User talk:Pathoschild

User:Pathoschild/templates/userboxes Discussions are archived regularly; see December 2005 for the latest archive, or Archives for an overview of all archives (Last archival: 22:19, 20 December 2005 (UTC).).

Used2BAnonymous/Dominick dispute

Related links: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Dominick, Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Used2BAnonymous.

Concerning the dispute

This discussion has been partially archived to the December 2005 archive.

You're both welcome. I cannot guarantee the results of arbitration either way, nor even give probable odds. However, the arbiters will do their best to judge the matter impartially. If you're both willing to go with arbitration, I'll find an experienced advocate who'll explain the process to you and help you through it. // Pathoschild 03:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Only Dominick can remove material and then accuse me of "shutting out any PoV" I do "not agree with" (I don't think I've ever removed any of his links). Anyway, thanks, Pathoschild. I am willing to move forward. Anything to make this stop. Thank you again for your time; I do appreciate it. Used2BAnonymous 09:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine she is going to put out some sort of complaint. I said what I found a problem with this user's conduct. It is a simple issue that has not been resolved since every process we undertake that deals with criticism of her actions turns into an accusation of her being treated unfairly. It isn't that she is breaking rules by using Wikipedia as a vehicle for website traffic and directing a "Wiki war" here, it is that I am wronging her in preventing her from doing just this. I think an arbitration will simply be twisted into another issue that will fail. If this is going to work, it would need to be binding. Dominick ^(TALK) 10:44, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. One other thing this wounded victim thing is disgusting. She can use a Jewish holday greeting as sarcasim, and then turn over the ban by playing the poor little stressed by Dominick game, all the while she is cursing and acting outside the bounds of decorum here. I have never used curse words in a posting, or frankly, in my experience acting as a Catholic apologist. Dominick ^(TALK) 10:50, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't present any arguments on this page; I will have no say in the outcome of the dispute, and the Committee will not be reading this page. Decisions by the Arbitration Committee are indeed considered binding, and will be enforced by the administrators if necessary. // Pathoschild 11:07, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was venting. Sorry to toss comments on your page. I made those same arguments on the RfC/Court-Martial pages. I understand all those things about your role, and I perfectly understand you not wanting to get in the middle of this stupid debate. Dominick ^(TALK) 11:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Used2BAnonymous/Dominick dispute

Discussion merged between talk pages Gator1 and Pathoschild.

Concerning the prolonged dispute between Used2BAnonymous and Dominick, it would seem that their RfC has been irrevocably damaged. I've consulted with a few other mediators on IRC, and I think their case would be best dealt with by the Arbitration Committee. If they accept to do so, would you mind helping them with their request? I feel that I'm too inexperienced to deal with a dispute this fierce. // Pathoschild 07:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not much more experienced than you on this, what would you like me to do though?Gator (talk) 14:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you know how to file a request for arbitration, I'd like you to help them through the process; for example, explaining what's expected of them, what explanation they need to give, et cetera. If you're no more comfortable with this than I am, do you know anyone more experienced who could do this? Either way, much appreciated. // Pathoschild 14:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am, unfortunately, not the man for that kind of job right now. There are many experienced users who MAY be willing to help. Android79 might be able to help your or them, as would Jdavidb to name a couple. Sorry :(Gator (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. ^^ // Pathoschild 01:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Responses to Admin actions

207.217.218.1 non-block

Hi,

Regarding the removal of this vandal from the "Intervention" page ([1]), can you please explain what constitutes "recent" activity? The request was made within 2 1/2 hours of the most recent vandalism, which is certainly within the 24 hour limit.

I'm not clear what the problem was in this case, and would appreciate an explanation and where the request should have been posted instead. Thanks.

Fourohfour 21:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Glancing through that IP address' contributions, it seems that it typically goes on a vandalism spree that lasts under an hour. Blocking it two and a half hours after it ended the last spree would not affect the vandal in any way, while potentially autoblocking any legitimate user that operates from that address. Ideally, a block serves not to punish vandalism but to stop it; in this case, I judged that a block would not have any effect on the vandalism that is launched from it. // Pathoschild 21:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fones

Hi. Please review User_talk:Katefan0#Sockpuppet_check. Thanks in advance. Regards, El_C 01:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for Admin actions

No discussions yet.

Barnstar!

I, FireFox, hereby award this Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar Award to Pathoschild, for the work he did for me today in regards to my monobook.css!

Fir e Fox 13:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ^_^ // Pathoschild 14:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: javascript

Drop us an email/note on talk page and I'll see what I can do. Alphax ^τεχ 15:13, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]