User talk:Tonymetz

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

What part of....[edit]

"I won't be partaking" did you not understand? Fred Zepelin (talk) 00:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the low quality citations have not yet been addressed. I pointed out the issues with both. I'm aiming to keep the bar high for citations. If the claim is endorsed by facts, we should have no problem finding high quality sources. Tonymetz (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Fred Zepelin I raised this on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Joe Kent
Are we being objective on the quality of these citations? Perhaps we should work with a disinterested party? Tonymetz (talk) 00:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This tone and approach is out of line . Let's stay on topic WP:TALK#OBJECTIVE Tonymetz (talk) 01:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple accounts[edit]

Please do not use multiple accounts, like Tonymet (talk · contribs) unless for a legitimate purpose as listed under WP:VALIDALT. If you are using the alternate account as an account that you will use to edit on public computers, please indicate so. If it is a doppelganger, no edits should be made from that account. It could be misleading if you use multiple accounts to edit without establishing the connection.

Consider using a template like {{User alternative account banner}} on your user page. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 08:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was a login bug and has been sorted Tonymetz (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i added that banner thanks it was useful. I don't think there's a way to merge accounts. let me know if there are further suggestions. @0xDeadbeef Tonymetz (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024[edit]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. — ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 11:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only recent editors were notified Tonymetz (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still learning how to steer discussions. can I ask how you got involved? Tonymetz (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected, I didn't see you left a message on a third editor's talk page, just the two that had removed it. I'll strike my comment and I apologise. To answer your question; I have a lot of pages on my watchlist, and after the 2022 elections Joe Kent's one is one of them - I saw activity on my watchlist and edited correspondingly. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 21:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks that explains it -- and thanks for the guidance -- no worries. feel free to share feedback as I'm still learning about Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I posted to the to raise discussion . Tonymetz (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Joe Kent Tonymetz (talk) 21:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stay off my talk page[edit]

Per WP:USERTALKSTOP, this is your only warning. Resolve your differences on article talk pages. Edit my user talk again and you'll be blocked. Fred Zepelin (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s take it down a knotch. I’m sorry how that was received. I was trying to be more considerate by delivering feedback on your talk page, following the practice of other collaborators, and yourself. Tonymetz 💬 16:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a bald-faced lie. This edit was not "trying to be more considerate by delivering feedback on your talk page". It was a revert of my edit that wiped a section of your trolling. Fred Zepelin (talk) 17:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seemed to have been reverted by accident, and the content had not yet been addressed. Anyone can see from the content of the comment that it was not a troll. It was about the edit on the Joe Kent page. Tonymetz 💬 18:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you state your agenda and demands so we can figure out how to resolve this disagreement? Tonymetz 💬 19:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kevin Waters (disambiguation)[edit]

Notice

The article Kevin Waters (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Invalid and unnecessary disambiguation page per WP:ONEOTHER.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 23:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pestering[edit]

I don't understand why you not only pester Fred Zepelin by restoring posts he has removed from his talkpage, but also involve yourself in his disagreement with Biohistorian15. Just leave him alone, as he has asked you to do. Bishonen | tålk 03:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

You took one side of the debate and I took the other . That’s how consensus is reached Tonymetz 💬 15:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What? No, you've got hold of the wrong end of the stick. I'm not taking any side in any debate. (Debate about what?) I'm warning you about harassment as an admin action. Same thing as I did with Biohistorian15. Bishonen | tålk 16:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
The debate is about Biohistorian15 raising a WP:Hounding concern on User:Fred_Zepelin's talk page. You said that Biohistorian15 should not do that, I said it was appropriate[1][2]
If a user can threaten admin action (WP:USERTALKSTOP) immediately when an issue is brought to the Talk page, what is the point of the talk page or WP:RUCD?
The more practical question is : there are users trying to help improve collaboration with User:Fred Zepelin . Can you offer a constructive way to do so? Is this approach WP:AGF? Tonymetz 💬 16:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also it would help to ad "admin" to your sig and if you are threatening people with "admin" action make that overt. I honestly didn't realize you were an admin until just now. Are you saying that since you're admin that we are not allowed to discuss things? Tonymetz 💬 17:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No admin has the word "admin" in their sig. (If one did, I'm convinced they would be attacked for "threatening" to use their admin power every time they spoke to anybody.) You seem very interested in WP:RUCD,[1][2][3][4] but I advise you to stop trying to twist it into support for your notion that it's inappropriate for a user to ask somebody to stop posting on their talkpage. The difference between your view and Fred Zepelin's isn't some technicality from WP:RUCD, but simply that Fred denies having hounded anybody, while you seem to take it for granted that he has. Fred is offended by the accusation, and so he tells Biohistorian not to come back. It's very simple, and is the kind of thing that happens on hundreds of user talkpages every day. It should be followed by Biohistorian not posting on Fred's page again, and indeed so far he has not. That seems to offend you, and you can't leave it alone. This may be because of some old bad blood between you and Fred — I wouldn't know about that, and I can't say I care — but you should in any case stop trying to fan the embers of the conflict between Fred and Biohistorian through what you call a "debate". No, I'm not saying you're not allowed to "discuss things", I'm saying you need to stop pestering Fred Zepelin on his page. Bishonen | tålk 18:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
I don't appreciate your condescending insinuations. I don't believe you are living up to your role here. You should do a better job at gathering context. Even the "restoring posts" reference you've exaggerated . And you didn't take the time to see the context of that single restoration. Tonymetz 💬 19:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"pestering", "bad blood" , "offended" -- these condescending insinuations degrade the admin role. do better. What's the next step here? Are you going to try to help resolve the dispute? Tonymetz 💬 19:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't appreciate you stirring up conflict like this [3]
again did you read the context? Tonymetz 💬 19:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
but simply that Fred denies having hounded anybody, while you seem to take it for granted that he has
@Biohistorian15's claim is warranted it's not just a matter of opinion.See these interactions there are 4 articles and 2 talk pages that indicate WP:WIKIHOUNDING
it's important that when behavior issues are reported on the talk pages that they are given credence.
You are an admin and the expectation is that you will address all parties concerns not only one Tonymetz 💬 00:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bishonen i know we were distracted with the ANI but @Biohistorian15 has a a legit complaint about WIKIHOUNDING . I stepped in to support because I experienced the same to a lesser degree, and noticed other complaints on user talk page and ANI
Can an admit look into that and come up with a verdict? The evidence warrants at least a review. Tonymetz 💬 22:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm done with it. Bishonen | tålk 06:28, 11 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Ok fair enough I can sympathize. Thanks for responding. I'll focus my efforts on the policy [4] and see if there's CONSENSUS there [4] Tonymetz 💬 16:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Fred Zepelin (talk) 02:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old content 2016[edit]

You might want to change that. Doug Weller talk 12:39, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for that. yeah I forgot that was there. It was for an old startup. I'll clean it out once the ANI wraps up so people don't jump to any conclusions Tonymetz 💬 17:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's just one section. Could just remove the hat and leave the section there. Or add __TOC__ above it so that the table of contents shows up outside of it. Eventually you'd probably want to set up an WP:ARCHIVE bot, but this talk page is a bit small for that right now, so not needed yet. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't get __TOC__ working but I did set up sigmabot and open the hat back up. Let's see how the archives work out.
If you can get __TOC__ working on my talk page go ahead and add it. I'm thinking maybe doesn't work on talk? I tried __FORCETOC__ too Tonymetz 💬 16:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the tip the archive bot did help to clean it up. very cool Tonymetz 💬 17:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ WP:RUCD
  2. ^ [5]
  3. ^ [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fred_Zepelin&diff=prev&oldid=1217421694
  4. ^ a b [6]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tonymetz&oldid=1220703551"