This is an archive of past discussions with User:Gaba p. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Gaba, I have increasing respect for you both as an editor and as a decent person with strong convictions, and an equally strong sense of honour. I would ask you please not to make any major reverts or to inadvertantly inflame a hairtrigger situation. Please give it an open time frame. I have requested some oversight, so other NPOV eds can be involved.
Please believe me when I say that my only objective is to help facilitate a fair and mutually agreed final draft. I was called here, i didnt stick my nose in. Now i have invested considerable time and nervous energy, when I have issues domestically and personally, and was winding down my WP involvement, speaks volumes for my commitment to facilitate a fair and just outcome. But now i am committed and will not cease my efforts. Please help me here. With respect and regards, Irondome (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC) or in the real world, Simon.
I really appreciate your input on the issue and your cool attitude when things get heated. The only reason I'm not restoring the old section right now is because you appear to be very much committed in helping to achieve a consensus and have indeed invested quite a bit of time and effort in it. I still believe it was utterly disruptive of Wee and Kahastok to delete the section with no consensus, but I am willing to hold off on restoring an old version of it with the hopes of finally getting a version everyone agrees with.
I thank you for acknowledging I'm making a big compromise here in accepting a version that is about 1/17th of the original one. Sometimes I can get a bit frustrated but I'd like to think I'm a reasonable person and I truly just want to make a balanced and informative section, as I'm sure you do too. Regards and thank you very much for your kind words. Gaba p (talk) 03:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Just the truth as I see it. You are a fine researcher and intellectual, and have proved to me a great willingness to compromise, in the right consensual and non stressful atmosphere that we all strive to create, if one are serious about the WP project, as I believe that all members of our group really are at heart. Anyway. Bed. Kind regards Irondome (talk) 04:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC) S
Talkback
Hello, Gaba p. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk. Message added 13:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi! The images you need are copyrighted, so I had to upload only for local wikipedia (it.wp), since that Commons can't accept images with similar license. There is an OTRS ticket concerning those images, that means that under specific cases, not free images could be uploaded in local wikipedia (in this case, en.wp). Altough an OTRS ticket should be valid for any version of wikipedia, specific cases may have to be discussed in the local wiki in wich you want to use it. --RobertoSegnali all'Indiano14:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Yes, something like this would sound better: "Each one of these clouds harbour at their core some infrared sources, that are all coincident with protostars." Bye! :) --RobertoSegnali all'Indiano20:10, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
I can see you are not interested by your somewhat aggressive (and completely unexpected) tone. Am I misinterpreting your message or did I do anything to upset you? Regards. Gaba p (talk) 22:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
And just so we are clear I'm all for making a list of countries supporting one side or the other. What we apparently don't see eye to eye is how the list should be made. The list, in my opinion, should go:
Countries that support Argentina
Countries that support the UK
Countries that remain neutral (or take no position on the sovereignty issue)
Countries that have called for negotiations to restart but not stated a clear position
I believe that listing all countries who have not expressed themselves on the issue in any way under "Countries that support the UK" would definitely not be correct.
And once again: I'm completely open to discuss this way of presenting the section but I really believe that, given how close we got to a consensus on your last version, we should first try to agree on a preliminary version to put up while we discuss the issue further. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 00:06, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Gaba p. You have new messages at Jmabel's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Re: Question
Yes, I have already removed the template from the article in question. Seeing as you have added categories to the article. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 15:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elementary (operating system), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dock, Midori and Deb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I notice you added a few paragraphs of text to the Falkland Islands dispute article. I cant comment on the merits of the material. But citations (footnotes) are needed, per the WP:V policy. I'm sure other editors will immediately remove it if there are no citations. Cheers. --Noleander (talk) 05:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
The citations are all there waiting to be added but Kahastok already removed the section, so I can't. Him and Wee are still blocking the inclusion of the section into the article even though I compromised on pretty much everything they asked for. I think at this point (if they continue with their position) an RfC might be needed. Would you be willing to open one if we see in the following days that consensus keeps being blocked? Regards. Gaba p (talk) 12:41, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi Gaba. I've seen that you're so unlucky as having to deal with Wee.
You can find this interesting:
[1]: Justin A Kuntz (who signs as "Justin the Evil Scotsman") has made a series of uncivil comments, assumed bad faith, and engaged in personal attacks during interactions with other editors concerning the history and political status of Gibraltar. (Justin is the former nickname of Wee).
As you can verify, Wee's pattern is clear and I can't understand why he hadn't been expelled log ago. --Ecemaml (talk) 09:21, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Hola Ecemaml, yes I'm sadly aware of what you present here. This is (again, sadly) not the first time Wee attempts to have me banned from Falkland related articles and because of that I've gather some knowledge on his aggressive past here in WP, specially in Gibraltar articles. I thank you for your message, hopefully this will get sorted out soon. Abrazo! Gaba p (talk) 13:05, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Burying the hatchet
(Pasted here after Wee deleted the original message from his talk page)
Hi there Wee, please don't get mad at me for writing in your talk page; I swear I'll make it quick. The last ANI seems to have been lost into oblivion leaving the issue of your "sock-puppetry" doubts about me still lingering. As I see it, there's two ways we could take care of this:
1- you pledge to not accuse me ever again of being a sock-puppet of that user or to casually imply it, or
2- you take the matter to SPI (with my full blessing).
Please understand that this is not only about me being tired of being accused of sock-puppetry, but also for your own piece of mind. Kahastok appears to be unconvinced too about me not being that user, which would point to the second option as the best one. In any case it's up to you given that Kahastok only jumps in the accusing-me-of-sock-puppetry wagon after he sees you doing it, so if you choose the first option and stop, I'm pretty sure he'll stop too. If you know of a better way we could put this to rest once and for all, please let me know so we can work something out. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 03:47, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
This is decidedly one sided, you've been having a pop at me ever since, which makes me deeply regret going that extra mile to give you the benefit of the doubt. I have no desire for any confrontation whatsoever. So if you simply stop and leave me alone, problem solved. I am not going to give you any undertaking not to refer to your previous abusive behaviour, as I see it your over-reaction to that reference was a rather cynical ploy to distract attention from your appalling conduct. Wee Curry Monstertalk12:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
I'd say this is decidedly one sided but the other way around: the way I see it you've had a grudge against me ever since my block was lifted (mainly because you think I am that blocked user you had trouble with some time ago). Trust me Wee, I have absolutely no desire for any more confrontations whatsoever. History shows nonetheless that if we find ourselves at a new dispute the chances of you bringing up the "sock-puppetry" accusations against me are pretty high and I really am fed up with it. That you think this is "faux outrage" (like you called it) and that you refer to my request for you to cease your accusations as an "over-reaction" tells me you have no idea how tiresome it is to be falsely accused of being a sock-puppet for over a year.
I am not asking you to stop referring to my previous behavior (we'll have to disagree on the "abusive" part tough) I'm simply asking that you abstain from accusing me of being a sock-puppet of that user, or casually implying it, ever gain. If you are not prepared to do this (and the last ANI pretty much proved you are not) because you still believe I am that user under a different account then I urge you to take me to SPI as soon as possible. That way we can at least continue editing side by side without you having that doubt lingering about me and without me having to expect the inevitable accusation at some point.
If you are not willing to either agree to cease your accusations of sock-puppetry or to take me to SPI then I am forced to request admin intervention because I am truly fed up with it and I sincerely would prefer to not have to do that. I'll await your decision. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 13:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Come on Wee, you are being deliberately tendentious. I am in no position to "leave you alone" since I never "seek you out" in the first place. Unless you intent on stopping your edits in Falkland related articles (and I hope you don't) then we need to solve this issue, because I will not stop contributing to them either and hence we are bound to cross paths. One more time: please work with me here so we can resolve this. If you truly believe I am a sock puppet of that user then please take the matter to SPI and be prepared to accept their ruling. If you do not believe that anymore then please I urge you to pledge here to stop accusing me of being a sock puppet or casually implying it. Your word is good enough for me and so we can move on after having put this matter to rest. Regards. Gaba p (talk) 14:40, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Alright Wee, just so we are clear I'm taking your refusal to respond anymore as an acknowledgement that this forces me to request admin intervention to settle the matter. I'd really prefer if we could resolve this issue in some other way, but you seem unwilling to cooperate so you leave me no choice. I'll let you know in the following days after I've taken action. Regards. Gaba(talk)12:04, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
WCM has made it abundantly clear on several occasions that you are not welcome on his talk page. In light of this, you need a seriously good reason to post there, and generally speaking you don't. I don't think you have anything to say to Wee that can't be said on article talk pages, and so you shouldn't be winding him up further by following him home to his talk page. Basaliskinspect damage⁄berate19:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Gaba p. Replies have been posted to your question at the Help desk. If the problem is solved, please place {{Resolved|1=~~~~}} at the top of the section. Thank you!
Message added on 04:17, 23 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{helpdeskreply}} template.
Falkland Islands sovereignty dispute
I'm not sure I'll have time to read all the text on the talk page to understand the problem and come up with a neutral RfC. Things seem to have been generally going well of late - at least by the edits to the article as there's been little edit warring. Hopefully you'll be able to sort it out. I'll keep my eye on it but it will be at least a few days before I can take a longer look. Dpmuk (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, the edits stopped since you blocked the article. I wouldn't say that proves things have been going well. I assure you that if I attempt to re-introduce the edit Apcbg removed twice with no reason I would meet an immediate reversion by either him or Wee Curry Monster or Kahastok. Keep in mind that the edit they're reverting to fails verification and the new edit (100% backed by sources) has been thoroughly discussed in the talk page. They're just using the "no consensus" card to block a perfectly valid edit basically saying WP:IDONTLIKEIT.
I'll make the effort to, once again, attempt to extract a valid reason or at least a source to back Wee Curry monster and Kahastok's version of the edit but I'm not keeping my hopes up. If you check the talk page you'll see I must've asked them 6 times for the source and every time they applied WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT.
Well I gave it another shot but it's a no go. At this point it appears only an RfC will resolve this issue. If you're not up to it, could I ask you to request an admin you consider neutral to please take a look at the discussion? I would prefer not to request one myself to avoid subsequent accusations. Thank you very much. Regards. Gaba(talk)20:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Gaba p. You have new messages at Dpmuk's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Re: Help
Yes, I am willing to help out with the mediation. I will be a little too busy in the next couple of weeks, but I should have more time on Saturday 11 of this month. Regards.--MarshalN20 | Talk12:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This sanction can be appealed to the community at WP:AN, or to the Arbitration Committee. Experience shows that the chances of any appeal are greatly increased if the appellant can show a lengthy period of compliance with the ban and of conflict-free editing in other topic areas. Sandstein 17:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
