FeloniousMonk (talk | contribs) →WP:Civil: not sure what you think you'd accomplish with this |
|||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 16:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC) |
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[User:Newyorkbrad|Newyorkbrad]] 16:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC) |
||
==[[WP:Civil]]== |
|||
I'll know your serious if you also gave the warning to the person who used the term first and who I was replying to, otherwise I'll know you are a [[shill]]. see: "this fucked-up conversation"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tstrobaugh&diff=prev&oldid=165275676]. Oh wait, I checked, you didn't caution the initial offender. I'll give you a chance to clear that up then.[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 14:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Still waiting, here is another one[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orangemarlin&diff=prev&oldid=165580402], I'm sure you're fair and balanced, being an administrator and all. If you want to recuse yourself from giving [[User:Orangemarlin|Orangemarlin]] a warning then just pass it on to another administrator and I'll see the warning on his talk page. Thanks.[[User:Tstrobaugh|Tstrobaugh]] 16:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC) |
|||
* Here is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AB&diff=165571112&oldid=165570850 another example] of OM's civility, or lack thereof. But to be fair to FM, OM is defending FM's interests here, and it would probably be improper of FM to use his admin tools in this context. Since there are now allegations of misuse of admin tools by FM before the arbitration committee, it would be unwise for FM to involve himself as an administrator in this situation. So I suggest you take this up on one of the admin noticeboards, or with another uninvolved admin directly. - [[User:Crockspot|Crockspot]] 17:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 01:42, 21 October 2007
feloniousmonk
Archives
You horrible person!
Why did you have to go and do something cool like that?
You leave me with no other option:
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For displays of sanity above and beyond the call of duty.--Kim Bruning 20:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC) |
--Kim Bruning 20:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom
Hi FeloniousMonk, I have filed an arbitration request pertaining to your indefinite ban on me. Here is the link.Ferrylodge 23:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hi again FeloniousMonk. I would like to remind you about my arbitration request. You are named as an involved party. Would you please say whether or not you plan to make a statement? I think the ARBCOM would benefit from such a statement from yourself, seeing as how you are the person who imposed the ban in this case. Thank you.Ferrylodge 03:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- If you do choose to make a statement, I hope you will at least answer the following two questions. You told me in June: “I suggest that you avoid throwing around inflammatory accusations like ‘KC's … summary is blatantly false.’ They constitute personal attacks.”[2] Will you please acknowledge that KC started using that phrase “blatantly false summary”?[3] And will you please acknowledge that KC’s incorrect summary was ultimately corrected by another editor?[4]Ferrylodge 12:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Why the reversion?
The ID article said a Zogby poll of scientists stated X, but linked to a poll of Ohio voters. I removed the link and added "citation needed", because the link should connect to the poll of scientists. Why revert this? How did the poll of Ohio voters act as a reference? Sad mouse 04:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 16:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)