Since 10.28.2010 (talk)

WikiQuiz 8/19/10 Mathematics Answer Sheet

Question	Answer
1	A
2	B
3	FALSE
4	B
5	A
6	B
7	FALSE
8	C
9	B
10	D

LOOK

POST ALL COMMENTS AT THE BOTTOM, OR THEY WILL BE REMOVED. Signed, A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010.

Help Desk section

This and shortcut. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 18:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This and shortcut. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 05:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This and shortcut. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 21:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainRick's section

DisMas' section

Porturology's section

RyanVesey's section

Here's a suggestion for the {{notice}} template: you can add “1=” after the pipe symbol “|” if it shows “{{{1}}}”. The problem is usually due to equals signs (“=”) in the notice, sometimes in the external links (links outside of Wikipedia). Just a suggestion. Thanks, Ryan Vesey (talk)

Got it. Thanks. A comment by a person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk)

Sphilbrick's section

SirSputnik's section

Here is the link for Shoya Nakajima. Regards, Sir Sputnik (talk)

Thanks. A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk)

Since 10.28.2010 (talk)

WikiQuiz 8/23/10 Wikipedia Answer Sheet

Question	Answer
1	C
2	B
3	TRUE
4	C
5	B
6	E
7	E
8	TRUE
9	B
10	B

more concerns

It is time to be straight with us now. Tell me how someone who knows the intrigues of advanced mark-up, can at the same time appear to not realize much smaller issues that others have been bringing to your attention. I think an RFC/U is in order, per concerns with possible trolling. Calmer Waters 23:04, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Straight with what? Exactly what are you talking about? What's “RFC/U”? Where was I “trolling”? A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are really going to make me shift through five plus hours of research and diff to provide the answer. You very well have the competency of clicking on the blue link I provided above to find out. This is clearly either a competency or even worse a trolling type of behavior, either of which is not progressing adequately in a positive direction. Assuming good faith only goes so far. You removing this conversation is regarded as dismissing the severity of the issue. Calmer Waters 23:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't understand. What “blue link”? Yes, I removed the section to conserve space. Is that the problem? I have no clue what you're talking about, I swear. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:18, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall continue this at the appropriate discussion board, where it will stay open without being removed by you until the discussion is complete and concerns rectified as it is obvious escalation and community sanctioned steps are the only means forward. Calmer Waters 23:23, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me exactly what you're referring to? Which board? What escalation? A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:25, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since 10.28.2010, I personally do not think you have been trolling, but I do think there are significant problems with your editing that have also become a significant time drain on the community. A certain level of competence is required in order to edit Wikipedia without causing disruption and damage. I have suggested to you previously that you should stop posting at the help desk. I did this before, and ask again now, not because I wish to be mean but because over and over your posts have been a problem there both on a competence level and on an interaction level, in that you do not appear to be able to interact without being nasty, or possibly because you do not understand how to convey certain things you want to say with tact (the end result is little different). I do not think the help desk should be your testing ground to get better. The problems, though, are not just confined to the help desk. I am afraid that if you do not at least seek mentorship, or restrict yourself to certain types of tasks that do not require a more in depth understanding of policy and guideline, you will not remain on Wikipedia for very long.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I must seek mentorship? I think RyanVesey suggested such. I will refrain from the help desk. But I must seek mentorship? A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think, given the discussion of the past day, that you have come to a point where you are almost required to seek mentorship. Without seeking mentorship, you will be indefinitely blocked as it seems like you cannot constructively interact with the community. I would highly suggest going through an adoption program with User:Worm That Turned if he will take you. I believe a program such as this is the only way that these problems can be resolved. Ryan Vesey contribs 23:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I actually see opposite: I am not saying this program may do more harm then good. I think that it may not work out exactly as planned. RyanVesey, discussion, as in the block, or ObsidianSoul, or what? A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c x 2)Then please offer some explanations. Why do you not want to go through a mentorship process? Why is it that you prefer deletion over archiving? Do you understand that there can be serious consequences if you cannot begin cooperating and conceding some of your ideas once this is brought to RFC/U? Ryan Vesey contribs 00:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is RFC/U? I posted my opinion on mentorship because it might harm the mentor person, and cause a disruption. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 00:11, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what is the difference between adoption and mentorship? A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 23:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c x 2) I am not saying you must do anything. I am saying that though I don't know what calmer waters is doing, possibly putting together a request for comment on your conduct, with the fairly constant problems in your editing, it was inevitable that some sort of escalation would happen if you didn't do something to help yourself. I think that time is now. Mentorship, if someone is willing to take on the role, is one of the only paths I can see that may help you avoid the problems with your editing.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

stub

When I said (above, deleted) "A disambiguation page is not a {{stub}}, please don't waste people's time by labelling it as such", you replied on my talk page: "Why are you criticizing me of a disambiguation page? I didn't know what I did was wrong and I don't see why they're wasting people's time." I was not criticising you, just informing you what you had done incorrectly and asking you to get it right in future. It wastes time if you label something as a stub when it is not because another editor then has to see it on the list of stubs waiting to be stub-sorted, look at it, realise it is not a stub, and remove the stub tag. That is a waste of their time. Please be calmer in your responses, and please do not try to do jobs like labelling pages as stubs unless you understand what you are doing. Thanks. PamD (talk) 08:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How was I not calm? I simply stated the above ("Why are you criticizing me of a disambiguation page? I didn't know what I did was wrong and I don't see why they're wasting people's time") because I thought you were criticizing me. That's it, and I haven't the foggiest how I wasn't calm. In fact, I kind of took your comment (“Please be calmer in your responses”) slightly offensively: Are you trying to prevent me from doing something? And yes, I did understand what I was doing, I simply wasn't doing it correctly. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 18:22, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

signature

Your sig is a little bit on the long, bold and eyestrainy-yellow side of things. Would you mind making it less conspicuous please? It's rather distracting, particularly the colour. It might be worth prowling community pages to see what sort of length and colour is generally considered appropriate. Brammers (talk/c) 07:21, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Work in progress. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 21:27, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment

I can delete the above unblock section, right? A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 21:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can, but why don't you let me help you create an archive. I can create a manual archive for you for the blocking section and you could use an automatic archive from then on. I could also help add some of your old deleted content to your archive. Ryan Vesey contribs 21:37, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need an archive? I really prefer not to have one. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 21:49, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You don't technically need an archive, but it is very highly encouraged. Ryan Vesey contribs 22:10, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I'd rather delete, I don't know what other way I can say this. A user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010. 22:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, I strongly encourage you to go through an adoption program. I did and if the person would like to take you on as an adoptee, I think he could help you considerably with your editing. Ryan Vesey contribs 21:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]