User talk:The Quixotic Potato - Wikipedia

"Somebody thinks something is wrong with this page"

Thank You! This is awesome, best Wiki laugh I've had all year, please hang onto that attitude. Dougmcdonell (talk) 00:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! I stole it from somewhere but I cannot remember where. Have a nice day, (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 00:15, 5 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I’m surprised to find another echoer around here! — (((Romanophile))) ♞ (contributions) 05:29, 6 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Aren't you even more surprised to find a potato who edits Wikipedia? (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 04:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I just figure that whenever someone says that they need more eyes on a particular article they are calling for your assistance... --Guy Macon (talk) 12:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I always keep my eyes peeled! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:38, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

That's why you are such a good spec *cough* tater. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:22, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

One sad day The Quixotic Potato was injured while showing off for a sweet potato. I took him to the emergency room, and after a long wait, the doctor finally came out to talk to me. He told me "I have good news and bad news. The good news is that your buddy is going to pull through. The bad news is that he's going to be a vegetable for the rest of his life". --Guy Macon (talk) 13:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Guy Macon: You can't argue with a potato, atheists! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I have been asked to write up an editorial for The Signpost. It is at User:Guy Macon/Draft of Signpost Editorial. If you have time, could you give it a quick look and correct any glaring errors you spot? Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 04:04, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Guy Macon: [1] It may be possible to find a more elegant solution for the sentence about the chessboard problem. I prefer using parentheses inside a sentence (like this). (This looks weird.) (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 04:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

It may be a good idea to mention the discrepancy between the fundraising goal for December 2014 (20 million USD) and the amount that was actually raised (30.6 million USD). (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 05:03, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Great comments. I have copied the above to User talk:Guy Macon/Draft of Signpost Editorial and will respond there. Let me know if you object and I will undo it. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:58, 7 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

You can use my comments/edits as if they're public domain. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thankyou for taking up the work to improve Wikipedia by ridding it of articles on non-notable beauty pageant contestants. This is difficult work, especially since it will at times lead to attacks from a group of people who defend these articles against normal standards of notability. Keep up the good work.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I think WP:GNG is a good idea, even though it means that some of my favorite artists are considered non-notable. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

here: ..............................  TAKE THAT! (p.s. i couldn't find a potatoL.S. inc. (talk) 20:04, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Try this, its full of beautiful potatoes! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Quixotic Potato,thanks. L.S. inc. (talk) 22:55, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I believe I am rather lazy. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 00:00, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Please, when you comment in an RfA, say so in the edit summary, - I thought until looking that you opposed ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Gerda Arendt: Haha, no, I was among the first few who supported. I even dared making a silly joke about Samtar's vote!. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I saw, but those not looking closer may thing you opposed if you don't say something like "cmt" or "reply" in the edit summary. I had no time to look at the candidate but will, and probably support as well. Did you know that I passed your quote collection to someone who needs one per day? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I rarely find editsummaries useful, and I rarely use them. I love reading (my father has more books than my local library) and I am extremely curious so I never think: "Reading that editsummary saved me some time, now I won't have to read the actual edit". I hope they enjoy the quotes! Of course I do not agree with every quote (let alone every author of those quotes), but I found the quotes interesting and I hope others do too. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 23:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

When I look at my watchlist for a day, I get about thousand entries. I skim by edit summary. - Yes, "they" enjoy and quote from there ;) (I passed the permanent link when they were not visible here, and "they" also enjoyed their return!) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:59, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Woah. My watchlist contains 93 pages, and I think it is quite long. See singular they and Third-person_pronoun#German. Quote: "German is special as it uses the feminine form sie both for basically all plurals, and for polite address Sie ("you" sing./plur.).".(((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Reverted the Stephen Miller page alters the tone back to biased. It should be neutral in Tone. Whether or not the National Policy council is anti-Semitic and white supremacist is obvious when you click that link. Thunderclap Thunderclap (talk) 02:09, 17 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

You've been reverted by someone else. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:02, 8 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

There was an ANI recently opened against me for contributing to AfDs. I am trying not to over react, but it is frustrating so I feel a need to mention it somewhere.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:59, 28 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Well, this is a good place to vent. I've been offwiki for a while. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:00, 8 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

"Can someone please fix the article Ralph Yirikian? Please ping me when responding."

If everyone who reads that request deletes a couple of blatantly promotional sentences, there'll soon be nothing left. I've done my bit. Maproom (talk) 21:05, 10 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! Wikipedia is not a good place to promote companies. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 21:14, 10 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

... about countering systemic bias. Not ready to join the conversation myself yet, but what you wrote was good. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:56, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 09:50, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 10:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

  Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 10:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hey I want to report the user ( ZxxZxxZ ).

I saw some of his contributions and some suspicious things..

He removes things that offend his country ( iran ) and add lines that offend a country that is an enemy of his. From a qatari-owned news channel ( Knowing that qatar is an enemy of Saudi Arabia which means most likely it's fake news with the aim of offending Saudi Arabia) as his sources. For example https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/794850202

Technical Peace (talk) 10:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC) Technical Peace (talk) 10:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

" And found suspicious things " even though it's obvious Technical Peace (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Technical Peace:!

This is not the correct place to report users. You can use WP:ANI for that. When you start a discussion about an editor on WP:ANI, you must notify them on their user talk page.

Have a nice day,

(((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Alright

Sorry for .. I couldn't find any page to report a user in since I'm a new Wikipedian. Thanks Technical Peace (talk) 21:10, 17 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I have explained my position in the Signpost comment section a bit better and I've fixed a typo in the draft. I have watchlisted the draft. I may end up buying one of these things. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 22:24, 23 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! Feel free to ask follow-ups! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Quix, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 20:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

My talk page was lacking in cuteness :-) = paul2520 (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for tidying up, the place looks much nicer now.

  I found this fly on my windowsill and thought you might like to have it as a pet. →

I think they look after themselves, pretty much. nagualdesign 07:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! All the girlies say I'm pretty fly for a dark purple potato. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 21:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

I'm glad you got there first at Wikipedia talk:WikiCV and put such a well crafted response. I know I would have been somewhat blunter in my comments coming to the same conclusion as you. Nthep (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I try. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 12:01, 18 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Lovely, thank you! Nom nom nom. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 20:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

A sweet potato pie could work. Now, the reason I'm asking about the parens is that I was thinking of doing likewise. My dilemma is that I also sympathize with the Palestinians to some extent, and I don't want to be seen as some kind of Israeli hard-liner. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

I am both for and against both sides, depending on how you look at it. I am pro-peace. http://www.trbimg.com/img-589158a7/turbine/ct-jewish-muslim-fathers-viral-photo-met-20170131 (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:31, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Oooh sexy! Thank you! Wikipedia is the perfect website for me because there are very few things I am not interested in. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 13:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Here is a bottle of my fathers favorite drink,good American rye

Happy Holidays--Woogie10w (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Delicious, thank you! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I followed WWBToo to your talk page. I am a wikipedia reader from Germany. As a 'Nederlander' would you give your expert comments on paid editing disclosure under European Union directives at Talk:Hilary_Rosen. I am especially worried by wiki markup like hidden headers, nowiki markup and false header descriptors being used by WWBToo on this article's talk page to deceitfully suppress the extent and scope of employers advertising drafts which are being inserted into articles at WWBToo's request. 91.49.40.172 (talk) 04:55, 22 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

In reply to the consumer survey which is part of this page, Customer satisfaction form. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to serve you better. Please help us by taking a few minutes to tell us about the service that you have received so far. We appreciate your business and want to make sure we meet your expectations. Please check all that apply.

I regret I have no personal information if The Quixotic Potato is...

corrupt

Zionist

gay

straight

Illuminati

Masonic

fascist

Islamist

feminist

Dark suited

Cthulhu

Marxist-Leninist

Christian

misogynist

SJW

socialist

capitalist

Reptilian Overlord

Also the collection of such personal information is not allowed in European Union. 91.49.40.172 (talk) 04:55, 22 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

I am not an expert on anything, not even potatoes. I don't really know anything about Hilary Rosen and disclosure laws. Maybe someone else does. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:16, 23 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 30 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

I'm getting old! Thanks Gerda. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I removed this discussion [2]. Looking a bit more, it seems the editor who brought up NeilN's comment at ANI was Vote X, probably also the editor at Jimbo's talk page. There are a bunch of other comment left by the IP which I've let be since I don't know enough about Vote X other than that they normally geolocate to the UK to say this is them, but possibly you do. Nil Einne (talk) 06:05, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, it was Vote, someone else has reverted. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

So why the small? -- ToE 10:29, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Thinking of England: Sometimes I use <small> when I think that my comment isn't important (e.g. a link to the relevant article for convenience instead of an answer). (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 10:37, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ah! I see now that they were asking for counties, not states, so your link didn't explicitly answer the question as stated. (Though I still think your link was probably the best answer.) Your mention of "a link to the relevant article ..." reminds me of this case of a courtesy link, explicitly labeled as such, which was received with anything but courtesy, though the OP was kind enough to later apologize. Cheers! -- ToE 15:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I need to apologize for failing to assume good faith in some of my recent posts.

By way of explanation (not excuse), I am a high-functioning autistic (Asperger's syndrome) and sometimes have trouble with certain social interactions. In particular, I sometimes categorize people into two classes ("This person is my friend. Anything they do is to be interpreted as positively as possible" and "This person does not wish to be my friend. Anything they do is to be interpreted with suspicion") when in reality there is a continuum. It isn't rational, and when I catch myself doing it I apologize and try to avoid making that mental error again.

Again, I apologize. This is something I struggle with. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Guy Macon: Thanks, but there is no need to apologize. I like you, even when we disagree. I've worked in IT my entire life so I am used to people who are on the spectrum. Almost everyone I look up to in my field of work is somewhere on the spectrum. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 23:19, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• PING. Where do I go, I'm messing things up?

Thx tho Potato. HNY too!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShelbyLH (talk • contribs) 07:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi ShelbyLH! The people over at the WP:HELPDESK and WP:TEAHOUSE are always willing to help. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 07:08, 6 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 21:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I love the Nederlands, two of my dearest friends live on Herengracht in Amsterdam (and I can pronounce it correctly). My favourite Dutch street name is Lijnbaansgracht. It doesn't get more Dutch than that :-) Guy (Help!) 21:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@JzG: Have you tried stroopwafels (preferably balanced on a cup of steaming hot tea)? (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 21:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have coeliac ;-) Guy (Help!) 23:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@JzG: A weird place for a smiley. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 02:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, why did you tag the article Interactive Brokers with {{COI}} and {{advert}}? I am a historical researcher; I wrote the article from a neutral point of view. There's no fluff, merely plain information about the company. If you don't agree with that, please provide examples. I had many others look at the article to ensure its neutrality, and ultimately, a totally uninvolved editor reviewed and published my draft of that page, the version live now. Can you please remove the tags, or explain in much further depth why you believe why the article "may require cleanup" or "contains content that is written like an advertisement"? ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 02:29, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Your version was a lot less messy. The COI tag was placed because a major contributor to the article appears to have a close connection with its subject. I may be just a simple potato from a humble background, but I believe that the "Interactive Brokers PR team" probably has a close connection to Interactive Brokers. The lede starts by claiming that they are the largest this and the largest that, and what follows is a lot of nonnotable detail about how one genius against all the odds defeated the evil bureaucracy that would not allow his computers to rule the stock market. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 02:42, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Ɱ: I highly recommend that you contact the users Jytdog and David Smith 111 (preferably by pinging them from the article's talkpage). Jytdog has experience dealing with COI issues, and David Smith 111 makes edits like this one... (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 02:57, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, that’s not how it works. You need to provide a giid reason for being unblocked, show insight into why you weblocked, etc. Doug Weller talk 08:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I was blocked because I pissed Alex Shih off by pointing out that his comment was BS (because it didn't make any sense) and because I asked him to read the relevant policy (which he should've done a long time ago). WP:PUNITIVE and WP:COMMONSENSE are both good reasons for an unblock, not to mention my todo-list and wikimood. Block doesn't protect encyclopedia but actively damages it. Am not going to mention anyone's linkedin for a while, and I won't tell people who are younger than me that they are younger than me.   "Fuck off" is not a personal attack, it is a rude way of saying "go away" (note that I didn't actually write that, I wrote I refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram which is both funnier and more polite). Writing: "In real life you would be very polite to me (and vice versa) so you are basically a keyboard warrior." is not a personal attack, it is factually correct information. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/keyboard_warrior Note that ɱ made several personal attacks recently. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 08:22, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

• Hi QP. This isn't you first block for this kind of thing, ist it? If people such as Drmies, GorillaWarfare, and KrakatoaKatie have blocked you in the past, then you are clearly not learning from it. Like Doug Weller says, you'll need to make a convincing claim that you will not make Personal attacks or harassment again. You may wish also to consider moderating you language if you want any sympathy - remember, talk pages are very public, and we strive to project a professional image of Wikipedia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:02, 14 January 2018 (UTC) (univolved)Reply

(talk page watcher) @Kudpung: As an exercise in precision, Drmies' block was self-requested. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 11:17, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Kudpung: If by "this kind of thing" you mean "running into people's ego" then I'm guilty as charged. Unsurprisingly I still haven't received an apology. As you are well aware there isn't much us hoi polloi can do when admins do stupid shit. Making false accusations and posting personal attacks are relatively mild offenses compared to what I've seen some admins do. In a fair and just world this kinda stuff wouldn't happen, but this isn't one of those worlds. I wouldn't want certain admins who do stupid shit once in a while to be deadmined because most of the work they do is good (you know, netpositive). Even an admin who has a very emotional and irrational reaction to being criticized can still be a net positive. Of course I wish people were able to deal with criticism a lot better. Have you ever seen a potato giving a fuck? This indifference to both blame and praise makes potatoes better companions than humans. I would love to be able to believe that we, as a community, can project "a professional image of Wikipedia" but I have accepted the fact that we cannot. Call me a pessimist or a realist; I am indifferent to both labels. If people would stop taking themselves so damn seriously then there would be considerably less violence on this planet. Sympathy is not something I am looking for. Heck, I prefer being honest over being well-liked (isn't that obvious?). Being blocked does not affect me negatively (I often use wiki as a procrastination tool when I should be doing more important stuff and I am not a paid editor); but it damages the encyclopedia. I have to file my taxes before the end of the month. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 14:13, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Out of anyone, Wales is the last person who could get away with crass incivility. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 14:47, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Pretty sure he didn't get blocked for it. [3] Doc James isn't the kinda guy who writes bullshit. I don't think that de-admining JW for that diff would've been a good idea. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 14:57, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

You should probably stop posting personal attacks and false accusations. You may think you've "won", but in reality no one won and Wikipedia lost. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Jimmy was not blocked for any of that. And MJ fwiw I suggest that you not participate here further. I will be addressing your behavior in WP generally later today or tomorrow. Jytdog (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Quixotic, am trying to understand what happened here.

Let me recap it.

First MJ and I have been in a dispute over the Culinary Institute of America article due to their BOOSTER edits there, and I recently barred MJ from my talk page, here. But MJ is still apparently watching my TP.

QP has pinged me a bunch of times in the past few days to deal with various COI things. For example

• here from the HelpDesk about David Smith 111 at Interactive Brokers on January 10
• here at the help desk about NBC News on Jan 11
• and the most recent was here at DGG's talk page.

That last one, and my comment at the interactive broker's TP here (which was about David Smith 111:, not Mj), were the immediate prompts for the funny non-barnstar thread at my TP, here - you can see this clearly in Quixotic's contribs.

MJ then chose to commnent on that thread at my Talk page, which he shouldn't have done at all since a) he has been disinvited from commenting there and b) it had nothing to do with him.

In any case, QP replied in anger at MJ at my talk page and gave MJ a facepalm at MJ's talk page and then came back to my talk with the harassing comment, as rightly noted by Alex Shih here in the warning. The harassing comment was this edit, in which QP changed his edit describing MJ's apparent immaturity, by first writing " In which year were you born? " which QP changed in that diff to "in your linkedin profile picture you look younger than I am (I am 30+)".

QP replied dismissively to Alex's warning, reverting with edit note "bs" and this kind of snippy note at 06:29, 14 January 2018, which is what led Alex to block QP at 06:34 per the block log.

Looking back over all that, the block is on the borderline but I believe it would be upheld at AN if it were to be challenged. OUTING was not indeed not strictly violated as the off-WP material wasn't actually linked. What QP wrote was however very harass-y due to the "I know who you are in the real world" aspect of it, the product of "opposition research" and written in the context of an interpersonal dispute. My sense is that if QPhad replied to the warning with "oh, yeah that is really harrass-y, I see what you mean" or even authentically asked what AlexShih found problematic, then QP would not have been blocked (just warned). it was the dismissal of the warning, showing that QP didn't understand that the reference to off-WP stuff was not ok, that led to the block - not getting it means it is likely to be repeated so the block is preventative. Alex ~could~ have explained the rationale batter in his warming to QuixoticPotato but the warning was clear enough.

QuixoticPotato I know you are quixotic and that you do not tolerate bullshit and I like those things about you but you did overstep and you should not have blown off and challenged the warning. I hope that you can see that what you did there -- the diff you warned about -- violates the spirit of the harassment policy for sure and possibly the letter, and you that you should not do that. Off-WP stuff needs to be handled with care and never in that kind of exchange. Would you please acknowledge that and say that you understand that, and that you should not have blown off the warning?

If Quixotic is able to do that, they should be unblocked in my view. This was a kerfuffle built of several layers of misunderstanding and anger. Jytdog (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

The reason I was blocked was because I mentioned the fact that BS is BS and asked someone to read a policy they should've read a long time ago. The Dutch in general (and especially those who live in Amsterdam) are infamous for valuing honesty over politeness (which can be perceived as rude and blunt). I am not here to make friends; I do unpaid volunteerwork because I believe in our mission. Unfortunately many people on this planet are arrogant and thin-skinned. We give people extra buttons to protect the encyclopedia, not their ego. I don't get paid for editing here, so being blocked does not affect me negatively; it only hurts the encyclopedia. WP:OUTING was not violated in any way, shape or form. People who make false accusations should be blocked imo (yes, even admins). Most kerfuffles are built on misunderstandings. The article Hanlon's razor does not get enough pageviews. The thing about filing taxes and procrastination was not a joke, I have to get everything ready for my accountant. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:40, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

No that is not why you were blocked, QP. I am not a bullshitter and I explained as clearly as I could why you were blocked. There was an issue with the WP:HA policy. Please read what I wrote again. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 16:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Let's agree to disagree. We agree on a lot of other stuff. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I guess you need for me to quote OUTING to you.. I already referred to it in my explanation above. It says "The fact that an editor has posted personal information or edits under their own name, making them easily identifiable through online searches, is not an excuse to post the results of "opposition research". You posted the results of opposition research, and you did so in the context of an interpersonal dispute. This is not OK. This is what Alex warned you about, that you did not heed, and it was not the not heeding that led to the block. He was going to let you off with just a warning. Do you get it now? Jytdog (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

He would've only given a warning if I wouldn't have mentioned the fact that BS is BS and asked him to read a policy he should've read a long time ago. The sentence you quote does not say: "if you google the username of another person then that is a blockable offense". For example, I have Googled your username, and Jimbo's. I agree with that sentence you quoted, but it is irrelevant here. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

It was not bulshit. This is quite important, and I value your presence here, which is why I am trying to make sure you understand this.... I was indefinitely blocked for violating OUTING, btw, for doing pretty much what you did (in a different context) but I actually included the link to linkedin. This is important stuff to understand. Please take off the combative persona for just a moment, my dear potato. Jytdog (talk) 17:01, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I think it was bs, but we can agree to disagree on that point. What you did was OUTING as described in WP:OUTING (and a blockable offense), what I did was not. Very big difference. I am a stubborn potato because of years of experience with people who are factually incorrect. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 17:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I am sorry my stubborn potato. Even if you will not back off this now, I hope you never do that again. If you do you will (and you will) get a longer block and they will pile up into indefinite blocks. What you did was icky. How would you feel if somebody wrote to you here about your linkedin picture or some other RW aspect of you? It would be different if MJ linked to it here in WP but he didn't. The community takes the "chinese wall" between what is on WP and what is off-WP very, very seriously. Jytdog (talk) 17:11, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Everyone is allowed to Google my username. Heck, everyone is allowed to Google my real name. And if I call someone who is older than me immature and he replies by stating that I look a lot younger than him then I wouldn't see that as a problem. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 17:17, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Jytdog: First off, show me exactly where you think you have the right to ban (or 'disinvite'?) me from your talk page? I think there's no policy supporting that, and I will take this further if need be. I won't allow you to take my rights away without any authority to do so. Secondly, QP did post that comment to your talk page directly after interactions with me about Interactive Brokers. So regardless of his intention, it can both subjectively and objectively be seen as inappropriate and as potentially targeting me. Next off, I'm not sure why you're trying to have me not respond here, that comes off as a little rude and shady. I'm also not sure why you'd be "addressing [my] behavior in WP generally later", as we settled our past issues, and in this issue I've been beyond civil even around the harshest of incivility. I seriously believe you have an axe to grind and are severely biased against me. And regardless of your view of unblocking, the user has to show insight into why they were blocked and prove that they will not repeat those actions. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 16:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

"I've been beyond civil" made me laugh out loud. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:41, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

This is inappropriate. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 16:50, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Your insults and false accusations are inappropriate. You should apologize. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 16:59, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

(talk page watcher) Just re. the whole "banning from talk page" thing, cf. WP:NOBAN, which addresses this very issue: "If a user asks you not to edit their user pages, it is sensible to respect their request, although a user cannot avoid administrator attention or appropriate project notices and communications by merely demanding their talk page not be posted to."^{My emph.} Just for info. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 16:44, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

It's a little weak, it doesn't mean I have to stop, but it is sensible advice. I will follow it, but note well that Jytdog could not enforce it or punish me for breaking it, like he seems to imply above. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 16:50, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

I cannot "punish" anyone for anything, nor does the community. The community has and does and will continue to block and ban people who violate policies and guidelines, including this one, in order to prevent further disruption - especially when they show no sign that they are willing to understand what they are doing wrong. The diffs you are providing here are digging your hole deeper, btw. This is why I advised you not to participate here. But you will do as you will, of course. Jytdog (talk) 17:04, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

As I said, that guideline's wording is not strong enough to be actionable. And your advisement to keep me off this page is beyond terrible, indescribably. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 17:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

When I said "including this one" I meant that. You can search ANI and find examples of the resulting blocks/bans. Jytdog (talk)17:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply