User talk:Cassianto/Archive 7

Welcome back!

	Welcome back!
	A toast to your return, my friend! We hope (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks We hope. It's Friday and I shall enjoy just that! Cassianto^Talk 19:13, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

"Nun lob, mein Seel, den Herren", and thanks for improving BWV 29. I am expanding to go for GA, and Dr. Blofeld seemed ready for a review, but ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		for suggesting that all should not respond to baiting, not just admins. But admins should since they have the blocking tool Wowee Zowee public (talk) 20:43, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks, but admins would not be allowed to use their tools if it were a personal thing. They would have to go elsewhere to ask someone else as otherwise it could be seen as a conflict of interests. If they did sort their problem out themselves, I would be asking questions. Cassianto^Talk 20:46, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Enthiran/archive2

I have opened the 2nd PR as the article's first FAC is withdrawn due to MoS issues. Feel free to leave comments. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 14:35, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Margaret Bondfield

Last year you kindly contributed to the above article's peer review or or FAC or both. An issue has arisen from yesterday's TFA appearance, and is under discussion on the article's talk. Briefly: an editor added into the text the cited information that Bondfield's was privately known as "Maggie", and then incorporated this into the lead so the subject appeared as Margaret Grace ("Maggie") Bondfield. I have removed the nickname from the lead, and stated my position on the talkpage. I would be pleased if you could visit and briefly comment there. Brianboulton (talk) 16:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

The Tower House

I've just lost all my bloody responses to you in an edit conflict! KJP1 (talk) 16:16, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't panic, go back one and copy and paste. Cassianto^Talk 16:17, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Think it worked. KJP1 (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Thankyou for your input into the peer review. The article is now at FAC. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:09, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Very much appreciate your input into the article and your Support. KJP1 (talk) 05:56, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

LALD

Hi Cass, Many thanks for your thoughts on Live and Let Die at the recent peer review. The article is now at FAC for wider consideration should you wish to comment further once the spurious block expires. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Free for a PR?

Hi Cass, You were kind enough to comment at PR and FAC on Casino Royale; could I ask for a similar favour for the next instalment of the Bond series: Live and Let Die, which is now at PR? Any thoughts or comments would be greatly appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 11:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Whatever happened to "uninvolved" re: blocks? We hope (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Nowt surprises me round here any more! We've all seen much, much worse going on and no action taken, but if t's someone who has an opposing opinion to you, it's aneasy decision to take, - SchroCat (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

So I'm being accused of being a racist now am I [1]? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:02, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

And Cass was sent to solitary for saying he did not intend the comment to be racist. We hope (talk) 21:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Sledgehammer, nut, censorship, loss of perspective by an involved admin. Hands up who is surprised.... No? No takers? - SchroCat (talk) 21:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

So Galadriel also blocked you Cass from editing your own page. Whatever happened to Freedom of Speech and NOT censored? The way some of them operate on here is as if they were trained in the Republic of Wadiya!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes they did, although personally speaking, I didn't give a toss as I was on holiday anyway. As far as Gamaliel is concerned I will retain my thoughts on him/her as an "editor"; suffice to say, I don't like them very much. Cassianto^Talk 08:59, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

prose skills....

If you've got some free time - a look over the smoothness of the prose of either Telopea oreades or Corona Borealis, both of which are at FAC but moving slowly, would be much appreciated...sometimes I find that retrospectively when reviews are slow it's because the prose might have put folks off......cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:26, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Will do Cas. I'll take a skim through over the next day or two. Cassianto^Talk 17:08, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Much appreciated. cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:18, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Enthiran FAC 2.0

I have opened the 2nd FAC for the article. Please do let me know if you would like to make any comments. Thanks. — Ssven2 ^{Speak 2 me} 02:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Eyes requested

In a bold spirit of cooperation, might I impose upon you to take a peek at my first article? I caught a red-link on the Hemi page, and created an article on the red-linked Fiat 130 HP Grand Prix racer. It's not in depth, or anything - I just want to ensure that I have made no egregious mistakes. Thanks in advance! ScrapIronIV (talk) 19:21, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

I'd be happy to. Cars are a passion of mine and Fiat are a vert good company. I'll post comments on the talk page. Can you give me a day or so? Cassianto^Talk 20:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your detailed evaluation. I believe I have addressed all of your recommendations and concerns with the article, and it should be fairly stable now. I did leave a red link for another model Fiat in the article, and plan to create that soon, assuming that this one is finished. Do you have any other thoughts to offer? ScrapIronIV (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for adding further comment. I have made all of the changes you suggested, and made a couple of minor additions. I appreciate the time and effort you put into it; you and Gerda have made me feel welcome to the project. ScrapIronIV (talk) 16:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Any time. Cassianto^Talk 18:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Question on online sources

Just a quick question about WP:BLP sources. If an online source is no longer available (taken down by the site) then what is to be done with the assertions that are attributed to it? The original information was supplied in a .pdf on the subject's website, and is no longer available. As the individual is an entertainer, the only replacement sources I have been able to find are from entertainment sites, and I have been told that those are unacceptable sources. Thanks for your advice! ScrapIronIV (talk) 20:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @ScrapIronIV: Is the source archived at Internet Archive or a similar service? Could the information be found in offline sources? Is the information valuable enough to warrant inclusion? Those are all questions to ask in this situation; without knowing which article and which material you're referring to, I can't answer them. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:57, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. We are talking place of birth, education, family history - all of which was single sourced to the subject's interview with a magazine, and released on .pdf on their website. It has since been taken removed; as it was a .pdf, the Internet Archive does not help. It would be a net negative to lose that information. But as we are talking a Bollywood actress, biographical information is usually just regurgitated Wikipedia data on blogs and fan sites. Occasionally it is new material, but simple additions - such as adding a birth date - are regularly rejected as coming from "Bollywood gossip" sites. If the data is lost, and no longer verifiable, what do we do with the information that was sourced to it? ScrapIronIV (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, first we would want to check that the data is actually lost - are you talking about this PDF? Even if it isn't archived online, a subject's interview with a magazine is verifiable and can be cited, it just requires a bit of work to track down the original citation details. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

It looks like my research skills need to be improved. Thank you very much for finding it. I have spent a couple of hours on it, got to the archives of the magazine, and it appeared to be gone there, too. But I went to the Internet Archive, and got a 404 error on the 2011 date... I wonder what I did wrong. This is where mentoring would help. Both Cassianto and Gerda were quite helpful in my last endeavor; thank you so much for helping out and going above and beyond. ScrapIronIV (talk) 21:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks for your replies Nikki. ScrapIron, you're welcome to ask for advice here anytime; as you can see from Nikki, if I don't get to answer someone else will. If you want you can also email me and I'll give you the names of some other editors who are excellent in their knowledge and who are very approachable. I'll even tell you some who you should perhaps keep away from. Cassianto^Talk 22:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, Cassianto. I spent a long time lurking before dipping my oars into the water here, and then there were bad first impressions. I have learned a few to stay away from, and I am pleasantly surprised at how mistaken I was of others. At this point, I am trying to take things more slowly, assess more, act less quickly. Like my Army days, it's a question of rules, not emotions. I am learning to be more rules-oriented again. I think the most important thing for me to succeed here will be to stay away from subjects I am passionate about. That, and realizing that I just may be wrong sometimes - to admit it, learn and move on. At my age, that's not as easy as it used to be. So, I will stick to things I know very little about, learn more about research and sourcing, and actually try to contribute - not "promote" or "defend." ScrapIronIV (talk) 14:35, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Albert Chevalier, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richmond (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

New PR request

Hi Cass, I have recently been working on the Burning of Parliament, which is now at PR for comment. Any input you could have would be much appreciated. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 20:02, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I was reading this today actually and it all looked very interesting. I shall pop along shortly Cassianto^Talk 20:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry for insulting you, I am going to say sorry to every user that I insulted, please accept my apologies int he link bellow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Floquenbeam#Sorry_for_everything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HondaS2200fan (talk • contribs) 17:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I have absolutely no idea who you are. Cassianto^Talk 19:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I got the same post. I think it's this guy: User talk:Doorknob747. Talk page is a mess. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:11, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that makes sense.. Thanks for clearing that one up! Cassianto^Talk 19:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

UKIP and Moors murderer

Can you tell me why you reverted my sourced edit with the edit summary 'no, I don't think so'? AusLondonder (talk) 20:08, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Because it's not relevent. That's why. Cassianto^Talk 20:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Why do you get to decide that? AusLondonder (talk) 20:22, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

AusLondonder, if you check the article talk page you will see someone already left a note about it with the comment it was not sufficiently notable to be mentioned. Hi, Cassianto! SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:20, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

I added it before the person left the note. AusLondonder (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't get to decide anything, it gets decided through a discussion; one, in which you will hold a minority view in I suspect. Hi Phil 👋 . Cassianto^Talk 20:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The note I've linked was added on 27 April; I believe the edit actually adding it was done in the last hour or so? Anyway, I see the discussion is now on the article talk page. Diary note: outstanding theatre date ... SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed. Things have been a bit hectic of late, but I plan to get there this weekend. I'll meet you at the entrance! -- Cassianto^Talk 20:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks so much for the kind message and the barnstar - you made my day!  Helenabella (Talk)  08:45, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Fiat 130 HP

You once asked me what my intentions were with this article, and I never responded. What would be the next step to improve it, maybe get it up to GA status? Scr★pIron^IV 19:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Is it as comprehensive as it can be? If it is, I would suggest WP:GAN. Cassianto^Talk 19:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

It is as comprehensive as the sources I have available to me can make it. There is, unfortunately, not an awful lot of material I can find on it. I will take a look over at WP:GAN - I have never visted that part of Wikipedia. Scr★pIron^IV 19:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I'd flesh out the lead section a bit and make it a bit longer. It should be a summary of the whole article. I wouldn't go over two paragraphs if I were you. Also, check and compare it with other GA car articles and copy headers etc. that will give you an indication on what is missing. Cassianto^Talk 19:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!

I think the Nielsen photo issues are the most difficult image problem I've had to try solving. With the requirement for dual licensing, if you have the requirements for one license, you don't for the other. I managed to get a photo from a HathiTrust book last night which is PD in the US-so that can be our "if all else fails" choice, and I see that the Nielsen Museum has uploaded some CC acceptable licensed photos to Flickr.

If I stay away from those picturing his wife's sculpture (copyright concerns), I should be able to upload some of them to Commons; they can "flesh out" the article if needed. I realize the other photos should be included in the article, but with the deadline looming large, there's just not enough time for someone to contact the Museum and the Danish Royal Library to ask about OTRS. There's nothing stopping anyone from trying to get approval on the photos after the Featured Article decision has been made and to include any approved at a later time. Think that someone like Crisco, who hasn't uploaded any photos and isn't a main editor of the article, should make any photo removal decisions which might be necessary. Anyone who says WP has no deadlines isn't involved with the Carl Neilsen FAC! :-D We hope (talk) 13:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Re:Palmyra

Hi Cassianto. I didn't add any substantial information to the Palmyra article. I believe it was an anon editor who added the unsourced ISIS sentence in the history section. I just did a few minor copyedits throughout the article in order to improve the flow and readability. Regards. Gizza ^(t)(c) 07:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

In any case, I'd agree with you removing the addition even if it was referenced. Mentioning the current situation in two different sections is clearly a case of WP:UNDUE recentism, especially for a city with a history as ancient as Palmyra. Gizza ^(t)(c) 08:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

My apologies, yes I see that now. However, it shouldn't have been copy edited in the first place and should've simply been removed altogether. Cassianto^Talk 11:07, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Fair point. I will look more carefully at the sourcing whenever I copyedit an article (particularly a GA or above) in the future. :) Gizza ^(t)(c) 11:52, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Cheers for WP:ASG and it's nice to meet you. Cassianto^Talk 11:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Reversions Ian Fleming

The information that you, so kindly revised!, was new source material, I have now sourced this CORRECT information to the best of my ability (not being an html pro) and as such information is not simply avaliable at a simple web link! so don't go randomly revoking good peoples' work! Tad102 (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, It was not "random"; I am a co-author of the article and so it is therefore on my watch list. Secondly, the "revised" [sic] information you are trying to add is just fluff and maybe contrary to the primary source. Thirdly, if you are unsure of the correct format, then you should ask first on the talk page then add in the correct format. Fourthly, don't come to my talk page and be pointy as it wins you no favours. Based on all that, you have again been reverted. Thanks. Cassianto^Talk 18:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Proverbs 12:15, you should read it!Tad102 (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't need to, but I suggest you read this. Cassianto^Talk 19:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Very constructive, sums you up basically!

Perhaps, Tad102, you should withdraw from this threaad if you're only going to post pointy messages. As to the cause of this - the edits to the Fleming article - Cassianto did right in reverting: they were not an improvement. - SchroCat (talk) 19:07, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you, SchroCat should mind your own business, besides Cassianto can easily delete this thread like deleting everything else i've contributed!Tad102 (talk) 19:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you should stop now before you make a bigger fool of yourself than you have already. Cassianto deleted what was poor, that is all, If it had been good, he would not have deleted it. - SchroCat (talk) 19:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Absolutley. ScrapIronIV, I'd add one more to list two if I were you! 😉 Cassianto^Talk 19:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

• Is the irony that the editor didn't heed Proverbs 12:15 lost on anyone? No? Good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• LOL - a good point, well made I think! - SchroCat (talk) 09:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• ...The diffrence is Chris I actually gave an apt proverb within the link I provided, but the truth hurt somewhat I think. Cassianto^Talk 10:52, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• Indeed. ;)  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Bligh

Good evening (or morning, or night), Cassianto, how are you? All well I hope. This is a note to let you know that Mutiny on the Bounty, on which Brian and I have been working over the past month or so, is now up at peer review here. Any contributions you might care to make would be more than welcome if you can find the time. Cheers and all the best, —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Most certainly, it would be a pleasure. I will be across shortly... Cassianto^Talk 10:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello Cassianto—just another note to let you know as a peer reviewer that the article is now at FAC here. Thanks again for all your help so far and I hope you're well. —  Cliftonian (talk)  01:58, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Certainly nothing else from me so I shall wave a flag of support there shortly. Cassianto^Talk 10:40, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Lekker, thanks, cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:21, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Interested in reviewing a GAN?

Just put up Ahmed Zayat. Entertaining character, racehorse owner and entrepreneur. Owns American Pharoah. Montanabw^(talk) 07:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi Montanabw, and thanks for thinking of me. Unfortunaly, I'm on holiday until at least 20th June so I'm not terribly active what with Internet access being incredibly intermittant. If it can wait until I'm back, then I'd love to! Cassianto^Talk 08:43, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps one of your stalkers on this page may be interested! Or if no bites by the time you get back, I can promise to fix all fixes in time to make the next wikicup deadline! Montanabw^(talk) 16:22, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Nobody stalks me, I'm far to boring! LoL. I can do a little review there this week on the talk in preparation for a speedy nomination for when I get back if you like. How does that work for you? Please bear in mind that I have only ever reviewed one article for GAN in the last 6 years or so, so I maybe a little slow on the technical side of things. Cassianto^Talk 18:05, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I stalk, but I am not qualified to do the job. And in truth, I've reverted to gnoming, after seeing what has been done to EC this past week. I'm just not certain I really want to be part of a culture that treats is citizens as Wikipedia does. I've met some good folks, but the bad ones make me paranoid. I would hate to put my heart and soul into this as a hobby, only to have it taken away at the whim of... well, whoever decides I don't "think right" or "talk right." Scr★pIron^IV 18:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not here to be treated well by everybody as it's wikipedia, few people really give a shit even if you promote articles to FA and the more content you produce the more grief you get at times. You might get the odd thanks, but it's mostly a negative environment. I contribute primarily for me and the massive potential I see. If it's not enjoyable to you to edit and you can't largely ignore the negative comments and assholes which exist on here then there's little to keep you here. The benefits of content and passion for building it has to outweigh the bad. But we all know why Eric is treated as he is, so don't let that be the reason to stop contributing here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Blofeld, ans speaking of the negatives, anyone want to buy popcorn and watch the show over at Mustang, which has been under full protection for a week or two and is going off later today or early tomorrow (depending on your time zone). I honestly cannot figure out how to get two tendentious editors I'm dealing with there to chill out. They both think I am totally evil and I've gotten snappish at them, for sure, but I have no interest in letting anyone run me off of an article (in nine years, I've never backed down from a fight). I know the usual advice is to ignore or walk away, but I've always believed that doing that leaves the field to the trolls. Sooner or later you have to dig in and stand up for something. Problem is, the person on point sure takes a lot of flak. Montanabw^(talk) 04:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Dr. Blofeld, I am not a tenditious editor and I do appreciate your work - just wanted you to know that. Secondly, Montanabw, you've been on WP long enough to know that casting aspersions is actionable whether you name the editors or not. It's easy enough to find out who you are referring to and I take issue with your incivility. I have never had the opportunity to collaborate with Blofeld, Cassianto, you or the other nameless editor you referred to but you are poisoning the well. Perhaps if you had taken a different approach, I would have been happy to review the GAN for you. Please get that attitude adjusted and AGF. Thank you. --Atsme^📞📧 13:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

(watching, yes, Cassianto, one of your fans): The article is already under review, and, ScrapIronIV, Eric just patiently waits for that block to go away, I just wait for my parole to go away - only 6 more months minus 2 days ;) - try to take the negative easy and build content, - I have a friend who wrote me IGNORE IGNORE IGNORE once, and it really helps, - I enjoyed the ride on an article with you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:14, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Atsme, you are not welcome here so kindly sling your hook. Cassianto^Talk 17:57, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Just wanted to say THANK YOU for popping by. I have found that having four or five consistent watchers who are basically neutral on the article topic is often very useful. There is potential for collaboration occcurring at the article now and I am cautiously optimistic. Please - Cassianto and all stalkers - do continue to keep an eye on things? Thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 20:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

You're more than welcome Montanabw. I've added it to my ever-extending watch list and I shall keep an eye out for any skullduggery taking place. I see the good Doctor is now taking care of the GAN, but if I can ever help in the future I'd be glad to help. Cassianto^Talk 21:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Beer O'clock

	Time for a beer award
	Time for a nice cold beer, I'd say. Winter has hit hard here and it is 7 C...so I am drinking a guiness. But I do like Hoegaarden and I saw this picture....curious... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

You're very kind Cas. I've never been partial to a Guinness really; I have tried Hoegaarden so it fits in well with my current destination. Ching, Ching! Cassianto^Talk 09:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Now I remember why I seldom go near AN/I. By the time I'd included one post and started to move down to the latest nonsense, then battled with edit conflicts and my appalling internet connection, the thread had been closed! Do any of the regulars there actually do much content work? Seems not ...

Cas: it's barely 10 degrees here (it's supposed to be summer) and that isn't allowing for the wind chill factor! I must bear in mind this isn't a social network, so I'll try to decide whether to do some more work on our latest feminist, have a stroll through the components of a fascinating building or do some more expansion on an interesting character. And I'll have some Chardonnay or a gin and tonic, please. SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:00, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

It sounds lovely SP. there certainly is no place like home. Cassianto^Talk 20:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I wish User:Baseball Bugs and co would take a leaf out of Casliber and Sagaciousphil's book and focus more on content and showing goodwill to others instead of attacking people. Sagacious your work increasingly impresses me!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I wish Baseball Bugs would just dissapear altogether, personally. Cassianto^Talk 20:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

There are many users of Wikipedia who are here to do nothing but comment on others. In a way it's probably for the best as they are utterly incompetent when it comes to writing encyclopedic articles. Best they confine themselves to "safe" areas of the project where they achieve and leave nothing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I am so jealous. Take photos. Australia is so goddamn far from anywhere...my son wanted to go see a castle...and the closest castley-looking thing is Borobudur....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:27, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Stubs

Cassianto, please find me 10 missing articles on Saint Barthélemy I can put up on the Intertranswiki board. I'll need your help stubbing a few of course :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:12, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll give it a go Doc! Cassianto^Talk 20:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

LoL, you do know I'm only here one more day? Cassianto^Talk 14:32, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you could nick a flower from Andromeda Gardens today then which I started back in 2006!?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

John Grimek and actual content creation

I know you are on vacation (and I do hope you are having a marvelous time!) but if you think of it, I cam across some information about John Grimek, and am looking to improve his article. It is an area I am personally unfamiliar with, and would appreciate collaborating again with you on some article content. The biggest challenges I am facing are image acquisition Strength & Health magazine covers were used in the past, but deleted in 2007 for fair use counter example #8. As he was the subject of (multiple) covers of that magazine and was also its editor, I think it might actually be appropriate. I went into the article's history, and the fact that he was also the magazine's editor was not taken into account when the image was deleted. The other issue I am coming across is that articles on this subject are often blogs or personal histories, and the only biography I know of his life was published in England, and out of print now. Personal histories may work; I have an electronic copy of the Iron Game History issue from which was dedicated to his life after his passing, and induction to the IBFF Hall of Fame. Scr★pIron^IV 14:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Jack Bologna

Grazie caro Cassianto! (I hope you don't mind me removing your kind welcome message to avoid misunderstandings - I prefer to contribute as a gf logged-out editor). Regarding Jack Bologna, I was intrigued to find out where he and his family emigrated from. According to Dickens's Memoirs of Joseph Grimaldi (primary/secondary sourcing?) they moved to London from Genova. Best, 109.146.70.40 (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Do as you will, but the sentiment still remains. Bologna moved all over the place and I do seem to remember Genova being mentioned in Dickens somewhere. If you want to add anything though, please do add the source and correctly format it. Cheers Cassianto^Talk 21:04, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

The format is that used on the Joseph Grimaldi page, which is an FA; I've now fixed the link, using Google Books for ease of consultation. I've also found a secondary source regarding the description of their friendship in the memoirs, which I'll add in. 109.146.70.40 (talk) 21:18, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

RE [2] How not a benefit??? I have serious backache irl, and now give up. 109.146.70.40 (talk) 21:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Having it as "Further reading" tells us nothing; it is merely a plug for the book. If you have access to the book, cite some info from it and weave it I nto the article. Then add it to the "sources" section. Re Grimaldi, I authored it and had it pass FA, so I know the links to Bologna. I saw your edit and agree with it. Cassianto^Talk 21:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

In the circumstances, I think what I'll probably do is make a comment on the talk page, with a secondary RS, and then leave it to you (or whoever). 109.146.70.40 (talk) 08:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Good idea. Cassianto^Talk 18:28, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

The Duke of Hamilton

I was going to ask if you were interested in expanding this I just started but as Stronzo blocked you I guess not.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:34, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Your talk page protection is being discussed at WP:ANI

Just for clarity, and out of politeness, your talk page being protected, and then unprotected, is being discussed at WP:ANI, at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Chillum overstepping reasonable boundaries of adminship. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

While you're on the beach...

Evening Cass, Tim riley and I have been working on P.G. Wodehouse and have now launched him on both the main page and now at PR. If you have time when you're back from the beach, or inclination, your thoughts would be much appreciated. Pip pip! – SchroCat (talk) 21:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

You're damn right I have the inclination! He was a great author, one of the best in fact! Hopefully, the PR will still be open by the time I get back. As you know from my gloating email earlier, I'm seldom in one place for very long at the moment and WiFi is a bit rubbish to say the least. I have started reading it nonetheless and will meet you at either PR or FAC in a week or so. Cassianto^Talk 14:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Tantrums and Tomfoolery

== User conduct == Hello, Recently it's been brought to my attention that there are some concerns about your recent conduct. Please take the time to review the civility policy and become familiar with the expected level of conduct towards other users. Thanks, Mike V • Talk 22:45, 8 June 2015 (UTC) What a tedious and patronising little comment... Perhaps the editor who's whining to you on your talk page should do something useful instead? – SchroCat (talk) 22:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC) Oh no, I'm quaking in my boots here!!! Listen, Mike V, why don't you and your teacher's pet go and do some good somewhere, like actually review a GA or write a few stubs? You know, somewhere where you're appreciated? Because let me tell you, your not appreciated here. CassiantoTalk 05:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC) oh, and since you're here, why don't you go and do something about the ganging up at RfA a few days ago; a place where I have never been before and one which I decided to visit to have my say over who becomes an admin or not. I see Chillum is reluctant to recognise the incident, so maybe you could. In fact, here's a coincidence! Your complainant was one of those admins! My point in turning up at ANI was that I am sick of watching those who couldn't give a toss about article creation and who care more about how to be lovely to one another, becoming admins. Once they have the tools they ignore article writing (in NeilN's case he never started), and then choose instead to loiter around ANI ready to console whinging editors who complain about incivility during content disputes. Having wrapped the complainant up in cotton wool, they then turn up at the featured article writer's talk page, eager to administer their first block. The result is that they then gain the necessary criteria to enter the Administrator's Mess and guffaw with their fellow newbies over a glass of malt. Now obviously, that doesn't apply to every admin, but for the large majority, unfortunately. I and other content writers feel the same about this, but nobody bothers to ask us how we feel. CassiantoTalk 05:44, 9 June 2015 (UTC) Please be careful here, Cass. This is the same guy that blocked me for edit warring with LB, and didn't seem to bother with looking at the actual edit history. I made one edit after notification of Discretionary Sanctions, and got a pretty little permanent black mark on my record. I did not break 3RR, but got the same block LB did for her 6th revert. Obviously does not know what it is like to actually create content, and have to work with other editors without the "tools" to back him up. Not even remotely familiar with the current environment. Scr★pIronIV 13:31, 9 June 2015 (UTC) I'm well aware who this person is. Unfortunately, he's implicated himself by rocking up on my talk page on the behalf of a troublemaker who felt the need to run to an admin when he could've challenged me here himself. All this because I wasn't allowed an opinion and didn't conform to the sycophancy which went on at NeilN's RfA. CassiantoTalk 14:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC) Please stop with the persistent uncivil comments, such as this. Further instances will result in a block. Mike V • Talk 16:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC) What a ridiculous threat to make over a nothing comment. Move on and try and be constructive for goodness sake: this smacks of some petty harassment over something so minor. - SchroCat (talk) 16:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

And how else is supposed to respond to being called a troll? I notice that you have not made a similar comment/warning on that user's page. Or is something else going on here? Scr★pIron^IV 16:32, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

The reason I called you a troll was entirely due to your own throwaway disparaging remark about FP@S's so-called 'conduct.' Allegations, like edits, need to be sourced. Diffs are RS. Your remark it amounted to nothing more than a personal attack therefore = trolling. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:36, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

He made no accusation, or allegation. He asked a question. Learn the difference. What you read into his comment says more about you than what he actually wrote. Scr★pIron^IV 16:39, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

No. He said "why am I not surprised by this editor's conduct.'" No question-mark. Just a full stop. Period. All I read was what was there. As should you. You failure do so- somewhat ironically- does indeed "more about you " than anything else. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 16:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

You can assume what you want to assume Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi, frankly, I couldn't give a toss. What I do care about is you coming to my talk page and causing trouble. Now kindly fuck off. Cassianto^Talk 18:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

With pleasure, cunt, and I'll leave you to finish yourself off _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 18:30, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

• Now Mike Vcalling someone a cunt does deserve a block: can you step up and take action against this editor? – SchroCat (talk) 18:43, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Personal attacks

I have blocked Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi for personal attacks here. The behaviour others here have not been much better. Further personal attack blocks can be handed out if people are not able to converse without resorting to childish name calling. Chillum 18:54, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Cassianto, I have blocked your account for 48 hours for persistent personal attacks towards others. I have also revoked your talk page access since you have used it to continue to make inappropriate comments. If you wish, you may appeal your block through UTRS. Mike V • Talk 18:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Why are you conducting half of this email conversation on-wiki? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

There's something distinctly creepy whenever somebody does that. I don't see the point in doing it other than to humiliate somebody.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:56, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

This is not the peanut gallery. If you wish to discuss this with me you can do it on my talk page. Chillum 22:17, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure you have any right to tell people where they can and cannot comment, especially as it's about actions on this page. – SchroCat (talk) 00:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Quite, and conducting half a conversation on wiki is really not on. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

And now the same admin has protected the page to prevent further discussion as to the odd and one-sided behaviour. This behaviour is getting worse by the minute. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:09, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

@Mike V: The blocking policy says that disabling a user's access to their talk page "is not checked by default, and typically should not be checked; editing of the user's talk page should be disabled only in the case of continued abuse of the talk page" (emphasis mine). As such, I'm going to restore Cassianto's access—leaving the block in place—before I go to bed tonight unless you have a policy-based objection. Best, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

And I've now done so. Cassianto, please don't continue the same behavior and make me look like a fool. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:27, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

In terms of my "behaviour" I shall change nothing. If someone trolls me, I am entitled to tell them to fuck off. Don't worry, my reasons for not posting here - or anywhere in fact - is because I am on holiday. The only "behaviour" that should be in question is that of Chillum and MikeV. As I've said previously Ed, thank you, and that goes to all others who have supported me through this. Cassianto^Talk 08:41, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Possible subject of interest

Thought you might be interested in the ongoing discussion about sock-puppetry and ip-falsifying software at Impact of paid editors and false ip software on admin elections

Cheers,

Scott P. (talk) 00:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the thought, but as I've stated elsewhere, RfA is for those not wishing to improve the encyclopaedia and is instead geared for massaging egos and adding to sycophancy. For those reasons I shall decline your invitation. Cassianto^Talk 11:37, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Phew!

I briefly thought Wikipedia had been taken over by Himmler or Pol Pot. Glad to see you're now acknowledged again as existing. Meanwhile, P. G. Wodehouse is at PR, courtesy of self and another old lag. All comments gladly received once you're back from your break. Tim riley talk 20:35, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

The full-protection of this page was certainly debatable and has been reverted, but that sort of analogy is distasteful. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Distasteful but close to the mark in this context. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Tim and TRM. Wodehouse is on my "to do" list. Cassianto^Talk 11:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

But not for four hours right? ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:54, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Peanut Gallery

Not another peanut gallery... Time for another lock! ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:49, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

More skullduggery?

Mike V and Chillum, is there a reason as to why I'm still blocked and Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi is allowed to edit here?. That's funny, I didn't see an appeal? Chillum continues to make the rules up as he goes along, why am I not surprised? Cassianto^Talk 16:40, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Because of this rather second-rate decision that absolutely stinks! Some have never been able to play straight.... – SchroCat (talk) 16:51, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Mates rates. Chillum, why don't you share Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi's email asking for the block to be removed? Presumably that must've happened? Cassianto^Talk 17:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure why you are pinging me or what this has to do with you. I blocked a user for personal attacks and this user responded in a mature fashion that led me to believe the block was not preventative any more. Are you suggesting that I should not reverse my own blocks without some sort of special process? Chillum 19:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

We all know how to avoid being blocked for too long for being displaying obnoxious behaviour in calling someone a cunt. Good work! - SchroCat (talk) 19:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm pinging you because it involves you Chillum. Please don't make me have to explain that to you. Cassianto^Talk 20:01, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

If you think my unblock was inappropriate you are welcome on my talk page or if you prefer you can seek a wider review. Chillum 20:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Your justification for unblocking FIM was flawed and without justification. I noticed you said on your talk page "nobody likes to be refused an unblock request", referring to me. Let's get this clear: I wasn't refused and I never asked to be unblocked. Where do you get your facts from? Cassianto^Talk 20:47, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Precious again

This user has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian on 21 June 2012.

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Anybody else see the irony? ;) -- Cassianto^Talk 14:08, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Irony is part of this game and was mentioned - sort of - three years ago already, just click on the date for a feeling of the good old days, then "life's mundane subjects, mixed with comic songs and surreal observations", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Bless you, Gerda. The current situation at ANI is certainly mundane and mixed with surreal observations. Funny how life imitates art. Cassianto^Talk 14:18, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

(ec) I came to say about the same about the arb case in which I was found guilty of systematically adding content ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Your Contribution

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I have seen that you have contributed a lot to article creation. But please don't use swear/indecent words in talk pages. And don't see blocks as punishment. Even @SchroCat: has made huge contribution to articles. Joking/taunts without any cuss words can be allowed if they are not personal attacks. You see movies have ratings like PG-13, Universal according to profanity. It's not nice that two valuable contributors of Wikipedia will have such block logs. I think you know how to deal with such users WP:DNFTT WP:DNIV. You are blocked mostly for personal attacks, Schrocat for Edit Warring. Problem is that during Edit War, administrators don't check which side is correct WP:CIRCUS. You know you are right and the other user is wrong, but still the administrator will give warnings to both of you. Due to 3-revert rule if you revert for 4th time, you will be blocked, even if you have improved the article. Administrators can't be expected to have knowledge about every field from Arts, Sports, History, Geography, Science, Movies, Commerce, Crime, Technology, Politics, Economics and pass their judgement: "This edit is correct, that edit is correct".

I also hope you won't abuse me back for writing this on your talk page. --Cosmic  Emperor  07:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I really don't care who you are, but don't ping me and lecture me: You'll get an earful next time you do. Word of advice: don't try and stir up fucking trouble when it's all caling down: it will only ever piss people off and get them riled, especially when it's nothing to do with you. - SchroCat (talk) 07:10, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

• In my ten years or so on the project, my experience has been that people with the user name "Emperor" or "King" more often than not only meet that descriptor in their "Holier than Thou" attitude. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't know why you think you're qualified to come here and start offering me your sage advice. I don't care for it and even if I did, then I certainly wouldn't be asking it from you. Your sole intention here is to stir up trouble, and I had enough of that yesterday. I've never heard of you and I can only assume you're trying to troll me again. This arguement died a death yesterday so I'd kindly ask for you to go away and do something more constructive with your time. That would of course be the more polite way of telling you to fuck off. Cassianto^Talk 08:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Welcome back

Hope you're well, glad to see things cooling down around here. The offer still stands, if you need assistance in the future with disruptive editors than please drop me a line, there's much we can do. Meanwhile, where's that beer? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

All's good and thanks for the offer. There was a bit of stupidity earlier, but they soon crawled back under the stone they came from. That beer is chilling in a tap near me. We'll sort something out soon. Cassianto^Talk 21:38, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Just stop

Please stop taking every chance you get to argue with me and others on my talk page. It seems when one argument ends you try to start another. You are welcome on my talk page if you have a specific concern involving me, but it is not the place for what I can only describe as heckling. Chillum 23:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Then stop gossiping about me. And tell your pal TParis the same. Cassianto^Talk 23:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

@ Chillum The same applies to you too, please stop taking every chance you get to support anybody at ANI who has a disagreement with Cassianto, SchroCat or Rambling Man.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Beadle

Hello Cassianto, how are you? I wonder if I might be able to tempt you to look in at the peer review for Sir Hugh Beadle. If you can find a few minutes any thoughts would be very much appreciated. Cheers and I hope you're well. Have a great week. —  Cliftonian (talk)  08:25, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm well thanks Cliftonian. Yes, I saw you working in this and I'd love to take part. I'm in the middle of one at the moment and will move onto this in the next few days. Cassianto^Talk 20:42, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Cassianto. —  Cliftonian (talk)  20:43, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Aha, interesting. Will take a look too. If'n I can interest anyone in a funny bird with a balloon under its chin then I'll die a happy man....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Seeking review

As is required at ANI I am giving you notice that you are involved in a discussion there:

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Seeking_review_of_an_unblock_of_mine regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Your concerns are important to me so I am seeking further review of my actions from the community. Chillum 21:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Wondering how exactly this helps the encyclopedia....♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

He clearly thinks it helps, but we all know that his under the counter behaviour has been at the heart of the problem here. FWIW, I didn't ask him to do this, but he felt the need to embarrass himself just one last time. Cassianto^Talk 13:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I just bury myself in article work at times like these....and tune out of discussion and drama pages. I generally find if i look for any length of time I find myself getting annoyed....and I edit here to relax.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Well said. I spend no time at any of the various dramah spots as they are just not worth it. They seem to be occupied by a strage bunch who do little to actually improve anything, but spend their time bitching an sniping at one another, or preening themselves and thinking how good they are - nothing useful in actually building an encyclopaedia. Those places are providers of nothing but grief for most! - SchroCat (talk) 13:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

That is, of course, the best way Cas. But these fuckwits then keep a watch on you like MI5 and pounce should you even so much as challenge a troublesome do-gooder who rocks up on your FAC to enforce a slice of POV, or an infobox onto all your hard work. Cassianto^Talk 14:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

That's sadly the case. One might wish they had something better to do, such as writing an article. Eric Corbett 23:27, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Perish the thought. Article writing has always come second best to civility, which in itself comes as a by-product to the former. What the civility police don't realise is that without the article writing in the first place, their entire existence would cease as there would be no Wikipedia. That is why content creation is a whole lot more important than telling someone to fuck off. Cassianto^Talk 08:57, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, but cussing others out doesn't help much though it may feel good. I don't see what you attain by calling The Rambling Man stupid. And what you say about "article writing has always come second" is really not true--you'd have been blocked for "fuck off" already. I think I closed an ANI report on you a couple of days ago (who the hell knows, there's so many Cs here--Cassianto, Casliber, Corbett...), and I really don't like seeing such reports anyway. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 01:31, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

LoL, The Rambling Man stupid? No, no, no. I have the utmost respect for TRM. I certainly wouldn't say anything of the sort to him. The ANI report was not on me, unless of course it was and I wasn't told about it. Nothing would surprise me with this place anymore. Cassianto, Casliber, Corbett? There's a film in there somewhere :-) Cassianto^Talk 07:09, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

How about a film Cool Company (or Clever, Caring, Capable, Classic, Content, ...)? All precious (with low numbers), anyway, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

I'd go with that! Incidentally, and I should point out, Cas should be known as "The Good" within my film suggestion :-) I'll have to fight Eric for "The Ugly" part as I think most would consider us both to be bad! Cassianto^Talk 12:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah...see my halo....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:19, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

I reserve the right to identify a dishonest twat when I see one!♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:50, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Anybody interested in expanding Twatt, Shetland? That would make a good TFA!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Hahaha! Cassianto^Talk 09:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Not to be confused with the Orcadian Twatt either. SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

More than one Twatt? Hmmm, now what does that remind me of??♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Don't tempt me Dr! ;-) Cassianto^Talk 11:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

There's even a Twatt Church [3]!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

On blocks

I think it is pretty pointless arguing for/against the EC block itself. The issue is the circumstances of the action and the position of the person, not the outcome per se. We reap what we sow. Turning it into a block/unblock !vote will get nowhere and the thread will just be hatted as being the usual EC drama with no consensus on either side. That's why I can't be arsed to say anything there: it will just get lost in the noise. - Sitush (talk) 12:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'm inclined to agree with you Sitush. I can't be arsed to engage with these fools any further. Let's hope common sense will prevail, although I'm not too sure Eric will want to come back anyway. Cassianto^Talk 23:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

What I said at 30. of oppose still rings true...♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Дэмий балай ямар нэг ачаалал ! ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Palmyra

Hello Cassianto. If you remember me, you told me that you would participate in a peer review for Palmyra. The article was finally copy-edited by the Guild and I asked for a peer review Here. If you are still interested then I would be very glad. Cheers.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 07:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Good, I'll read through and report back. Cassianto^Talk 17:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Block status

Although there is no unblock request, I have reviewed this block and recommend commuting the block to "time served." Despite provocation, the type of comment for which Cassianto was blocked does not foster a collaborative environment, and the record of prior blocks for personal attacks is unfortunate. Nonetheless, I find the block to be unnecessary, and in any event, excessively long. I also do not see a good basis for pulling talkpage access, which I recommend be restored even as block review proceeds. Requesting input from Mike V and any other reviewing admins. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

NYB, I'm sure you've realised, but Cassianto can't out his side of the story, or appeal the block with his tak page locked down. This seems to be an increasing practice among some admins, and smacks of petty censorship, rather than anything beneficial to the project. – SchroCat (talk) 22:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I do realize that, which is why I've commented here despite the absence of an unblock request. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd say "time served", more like a straight unblock as "block was overkill, edits had been self-reverted before block and there were extenuating circumstances". I hesitate to make this an AN/ANI thread; I'm sick to death of those pages lately. I count 4 admins recommending an unblock here (plus, no offense intended, several friends); two admins I know for a fact aren't Cassianto fans, and the other two I have no idea, but it's certainly not an admin fanclub clique rushing in. I'm tempted to call that "consensus" and unblock now; I'll wait a while to see if there are any other comments first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Aside from Mike V, all other admins who have featured here I either know and like, or have never interacted with before. That being said, I'd be interested to know who the two are who don't like me. We either have a couple of fifth columnists within our midst or people who like to judge others based on their block log. :-) Cassianto^Talk 05:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Then, as a separate issue, without a block threat looming, I'd really like to ask Cassianto to dial it back a few notches. There's being "right", and there's being "obnoxiously right", and the later kind of grates on people after a while. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I've no idea when I have been "obnoxiously right". But if you'd care to elaborate then I may learn something. Cassianto^Talk 04:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I think avoiding all Anglosaxon swearwords at all costs would be prudent. Am presuming that is the meaning. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

In an ideal world Cas, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately, as recent events on here have shown, we do not reside in an ideal world because if we did, people like Mike V would not go around stalking me. Similarly, If it was an ideal world, then I'd have won the euro millions and found a cure for the common cold. I would also have said that in an ideal world I'd have written articles like this, which I read last night and enjoyed. Alas, that is being too wishful ;) Cassianto^Talk 07:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Based on comments by, including me, six other admins now, I've unblocked Cassianto, noting in the block log "consensus is that the block was overkill; edits had been self-reverted before block and there were extenuating circumstances". Cassianto, I don't see any autoblocks, but let us know if there's a lingering one. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

• • Common sense has prevailed! Thank you Floquenbeam, Newyorkbrad and others for your rational thoughts and for coming to this decision. I don't know what an "auto lock" is, but if I experience any problems, I'll let you know. Cassianto^Talk 04:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Bad form

It's generally considered bad form to revoke talk page access from the person you've blocked, barring blatant abuse. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

If it's generally considered "bad form" to revoke talk page access from the person you've blocked once, then I wonder what it is considered to be when the same admin does it twice? Cassianto^Talk 04:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• That is ridiculous. "Revoke talk page access" should not be a default. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The only people who get talk page blocked by default are blatant abusive trolls (who will only post trolling unblock requests and further waste time) and spambots (obvious reasons). Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Which is all the more reason as to why Mike V's actions yesterday have come across as vindictive and bullish. Cassianto^Talk 16:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• Cassianto, please rephrase that unless you're actually trying to get reblocked. Sometimes I wonder, I really do. Bishonen | talk 16:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC).
  • Reworded. Cassianto^Talk 16:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.