This is an archive of past discussions with User:LaughingVulcan. 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.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Removed from Signpost spamlist
Hi! I'm Ral315, editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost. It appears that you have not edited in at least a few months. To avoid spamming your talk page any further, should you be on leave, your name has been removed from the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to continue receiving the Signpost on your talk page, please leave a note on my talk page to that effect, and I will restore your name, and keep you on the list indefinitely. Ral315 (talk) 07:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Open Ended Question for Discussion
Is anyone else frustrated that it seems like every article page has two or three banners at the top of the page detailing all the things perceived to be wrong with the article? I can't be the first person to think that "routine" editing banners could be set as a pop-up box. Thus those looking to edit could expand and reveal what others feel need to happen to it. Those looking to just read the article could do so and form their own conclusions about what's wrong with it (if anything.)
I'm not suggesting that time-critical notification (espeically AfD noms / prods / etc.) should be treated the same way... I'm just tired of seeing things like Jason Bourne (character), where what's alleged to be wrong with it takes up most of the real estate on the first screen. LaughingVulcan19:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Regarding your comment
Normally I'd reply at my own user talk, but somehow I missed your comment when it first went up two days ago. It's difficult to reply because there are so many ways to hit a wrong note. Yes, I erred, and I've been very sorry for that. What also happened was a lot of false accusations sprang up that construed much worse than I actually did, and dispute resolution systematically denied me the opportunity to demonstrate which portion of blame was properly mine from a surrounding mess of factual errors. The block I performed lasted 75 minutes, for example, not three days as The Register alleged. As soon as I realized I had erred I promptly did my best to correct it, take ownership of the mistake, clear other parties of unwarranted suspicion, and extend apologies. I took the initiative of opening the noticeboard thread that placed my own actions under review. A perfect storm developed where 80% of anything I said got ignored and the other 20% got misquoted. After a few days I found myself in a position where the only dignified and drama-reducing option was to stop presenting evidence and resign, and accept a worse hit to my reputation than was really deserved. It isn't an experience I'd wish on anyone; it actually got into a few legitimate tech presses yet only one reporter contacted me to check the facts. So I'm not sure what exactly you've seen, but I can understand people getting very angry at the caricature that was presented. I wasn't in the right; no question there, I also probably wasn't so bad as your reading indicates. Best regards and thank you for your candor, DurovaCharge!23:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Hello Mr. Laughing Vulcan. I was not sure how to do this right so I'm doing it here. First, thank you for your advice on correcting the Briar Rose (band). I have gone back to correct the items you have mentioned and I responed to your response on th Afd section. Could you please look when you get the chance? I value your opinion. I'm just trying to do things the right way. Thank you. (TinkerBoop (talk) 12:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC))
Hello again Mr. Laughing Vulcan. Thank you again for your help on the AfD on Briar Rose (band). I hope that the ARS can save the article. I really am just trying to get it right and I hope it stays because I feel the subject really does have a place here. I am more than accepting of the idea of some help to correct or someone to correct who knows Wiki to save it and I can learn from them. Again thank you and yes, I'll take all the help I can get. If you could advise me on some of the things you mentioned I can try to correct but I'm begining to fear of goofing it all up. (TinkerBoop (talk) 16:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC))
Thank you for everything you have done to help save the page. I am very grateful and happy!! I hope it makes the page a keeper. You are really talented with this Wiki thing, I never would have gotten it right. Still learning! : ) Thank you again!! (TinkerBoop (talk) 03:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC))
Re. The Adventures of Brer Rabbit
I closed the AfD because the article clearly established notability at the time, and, if I'm wrong, it was also shown to clearly pass WP:N and such. If that doesn't explain it clearly enough, I'm sorry; honestly, after watching the consequences of this NAC, I'm wondering whether or not it helped. Your civility is much appreciated. Leonard(Bloom)22:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Whew!! Glad that AfD is over!! Thank you again for everything you did, very grateful!! One question on your name...Did Spock ever laugh on the original show?? You have me wondering??...(TinkerBoop (talk) 07:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC))
Thanks for the comment! I'll keep my eyes open next time! About the warning, once a last warning has been posted, do I post another last warning? I thought the 'only warning' template came after the last warning one. =S
Again, thanks for correcting my mistake with the Physicist article.
Thanks for your comprehensive reply! It certainly explained a lot. I didn't know about the 'order' of warn templates.
Are you an admin? Have you applied for admin-ship? You should be. You're pretty helpful. I'm gonna apply after I complete about 8000 edits and help reduce the backlog of page requests.
Just a note that I saw your comment at ANI; any user is permitted to contribute to AN and ANI as there is no hierarchy or class system at Wikipedia and Administrators have no special rights to participate in conversations to the exclusion of non-admins. Happy editing. MBisanztalk04:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Changes made by SmackBot
Hi,thanks for your message, SmackBot makes a number of changes that are available to all WP:AWB bots - in general these provide a number of non-controversial minor improvements.
The issue you raise is related to these, and is done as a "general fix", however SB used to have code to do this that was unique - whether AWB caught up or SB was a little smarter or both I can't remember. Regardless, it no longer does it as a task.
Thanks for the note, I'll update the documentation a little.
Regards, RichFarmbrough, 14:17 9 September2008 (GMT).
Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
The work it would take to file an Arbcom about a particular editor's serial bullying and uncivil conduct just ain't worth it. Those browsing my history should figure out just who that is, I think. If he's reading this, doubt he cares: Remember your civility is ultimately only your own responsibility and doesn't depend on what anyone else does, and how you treat your friends is no measure of it.
Don't tell him to come here. It would only piss him off again and do no good.
For others... if you want proof of what really causes problems with editor retention? Lack of civility on the part of established editors. I can get over his being an asshole to me, and I'm sure he thought I was being an asshole to him and I probably was. Maybe I'll be able to forget how many other people he fucks over and gets to walk away from blithely because he has friends. Even bullies have friends, you know.
But for now.... this place and my contributions to it just aren't fucking worth it. So I'll see how I do with not only with a semi-retirement/indefinite wikibreak but also not coming here for information as that too supports the bullies who want to control Wikipedia. I'll still watch my userpage and talkpage just to keep it clean. Expect no responses but deletions for now. Maybe I'll be back soon, or maybe I'll be back late. I couldn't stay away before, maybe I can now, or maybe I'll find new hope to come back. I hope I'll never be back at all. But see y'all again someday. Maybe. LaughingVulcan00:28, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
