This user may have left Wikipedia. Tijfo098 has not edited Wikipedia since November 2012. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
Which prose? Copy the sentences you deem unsupported to the article's talk page. The quote you deleted is actually found in the source cited. Tijfo098 (talk) 13:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You know what. I don't care. You can restore the material though it is repugnant. I am not going to edit war with you and I show you I DON'T EDIT WAR. Your provocations are uncalled for so I will leave your version.Curb Chain (talk) 07:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have about a minute...
...to undo any changes you have made to your original ban proposal. You cannot ethically modify them AFTER !voting has already begun, and doing so is extremely disruptive (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's simply a note that the would be !voters should read the entire discussion. I don't see anything inappropriate about it; it is timestamped. Tijfo098 (talk) 14:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll let you move the subsection you created about SELFREF down to below the current ban proposal right away as it has no place belonging where you put it. What's up with you today? You've look like you've completely gone off the deep end...you know better than what you're doing. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because I had replied to the section right above and added it one edit. [3] I don't see the big deal to where that is placed, so I've moved it now. Tijfo098 (talk) 14:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have collapsed your latest bits - none of that belongs on ANI. If you want to file an RFC/U, please do it - but I'd say you have shot down any chance of it doing anything positive by your actions on ANI this morning (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:12, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I had blocked you for disruption like I had originally considered, that might have been considered shooting the messenger. You KNOW how these things work. You cannot jump to a ban the way you did. You know that RFC/U was the right step. You know that none of your posts belonged on ANI. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Shaz0t was blocked after I posted to ANI what kind of editing he engaged in. Which isn't terribly different from what CC has been doing. But fine, I'll go the RfC/U route given that CC is a longer term contributor (with apparent wikifriends although that looks more like a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"). For the record, I've disagreed strongly with BMK on some stuff in the recent past—Lake Michigan-Huron, cough, cough—so I'm not doing this as any sort of personal favor him. I just think CC has been editing disruptively, just as Shaz0t has. Tijfo098 (talk) 15:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure they have wikifriends as you suggest :-) I'm just sayin' you know how things work, and what you were doing sure doesn't work. I honestly think you call for a ban was one of the oddest things I have ever seen you do! (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After some consideration, given how hard it is to do anything about obviously disruptive editors, I decided to no longer donate any of my time to Wikipedia. Trolls, vandals, Randys, POV pushers, spammers, and wiki-potentates: rejoice! Tijfo098 (talk) 15:51, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tijfo knows it was meant in humour, even without the smiley (perhaps you missed the smiley yourself) - and they also know how I commend their work overall (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be a "wuss". I expanded the DIVA thing because of an editor (or two or three) that epitomized the concept. That's not you. Suck it up and get back to work. Doctalk06:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please. My editing is a content dispute not a conduct dispute. User:Beyond My Ken is irascible with editors. Yes that is disruptive. Wikipedia is not a titfortat game. And pray tell, what is your username so you can face me instead of lurking behind a number.Curb Chain (talk) 08:11, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your editing is indeed a conduct dispute, as I explained with this reply. But you of course decided to get the last word on your talk page by archiving the material. Too bad that you can't archive things at this talk page to get the last word. Not that your "last word" is even valid. The only response you have to valid complaints made against you is to assert that you are right. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge any wrongdoing in your editing shows your very real WP:COMPETENCE issues. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that you remove any of the words listed at User:Curb Chain#WP:NPOV, no matter that these are very often needed words, and are often used by reliable sources in the articles that they are in. Some buildings are large, while others are small, for example. Some people smoke frequently. And so on and so on. I've already pointed out one of your other competence issues -- I emphasized that it is not at all okay to remove text from articles simply because the text is supported by a dead link. This is made explicitly clear at WP:Dead link. If all of the information in the WP:FA article Big Bang was throughly supported by dead links, does that mean that most or all of the information in that article should be removed? No! It means that you are supposed to tag those links as dead links and/or take yourself to Internet Archive and restore some or all of those links. You don't understand that, of course, which is one reason why you are a problematic editor. Yes, you were warned by an experienced WP:MED editor -- Jmh649 -- to follow WP:MEDMOS about using "In other animals." You speak of your edits to the WP:MEDMOS guideline. Yes, you are the one who changed the guideline to just state "Other animals" instead of "In other animals." And looking at this edit again, you should stay away from all medical information. Your removals were completely justified, you state? Laughable. Tijfo098 explained quite well why you've been wrong, and so have I. You can't even handle Wikipedia:Third opinion (30) requests correctly.
As for my identity, having a registered user name does not make me any more accessible to you. It's none of your business who I am. A lot of IPs edit Wikipedia without ever registering to this site. Just like a lot of problematic editors are blocked or banned from this site only to return later (looking at you when I state that).
If you are hiding behind a number so you can harass people then you can see yourself blocked, or purposefully attacking people since you are not logged in. Seeing as you are an experienced editor you should know what archiving does not mean I get the last word. And your opinion of User:Jmh649 baffles me as he obviously erred in judgement with his communication and what you would note: WP:COMPETENCE issues.
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
Disambiguation link notification for December 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).
You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
Hi! We tried to send your your WP:Questia account access but your Wikiedia email was not enabled in Special:Preferences as requested by the signup application. To remedy this, could you please email me using the emailuser feature or directly at wikiocaasiyahoo.com. Your code will be on the way shortly thereafter. Thanks! Ocaasit | c17:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!
Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code. Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
Create your account by entering the requested information. (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID. (Your account is now active for 1 year!).
If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelpcengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia).
A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
Sorry for the disruption but apparently the email bot failed. We'll resend the codes this week. (note: If you were notified directly that your email preferences were not enabled, you still need to contact Ocaasi). Cheers, User:Ocaasi21:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Beach bunny, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Beach bunny and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Beach bunny during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Sandstein 14:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beach bunny (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sandstein 18:12, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. GamerPro6423:46, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
