User talk:John

A Note on threading: Interpersonal communication does not work when messages are left on individual users' talk pages rather than threaded, especially when a third party wishes to read or reply. Being a "bear of very little brain", I get easily confused when trying to follow conversations that bounce back and forth, so I've decided to try the convention that many others seem to use, aggregation of messages on either your talk page or my talk page. If the conversation is about an article I will try to aggregate on the article's talk page. If the conversation is on your talk page or an article talk page, I will watch it. If the conversation is on my talk page or an article talk page and I think that you may not be watching it, I will link to it in a note on your talk page, or in the edit summary of an empty edit. But if you start a thread here, please watch it. I may mess up, don't worry, I'll find it eventually. Ping me if you really need to. please note this is a personal preference rather than a matter of site policy

(From User:John/Pooh policy)

Click to show archived versions of this talk page

User talk:John/Archive 2006 User talk:John/Archive 2007 User talk:John/Archive 2008 User talk:John/Archive 2009 User talk:John/Archive 2010 User talk:John/Archive 2011 User talk:John/Archive 2012 User talk:John/Archive 2013 User talk:John/Archive 2014 User talk:John/Archive 2015 User talk:John/Archive 2016 User talk:John/Archive 2017 User talk:John/Archive 2018 User talk:John/Archive 2018-2022 User talk:John/Archive 2022-2024

Please unblock Hi, John. I think your block of EEng was based on a misunderstanding, as evidenced in this and this comment. He didn't actually call anybody a disruptive prick in saying "Jrcla2 was offering a way to see what you're doing as the result of a cultural difference rather than you just being a disruptive prick, and you choose to turn it into 'racism'". Compare also Mr rnddude's comment here, which I agree with. Nor did EEng IMO harass the user, as your note in the block log states. Please unblock. Of course I realize you may not be online, sorry about that, but I don't want to leave him blocked much longer — I only just noticed the block, which you placed some hours ago — so unless you turn up and respond to me pretty soon, I'll unblock myself. Hope you don't mind. Bishonen | talk 17:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC). Thanks for letting me know, Bishonen. I did not misunderstand, I don't think, but if the consensus is that it was ok for EEng to use this word in these circumstances, I am fine with them being unblocked. --John (talk) 18:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC) I'm not now sure, looking at stuff like this, that unblocking was the best move. I think the user knew very well how the comment would be perceived, and is now having the time of his life thinking he has been vindicated. Thought experiment for today; how would it play out if an editor at AN/I was to comment on the behaviour of an editor identifying as female by "hypothetically" calling them a cunt? Seems pretty much the equivalent to me. --John (talk) 19:28, 7 May 2017 (UTC) I don't think Bishonen is the admin you should be debating this with, especially given recent punitive blocks and their results. Just let it go John, there are some who are golden, and there are some who are not. EEng is one of those, like Floq, who is inherently entitled to be riled up and fire off a "fuck off" or "prick" or "asshole" or "cunt", or be "contextually rude". Others, like 99.95% of editors are not. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:43, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Following up your point about a female editor "hypothetically" being called a "cunt", is it any better for an admin to "hypothetically" call an editor a "prick"? Or are we just assuming double standards because "men get over it, just banter, right?" The Rambling Man (talk) 19:48, 7 May 2017 (UTC) That would be a conclusion that one might make from reading how the discussion was going last time I looked. It is one I disagree with. --John (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC) (watching:) How about just calling nobody anything and focus on articles and their reviews? I decorated my talk with coffee today, on top of a woman singer and my latest GA. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:18, 7 May 2017 (UTC) That's good advice, Gerda. Is that another of your fantastic articles I need to read and review? You are an example to us all. I have some article improvement work to do but it is getting late now for tonight. It will have to be tomorrow. Take care. --John (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2017 (UTC) That one was a review TRM put on hold. If you want to review one, you know where to find it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC) ps: I try to avoid the EEng talk, takes too long to load, so missed that whole thing. I got him to work on Ritchie's, picturing me as TRM groupie on my request ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Gerda Arendt I apologise for the delay in returning to your GAN, I will do so forthwith. John, I'm sorry you've been placed in such a position by reacting (correctly) to abuse of others from a long-term user. Sadly it seems it is now accepted by some admins. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:35, 7 May 2017 (UTC) I'm glad if that construction of the situation helps you two sleep at night. EEng 21:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC) EEng, you're probably better off doing something other than making utterly stupid comments here. Go away and do something to improve Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 7 May 2017 (UTC) I was just taking a break. Beyond that I refer the gallant and honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago. Always a pleasure. EEng 21:23, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Carry on, it won't be long before your extended break isn't of your own choice. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC) You've been saying that for an awfully long time. Beyond that I refer the gallant and honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago. EEng 21:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC) No, but it's interesting to see your on that staircase now. I don't care at all what you have to say or what you do, I know that you think you're incredibly funny and that you believe your humour benefits Wikipedia, which isn't true. You're on the path now, see you soon. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Do you get some sort of kick out of causing disruption by using gendered obscenities, EEng? If not, why don't you go and learn from your lucky escape instead of joking about it like it was some sort of badge of pride? Also, do you stand by your comment I highlighted in the diff above? If you do, I agree with The Rambling Man that you may quickly work up to another block. If you don't, you should reflect on what a fool you've made of yourself and the degree of disruption you have caused with your unsolicited intervention at AN/I; two blocks and one unblock, so far. --John (talk) 22:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC) TRM, thank for completing the review, made my day. No more excuses to take it to FAC after expanding ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:18, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Indeed Gerda, glad to be of service in the short term! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 7 May 2017 (UTC) And thanks for reminding me, both of you, that among the trolls and attention seekers on this site there are decent people trying to improve articles. Well done. --John (talk) 22:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC) Sorry.... For continuing to add to Jacob Gens ... I know I'm being a pain, but I keep finding sources - it's like a scavenger hunt to find these sources - one leads to another which leads to another... at this rate I'll end up working on Vilna Ghetto also just because I have the sources... Ealdgyth - Talk 21:06, 7 May 2017 (UTC)