Ken you believe it?

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
kołdry
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Hex » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:32 pm

Tonight on "Class Acts of Wikipedia": Beyond My Ken (T-C-L). 74,000 edits in just over two years, and a silky-smooth tongue to match. BMK isn't an admin, but is very fond of issuing warnings:
Beyond My Ken wrote: Also note that Face Book, You Tube and Wikipedia itself are not considered reliable sources and cannot be used in references. Please do not change the text from its current state - you obviously have a conflict of interest in regard to this play and should not be editing it at all. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:NaturalWon. "Face Book"? Really?)

BMK knows a thing or two about the theater and conflicts of interest, of course.
Beyond My Ken wrote: == You're just floundering around on a subject you don't know shit about ==

You edited Morosco Theatre, and its just an article to you, but it happens to be the first Broadway theatre I did a show at. Go edit something you understand. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:24, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:Epeefleche)

He's a natural communicator:
Beyond My Ken wrote: == Well, you are a little pissant..... ==

...aren't you? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Beyon ... ish_Rialto] Fuck you, asshole. Your Asperger's is not a "get out of jail free" card. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:Epeefleche)
Beyond My Ken wrote: Oh my god, you're right, the world is swirling around me -- Where Am I? Who Am I? "Kiss"? What is "Kiss"?.

No actually, your edits were shit, kemosabe, utterly shit. Don't restore them, they'll just be deleted again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:Beyond My Ken)

And cocks a snook at the standard warning templates:
Beyond My Ken wrote: == Peter Cooper ==

Cut the crap, kid. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:98.228.134.20, in response to that IP adding "he ate cheeseburgurs" to an article)
Beyond My Ken wrote: == Vandalism and spelling ==

Hello. Vandalizing Wikipedia, by adding "genitalia" to an article, makes you look like an idiot. Misspelling the word, as "genetalia", makes you look like a stupid idiot. If that's how you want to present yourself to the world, you're doing well. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:50.77.28.105)

Luckily he has an excellent grasp of policy.
Beyond My Ken wrote: Also, calling another editor "ignorant" is potentially a personal attack, so I suggest that you review that policy. Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:Hmains)

Because Wikipedia is serious business, and BMK gets upset when people are noisy.
Beyond My Ken wrote: I respect (most) admins because they do a really difficult job; I respect (almost all) Arbs because they do an entirely impossible job; I would like to meet many of the drama board regulars and ArbCom commentators at a party, so I can sucker punch them in the gut and lay them up for a couple of days, so we'd get some respite from their constant crap - that's how angry they make me. In the long run, I'd rather find a way to reduce the drama, defang the commentators, and lower my blood pressure, while maintaining a healthy colloquy within the community about the administration of the project. How? Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
(User talk:Drmies)

That last was posted apparently without any irony at all to a section called "Reducing drama-mongering". Elsewhere on the page BMK mentions he has a son; what a great example to be setting as a father.

That's a random selection from Beyond My Ken's contributions in 2013. I didn't bother looking any further - it probably goes on like that right back to the day he turned up.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13408
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:47 pm

Wikipedia: The encyclopedia that personalities like Beyond My Ken are encouraged to edit.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31695
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:54 pm

thekohser wrote:Wikipedia: The encyclopedia that personalities like Beyond My Ken are encouraged to edit.
You know, if wikipedia cracked down on people like this, then people like me wouldn't go on fishing expeditions for wikipedia user information.

Given his history, his actions are even more hypocritical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Beyon ... My_history
I originally did the bulk of my editing (42,000+ edits) with another ID (now User:Before My Ken), but because of wikihounding which I felt could not be effectively handled by the state of interpretation of Wikipedia policy at the time, I changed ID to avoid the harrassment. With a second ID (now User:Between My Ken) I had very negative interactions with a sockfarm attempting to control the content of various pages connected to an independent film, and I changed to my current (and final) ID, User:Beyond My Ken. After I filed the initial SPI on the puppetmaster, Sorrywrongnumber, one of the socks filed a retaliatory SPI on me. As a result of the positive checkuser result, my accounts were blocked, but after a subsequent discussion on AN/I I was allowed to continue editing under this account. The other accounts were redirected to my current user and talk pages, and were blocked.

I want to be clear that although I have had more than one account in my time on Wikipedia, I have never, with the trivial exception of a few housekeeping edits to my original account, used more than one account at a time, and once I stopped using an account I did not go back to it. What I did could best be described as "using serial accounts".

I made my first edit as a registered user on 26 June 2005. For those interested in edit counts, add 44,600 edits to whatever my current "Beyond My Ken" total is.

Regarding "Ken"

It's a natural mistake to make, but "Ken" in "Beyond My Ken" is not short for the name "Kenneth", it is the English word "ken", derived fron Scottish, and meaning "knowledge". My given name is something else entirely, so "Beyond My Ken" or "BMK" are appropriate appellations for addressing me here on Wikipedia.
http://web.archive.org/web/200805050002 ... Fitzgerald
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:33 pm

1) he's probably a sock of someone "important"
2) instead of digging up his past talkpage insults, summarize his Wikipedia history, especially his interests. More useful.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31695
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:42 pm

Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Kumioko » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:47 pm

Don't even get me started on BMK! He is just one of a growing number of Wikipedia editors who should be banned from the site for general assholery. He may be a decent editor but he has no sense of propriety, he's rude, he's a bully, he drives off new editors and is just generally a jerk. In the real world we refer to these individuals succinctly as "Losers".

User avatar
Captain Occam
Gregarious
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Captain Occam » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:49 pm

I'm not sure I see the connection. Are you saying you think Beyond my Ken is a sock of Ed Fitzgerald?

I've had several experiences with Beyond my Ken, and he does seem a lot like a bad-hand account, but I could never identify a specific sockmaster. If you think there's enough evidence that he's Ed Fitzgerald, you should try making an SPI report.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:53 pm

Captain Occam wrote:I've had several experiences with Beyond my Ken, and he does seem a lot like a bad-hand account, but I could never identify a specific sockmaster. If you think there's enough evidence that he's Ed Fitzgerald, you should try making an SPI report.
Don't be silly. An SPI would be a waste of time. He should post it here.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31695
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:53 pm

Captain Occam wrote:
I'm not sure I see the connection. Are you saying you think Beyond my Ken is a sock of Ed Fitzgerald?

I've had several experiences with Beyond my Ken, and he does seem a lot like a bad-hand account, but I could never identify a specific sockmaster. If you think there's enough evidence that he's Ed Fitzgerald, you should try making an SPI report.
Ed Fitzgerald is the previous (first?) account of BMK

At the risk of exposing some of my supar sekrit Durova(tm) sloothin' teckneeks.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Beyond_My_Ken
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Beyon ... My_history
3. http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.ph ... ext=Search
4. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: ... s_head.jpg
5. {{Information |Description={{en|1=The back of a middle-aged American man's head, showing typical male pattern baldness}} |Source=Own work by uploader |Author=Ed Fitzgerald |Date=13 September 2008 |Permission= |other_versions= }} <!
6. http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.ph ... &redlink=1
7. 14:52, 22 September 2011 EugeneZelenko (talk | contribs) moved page User:Ed Fitzgerald to User:Before My Ken (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Ed Fitzgerald" to "Before My Ken")

QED
Last edited by Vigilant on Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
mac
Banned
Posts: 845
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:21 am
Contact:

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by mac » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:53 pm

Captain Occam wrote:
I'm not sure I see the connection. Are you saying you think Beyond my Ken is a sock of Ed Fitzgerald?

I've had several experiences with Beyond my Ken, and he does seem a lot like a bad-hand account, but I could never identify a specific sockmaster. If you think there's enough evidence that he's Ed Fitzgerald, you should try making an SPI report.
07:19, 21 September 2011 Nihonjoe (talk | contribs) moved page User:Ed Fitzgerald to User:Before My Ken (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Ed Fitzgerald" to "Before My Ken")
The account was renamed.

[Edit: Here's the SPI.]
Last edited by mac on Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:54 pm

mac wrote:
07:19, 21 September 2011 Nihonjoe (talk | contribs) moved page User:Ed Fitzgerald to User:Before My Ken (Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Ed Fitzgerald" to "Before My Ken")
The account was renamed.
That's more like it!

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31695
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:03 pm

From the SPI page:
User:H_Debussy-Jones has also been censured dozens of times by the admins for violations of WP:OUTING, as can be seen here. While this is not direct evidence of sockpuppetry, I include it here to demonstrate that the admins were "on to him," so to speak, and thus he clearly had sufficient motive to evade detection by creating an alternate username in order to continue his non-neutral editing of pages related to his film and his associates. 2Misters (talk) 13:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

Edit: Just how many accounts has this guy had?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... 4#Response

Outing is bad.. mmmkay?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... ted_outing
Confirmed - the following accounts as being the same editor;

Beyond My Ken (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser (log))
H Debussy-Jones (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser (log))
Ed Fitzgerald (talk+ • tag • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL • checkuser (log))
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =340328779
{{resolved|Consensus not to impose any sanctions on Ed/BMK beside the status quo. Filer of the SPI and their socks blocked by {{admin|NuclearWarfare}} per Checkuser results in another SPI. User advised that in the future a private email to functionaries-en or arbcom is recommended for such situations. The SPIs will be closed in due course. [[User:Tim Song|Tim Song]] ([[User talk:Tim Song|talk]]) 13:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)}}
Someone has friends inside the WP power structure.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Captain Occam
Gregarious
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Captain Occam » Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:18 pm

I'm very curious to know what Cla68 thinks of this, seeing how much outing (combined with socking) other people have been able to get away with, contrasted with how little it took to get him indeffed.
Last edited by Captain Occam on Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Cla68 » Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:24 pm

Captain Occam wrote:I'm very curious to know what Cla68 thinks of this, seeing how much outing (combined with socking) other people have been able to get away with, contrasted with how little it took to get him indeffed.
I think BeyondMyKen may have trolled the discussions concerning my recent block. So, if he outed someone in the past, that definitely will be included in my after action report.

User avatar
Captain Occam
Gregarious
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Captain Occam » Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:35 pm

By "after action report" do you mean something you'll be sending to ArbCom, or just something you'll be posting here? After seeing how Beyond my Ken got away with doing several times more than what you got blocked for, I think he really ought to be under some sort of sanction. You'd probably have to wait until you're unblocked before you can expect ArbCom to listen to you about anything like this, though.

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Hex » Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:16 am

Well this thread is turning out to be unexpectedly lulzy, I must say.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12180
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:28 am

He seems to be a hardcore content writer, which gives him a right to be crabby, in my opinion.

http://toolserver.org/~tparis/pcount/in ... =wikipedia

Bit of a jackass, as are we all.


RfB
“I tell ya, it's a bit rich to see Silver seren post about the bad offsite people considering how prolific he was (is?) at WR.” —Mason, WPO, April 12, 2012

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Habitué
Posts: 1908
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:19 am
Wikipedia User: The Devil's Advocate

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by The Devil's Advocate » Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:46 am

Ahhh, Beyond My Ken, I only had one positive interaction with him, but it was fleeting. When I was brought up at AE back in 2011 the only admin to comment on the case said my statement was "tl;dr" (Too long; didn't read) and Ken interjected to object to such a response from an admin, but quickly removed the comment (he never explained why he backed off).

Since then I have mostly interacted with him in the context of his incessant activity as an ARS apologist, like when he accused me of bitchin' and moanin' at an ANI discussion about a recent AfD the ARS were canvassing and then trying to close that discussion.
Last edited by The Devil's Advocate on Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

"For those who stubbornly seek freedom around the world, there can be no more urgent task than to come to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination."

- Noam Chomsky


User avatar
mac
Banned
Posts: 845
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:21 am
Contact:

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by mac » Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:41 am

The Devil's Advocate wrote:[...]then trying to close that discussion.
Oops. It took some searching, so here's the link where BMK hatted the discussion.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Mar 21, 2013 5:11 am

Captain Occam wrote:By "after action report" do you mean something you'll be sending to ArbCom, or just something you'll be posting here? After seeing how Beyond my Ken got away with doing several times more than what you got blocked for, I think he really ought to be under some sort of sanction. You'd probably have to wait until you're unblocked before you can expect ArbCom to listen to you about anything like this, though.
I haven't decided the format and forum yet. By the way, I don't find this statement to be completely accurate. I have had one email from the ArbCom after I resumed contact, which basically said, "Stand by, we're discussing it and it may take a few weeks." I replied by letting them know that I currently have an outstanding Good Article review which took place while I was blocked and thus haven't been able to respond to yet, and that I was in the middle of preparing another article for FA submission. They did not respond. So, I don't find the statement "discussion with Cla68 is ongoing" to be very accurate. If someone is willing and able, perhaps they could post this paragraph to my user talk page and/or Timotheus Cannens' talk page?

User avatar
Kevin
Critic
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:56 am
Wikipedia User: Kevin
Wikipedia Review Member: Kevin
Actual Name: Kevin Godfrey
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Contact:

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Kevin » Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:31 pm

Cla68 wrote:
Captain Occam wrote:By "after action report" do you mean something you'll be sending to ArbCom, or just something you'll be posting here? After seeing how Beyond my Ken got away with doing several times more than what you got blocked for, I think he really ought to be under some sort of sanction. You'd probably have to wait until you're unblocked before you can expect ArbCom to listen to you about anything like this, though.
I haven't decided the format and forum yet. By the way, I don't find this statement to be completely accurate. I have had one email from the ArbCom after I resumed contact, which basically said, "Stand by, we're discussing it and it may take a few weeks." I replied by letting them know that I currently have an outstanding Good Article review which took place while I was blocked and thus haven't been able to respond to yet, and that I was in the middle of preparing another article for FA submission. They did not respond. So, I don't find the statement "discussion with Cla68 is ongoing" to be very accurate. If someone is willing and able, perhaps they could post this paragraph to my user talk page and/or Timotheus Cannens' talk page?
Done. And for good measure.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31695
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:43 pm

Kevin wrote:
Cla68 wrote:
Captain Occam wrote:By "after action report" do you mean something you'll be sending to ArbCom, or just something you'll be posting here? After seeing how Beyond my Ken got away with doing several times more than what you got blocked for, I think he really ought to be under some sort of sanction. You'd probably have to wait until you're unblocked before you can expect ArbCom to listen to you about anything like this, though.
I haven't decided the format and forum yet. By the way, I don't find this statement to be completely accurate. I have had one email from the ArbCom after I resumed contact, which basically said, "Stand by, we're discussing it and it may take a few weeks." I replied by letting them know that I currently have an outstanding Good Article review which took place while I was blocked and thus haven't been able to respond to yet, and that I was in the middle of preparing another article for FA submission. They did not respond. So, I don't find the statement "discussion with Cla68 is ongoing" to be very accurate. If someone is willing and able, perhaps they could post this paragraph to my user talk page and/or Timotheus Cannens' talk page?
Done. And for good measure.
How about it Worm That Turned?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:15 pm

Vigilant wrote:
Kevin wrote:
Cla68 wrote:
Captain Occam wrote:By "after action report" do you mean something you'll be sending to ArbCom, or just something you'll be posting here? After seeing how Beyond my Ken got away with doing several times more than what you got blocked for, I think he really ought to be under some sort of sanction. You'd probably have to wait until you're unblocked before you can expect ArbCom to listen to you about anything like this, though.
I haven't decided the format and forum yet. By the way, I don't find this statement to be completely accurate. I have had one email from the ArbCom after I resumed contact, which basically said, "Stand by, we're discussing it and it may take a few weeks." I replied by letting them know that I currently have an outstanding Good Article review which took place while I was blocked and thus haven't been able to respond to yet, and that I was in the middle of preparing another article for FA submission. They did not respond. So, I don't find the statement "discussion with Cla68 is ongoing" to be very accurate. If someone is willing and able, perhaps they could post this paragraph to my user talk page and/or Timotheus Cannens' talk page?
Done. And for good measure.
How about it Worm That Turned?
Thanks Kevin. ArbCom, if you have any further concerns, I am available to discuss them with you. All you have to do is ask. I still haven't received any further emails. Why don't we use my user talk page where everyone can see our discussion? (Someone please post this to my user talk page)

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Kumioko » Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:38 pm

A few weeks? God made the Earth in seven days and although I think we can all agree that the Arbcom is far from that lofty level, a week seems more reasonable.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31695
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:08 am

And there's prioryman, right on cue.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by EricBarbour » Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:36 am

:yecch: -_-

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:48 am

Cla68 wrote:
Vigilant wrote:
Kevin wrote:
Cla68 wrote:
Captain Occam wrote:By "after action report" do you mean something you'll be sending to ArbCom, or just something you'll be posting here? After seeing how Beyond my Ken got away with doing several times more than what you got blocked for, I think he really ought to be under some sort of sanction. You'd probably have to wait until you're unblocked before you can expect ArbCom to listen to you about anything like this, though.
I haven't decided the format and forum yet. By the way, I don't find this statement to be completely accurate. I have had one email from the ArbCom after I resumed contact, which basically said, "Stand by, we're discussing it and it may take a few weeks." I replied by letting them know that I currently have an outstanding Good Article review which took place while I was blocked and thus haven't been able to respond to yet, and that I was in the middle of preparing another article for FA submission. They did not respond. So, I don't find the statement "discussion with Cla68 is ongoing" to be very accurate. If someone is willing and able, perhaps they could post this paragraph to my user talk page and/or Timotheus Cannens' talk page?
Done. And for good measure.
How about it Worm That Turned?
Thanks Kevin. ArbCom, if you have any further concerns, I am available to discuss them with you. All you have to do is ask. I still haven't received any further emails. Why don't we use my user talk page where everyone can see our discussion? (Someone please post this to my user talk page)
Apparently that ain't gonna happen.
This is not a signature.

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Ken you believe it?

Unread post by Hex » Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:57 am

Ken we move the Cla/ArbCom stuff to an appropriate thread please mods?
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

Post Reply