Open main menu

User talk:DanielTom/Archive 1

Active discussions
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


Contents

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Wikipeidia Education Program: Walaa post

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Wikipeidia Education Program: Walaa post is available for translation. You can translate it here:



This is the text for a blog post that will be published (together with the translation) at https://blog.wikimedia.org/ . If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [1]. You can manage your subscription at [2].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 00:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Wikipeidia Education Program: Walaa post

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Wikipeidia Education Program: Walaa post is available for translation. You can translate it here:



This is the text for a blog post that will be published (together with the translation) at https://blog.wikimedia.org/ . If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [3]. You can manage your subscription at [4].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 13:39, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, January 2013

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, January 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, Identi.ca and project village pumps. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [5]. You can manage your subscription at [6].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 04:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Template:OurProjects

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Template:OurProjects is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é baixa. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-03-31.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 00:35, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: FDC portal/CentralNotice2013-1

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page FDC portal/CentralNotice2013-1 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta.


This banner will invite logged-in editors on all projects to participate in the current public review phase about funding requests by 4 Wikimedia organizations. Around 2.6 million US dollars of donation money are available in this FDC round. (Questions about the translation notification system can be asked at [7], and you can manage your subscription at [8].)

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 06:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Fundraising 2012/Translation/Thank you letter

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Fundraising 2012/Translation/Thank you letter is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-03-30.

The thank you letter has been had minor formatting changes and some changes to the text however the work is only minor and shouldn't :) Thank you again

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 02:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Fundraising 2012/Translation/Thank you letter

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Fundraising 2012/Translation/Thank you letter is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-03-28.

Minor update to this translation with some changes in formatting. Should be fairly minor changes needed. Thanks guys :)

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 02:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, February 2013

Hello Daniel Tomé,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, February 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, Identi.ca and project village pumps. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [9]. You can manage your subscription at [10].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 04:26, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: FDC portal/CentralNotice2013-2

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page FDC portal/CentralNotice2013-2 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta.


These banners are for a "last call" inviting logged-in editors on all projects to participate in the current public review phase (until March 31) about funding requests by 4 Wikimedia organizations, for around 1.3 million US dollars of donation money. (Questions about the translation notification system can be asked at [11], and you can manage your subscription at [12].)

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 13:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Turning off outdated skins

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Turning off outdated skins is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-04-12.

Please translate to help inform non-English-language users about some important changes that will affect some users across all of our wikis. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [13]. You can manage your subscription at [14].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 19:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Free knowledge based on Creative Commons licenses

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Free knowledge based on Creative Commons licenses is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta.


Hello, please translate this very important brochure to explain the free content nature of Wikimedia projects. You can take your time to translate it, but your translation can have a long-term impact.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 12:21, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, March 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, March 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please help non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, Identi.ca and project village pumps. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [15]. You can manage your subscription at [16].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 19:46, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-04-26.

Please translate to help inform non-English-language users about the important upcoming Wikimedia Foundation elections, including those for the Board of Trustees and the Funds Dissemination Committee . If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [17]. You can manage your subscription at [18].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 20:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Requests for comment/Activity levels of advanced administrative rights holders/Global message is available for translation. You can translate it here:


A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-04-23.

Using Global message delivery, this message will be sent to all Wikimedia community discussion pages.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 13:55, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Single User Login finalisation announcement/Personal announcement

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Single User Login finalisation announcement/Personal announcement is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-05-13.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 08:23, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Fundraising 2012/Translation/Thank you letter

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Fundraising 2012/Translation/Thank you letter is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-05-18.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 19:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, April 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, April 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please help non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, Identi.ca and project village pumps. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [19]. You can manage your subscription at [20].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 23:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Voter e-mail

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Voter e-mail is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-03.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 03:07, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: User:SamoaBot/Wikidata Summary/translate

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page User:SamoaBot/Wikidata Summary/translate is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é baixa.


It is a new and improved version of User:Addbot/Wikidata Summary, featuring full support for "plural" directives and a new "$user" variable. We are working on enabling these summaries for all "new-generation" interwiki bots.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 07:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Translation/SecurePoll

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Translation/SecurePoll is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-06.

We could greatly use your help doing some quick translations for the SecurePoll (voting) interface that will be used for this years Board and FDC elections. The translation consists of a short, 2 sentence, intro for the vote and 3 short 'titles' saying which vote or question they will be on. The page also lists the candidates for each election which do not need to be translated but can be transliterated if that makes sense for your language/script. Thank you! If you have any questions please feel free to ask on the Elections talk page.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 00:28, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Translation/SecurePoll

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/Translation/SecurePoll is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-06.

Please accept my apologies for the second notification. Because of the importance of the election and 2 new sentences that need to be translated we decided it was worth it to message everyone again. Please double check to make sure everything in your language is translated!

If you can please also translate the Central Notice banners that will alert people that the election has started (and when results are ready). So that we do not have to send out another notice you can find those translations:

Here (for the voting banner)

Here (for the results banner)

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 02:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Announcement Universal Language Selector

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Announcement Universal Language Selector is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-11.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 21:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Announcement Universal Language Selector

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Announcement Universal Language Selector is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-14.

Hello, this change will be live *on pt.wikipedia* on the 2013-06-18: help translating it in the next few days would be very appreciated. Thank you very much.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 10:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Announcement Universal Language Selector

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Announcement Universal Language Selector is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-17.

Additionally, please translate the interface strings of ULS if it's not already done at translatewiki.net:

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 13:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, May 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, May 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, Identi.ca and project village pumps. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, you can ask them at [21]. You can manage your subscription at [22].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 18:36, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: PRISM

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page PRISM is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-06-18.

Hi translators,

the Wikimedia Foundation legal team has just published this page, asking the Wikimedia community to comment on whether they should take any action with regards to the recently uncovered PRISM surveillance scandal.

I'll greatly appreciate your involvement & contributions to have this page translated into as many languages as possible as well as popularised as widely as possible — please let your communities know about this so we can make the most use of this consultation period.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 15:21, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Admin activity review/2013/Notice to communities

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Admin activity review/2013/Notice to communities is available for translation. You can translate it here:


A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-07-20.

This text will be used to inform communities which will be affected by the new global Admin activity review process which is carried out by stewards. You can also translate the page about the review itself. In order to ensure the global community understands what is happening, your translations will be very helpful.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 01:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Admin activity review/2013/Notice to communities

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Admin activity review/2013/Notice to communities is available for translation. You can translate it here:


A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-07-20.

This text will be used to inform communities which will be affected by the new global Admin activity review process which is carried out by stewards. You can also translate the page about the review itself. In order to ensure the global community understands what is happening, your translations will be very helpful.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 01:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, June 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, June 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 16:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Help

{{helpme}} Why wasn't I notified that some people were trying to get me globally locked, so that I could defend myself against such attacks? ~ DanielTom (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello. I've started a discussion here. I wasn't really sure what to say about this help request, as I'm not a steward. I think people usually don't notify users they are asking to lock, so I started the discussion there. Cheers, PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. You will note there are only two places in the world: "here", and "there". Somehow, in your reply, you've managed to make them be the same place. Best ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
I wrote that message quickly and without checking. Sorry. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Your message was perfectly fine. I was just trying to make a joke. Clearly, it failed. ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:17, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Can I say that from reports I am hearing of your attitude and manner of addressing people that you are quickly heading for multiple locking, and possible locking without further discussion. I suggest that you step away from your keyboard, have a break from using the wikis for sending mail, and have a break from wiki-editing. Work out what is important and if it is wiki-editing, then get on to being useful rather than being painful. You control your behaviour, not others. Please pull your head in. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:58, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bill. I do not doubt, for a second, that many people should wish to see me locked. You will note, however, that the vast, vast majority of my edits are to articles, not to talk pages. Maybe you have seen that at Wikisource, although at Wikiquote (where I edit the most) that is even more evident. I have already said I won't send any more emails. I have in my possession for a limited time some rare books about Camões which I am using to edit his article at Portuguese wiki. [23] I will take your advice in attempting to play well with others, but really, locking my account would be a great inconvenience to me, and I should think only accounts engaged in cross wiki vandalism, or the like, should be globally locked, not mine as I work hard on several wikis with very few editors. Work out what is important and if it is wiki-editing, then get on to being useful rather than being painful. You control your behaviour, not others. Please pull your head in. I am trying, and will try, my best to be useful. I apologize if I upset so many people, I am just doing what I think I must do, but forcefully blocking me on wikis where I am in good standing and actively working on articles would be unfortunate. ~ DanielTom (talk) 11:19, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Regarding your recent post at Talk:Steward requests/Global: Actually, it is not at all easy to explain what is meant by maturity. I was not trying to attack you in that thread, but to educate. I am glad that you have taken the point about "insulting the judge". Another point to consider: "Sir, please do not attempt irony. This is a most serious issue." If you have a low opinion of someone's judgment then it is probably wise to just assume irony would be lost on them: if they see it as mere sarcasm it will be taken as an insult.

It is not the case that "anything goes" on the Steward request page, but bear in mind that it is a discussion of your conduct. If you do not appreciate what people are saying about immature conduct, or if it seems too subjective to allow rebuttal, then please try to recognize and deal with the objective fact that multiple people are receiving that impression.

If you do not want this sort of advice then just say so and I will stop. I have argued for indulgence in your case because I believe you are competent to work it out; but you have been drawn into a situation that demands level-headedness and restraint, and if you do not rise to the occasion then billinghurst will have been right about your trajectory. ~ Ningauble (talk) 21:43, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

In the words of Camões (Lusíadas, X.58.5-8) —


Quem faz injúria vil e sem razão,
Com forças e poder em que está posto,
Não vence; que a vitória verdadeira
É saber ter justiça nua e inteira.


You might remember the caption "Am I the one holding the gun?" used by me on Wikipedia.[24] Some people tried to guess, by email, who was who (alas, we are truly identical twins, so even I can't tell). My main point, however, was that I am not holding any gun: the admins have all the guns. Any editor who is vocally critical of their abuses can (and will, eventually) be blocked. I am acutely aware of this.
The only thing regular editors like myself have are words. Palavras. And yet, there is something morally disturbing about those who log in every day on Wikipedia and, despite all the abuses taking place there, never dare to speak up. We are different in that I cannot do that, myself. I really think these abusive people need to be treated with contempt and ridicule.
I am not replying to the latest insults there only because I want to keep improving articles on several different wikis, which will be impossible if some steward decides to disrespect all the local wikis who do not want me blocked, by abusively locking my account, and thus preventing me from constructively editing in them. Some people simply do not care about articles, and just like feeling power, and punishing others. The appropriate way to deal with such people may be to "restraint" oneself from even responding to them, although I would be tempted to at least say (best read with a British accent) —


I may give in to your demand for censorship because I fear your barbarism. But don't, for a moment, confuse that with respect. I don't respect you, I despise you.


Just for laughs. ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Ok then. If I am despised and my attempts to help are perceived as slander then I will desist from wasting my words. If you ever decide you want to question authority effectively and speak truth to power that will be heard, feel free to ask me about it. ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
You misunderstood (completely). I said abusive people need to be treated with contempt and ridicule (e.g., Cirt, Deskana, Toddst1). I don't think you are abusive. ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:03, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
That was my point (irony intended): you are misunderstood. You can despise those who do not understand, or you can attack the misunderstanding directly by striving to communicate effectively. You can do both, but bear in mind that even the most misguided abusers of power are usually well intentioned.

Note that only one Steward commented on the global lock discussion before it was closed. The reason he was inclined to lock had nothing to do with the basis of the original lock request: it was due entirely to your manner of discourse. There is an object lesson here: you were very nearly locked out globally not because the complainant was acting in bad faith, but because you made yourself so badly misunderstood.

Yes, all you have are words: they are mightier than the sharpest sword if you wield them effectively. On the other hand, if you only want to fall on your own sword then a dull and rusty one will do the trick. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll save my thoughts about being misunderstood for later, if I may. You lost me when you said "even the most misguided abusers of power are usually well intentioned". Are we reading the same Wikipedia? And more importantly, for me, could you tell me why you never get involved in controversial discussions at Wikipedia (e.g., admin conduct review)? Is it to keep out of trouble? Are you trying to maintain your "reputation"? Or have you perhaps realized that pointing out admin abuse is useless, and would only get you enemies? Please educate me. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I have been involved in controversial discussions at Wikipedia, including extensive participation in an Arbitration case about an article so shamefully controversial that it earned a place in the Hall of Lame. The question you say is most important to you presupposes a counterfactual, so I can only answer "Mu".

However, you would be correct to note that I participate at Wikipedia much less than at Wikiquote. This is primarily due to exasperation with the culture of Wikipedia contributors generally, and has nothing to do with the conduct of its functionaries. I just find it excruciatingly laborious to get anything done in an environment where, e.g., even the most straightforward article improvements can involve interminable negotiations with Randy in Boise. I choose to spend my time where (1) I care about the subject enough to invest the effort, and (2) I have good reason to expect positive results.

I have no problem with taking on the errors of people in positions of authority when it meets the above two criteria. In "real life" I became publicly involved in activist work before the majority of Wikipedians were born, and freely accept the risks of doing so. From my perspective, being blocked at Wikipedia is a trivial risk. That said, I am well aware, and have often remarked, that "there are none so officious as those with authority over trivial matters". (Have you ever argued with a parking lot attendant? It's about as productive, and boring to me, as Wikidrama.)

As for "reputation", though I do try to avoid the tactical mistake of appearing to be causing trouble rather than solving problems, I am very skeptical of my ability to account for, much less influence, what people think of me, which varies at least as greatly as the number of people who deign to think of me at all. ~ Ningauble (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Ningauble, I know you (have) participate(d) in many Wikipedia discussions. Yet none of those are about admin misconduct. Why? Have you never seen any administrator behaving in childish, vengeful, petty ways? (Recently, User:LauraHale comes to mind.) Or do you think speaking up isn't worth the trouble? I am inclined to take the latter view, myself, as when I point out abuses, even more abuses follow. To give you another opportunity to cite Godwin's law: would you oppose Hitler if you knew you'd be shot in the head next? (Of course there are more urgent things to fight in this world than abusive wikipedia admins, but what can I say.) Maybe you don't "expect positive results" by criticizing admins?
You write: In "real life" I became publicly involved in activist work before the majority of Wikipedians were born, and freely accept the risks of doing so. From my perspective, being blocked at Wikipedia is a trivial risk. Good to hear. Unfortunately, for me, things are a bit different. I don't have an anonymous username, so it does matter what people place in my user page (I've heard it called "grave dancing"). Of course, if I had a name like "starwarsfan93", then I could more easily throw it away. (I'm not saying "Ningauble" should be easily thrown away. You must like your account. What's more, the name Ningauble seems to make people think you are female, for whatever reason.)
What would your advice be to me? Should I just ignore every abuse I see (about 4-5 a day at Wikipedia), never say anything against any unscrupulous admin, and just keep editing on projects with my mouth shut? That would seem the wise thing to do. If only there weren't so many abusive admins! A friend suggests they must be such Losers (with capital L) in real life, to feel the need to have this "power" and to exert it in such petty ways, that I better give up now and stop wasting my time. (Take Toddst1, for instance. The only sensible thing to do with such an abusive administrator, to my mind, would be to desyop him immediately. But it ain't gonna happen, never, ever! So I do fear this is all a waste of time.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:58, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

On being misunderstood:

Bertrand Russell often got in trouble for his sharp observations because some of his readers couldn't tell he was using sarcasm.

Perhaps you have read his essay Nice People, starting: "I intent to write an article in praise of nice people." Only at the very end of the essay — indeed, in its last two sentences — does the sarcasm end (with a punch-line).

I once made my relatives quiver when I (tried to) read to them out loud Ha-Joon Chang's delightful passage in Bad Samaritans, beginning of chapter three, where the idea of free trade is ridiculed—

I have a six-year-old son. His name is Jin-Gyu. He lives off me, yet he is quite capable of making a living. I pay for his lodging, food, education and health care. But millions of children of his age already have jobs. Daniel Defoe, in the 18th century, thought that children could earn a living from the age of four.
Moreover, working might do Jin-Gyu's character a world of good. Right now he lives in an economic bubble with no sense of the value of money. He has zero appreciation of the efforts his mother and I make on his behalf, subsidizing his idle existence and cocooning him from harsh reality. He is over-protected and needs to be exposed to competition, so that he can become a more productive person. Thinking about it, the more competition he is exposed to and the sooner this is done, the better it will be for his future development. It will whip him into a mentality that is ready for hard work. I should make him quit school and get a job. Perhaps I could move to a country where child labour is still tolerated, if not legal, to give him more choice in employment.

You just have to assume your readers are intelligent. That is — I grant you — a very generous assumption, unsupported by evidence, but anyway, being understood is overrated. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

@Ningauble: I learned a new word today: Gaman. Thought it might interest you. Cheers, DanielTom (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Great word, Daniel. Over the last year, I've had a series of things happen to me that most people would say -- and do say, when I tell the stories -- were horrible. Yet when I realized that "horrible" is not a fact, it is an interpretation, and I'm trained to handle interpretation, and I simply dropped that response, accepting that what was happening, was what was happening, it became totally obvious what to do, and what seemed like miracles occurred. In fact, this was just the normal operation of the brain when the lizard-brain responses to fear are quieted.
Now, one day, not too far away, I'll die. Is that "horrible"? Right now, my 12-year-old daughter, who depends on me, might think so. But how can what is inevitable be horrible unless life itself is horrible? And, simply because I say so, it is not horrible. It's actually a fantastic opportunity! Those are both interpretations, neither true nor false, but they have different effects. Pick the story that works for you! --Abd (talk) 20:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
The advice I give to people who don't believe in an afterlife and who don't want to die is this: start saving up for cryonics. ~ DanielTom (talk) 21:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Admin activity review/2013/Notice to inactive right holders

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Admin activity review/2013/Notice to inactive right holders is available for translation. You can translate it here:


A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-08-10.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 03:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Closed discussion

Hi! I know you were not satisfied with the outcome of the discussion, but I don't think continuing the drama will get any better results. I hope you can understand. PiRSquared17 (talk) 19:11, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

It was your talk page, and your call. I certainly have great respect for your judgement, and admire your politeness. If all admins were as helpful and nice as you are, all wikis would be Heaven (but alas, most admins—in my experience—are the exact opposite of you). Disse. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Asked to desist

Deskana has indicated that you are pursuing an enWP issue at meta on which you have been asked to desist. It would seem that you have exhausted all your avenues of appeal with regard to your block at enWP, and probably time to accept that and move on. If you don't, have a guess at the means of management at meta, and there is even less in the way of an appeals process. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

That is false. Deskana should stop misrepresenting my emails, or offer evidence for his assertions. I have never appealed my block at Wikipedia (nor anywhere else. In my emails I make it very clear that I am not appealing the block. What I am doing is expressing concerns about abuse, dishonesty, and misrepresentations). ~ DanielTom (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
That is called a deflection of the argument. You know that I am asking you to desist in your accusations about people, and bothering them via meta about issues at other wikis. Adding derogatory statements about people and using evocative words to disparage is not acceptable.

If you wish to undertake any formal process and engage the WMF on that, you have been directed to how to undertake that and the means. None of that is on-wiki. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

No, it is called being truthful. Thanks for making your request clearer, though. I agree, now that I know the procedure, I will email the WMF. ~ DanielTom (talk) 15:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikivoyage Logo voting

As far as I can tell you, you are eligible :-) -- Rillke (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I misread, and thought that only "Wikivoyage contributors" with 50 or more edits there could vote... The logos are all very beautiful. ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, July 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, July 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 00:31, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Re:Advice

Oh, just here to thank for your advice, I will stop let people know my age.--Gabrielchihonglee (talk) 08:43, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

A wise choice. The page I linked you to also advises that you do not give out your name, location, & school. You should wait until you're much older before posting that sort of information online. (And even then I'd say it would be best not to do it.) Take care, DanielTom (talk) 08:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, August 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, August 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é baixa.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from August, with a focus on topics from Wikimania. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 09:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Unlock the Secrets of Wikipedia Zero/Video (South Africa)

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Unlock the Secrets of Wikipedia Zero/Video (South Africa) is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-11-30.

To unsubscribe from translation notifications, uncheck the boxes on this page.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 22:50, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, September 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, September 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:



Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from the month of September. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 10:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, October 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, October 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 06:10, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: User:MediaWiki message delivery

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page User:MediaWiki message delivery is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-12-31.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 09:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: User:MediaWiki message delivery

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page User:MediaWiki message delivery is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-12-31.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 09:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: User:MediaWiki message delivery

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page User:MediaWiki message delivery is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2013-12-31.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 09:09, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements is available for translation. You can translate it here:



Dear translators,

I have updated the Eligibility Requirements page for the Project and Event Grants program, and re-organized the information to be more readable, as well as easier to translate.

Your help in bringing this information to different language communities has tremendous value: many people are timid about grants, and having to digest all this relatively-formal information in English makes it even more scary.

Your translations can help more Wikimedians apply for funding, and thereby enable more awesome work to take place around the world. Thank you for your valuable efforts!

Asaf Bartov, Grantmaking team, WMF

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 22:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Grants:Index/Eligibility requirements is available for translation. You can translate it here:



Dear translators,

I have updated the Eligibility Requirements page for the Project and Event Grants program, and re-organized the information to be more readable, as well as easier to translate.

Your help in bringing this information to different language communities has tremendous value: many people are timid about grants, and having to digest all this relatively-formal information in English makes it even more scary.

Your translations can help more Wikimedians apply for funding, and thereby enable more awesome work to take place around the world. Thank you for your valuable efforts!

Asaf Bartov, Grantmaking team, WMF

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 22:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, November 2013

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, November 2013 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from last month. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists. If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 02:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Fundraising/Translation/Thank you email 20131202

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Fundraising/Translation/Thank you email 20131202 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta. A data limite para traduzir esta página é 2014-01-02.

Thank you for your help translating this 'Thank you letter' from the Wikimedia Foundation's Executive Director Sue Gardner into your language.

If you have any questions, please post them on my talk page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jrobell

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 22:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Privacy policy

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Privacy policy is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta.


The discussion phase about the draft for the Wikimedia Foundation's new privacy policy is ending on January 15. Your help is welcome in translating the current version of the draft, which is expected to be

close to the final version. This will also enable more community members to contribute comments before the discussion phase ends.

The main text of the privacy policy is contained in the following pages, please click "Translate" on each of them:

Privacy policy / Summary / What the policy doesn't cover / Definitions

Please also consider translating the FAQ and other supplementary material, which can be found (along with the main text) here:

[25]

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 08:44, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Nothing

[26]. Nothing. I know what stewards do and don't do, and each steward is different. There is no general rule. Some follow policy and some don't. The best follow w:WP:IAR (i.e, the equivalent here), but will note, explicitly, when they are acting outside of policy. And if someone questions them when they fail to do that, or it appears that they have failed, they will answer, simply and civilly. And some won't do that. Some will ignore anything that looks critical.

In a word, stewards are human. So why do you ask? I didn't answer you there because the question is irrelevant to the purpose of that page, which would be to request locks or to request unlock. I did ask for reconsideration. I am considering if I should simply ask for unlock, but not being adequately informed about the specific situation, the specific user, I'm not entirely comfortable about that. --Abd (talk) 21:09, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

There are many good stewards (or so I should hope—I myself can only think of one). My comment there was just to point out that no one can seriously expect stewards to check facts, as that takes time, possibly more time than the few seconds it takes to lock someone's account. I personally have suggested that people whose accounts are being considered for global locks should at least be notified in time so that they could defend themselves from what often are malicious lies by "respectable" involved editors. But then again, even that wouldn't do much good, as apparently stewards can globally lock anyone they want and for whatever made-up reason they want, which doesn't even have to appear in the policies they don't follow and presumably have never read—for instance, I remember one steward threatened to lock me, twice, for "childish trolling"... whatever that might be; I'm a little light on the details). I was advised by email that I should stop editing Meta "if [I] like editing Wikiquote", but sometimes I see such stupidity that I can't control myself. Do carry on and ignore my little rant. My apologies for the aside comment, hope it wasn't counterproductive. Have a nice day. ~ DanielTom (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Understood, Daniel. Look, I've seen all this. What used to exist, more commonly, was users who would notice a problem and speak up about it. It used to be that stewards were famous for being level-headed, they didn't get upset. Yes, I saw exceptions, but they were exceptions. Gradually, I've seen that slip away. And the people who would mourn it slipping away, are mostly gone. They slipped away! The way I see it, the wiki process, as commonly practiced, is a set-up for this to eventually happen. There would be ways, in theory, to prevent this, but not enough users care enough to do what would need to be done. It's quite what you wrote. It takes time.
I'm active on Wikiversity, where we hardly ever block a good-faith user. But, then, again, we don't have a structure that promotes conflict, i.e., say, a single entry on a topic. We can have as many entries as we need on a topic, and remain in compliance with overall neutrality policy. When there is only a single entry allowed, with no alternative versions, of course people fight over it. It's a set-up. It's not that it could not be done, but doing it efficiently and effectively would require genuine deliberative process, and, in fact, full-on consensus process. Consensus promise is famously not quick, i.e., not wiki. And as soon as you start blocking dissent, any consensus that appears is false.
As to nice day, and referring to your edit summary, I'm fully responsible for how my day occurs to me. I have a nice day if I say so. If I have a Bad Day because of what happens on these silly web sites, I'm choosing that, but I do consider that a Bad Idea. It only happens in this sense: sometimes I spend an entire day wikignoming, when I had other things to do, and then wonder why I did that. It's usually some kind of avoidance. Thanks for your thoughts. --Abd (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Re your question to Philippe

You have been checkusered on this wiki three times. Two, coincidentally, in conjunction with the socking activity of another user (at about the time of your account creation), and once in relation to your activities on this wiki. For the first two, I doubt that you would have been notified you as that would have confused any new user, and the latter while I am not sure exactly, it was around the time that your actions were concerning numbers of parties, so it was presumably looking at the extent. One of the first two was by me, and my looking at the checks they seem reasonable in the circumstance where sock activity has been reported. Re notifying users, it would depend on the circumstance. If there was an investigation of the user, not during the course of the investigation, possibly afterwards depending on the circumstance. Users of good standing I would usually notify where they are collateral detection to another search. To note that the vast bulk of searches on this wiki more involve spambots, checking the consequences of a block in prevention, or in response to an unblock query. There is less investigative check of socks due to the existing policy. You will need to check other wikis for their policies.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

You make it sound as if I asked how many times I had been checked. Your comment here to me reads as a sort of confession, which is completely unwarranted, as you and your friends are perfectly free to check my IP, without my permission, and without ever telling me about it. I'm sure the "three times" I was checkusered on this wiki all proved very instructive. They could have been three times every week, for all I care. You are welcome to check my IP after every single one of my edits, if you want, as it is no secret at all. There is even a completely disgraceful userpage on Wikipedia linking an IP to my real name, which is claimed to be a sock even though it only has one edit whose signature was corrected and replaced by mine seconds later (usually such edits are oversighted, when someone edits logged out by accident revealing their IP, but in my case it's conveniently used for public shaming and lynching).
But you see, checkusers don't care about the truth, and are perfectly happy to use their trivial "findings" to silence and attack anyone who dares criticizing them or their friends, and they do so even more happily and willingly when people use their real names on-wiki, as that's when you can really destroy that person's reputation based on nothing but lies, distortions, and omissions, which no one ever cares to challenge. Perhaps that's a good thing altogether, as when you do challenge these people, you find out not only how dishonest they are (e.g. Deskana), but just how bat-sh*t crazy and psychopathic some of the other anonymous people who want to have access to these tools really are. Should I be surprised by the kind of trollish, "anonymous" hate mail I receive, and the rather obvious indirect death threats, which I can show you on request? Apparently not, and it must be perfectly okay for cowardly anonymous people to access other people's IP without ever notifying them even when their real-life identities have already been established. Yeah, I think this needs to change. DanielTom (talk) 01:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
If you believe the checkuser tool has been used inappropriately, you should email me directly (philippe@wikimedia.org), or send an email to the ombudsman comission, which can be reached at cu-ombuds-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Philippe (WMF) (talk) 21:25, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Blocked

DanielTom was infinite blocked without warning. The sequence I see:

  • 22:36, 8 January 2014 User talk:Philippe (WMF) ‎DanielTom (→‎Question: new section) Revision hidden
Revision hidden What was hidden may have been unrelated. This is what shows:
Dear Philippe,
What do you think of implementing a system that automatically notifies users when their IPs are checked? Something like the notification you received for my posting at your talk page, only so much more important for that person's privacy and security, and which incidentally might also help prevent abuse.
Thanks for your consideration!, DanielTom (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
  • 12:24, 9 January 2014‎ User talk:DanielTom Billinghurst (→‎Re your question to Philippe: new section)
  • 01:54, 10 January 2014 User talk:DanielTom DanielTom (→‎Re your question to Philippe: it's not just about me, though my experience has awakened me to the dark wiki-reality, where anonymous psychopaths do have access to the IPs of actual identifiable people)
This was not a personal attack (what's in the edit summary). However, DanielTom did write:
... when you do challenge these people, you find out not only how dishonest they are (e.g. Deskana), but just how bat-sh*t crazy and psychopathic some of the other anonymous people who want to have access to these tools really are.
That would be uncivil (i.e, the claim that Deskana is "dishonest,"), but this level of incivility was, once upon a time, tolerated in a context like this. Obviously, the user is upset about something Deskana did at some point. The rest of the comments were not personal attacks at all. A blanket, unspecified criticism of checkuser practice is not a personal attack, nor is it an insult.

I would certainly not have written what DanielTom wrote, and don't agree with much or most of it. However, the sequence here creates an appearance that DanielTom was infinite blocked for being upset (or cynical), about checkuser or other administrative behavior, and showing it, on his own user page, in response to Billinghurst. Once upon a time, most stewards carefully avoided that appearance.

That DanielTom would be blocked would be more or less what he might expect, if stewards are as he was claiming. --Abd (talk) 01:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

  • Notice that a block for incivility on the user's talk page which leaves talk page access open, unless that was merely an error, implies that the block is punitive, not preventative, since it does not prevent the problem behavior. It would be much simpler to warn the user. This is ironically like the issue that first brought me to DanielTom's talk page, a global lock on an account where the only alleged cross-wiki vandalism was the creation of abusive user names. Locking the account has no effect on that. --Abd (talk) 01:47, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi Abd, if you believe DanielTom's talkpage access must be revoked you'd better fill a proper request. I left it because I though the request for deletion was, matter of fact, right. For that reason I forwarded it to the people who already fulfilled it, if you think that deletion was wrong you should ask en.wiki's sysops rather then me. --Vituzzu (talk) 11:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
If that is what Vituzzu derived from the above, I'm at a loss. My position is that DanielTom should not have been blocked at all, and my impression from available evidence is that the block was punitive, not preventative. As to the revision deletion, I have no clue as to whether or not this is related to DanielTom at all. The discussion that shows provides no evidence, and it appears to be a friendly conversation. Hence I can have no opinion about its propriety. However, in researching DanielTom's history, I came across something that, if repeated here, could have led to revision deletion. And it was so face-palm stupid that I have no wonder that DanielTom became increasingly disaffected, it was a rule being applied entirely outside of the original intention, a catch-22. And I even know and trust the administrator involved, it was a good-faith action.
I've long felt a kind of moral compulsion to intervene when I see a user either being abused or made unwelcome. Everyone makes mistakes, and that includes administrators. I'm not the ultimate judge, and I have, in fact, no opinion that DanielTom is better off unblocked. I've done what I can do here, and it's obvious that I can provide much more benefit in other ways. From the request that led to the preceding discussion, it has become clear that review or criticism of administrative actions by ordinary users is very much unwelcome. Any error that a user makes in such review is likely to be punished. Power corrupts. That's a toxic community, and if I stay in such an environment, I've got zero right to complain about it. I have a life to live, and its not here. --Abd (talk) 15:49, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

{{helpme}} Could someone block User:YODO (You Only Die Once) on Wikiquote? He is vandalizing several pages, and there doesn't seem to be any local active admin there to stop him. Thanks. DanielTom (talk) 18:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I am an active user their in counter vandalism. If only when had Scott their, Yodo would be blocked. Sorry, can't stop him. --Goldenburg111 18:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes, it's no use reverting him, as he just reverts back again. Thanks, though. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Your Welcome. Back here, Vituzzu should have not blocked you. They are many obvious reasons. (1 You were expressing your own opinion. Saying "Stewards only help their friends" is your matter of opinion (2 Not have been warned, I hope Meta does not break down like Wikipedia. Block first, then comments (Not saying I have been blocked their). I'll stay right by your side Daniel, it's not fair for you to get smacked with a hammer at the first shot. Anyway, good luck :) --Goldenburg111 18:53, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind sentiments. No need to worry about me. ;-) DanielTom (talk) 19:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I'll not force you. I'll be at Wikiquote reverting YODO's vandal edits. --Goldenburg111 19:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

  Done by Barras. DanielTom (talk) 20:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I thanked him, finally, my banana break ;) --Goldenburg111 20:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

@Barras:: perhaps you could block the new vandal, User:Tell me about it! ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Done. -Barras talk 23:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
(Thanks.) DanielTom (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

@Barras: another vandal for you: User:DarknessFalls74‎. Needs to be blocked, but no local admins around. Thanks ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

(  Done very quickly by Barras.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

@Vituzzu:

Vituzzu, you recently blocked me indefinitely, for a comment on my own talk page, giving the rationale "insults/personal attacks". I don't know when telling the truth became a personal attack. But I know why you actually blocked me, and I should perhaps quote a comment I made (again, on my own talk page) just 2 days before your excessive block, to other people's enlightenment:—

... apparently stewards can globally lock anyone they want and for whatever made-up reason they want, which doesn't even have to appear in the policies they don't follow and presumably have never read—for instance, I remember one steward threatened to lock me, twice, for "childish trolling"... whatever that might be; I'm a little light on the details...

Who was I referring to there? Hmm... Oh, right, to you, Vituzzu. So, you see, I understand your impulse to block critics. I am naive, but not naive to the point of thinking that everyone values truth, or that truth will always prevail in the end. I don't believe that, and you—perhaps unintentionally—prove me right.

In any case, blocking someone for what they say in response to questions on their own talk pages, doesn't seem very proper to me. Especially when the blocking admin (you, in this case) does so without any warning, as a form of revenge, and being involved. Usually I would ignore these abuses without saying a word, and just wait for the block to expire, which in cases of alleged "personal attacks" is usually about 2 days. But in your infinite wisdom, you decided to block me indefinitely, with no warning, and no explanation, at the first and smallest opportunity you got.

There are two activities which I do, that do not seem to me particularly controversial. One is translating pages into Portuguese, the other is notifying stewards of vandal attacks against Wikiquote. There is a third activity, which is very unpopular, that is expressing my opinions on important issues. I understand these opinions are not welcome. However, for the first activity, I actually need to be unblocked. For the second, I don't, although I would prefer to post notifications to stewards in the proper forums. There is currently a vandalism spree by new socks going on at Wikiquote, and on Wikipedia, which aim at harassing a user who has been their target for many years, and it would be useful to check the socks behind this attack, but I cannot file the proper request (while blocked). So, believe it or not, I would like to be unblocked.

It would be useful if you could tell me your conditions for an unblock, so I could review them, and come to some sort of agreement. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I must apologise to the whole community, both me and @Billinghurst: were wrong while @John F. Lewis: was absolutely right, giving you a second chance is simply useless. You still think you can use meta to insult other people and you still think every critics, every block or every other measure you don't like comes out from a plot against you. You're using a text I never read as an excuse to call me "involved" in order to self-acquit you from incivility. I still think your original incident has been poorly managed but then you decided *on your own* to break any minimal rule of a collaborative project. That's definitely your last chance, the next explosion of incivility or the next attempt to carry on wars from other projects here on meta will be also the last ones. --Vituzzu (talk) 12:18, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Vituzzu, the above text was written while this user was still blocked by you, before any "second chance." I suggest you drop the cudgel, and, for the future, it's fairly obvious from the above comment that you would be under a reasonable recusal requirement. See also DanielTom's comment in Vituzzu's Steward confirmation discussion, which could, from timing, be the occasion for Vituzzu's comment.
DanielTom can be abrasive, we know that, but, unblocked, he has been restrained, so that you add this at this late date, given his behavior on being unblocked, shows that you are holding on to your former impressions, for reasons I don't understand. I previously have congratulated you for your restraint in not reblocking. You have kind of ruined that.
DanielTom's comments in steward elections and confirmations have not risen to the level of disruptive incivility, as far as I have seen, and that he would be so seriously reprimanded here for commenting there, a very specific place for criticism, and by a steward, is chilling. I was not planning on commenting. I now will. --Abd (talk) 17:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Nope @Abd:, I'm not dealing with the trolling above I already dealt with in ban rfc, I'm dealing with the last comments when DanielTom claims his incivility was right. The first step towards catalysis is forswearing obvious mistakes. --Vituzzu (talk) 18:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
That's even worse, Vituzzu. Essentially, he made a plea to you, in his comment in your steward confirmation discussion, which was not a personal attack. The plea was essentially that you act properly. I was already worried about your prior block of him without warning, but it seemed you had let that go. Your response to that confirmation comment showed me otherwise. It's clear that you have something yourself to learn about "forswearing obvious mistakes," and until you learn it, you are not qualified to be a steward. I suggest apologizing. --Abd (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Could you please provide a diff where I "claim[] [my] incivility was right"? I always try to be polite, and don't approve of incivility—I also don't approve of putting words in other people's mouths. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
@Abd: feel free to let you be fooled but please don't ask me to do the same. I'm pretty sure there's an inner logic into this funny drama which surely goes beyond my ability to understand. For truthful posts to their own talk pages + also please don't block me for this post. Seriously we already lost so much time trying to catalyse the uncatalysable, but I'm confident the time meta has become the "place for rant" for ex-en.wiki users is about to end. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Time will tell, Vituzzu. There are about twenty days left with the confirmation discussion to proceed. Some people will just comment based on whatever, but some will read evidence, and you've been providing plenty here and there. Again, I suggest an apology, if you wish to avert the risk. Just a recommendation, not a demand, and certainly not a "rant." Or do you thimk that threatening "ex-enwiki users" during your confirmation, based on comments in it, is just fine? (I actually agree with better handing of "rants" here, but given what Vituzzu is defending in his action with DanielTom, he's not about improving the civility of the place, he is about winning his side of a war.)
Daniel, I recommend you stop, totally, dead in your tracks. Defending yourself is not something to do on that page. Even on this page, a bad idea. You have not been uncivil, there, but don't push it. --Abd (talk) 23:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
[27]. Cute. Daniel, I recommend you reverse that change immediately, before someone comments on it, and apologize in the edit summary. I think there is about a 10% chance that you actually were sincere in that comment; more likely you were being sarcastic, and in this situation, especially, you cannot afford to do that. If it already has seen response, then at least apologize. --Abd (talk) 23:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
It's an important issue. Most people, even those with advanced permissions, are anonymous, and this is their hobby—they never face any repercussions for their actions in their "real-life", so it shocks them when someone who uses their real name on-wiki commits suicide just after reverting attacks to their user page (as recently happened). I won't revert that comment. ~ DanielTom (talk) 23:36, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Obviously you are not my meat puppet! At this point, it looks to me like Vituzzu is immolating himself, I can't believe what he's been doing. Dumping on you for mild criticism on his steward vote, threatening me with his comment above about ex-enwiki users, and then he's obviously been scouring my contributions, because he reached back to find the archiving I'd done of Jimbo Wales talk -- it was a move that stopped a useless flame war in its tracks --, not only reverting it, but deleting the archive and full-protecting the talk page, claiming vandalism when there was none, but really trying to prevent the same thing from being done again by a non-admin, i.e, using his tools to promote his own position in an editorial decision -- and then revert warring with Michaeldsuarez on poking out the http: from a link, about as silly a thing to revert war over as I can imagine. All this was totally unnecessary, he'd have been fine if he simply hadn't responded to you. Nobody would have gone ballistic over what you wrote. This is bring out a major lack of self-control. The voting since it became clear what he was doing has substantially reversed direction, and there are twenty days left to go. I have no crystal ball, but .... that is the direction the wind is blowing. Please don't poke him. Okay? --Abd (talk) 03:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Sure. I'll stick to translations from now on. :-) DanielTom (talk) 14:02, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Global ban discussion

In the past, you had express concerns about not receiving notifications about global lock discussions, so I'm here to inform you that John F. Lewis has opened recently a global ban proposal against you. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 03:45, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I was about to do the same thing. As you had a block in place locally, I have removed it so that you can participate in the conversation. Please keep yourself nice, and on topic, if you are unable to do so, then I will consider whether to reimpose the local block.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:59, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 13:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Not bad. Daniel. Now, for the moment, except for necessary business and noncontroversial editing, drop the whole matter. You may always email me. There is still some cleanup to do, but none of it is urgent. Take your time. What do you do for relaxation? Do it! --Abd (talk) 16:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

@Vituzzu: re: "I forwarded it to the people who already fulfilled it" – thanks! ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Tradução

Boa noite. Eu estou traduzindo de inglês para português tem poucas semanas. Foi na hora de traduzir o nome das categorias. :-) Bom encontrar aqui quem entende o português. Até pouco tempo eu pensei estar sozinha com todos se comunicando em inglês. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 23:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Igualmente. Dá-me um certo prazer escrever em português, nem que seja só para confundir o resto do pessoal a ler isto—duvido que façam ideia do que estamos para aqui a dizer. ;-) Fique bem, DanielTom (talk) 23:22, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Achei um administrador de tradução que fala inglês mas entende um pouco de português, e o Vert p, é francês, não sabe escrever em português, mas ele entendeu o que eu escrevi em português no perfil dele. Boa Noite Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 00:55, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Gauna, desculpe por não responder. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
DanielTom, eu já tinha feito logoff e vi no meu email que alguém escreveu algo. Eu usei o /pt-br = Brasil o em algumas traduções que eu fiz. o /pt é o português de Portugal. Eu acho que eu disse alguma besteira. Ele me largou falando sozinha. Não vou mais aborrecer ele com minhas bobagens. Sempre me virei sozinha online desde 1991. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 04:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Já vou desligar. Boa Noite. :-) Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 04:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Não tem mal, se ele não respondeu logo é porque estava ocupado, ou não percebeu. Não se preocupe com isso. Se precisar de ajuda nalguma tradução, estou ao seu dispor. ~ DanielTom (talk) 09:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Não foi só eu. Ele te largou falando sozinho também. Se eu tiver alguma dúvida de alguma palavra que eu não achar o significado online te pergunto. Obrigada. Bom Dia. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 14:24, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Esteja à vontade. ~ DanielTom (talk) 14:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Acho que o Teles foi resolver algum problema. Ele nos deixou falando sozinho também lá no perfil dele. Eu vou sair agora, ainda não fui almoçar. Boa Tarde. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 17:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
É normal. Numa discussão, tem sempre que haver alguém a mandar mensagem em último, não leve isso a peito. E sim, o Teles anda ocupado em muitas wikis. Fique bem, DanielTom (talk) 18:27, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Special:Diff/7440949/7441631 (edits by Ana) -- correct or not? PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Clearly she didn't understand your explanation. ~ DanielTom (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Can you do it in correct Portuguese? PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:01, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
I can try tomorrow, now I'm going to sleep, sorry. ~ DanielTom (talk) 01:04, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Boa noite. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Obrigado. Apparently Ana is upset that you called her (or the IP) a "duck". Well... good luck. ~ DanielTom (talk) 01:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
      Daniel, a palavra irônica te lembra alguma coisa?

Se você tiver algum problema e precisar, eu tenho o email da Meta. Hoje mesmo já conversei com eles diretamente. Já vou desligar. Boa noite. Ana Mercedes Gauna

Daniel, I just want to let you know that maybe some other admins don't, but at least I appreciate your translations and other recent help here. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but it's no big deal. Also, you don't need to suck up to me, I already like you. Of course, that is not good for you, but I cannot help it. ~ DanielTom (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Daniel, ontem eu estava de brincadeira com o Verdy b, pensei que ele era um robô pelo modo como se comportava, e quis verificar se ele era humano ou robô. Mas ele e os demais acham que eu sou vandalismo e abuse filter. Não vou mais fazer nenhuma tradução. Vou voltar a trabalhar depois de amanhã, vou sumir mesmo. Bye. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 17:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, Amgauna, foi um prazer conhecer vc. Não se incomode com isso. Bom trabalho, e boa sorte. ~ DanielTom (talk) 00:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Enviei para a Jéssica da Meta, responsável pelas traduções, um link do seu perfil na Meta para ela saber que você é o responsável pelas traduções inglês para português. Boa noite. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Eu não sou responsável não!, só traduzo ocasionalmente. Fique bem... ~ DanielTom (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Ok. De qualquer forma, já enviei por email. Boa noite. Ana Mercedes Gauna (talk) 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Ferramenta de Tradução da Meta = https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:LanguageStats

Desculpe, eu estou com stress. Ana Gauna (talk) 10:22, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

(Não tem mal, Ana, desejo-lhe as melhoras.) ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Data retention guidelines

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Data retention guidelines is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é alta.


The discussion phase about the draft for the Wikimedia Foundation's new data retention guidelines is ending on February 14. Your help is welcome in translating the current version of the draft, which is expected to be close to the final version. This will also enable more community members to contribute comments before the discussion phase ends.

Please click "Translate" on both of these pages:

Introduction explaining the discussion phase / Main text of the guidelines

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 05:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Agradecimento

Grato pelas boas vindas! Espero ser útil por aqui também! Abraços, Tonelada (talk) 01:21, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

(Prazer!) ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Board Service

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Blog/Drafts/Board Service is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


This is the second in a series of blogs posts by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, explaining the work of the Board Governance Committee. It is planned to be published at https://blog.wikimedia.org/ on Friday, February 28.

Translations are also still welcome for the first post in the series, titled "Introduction to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees", where Vice Chair Phoebe Ayers explains the Board, its mandate, and its work within the community. It will hopefully remain a useful reference for a long time to come. It can be translated at [28].

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 19:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Wikimedia Highlights, January 2014

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Wikimedia Highlights, January 2014 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


Please consider helping non-English-language Wikimedia communities to stay updated about the most important Wikimedia Foundation activities, MediaWiki development work and other international Wikimedia news from January. Completed translations will be announced on Facebook, Twitter, project village pumps and (for some languages) mailing lists.

Translations are also still welcome for the recently published December Highlights, at [29].

If you have questions about the translation notifications system, ask them here. You can manage your subscription here.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 09:20, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Vote on Alan's RfGR

Hey DanielTom, I just wanted to say a couple of things about my response to your comment. First of all, sorry if it was overly harsh - I wasn't feeling well and that can result in me being rude.

You bring up a good point. My concerns lied with how you said it. In general, people would respond to such a comment better if it sounded something like:

Comment - I have concerns with some of Alan's recent reverts, which indicate that he might not have enough of an understanding of what vandalism is past language barriers to be trusted with the gr tool. Here are some examples of him reverting good faith edits [1] [2]. I don't think that he puts enough care into determining whether or not an edit is vandalism before reverting it, and as such am unable to support this request. User (Talk) 23:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

It is definitely a good concern to have on a request for gr - obviously, since the point is countervandalism and not counter-good-edits. While my personal opinion is that the good outweighs the bad for that candidate, a more succinct and positive comment like the one I used above might be a better way to get across the same information, and thus make people more receptive to the content of it. My ultimate goal for the RfGR process is to appoint users who are helping to create an encyclopedia, not damaging it unintentionally, so such a comment is very welcome and useful for that purpose.

I hope this better explains my reaction, and gives you some idea of how to better get your ideas across in the future. Ajraddatz (Talk) 23:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ajraddatz. You don't have to apologize. Please note, though, that if I changed my style of comments, so that people would receive them better (in other words, so that I could better manipulate said people), I would in fact be paying Alan a disservice, as people would then realize, that he is not fit to have global rollback. It just so happens, that people support their friends, on a "you vote for me, I vote for you" basis. Nothing that I can say can change this fact. All I can do, is to put into Alan's head, that he should be much more careful when reverting new editors. Needless to say, I can afford to express myself in exactly the way I want, because I have no intention of ever becoming an admin, much less a steward. Thanks for your comment. ~ DanielTom (talk) 18:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Stop

Stop quarrelling with JFL on my talkpage, or better, stop quarrelling. That's a wiki, not a battleground. --Vituzzu (talk) 19:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Seriously, I cannot understand your irresistible impulse towards insulting/making personal attacks at people you don't agree. I really cannot understand why you always comment about people rather than actions. I no longer think it will be possible (at least for a certain number of years) to "recover" your aptitude towards the wiki-world but still I cannot understand the underlying reason. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:03, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Calling Vituzzu "abusive" was not entirely constructive either (i.e., give serious suggestions for how to improve), even if you think it is true. Could you please try to discuss this more civilly? PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I don't remember ever "insulting" anyone. I remember being insulted all the time. For example, when I am accused of "harassment", "identity theft", and other such criminal charges, with zero evidence, that doesn't seem to bother you. No, my friend, it is you, Vituzzu, who has an "irresistible impulse" to block critics, and abuse your rollback and other rights, that were trusted to you. And if I say, that given this, you are abusive, that is not an insult, that is simply the truth. I didn't ask for "JFL" to comment there. It is not my fault that he keeps wikihounding my edits, and harassing me everywhere I go. Apparently I'm an easy target. ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I already told you en.wiki's matters are not meta's business also, the poor managing of your "case" over there is not a free pass to harass and insult. As you should assume after two lock requests rejected there are no actual prejudices towards your but still you must learn to avoid making a personal matter out of everything. --Vituzzu (talk) 20:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not talking about en.wiki matters, I'm talking about Meta matters, as the insults and accusations were made at Meta. ~ DanielTom (talk) 20:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

SRP is not a debate place

 
...

SRP is a place for the lodgement of requests. It is not a place for debate, and pretty well not for you. That was trolling, and some of your edits in other places occasionally approach it. I would advise you to keep clear of the page, and if it is on your watch list, then take it off.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

What was trolling? Trying to calm down the user? In the future I'll certainly use the talk page, of the user, rather than posting there. Or, even better, I'll simply look away. ~ DanielTom (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Daniel, that edit ([30]) was provocative. I recommend you follow Billinghurst's advice. If you want to commiserate with an upset user, I suggest email, though the user talk page is second best. It's not about "truth," it's about what can cause upset and disruption. Billinghurst is completely correct, SRP is a request noticeboard and should be kept very, very simple. Every unnecessary edit there is actually disruptive. --Abd (talk) 18:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Notificação de tradução: Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round2/Staff summary/Progress report form/Q2

Hello DanielTom,

You are receiving this notification because you signed up as a translator to português on Meta. The page Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round2/Staff summary/Progress report form/Q2 is available for translation. You can translate it here:

A prioridade para esta página é média.


This report is written by FDC Staff and is intended for the FDC, FDC grantees, and the larger movement. It includes a summary table of financial information from this past quarter, and summaries of each entity’s progress report in this past quarter.

Your help is greatly appreciated. Translators like you help Meta to function as a truly multilingual community.

Thank you!

Meta translation coordinators‎, 10:41, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Leucosticte @ Meta:RFH

Meta:Requests_for_help_from_a_sysop_or_bureaucrat#Leucosticte – I'm just letting you know that I started a "request for help" discussion about a concern that you were involved in. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 12:46, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree with you—his talk page access and email function were abusively revoked, and should be restored. ~ DanielTom (talk) 14:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome. I understand the risks, but it would be wrong for me not to try. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Digging a bit deeper, I find it interesting that Abd, DanielTom, Leucosticte, and Michaeldsuarez are all indefinitely blocked (and likely banned) on the English Wikipedia. Of course correlation isn't causation, but I wonder if the trend is meaningful. Perhaps users who have been subject to indefinite blocks are more likely to want to aid others who are similarly situated. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 23:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict with below)Yes, that would likely be so, though you did not indef block Leucosticte, and he is not banned here. However, if you look at my actual Wikipedia history, you would find that I was active there for the rights of users against abusive administrators, long before being seriously blocked myself. The first time I was seriously blocked came out of intervening on behalf of a teenage girl who had been topic banned, quite unfairly, and the pot on AN was stirred by a highly abusive (and blocked) editor, by IP. (It's amazing how certain editors can *anonymously* start a wikiriot by knowing exactly what claims will rouse the mob.) The ultimate result: the girl was unbanned, and helping make this happen was another editor whom I had assisted. What goes around comes around. (The administrator who blocked me was not abusive. The administrator I was attempting to work with was also not actually abusive, he'd simply made a mistake, and he became a good friend, and became an arbitrator, saying to me that I'd inspired him, and so it went until he was hounded off the site. Off-wiki threats, believeable, to his family. Etc.)
Do note, though, MZM, that I consider your block (and related actions) proper, and do not see your action as at all abusive. I think you went too far by shutting off email access, because Leucosticte has no history of email abuse. However, you wanted to act swiftly, and I fully understand why, even if some of the others don't. It was necessary. As to shutting down talk page access, you had a clear justification for that, though you have not explained much. I've explained in the RFH request. My suggestion is that you simply begin the action by restoring email access, at least. I've warned Leucosticte, by email, not to send any emails unless he is confident that the person will not complain. If in doubt, he could email me or another trusted intermediary and we could forward what we judge as inoffensive. Thanks for considering this. --Abd (talk) 00:27, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Leucosticte is happily editing at mediawiki.org. I'm going to try to not get in the way of that. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
You are absolutely right (except, I'm not banned). I think it is very hard (I'd say impossible) to be a truly humane editor, and not end up indef blocked, on English Wikipedia. There is too much admin abuse there. And if you stand up to it, and try to defend users against admins, you get many enemies. This creates a paradox, that is that admins cannot be truly moral people, because almost by definition they have to look away and ignore such abuses (otherwise they wouldn't get elected). In the end, though, trying to help such users may be of no use, at least the two users I tried to defend also ended up indef blocked. It's the unfortunate reality. ~ DanielTom (talk) 00:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with the claim that "admins cannot be moral people." It may be true that those who confront abuse before becoming administrators, cannot become administrators, there is a real effect there, related to the reason why Wikipedia doesn't want to require administrators to stand for confirmation elections. It is believed that there would be retaliation. That would also apply to editors who become involved in controversy before running for the position.
However, plenty of administrators, already established, have used their tools humanely; Wikipedia, however, is far too complex for a single administrator to do much. Quite simply, no fair judgment can be made like DanielTom proposes. Wikipedia situations can get extraordinarily complex, so understanding that an action is actually abuse, instead of merely being claimed to be so, can take up more time than the administrator has available. The problem is a structural one, almost intrinsic to "wiki" as the concept has played out. To handle the traffic, to apply the level of attention that is needed to truly understand and fairly judge situations, there must be efficient division of labor, and that is utterly absent. Blaming administrators for this is a serious error. --Abd (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
What I wrote was that "admins cannot be truly moral people", and they can't. Unless, of course, you consider looking the other way (which they have to do) moral. Perhaps my word choice was not the best, though—it's already late here and I almost haven't had any sleep last night, so I can't come up with the appropriate words, not to mention my English vocabulary is very limited. I should say, I also don't consider people who are not vegetarian to be truly moral (for example), but this word is so subjective, and carries so many different meanings, to different people, that one is well advised to simply refrain from using it. ~ DanielTom (talk) 01:17, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

(@Michaeldsuarez: they completely misread your request. I don't know how, or why—you were very clear, simply asking for his "talk page and Email access to be restored" so that he could "be able to appeal his block via the proper channels". But, they didn't address this, and didn't even mention talk page or email access. It's basically just "off with their heads!") ~ DanielTom (talk) 09:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "DanielTom/Archive 1".