We have nothing in common by your RFA, but it seems to me at first glance that the renaming of the Santorum neologism article was a good solution. That was an awful controversy and I disagree with making fun of people's names, however it is also true that Sen. Santorum made deeply harmful and insulting statements about gays. From your userpage we also don't have much in common that I see, however as a child I was a mediocre clarinetist, then a pretty good bass clarinetist, then the world's worst bassoonist because I undertook an experiment basically to play a beat-up old one that was laying around and then the band director wouldn't let me out of it.

Would you have a look at my ban? I was perma-blocked without warning on a false charge of socking like three years ago and never have been able to dig out. I view my unblock efforts as being repetitively bullied by bad admins, and attacked by unreasoning mobs at WP:AN/ANI. When I go to Arbcom, they typically decline without reason. The first time that happened, Silktork said a full year later, that he viewed me as the sock of some mysterious banned other user that he always refused to name. But at the time he told me nothing. More recently I was formerly banned by a WP:AN/ANI mob, the unique aspect of that was that none of them gave a reason. That was ringleadered by "Dangerous Panda" whose since been desysoped for conduct unbecoming (didn't help me though). I appealed to Arbcom last month, was declined without reason. Perhaps you'll agree with me that no-reason bans are improper and counter-policy.

Anyhow, I shouldn't type a volume at your page. The key points are that I had a prior account for five or six years that I abandoned for privacy reasons. I started a single new account as I said about three years ago, accidentally ran into trouble after a few months with the WP:AN/ANI-style participants (an horrifying alternate side of Wikipedia I had no idea existed), and was perma-blocked by an admin who wasn't ever going to talk about it. Since then I still have never socked, but have clearly-disclosed-username block-evaded with raw IP edits in order to seek fair and policy-based treatment, which has not been forthcoming yet.

If you are crazy enough to help you might unblock merely my page only, and we'll talk about it without my having to block evade. Colton Cosmic.

Well that's one quick route to desysopping. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:40, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

But a brave and honorable one. Colton Cosmic.

I may on occasion think of myself as brave and honorable, but at the moment, I'm paranoid as all get-out. If the new Arbcom denied your appeal, I'm not going to paint a huge honking target on myself. Sorry. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

"You could warn me, but my mortification on the terrible bullying I'm receiving from that user is so obnoxious and corrupt."

This is what I said. Now, as you could see, I referred to the bullying, not the user, that was obnoxious (dangerously annoying) and corrupt (unfair). How could this be a personal offense? I have not insulted the user, I have simply described the user's bullying. Maybe it was grammar confusion, but this is how it goes:

"You could warn me, but my mortification on the terrible bullying (I'm receiving from that user) is so obnoxious and corrupt."

Is it still an offense now?

I understand the distinction you're trying to draw here, but in my experience, it's not a valid one. It's not possible to refer to an editor's "bullying" as corrupt without passing an implicit judgement on the editor themselves. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Done. Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 21:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

I noticed that you had an active UTRS account, but it was made inactive after your admin bit was removed. Now that you are back in our cozy little cabal, I have reactivated your UTRS account as a matter of procedure (since there is no reason for it to be inactive anymore). You are free to use it actively, when needed, or not at all. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) Now I have to remember how to use the dratted thing. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 05:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Or not, as you see fit. You had zero closed appeals even during your first admin term, nothing's forcing you to take on more now. UTRS access is just useful every once in a while if you need to read an appeal. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 05:43, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the addition to my talk page. Here is a beer because it must get pretty hot on your planet! talk ) 17:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

@SarekOfVulcan:, please check this:

"Your arguments are full of holes, and they continue to show a closed-minded ignorance of Wikipedia editing concepts (see WP:Other stuff exists for example), but I am through wasting my time arguing with you. "
I find this statement pretty offensive. Isn't there supposed to be a warning towards Walruss??

It's a bit blunt, but I don't think it rises to the level of a personal attack. Making fun of someone's username, though, as you did twice above, could be considered one, though. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

1) The route map is inaccurate. There are stations on the map that shows there is going to be a route to the north- no official announcements has been made for that section- even a consideration. Also, the southern extension's names are not official yet; the image is clearly off.

2) That image shows no aboveground or underground information unlike the route map. There is also no way to add on structures and details that is along or on the route.

3) The article has been worsened with replacing a more functional, same route map with a less functional one- this means the image insertion is a degradation. Terramorphous and I have made this map (along with another user), so we are accurate on what we made.

• SarekOfVulcan, just letting you know that I have raised this at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:HanSangYoon reported by User:ColonialGrid (Result: ). ColonialGrid (talk) 05:48, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
• The bit about the north and south extensions is a valid concern: I've created a derivative work at File:Busan Metro Line 1 Map.png that only incorporates the current stations and will replace the map in the article. Can anybody speak to the accuracy of the map itself, given that there doesn't appear to be any source given? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 12:52, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

  Ah, this is helpful. The northern section appears to be a railway connector, rather than part of the line itself. And the map as drawn appears to match up fairly well with the map at that link. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:HanSangYoon reported by User:ColonialGrid (Result: ). If you know anything about this dispute, could you add some information to the AN3 complaint? Passing admins may not want to close it because it's too mystifying. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Since I was one of the editors HanSangYoon reverted, I have no comment as to the merits of the complaint at this time. I do note that he self-reverted his last edit, though. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:30, 27 February 2015 (UTC)