Jump to content

User talk:Arthur Smart/Archive 02

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Late night and Insomnia

Note: Copied from User talk:Hourick#Greetings, Fellow Late-Night Houstonian:
Man, you're up late tonight (like me). So, when are we going to go out for a beer? I live in the SW part of Houston. You? --Art Smart (talk) 07:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

LOL. I wouldn't be opposed to a beer thing with several wikipedians. Lord knows we have a few here. I'm mostly up because of insomnia, though. hmm..I wonder if there is an infobox for insomnia? :)--Hourick (talk) 07:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm up editing, encoding and uploading footage from a high-dollar commercial shoot I did a while back. While I wait for my system to do its various things, I catch up on TiVo recordings and check Wikipedia stuff. Saw a recent edit of yours, and had to give you a shout-out. If you ever want to share a beer, then shoot an e-mail to [1]. I've had lots of written interaction with fellow editors (haven't we all?), but never spoken to a single one, much less seen one in the flesh. Just thought it might be fun to chat. Thanks. --Art Smart (talk) 07:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Heads up re: Oni Ookami Alfador

Note: The following is copied from User talk:NeilN#Heads up re: Oni Ookami Alfador for my future reference:

This message is with regards to User talk:Oni Ookami Alfador#Dell which refers to me. After putting up with repeated personal attacks within Talk:Dell#Dell helping President Bush, Talk:Dell#Whining about jobs, and User talk:Arthur Smart/Archive 01#Talk:Dell, I have now decided to seek formal resolution, probably starting with a request for Wikipedia:Third opinion. I will be alleging his calling me a whiner, a hypocrite, and an irritant, and his templating a regular. Each time that I have request he cease his personal attacks, they only have continued.

If you wish to intercede prior to my taking formal action, that is fine. It is also fine if you decline to get involved. Thanks either way. --Art Smart (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Heading to WP:3O is probably best as I also disagree with your edit. --NeilN talkcontribs 20:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Will do. Your disagreement with my edit has nothing to do with the alleged personal attacks. The former is about the content, the latter is about the contributor. By convoluting the two issues you've convinced me that you couldn't be an unbiased third party, so WP:3O is best. Thanks anyway. --Art Smart (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought you were referring to the article. WP:3O usually deals with articles. WP:RFC deals with user conduct. --NeilN talkcontribs 20:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Will do. Thanks again. --Art Smart (talk) 20:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Or try WP:WQA - it's usually quicker. --NeilN talkcontribs 20:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Much obliged. I've never before dealt with such persistent incivility before, so I'm a newbie to these ropes. Thanks again. --Art Smart (talk) 21:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Finally got around to filing the WP:WQA complaint. Thanks again. --Art Smart (talk) 10:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

This WikiProject is having a revival and is trying to determine the direction it will be heading in the future. Questions are being asked, and exciting things are coming in the future, including the bringing of 1345 and other year articles to GA and even FA status. You are listed as a member and are invited to respond to this roll-call by putting an asterisk next to your username on the members list to show that you are still active in the project. Thanks. Wrad (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Careful!

Your last edit at Talk:Barack Obama, which I'm pretty sure was meant to revert vandalism, actually reinstated it. In the edit you reverted, the IP user had actually removed previous vandal's post. Easy mistake to make, I almost made it myself. --Clubjuggle T/C 01:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

So you are saying that the N-word vandal actually removed someone else's vandalism? Sheesh. While I certainly would not have asked the question posed by 85.2.231.69, it looked like a good-faith question. Now that I see his/her similar question elsewhere, I suspect you might be right about bad faith.
I see you reverted this edit, but you did not issue a warning for it. Just curious as to why not.
I am very loathe to alter other people's talk page entries. Perhaps my bar is too high. Please advise me as to what the criteria should be. Thanks. --Art Smart (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Both vandalism edits had already been made and reverted before I issued the warning, so I only issued one warning. Had the vandalism then continued, I would have escalated from there. Keeping in mind that the purpose of the warnings is to get the vandal to stop, it's generally better to start at level 1 and escalate if the vandalism then continues (allowing, of course, enough time for the vandal to see the message before assuming they've ignored it). --Clubjuggle T/C 12:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
For the record, here you went straight to v4im, and I heartily agree with you on that call under the circumstances. When I subsequently noticed additional (but much less egregious) vandalism, I issued a v1 warning, but I inserted it above your v4im since it was a lower level warning. Unlike you, I always issue warnings for vandalism, so that when others see the warnings, they know at a glance how many acts of vandalism have been committed. However, I don't escalate the warning level unless enough time has elapsed to reasonably conclude that the vandal has seen the warning. In other words, I won't hesitate to issue, say, five v1 warnings all at once, just to document that five acts of vandalism have been committed.
As to my question regarding altering other editors' talk page entries, you seem much quicker to do so than I. Again, what are your criteria? Thanks. --Art Smart (talk) 21:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Okay, twice I've asked, and twice you have ignored my question. Perhaps you edit other editors' talk page entries arbitrarily, or at least with an arbitrarily low threshold as to what you personally think might be vandalism. Please advise if my assumption is incorrect, otherwise I'll assume it's the truth. Thanks. --Art Smart (talk) 08:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I take great exception to all of Oni Ookami Alfador's characterizations, above. Some of those characterizations are not just matters of opinion, but factually incorrect. But since he's just a young kid in college and probably doesn't yet know how best to conduct himself, I'll take the high road on this one and just leave him be for now. --Art Smart (talk) 23:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Resolved
 – User has indicated he will try to improve. Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)