User talk:Scalhotrod/Archive 27

This page is an current talk page .

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
137		Florida State Road A1A (talk)						Add sources
213		Payphone (talk)						Add sources
95		Angelica Costello (talk)						Add sources
614		Overview of gun laws by nation (talk)						Add sources
475		Diamond Foxxx (talk)						Add sources
15		Charles Herrold (talk)						Add sources
502		MAC-10 (talk)						Cleanup
15		Yerba Buena High School (talk)						Cleanup
263		Woodland Hills, Los Angeles (talk)						Cleanup
4,047		History of the FIFA World Cup (talk)						Expand
280		Gun law in the United States (talk)						Expand
368		District of Columbia v. Heller (talk)						Expand
127		Frank Luntz (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
632		Boy band (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
45		Portable audio player (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
274		Effects of climate change on humans (talk )						Merge
124		Automatic firearm (talk)						Merge
218		Bikini barista (talk)						Merge
91		Daniel Suarez (talk )						Wikify
44		Sam Phillips (model) (talk)						Wikify
30		ChIA-PET (talk)						Wikify
43		talk )						Orphan
6		LAPA CM-02 (talk)						Orphan
2		Joseph Gaylord (talk)						Orphan
3		Rectilinear minimum spanning tree (talk)						Stub
1,004		Samantha Saint (talk)						Stub
1,611		Dani Daniels (talk)						Stub
18		Dan O'Connell (director) (talk )						Stub
404		Alexis Ford (talk)						Stub
598		Adrianna Luna (talk)						Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I have requested an evaluation of your conduct here:[1]. Lightbreather (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:HEAR the good advice given to you by many uninvolved editors and admins. "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye" - Asking to be "left alone" and have other's not to comment on you, while simultaneously writing an essay attacking Sue Rangell (User:Lightbreather/sandbox/Vigilantism) an editor you have had significant conflict with, seems a bit tone deaf to me. To paraphrase the very good advice someone else gave you - go edit some articles and stop paying attention to the buzzing flies. (No attack intended against the buzzing flies) Gaijin42 (talk

) 20:01, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Gaijin, although I have thanked you in the past for your clarification on some things - especially WP jargon - I think an editor who has been topic-banned for incivility and personal attacks,[2] isn't going to be my first choice in matters of how to handle feelings (with evidence) that I'm being attacked and/or harassed. Also, the essay you point to is an unfinished draft based on behaviors that I've observed among some editors, not just by one. Lightbreather (talk) 20:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

@

I don't see the issue. It's forever in the history of her talkpage. Removal of a message is tacit acceptance that the message was read. Hopefully she takes the advice - it would be a shame for her to start being considered

unaware of the policy and how it reads - her own next steps will make the difference in her future on Wikipedia the panda ₯’

16:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough, I agree with your assessment and the action seemed minor, but I just wanted those involved to know about it. In a conversation that stemmed from a discussion of Civility, it seemed a little hypocritical... :) --

(Talk)

16:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for attending to it. I am quite used to being not understood ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

YW :) --

(Talk)

16:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

YW? - English is not my first language, I am known for taking things too literally, and for asking the meaning of abbreviations. (Once, the question could only be answered by email ;) ) - I saw on Lightbreather's talk that she wanted to be left alone, however I thought if there's a major misunderstanding that I could help clarifying I could at last try. A personal attack is directed at a single person. I confess that I prefer to be insulted personally to possibly be included in a group which is described with negative attributes, and if you complain you hear "I didn't mean you". (I have some red scars on my user page.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

My apologies, I did not know. YW is an abbreviation for "You are welcome" or "You're welcome". And I agree with your assessment of the situation. --

(Talk)

17:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Dammit, Scal, I've asked you this mutliple times now: If you're going to talk about me, take it to the appropriate forum. And notify ME that you're talking about me, so that I can defend myself. Quit gossiping about me. Quit harassing me. You told me yourself, barely two weeks ago that my talk page is mine to deal with.[4] What's more, you weren't involved in that conversation. I only replied to HiLo's request (which he chose to give a very uncivil discussion header[5]) because he posted it on my talk page. When we started rehashing what has already been discussed in several related discussions, I asked him to leave me alone.[6] I removed what was said, by himself and others, after that because - again - it was just rehashing the same arguments and was feeling more like harassment to me than conversation. Scalhotrod, quit following me around, leave me alone. If you have a complaint re: my behavior, gather your evidence and take it to the appropriate forum. Quit talking about me behind my back. Lightbreather (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Nobody is required to advise you when they're talking about you, EXCEPT when specific incidents are being raised at an admin noticeboard. Your accusations are becoming

disruptive as they are wholly inappropriate the panda ₯’

18:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Get more specific, DP. Which Disruptive editing subsection applies? Lightbreather (talk) 19:15, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

All of it. You continue to make false accusations of personal attacks, while ignoring ANYONE who actually shows you that you're mistaken on what the policy says. That's inappropriate, and actionable. I see you refused to respond to the AN you opened, and now it's closed. Further harassment of people who have the right to discuss their concerns on how you appear to have gone off-the-rails is unacceptable. the panda ₯’ 19:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

All of it? It is almost, if not entirely, to do with conduct in the mainspace. And I "continue to make false accusations"? What above is a false accusation? Where did I mention personal attacks? I mentioned harassment. They're separate policies. Lightbreather (talk) 19:30, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to pretend I was invited to this conversation: Scalhotrod, sorry, but I think it's very inappropriate of you to be editing the talk page/archive of someone with whom you have such disagreements. The appropriate thing to have done, if anything had to be done in the first place, would be to notify an administrator. And this discussion, again, sorry, but I find this (pace the Panda and

Hell in a Bucket's comments) a bit unseemly. I wouldn't call a roundtable on my own talk page to discuss someone else's behavior; it's quite different, at least in tone, from bringing up some matter on an admin's talk page, for instance, or a notice board. I don't want to call Lightbreather a bear, but what you're doing resembles the poking of one. Thanks, Drmies (talk

) 19:32, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Drmies, its a fair observation. I made the edit with the clear intention that the entire conversation should be archived, not just what LB preferred to keep. As for any "poking", I'm just tired of being on the receiving end of LB's vitriole that seems to be based on personal bias versus anything concrete. I'm not doing anything "to her" other than shining a light on her actions for others to be aware of. As for the "round table", that was just a practical decision. Since I was starting it, it seemed to make sense to do it on my page versus Panda or another Admins. If bringing it up on an Admin's page and alerting others would have been the better route, then I apologize for that choice.

This started when LB made a personal attack, twice, on me during the ARE proceeding; and it was ignored even when I asked about it. Its since been alluded to when I added myself to the Gender Gap Task Force [7].

I kinda agree with Drmies. Under

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk

) 19:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

There are a few restrictions. Things shouldn't be put in a different light by omission of comments; my rule of thumb is you shouldn't remove something from the middle of a thread or, to keep it more simple, you can't remove a comment once it's been responded to unless you remove everything that follows--on your own talk page, that is. On article talk you can't ever remove someone else's comments as long as those comments are valid (not soapboxing, etc.). But regardless of the merits of the removal or the restoration in this case, why would person a do that to person b if a and b have been before ArbCom and have duked it out often enough? It's not wise. Drmies (talk) 19:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Did we just hear a proposal for a voluntary interaction ban? If that happens I suggest you include an agreed duration.

Although it is ambiguous, I read that as saying inline striking or removing, not wholesale removal of a comment from one's talkpage. Although perhaps not in the full spirit of discussion, LB is indeed not under any obligation to leave comments up from someone on their talkpage, even if those comments are part of a larger conversation, and she leaves other parts up. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I guess I was reading it from the perspective of the entire conversation versus a specific comment, so I see your point. --

(Talk)

20:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

This and other actions of the past week are evidence of harassment, and I would surely appreciate it if someone would re-open the request for evaluation that I started at ANI so that there is an audit trail, so to speak, not only of the behavior, but of my strong, and IMO justified, objection to it. Lightbreather (talk) 20:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:RFC/U if you feel so inclined. I've considered starting one on you, to be honest...the fact that you showed up here is proof that you are harassing/stalking...remember that. So, you really don't want that ANI re-opened, as your behaviour will be investigated, and right now your behaviour is blockable the panda ₯’

20:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for inviting me here Scalhotrod. It's been sleep time in the part of the world where my Wikipedia minority lives. (Pretty sure there's fewer Australians than women.) I don't need to add anything, except an observation from another place that among Lightbreather's list of acceptable words is "bullshit". That being a word for which I've been condemned here in the past, that's pretty common where I live and, no matter how hard I try to please the conservatives here, does slip off my tongue and keyboard at times. I'm now feeling much better. Keep up the good work. HiLo48 (talk) 21:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I seem to be doing this a lot lately, but my apologies for involving you in the drama between LB and myself. Thank you for your comments and I wish you well. --

(Talk)

21:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Re an earlier comment, and at this point it may be academic, but since you ask about TPG, under the permitted reasons for editing others comments at

NewsAndEventsGuy (talk

) 21:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I guess what I found odd about edit that prompted my action (the restoration of text that was missing from an archived discussion) is that LB actually deleted part of text, comments from several Editors, and then moved what was left of the conversation to her archive.[8][9][10][11][12] I restored it and then started this discussion. --

(Talk)

21:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

With respect, I don't think I have seen anything quite so ridiculous in all my life. Needless to say, I have reverted you. Cassianto^talk 21:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Can't disagree, but its been a busy day (scroll up a bit). I'll add them back when I have time to properly fill them out. Thank you for noticing... :) --

(Talk)

22:01, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, so I see; bigger fish and all that. However, I really wouldn't bother. Infoboxes are

neither required nor prohibited for any article, and I think in this case, one would be completely redundant as everything is contained nicely in the lede. Cassianto^talk

22:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, I do see your point, and not that I'm trying to "muck up" the layout or anything, but I do value the purpose of Infoboxes. In this age of Google searches and wanting instant gratification, they provide quick access to information. Plus its an easy place to add a photo, which as a notable former model I feel that Dahl is deserving of her image on WP. --

(Talk)

22:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

banjo bands
Thank you, advanced banjo player, for quality articles, working on the List of banjo players, such as Charlie Tagawa, for diplomacy, "conservata veritate" and "I do value the purpose of Infoboxes", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! :) --

(Talk)

16:20, 29 July 2014 (UTC)