Difference between revisions of "En-WP:Kingofthehill"

Revision as of 22:43, 17 May 2019

20 Aug 2016: TF slapped down a {{GMORC}} notice on the talk page of Jill Stein

1 Sept 2016. TF's initial filing was dismissed at AE as a red herring (my link is to TFD's statement, which is a good explanation of what was going on).

Contrary to what is stated by K & TF, I was topic-banned from Jill Stein for wrestling over a paragraph titled "Media Access" on (2 Sept 2016). The stuff about Weissman's mistaken accusation and Trypto's misrepresentation of the article in Physics Today was not found credible.

2 Sept 2016, TF !voted delete for a spin-off Political positions of Jill Stein entry to mirror those existing for the Rep/Dem/Lib candidates

3 September 2016 : TF comments on that "invisible" AfD (no handy link from mainspace these days, you have to know it exists):

SashiRolls has been topic-banned from Jill Stein-related content as an Arbitration Enforcement sanction.

10 Sept 2016 TF responds to my appeal:

This request is without merit. Almost all of the request completely misrepresents the facts, and it is fundamentally a demonstration of unwillingness or inability to understand SashiRolls' own misconduct that resulted in the sanction in the first place.

19 Nov 2016 in response to TFD and Gandydancer wondering why the Jill Stein article looked like it did, Trypto wrote:

There is a very simple reason why I was drawn to editing this page. I have followed the edits of editors who were parties to the GMO ArbCom case (to my knowledge, they have not edited the Clinton page), and I observed that one such editor made an edit to this page that violated the DS, so I came here and corrected it. That's it. "

Notes: The August 2016 edit he presumably thinks violated DS was reverted by Victoria Grayson in the next edit. Trypto, in fact, just added some juice to something one of the page architects had written on the 6th and some hatnotes that were the source of contention in the cited discussion above.) It is worth noting, concerning changing standards for warning the public/readers that an article is under 1RR, that there is a BIG BIG BIG template on this page warning about 1RR at the time. No such warning exists on the Séralini Affair page or the Glyphosate page. It's as if en.wp only wants anyones who change the encyclopedia to know about them, not those who read the encyclopedia.</p> On 19 Dec 2016, helps Cirt in Cirt v. Sashirolls #1:

This dispute is indeed ripe for AE, and maybe well-past its spoilage date. I've been in the previous AEs for SashiRolls, and Snooganssnoogans is correct that this is the typical pattern. I agree strongly with what Dennis Brown says below, having actually been in such editing situations. We are at the end of the WP:ROPE.

On 22 June 2017, lends Cirt succor in Cirt v. Sashirolls #2:

It boggles my mind that we are back here so quickly after the previous block expired. I agree with all the other editors who say that this is in NOTHERE territory, something that I have been seeing since a long time ago with this user.

From Halloween night through to Toussaint, 2018, Mr. T. expressed the "strongest possible opposition" to my unblock request at AN writing of me:

This is someone who has zero intention of coming back and being a productive editor. I appreciate the number of admins who have, quite thoughtfully, given the benefit of the doubt, and I was going to defer to you on that, setting aside my personal reservations on the assumption that my personal views might be skewed by past experience. But now, I have to say that you are being played. Indefinite block, no talk page access."source

He was also involved in lengthy discussions about me on his talk page.

On 30 March 2019, TF placed a DS notification for GMOs on my page.

Fast-forward through the recent ANI/fest to the penalty groin-kicks and M. (Call me Kolya) Butternut filing at Arbcom. This led me to receive a ping to Trypto calling me a crackpot:

Tryptofish: Labour Day thanks for the volunteer's labors That new thing at ANI is just trolling. I'm going to try to ignore it, and let others evaluate it, and I recommend that you not reply to it either. Given your wishes, I won't propose the IBAN. If you go to AE, it's up to the admins what kind of ban, if any, they hand out, so you cannot really request a site ban. Being at Wikipedia tends to come with crackpots saying obnoxious things about one, so sometimes it's best to just let it pass. I can assure you that no one in their right mind takes seriously the stuff that SashiRolls said about you.

source

ed. what stuff? that bit about the drama blue ice-cap in the graphs here?

Have I wandered into some sort of wiki-campaign by any chance?

I saw that Kingofaces43 added the redundant {{Round in Circles}} to Talk:Glyphosate back in 2015.

I also saw that they filed a successful suit at AE against another encyclopedia-builder on 13 September 2018, which Mr. T merrily joined in. (§)

The patterns on the elephant's skin are always very intricate.