I want to know why you are harassing me? This is my band and I have the right to post facts about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hippipimp (talk • contribs) 04:04, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Seb az86556. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 00:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC) |
I thought I would bring to your attention that a user who recently rewrote the Colorado River article removed the indigenous language names from the lede and moved them to a section which describes indigenous peoples, cultures and languages in the past tense. I made some preliminary fixes in the article and added a (long) note about the issue on the talkpage, but I currently only have internet access every once in a long while, so I thought I would mention it to you in case you have any interest in keeping an eye on the situation. --ಠ_ಠ node.ue ಠ_ಠ (talk) 02:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
I respect your diligence in maintaining the sanctity of these Wikipedia pages but re: the DREAM Act page, I am curious as to why the changes to edit the derogatory and oppressive terminology (eg. illegal aliens/peoples, etc) are repeatedly reverted.
Thank you for your time.
Srho (talk) 20:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't think it was reasonable on your part to make a veiled threat in the middle of a discussion about the negative impact of threats at AN/I. I had a legitimate point, I didn't make any personal attacks and I was using policy and guidelines to make that point. Simply being in disagreement with the point doesn't mean I need or should be disciplined, and I don't see how its a good attitude to display in the middle of a dispute over admin use of tools. -- Avanu (talk) 15:02, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Seb, I think the IP contributor 91.63.202.190 / 91.63.217.224 is a possible sockpuppet of User:AnAimlessRoad, who was indefinitely topic banned yesterday. The behavior seems consistent, as is the talk page rhetoric, and the timing is certainly serendipitous. Wanted to get your opinion on the merits of a checkuser request.
ps., appreciate your vigilance on this page. Homunculus (duihua) 20:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Haha, fair enough. They've been blocked either way (for now...).Homunculus (duihua) 00:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)