User talk:Salmon of Doubt

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

User talk:Salmon of Doubt/Archive 1

User talk:Salmon of Doubt/Archive 2

User talk:Salmon of Doubt/Archive 3

inappropriate speedy deletion request[edit source]

The page Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia/Case Studies/Controversy or disruption was created by Dzonatas, yet you have requested deletion here saying

So, the natural conclusion is that you are Dzonatas, however you must make that very plain, otherwise your speedy deletion request is invalid and inappropriate. If you wish to remain anonymous, please remove your speedy deletion tag, or rewrite it to use a different reason for deletion if there is another speedy deletion criteria which is appropriate. Then, if Dzonatas wants to delete it, that account must tag it for deletion; people will draw conclusions from that as they see fit. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:15, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

John - all of the content placed at that page was authored by me. Dzontas seperated it out from sections into subpages. You'll want to get a little bit up to speed before deciciding on issues - people might think you are jumping to promote Taxwoman to checkuser - wait, I mean jumping to conclusions without getting all the facts on the ground. Salmon of Doubt 12:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Taking shots at valuable members of Wiki projects is definitely not a way to build trust. You have already demonstrated that you are unwilling to discuss things and instead claim bias. You have already demonstrated that you wish to cause harm via use of automated systems. Now you are resorting to attacking people without just cause. Please stop. Ottava Rima 15:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
You say it's without cause. I say it's a revealing pattern of behavior. JV trusts users who do not merit trust, jumps to the wrong conclusion, and has done so before. I have no desire to "cause harm." Salmon of Doubt 15:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I jumped to the wrong conclusion. But come on, .. you tagged it in a manner than a component uninvolved person couldnt approve a speedy delete. You could have been a little more clear in the tagging. Rather than simply point out my error and fill in the blanks, you attack me unnecessarily, and you made ill-informed suppositions of your own, guessing why I have done some things rather than comprehend what I have said on those matters. We are off to a good start, I see. I did not assume you intended harm. I know a little about Dzonatas, and thought it odd that he would tag it like that via a sock, so I had already kind of assumed that you were not him. I dont know what level of competence you have here or on other wikis, so I was trying to help. If you re-read my original message above, you will see my intent was to explain how I thought you could keep doing whatever it is that you are trying to achieve here. I am yet to learn what that is - I look forward to doing so.

Could you please provide a diff or two to illustrate where the content came from, demonstrating that you wrote it all?

Since it is causing you concern, I will explain a little. I never ever assumed that Poetlister & co where anything else other than one person. You will see my comments on ANI very clearly showed that. I have been painfully aware of the reality of the PL situation, roughly about as soon as aspects of it were known to various people, which means I was extremely well informed in this. Overarching my decisions is always an intent to demonstrate good faith where the risk is low. sysop on Wikisource is no big deal. Being allowed to resume editing on WP due to the enourmous quality contributions on Wikisource & Wikiquote is also reasonable application of "assume good faith", and again, was not a big deal. In both cases, I carefully watched all edits by those accounts on Wikisource and Wikipedia. i.e. Trust, but Verify. Some of my watching paid off, in the end result. I do not regret any of my decisions in this case. Notice that my name is not on either Wikiquote requests for more important tools, because I wasnt comfortable with them, based on my limited knowledge and suspicions at that time. I didnt have a good enough reason to object at that time, so I stayed out of the matters of another Wiki. If you have a more specific query about my actions which you think are questionable, feel free to ask direct questions and I will answer them as directly as I can.

John Vandenberg (chat) 09:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Salmon of Doubt 11:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Lovely. That is the top half. Do you know where the bottom half came from? John Vandenberg (chat) 11:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC) If dan would like to put his content on a different page, or have it sit out there as the only content, he, or someone else who cares, can go ahead and say so. I will not bring articles to RFD on this project, as RFD on this project is beyond broken. Salmon of Doubt 11:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

RE your request for notifications[edit source]

I find it odd that I ask User:KillerChihuahua to provide a dif and then I get a reply from "Salmon of Doubt".

I was asking about this block: 19:22, 11 September 2007 KillerChihuahua (Talk | contribs) blocked "Moulton (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Disruptive POV OR warrior with no interest in writing an encyclopedia. See Rfc.)

KillerChihuahua blocked with the reason given as "Disruptive POV OR warrior with no interest in writing an encyclopedia. See Rfc." Then, 10 minutes later, MastCell made this edit which says "indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges." The text "abuse of editing privileges" linked to Wikipedia:Vandalism. So, there was no notification given on Moulton's user page of the reason for an indefinite block. Why did MastCell get involved? Why did MastCell post the wrong reason for the block? Why did KillerChihuahua never make sure that the reason for the block was posted to Moulton's user talk page? --JWSchmidt 21:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I watch your edits. It would be in poor taste for me to discuss this with you on Wikipedia without coming clean about my Wikipedia account, so I dropped you a message here because I'm certain you will be ignored there. I can't speak to why MastCell left a message, since I'm not admitting (or denying) being MastCell. I can't speak to why KillerChihuahua didn't leave a message, since I'm not admitting (or denying) being KillerChihuahua. I can, however, state that attempting to argue that the block on Moulton was inpropper because someone forgot to, or left a bad talk page message is as likley to work by pissing in the wind and telling yourself it's raining. Salmon of Doubt 21:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Is this what piss looks like? --JWSchmidt 21:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome[edit source]

Hi Salmon of Doubt, thanks for joining the Learning from conflict and incivility project and your comments in your narrative. I also appreciate the generally more reflective tone in your recent participation. I'm looking forward to working with you on this issue - I'll post some questions to your narrative's talk page. Cormaggio talk 07:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

a bot for copyvios[edit source]

"no robotic tagging and notification system for obvious copyvios" <-- Have you seen User:Wherebot? I don't think that bot was ever initiated at Wikiversity (see). --JWSchmidt 22:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

How to be a Wikimedia sysop[edit source]

Hi - just thought you might be interested in this page and possibly being a participant. It's entirely optional. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 01:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I am. I'll see what I can do to improve it. Salmon of Doubt 11:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

A random mascot[edit source]

Crystal Clear app gnome.png
Wikiversity logo 01.png

Hi! My name is WikiversityJack. I am a pumpkin and a Wikiversity mascot. My aunt told me that fun + learning = Wikiversity. Let me know if I can help you out.

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to your daily "how to be a sysop" tutorial[edit source]

Hi Salmon. Thank you for joining the "how to be a sysop" programme. As part of your welcome package you now get to be chased around by well-meaning tutors like me. As I don't know anything about you or your previous wiki experience, please bear with me if I underestimate your abilities! Couple of points: (1) cascading protection - all the pages you just protected were already protected by cascading protection, so technically you didn't need to do this; are you familiar with cascading? (2) Have you added your signature under "students" on the "how to be a sysop" page? --McCormack 12:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, quite a few of the pages I protected were not cascaded - for example, Educational Media Awareness Campaign/Art/POTD 11, and a few others. My inital thought was to cascade the main page, but there was a cryptic note in the protection log that it was intentionally uncascaded due to a comment in Dec 07, which I couldn't find. Adding my sig now Salmon of Doubt 12:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I explained the reason again on the talk page for the news page. I'm very good at being cryptic. The EMAC pages should find themselves as protected by cascading on the days they display, but not on the days they don't. But some of my cascading is a little dodgy (see recent changes). --McCormack 12:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Ahh. I can fix that up. I get the system now. Salmon of Doubt 12:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Hye just a note if you're going to be going through images... I saw the other day some Pdf files that were obvious copyvios, but don't have time to trace them down this morning. They should be deleted, of course, but maybe tell the uploader that they'll have to do that sort of thing via email/etc. (Actually, they should be making a packet and paying the royalties, but I have no idea how one sets that up). --SB_Johnny talk 13:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikiversity:Participants[edit source]

You're clearly a top contributor during September (as you were in August). I wonder if you might reconsider being listed on this page? -- Jtneill - Talk - c 14:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Second that. --McCormack 14:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikiversity:Support staff[edit source]

Per this list it states that you now have temporary Custodianship - please update the Wikiversity:Support staff section under Support Staff directory, and place your username on the list as a Probationary Custodian this will then alert other users that you have Custodian tools, if you view this revison it'll show my former Terra username as a Probationary Custodian, when I used to be known by that name - this is what it'll look like, but yours will be different. DarkMage 18:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Bots[edit source]

You had mentioned somewhere that you could help design some bots, and I was wondering if you could have a look at some things on the bloom clock that could use automated assistance. A bot that could convert raw DPL results into keys would be one great thing to have, but also a cross-wiki bot that can translate templates from cs to en and vice versa. --SB_Johnny talk 12:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Would be nice to also include knowledge here: Programming bots on Wikimedia projects, ----Erkan Yilmaz uses the Wikiversity:Chat (try) 12:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm a bit too stupid right now. Perhaps it's the AM - bloom clock? DPL? I can work on template translation, that shouldn't be too hard. Salmon of Doubt 14:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
LoL, sorry :-). I'd like an automated way of taking the list from a page like this one, and add the transclusion stuff to make a page like this one. I've been doing it copy-paste for 2 years now, and it's tiresome. --SB_Johnny talk 14:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Moulton's three day trial[edit source]

I have posted this on multiple pages - Please see this. I would like to try and have Moulton work on this task and have him refrain from the escalating actions. I would ask that you monitor but respect Moulton's work at this time, and take any complaints or concerns directly to me. There will be a peer review process at the end, and I believe that this process will be most effective after he is complete and in the manner that I put forth. I am requesting that Moulton only edit on this project during this time, and I would like if you could show him the courtesy in not furthering any dispute with him until after the process is over, and that we are all able to discuss this project. If that is too much to ask for, please contact me, and I will see how I can accommodate your needs. Thank you, and please pass the word to any that I may have forgotten and this may pertain to. Ottava Rima 18:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

As per Jimbo, my project has been canceled. Please disregard the above. Ottava Rima 19:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Suspend for a while?[edit source]

Hiya Salmon. If you're going to be away for a while, I'd rather hold your janitor's keys here in the office. You can have the mop (and pooper-scooper) back when you return, of course :-). Let me know if you're going to be gone for more than a week or so.

Sorry to hear about your kitty... I've lost my share of those over the years. --SB_Johnny talk 20:07, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

That will be fine. I'll be back, eventually. Salmon of Doubt 04:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Heya kiddo[edit source]

You're supposed to block when you do that. Are you ready to be a probationary custodian again now? --SB_Johnny talk 19:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Not right now, thanks. Salmon of Doubt 13:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi[edit source]

I noticed the recent revert war. I haven't had time to look at the content, but I just noticed a bunch of different IP addresses and you. The IP addresses have been blocked for their part, and the page temporarily locked down until we sort that. I didn't want to block you, because, as a probationary sysop, I can only assume that you were doing what was in your power to clean up. I would ask that you don't revert so much, but instead drop a message on the custodian action page. Otherwise, it is just a little hard to keep up :). That page did get flooded rather fast, and my head is still spinning. Drop by chat if you would like to discuss this more thoroughly. (note - this isn't a warning, nor should it be construed as one, its more of a friendly note). Ottava Rima (talk) 15:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Ottava, the academically correct version of the scholarly discussion is now available on your talk page. —Montana Mouse 15:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I wanted to note that I temporarily protected your user talk page against IP addresses. I did not look at the content, but it seemed that from the reverts that this could be related. I hope the protection gives you enough time to sort things out. I'll be around the IRC if you would like to chat. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

"Done"?[edit source]

Hi Salmon, I was wondering what you meant when you said you're "done here" - do you mean at Wikiversity:Community Review, or in the discussion there around Geoff's participation, or in Wikiversity overall? I'm sorry if I provoked you - I think you've a lot to contribute - I just wanted you not to escalate the discussion into any further drama. Cormaggio talk 13:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Geoff. Probably community review as well, untill it actually has some teeth. Salmon of Doubt 13:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for clarifying that. I think the community review is bringing up useful and interesting perspectives - it'll still take time before we can craft all this into policies etc that "have teeth". Hang in there in the meantime. :-) Cormaggio talk 14:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Moulton[edit source]

Moulton's talk page was unprotected for the sole purpose of allowing him to respond to the unblock request at Wikiversity:Community Review#User:Moulton. Please allow Moulton to comment on those matters without distraction, and within the guidelines posted at the top of the page. [1] The more questions you ask him, the more justification he has for straying off topic. --mikeu talk 14:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

No. If he strays off topic, he should be rebanned. I will not stray off topic. He alledges that he did not reveal private information. This is a lie. I will refute his statement. Salmon of Doubt 15:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
His position that he did not reveal private information is no different the statement[2] you made about your position[3]. I hope you realize this. Dzonatas 17:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Except for the fact he's lying, yes, I realize this. Salmon of Doubt 17:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Abd's nomination for full custodianship[edit source]

Discussion re-opened on this nomination, November 16. You commented in the original discussion, but have not commented in the current one, which might close on November 21. The current discussion is at Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Abd (full custodian)#Re-opening_community_discussion. --Abd 20:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)