Heathcliff

Welcome!

Welcome aboard, Heathcliff. --Wetman 05:48, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Gamaliel

Gamaliel has threatend a revert war on Joe Scarborough. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gamaliel#Joe_Scarbourough 67.18.109.218 18:04, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

67.18.109.218

(Pasted from user talk:Bishonen) Why are you reverting old warnings to User talk:67.18.109.218? He's obviously read them. They've served their purpose. Why can't he now have control over his own user page so long as he does not post anything which violates Wikipedia policy?--Heathcliff 01:38, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Heathcliff. Many people think it's common courtesy to leave other people's comments on your talk page, unless it's getting long and needs to be archived, or unless they're personal attacks. Vandalism warnings don't exactly qualify as personal attacks. It's a wiki, and people very often do revert blankings of personal talk pages, when they see information being hidden by the blanking. The reason I reverted 67.18.109.218's page, for my part, was that he's just filed an RfC about user conduct, on three other editors. Now, I fully expect him to blank again, but maybe he should also be prepared for other people to revert him again. Not me—I wouldn't do it more than the once—but others who see the RfC and go to his userpages, out of interest in his own conduct. It's kind of hard to form an opinion of the merits of a user conduct RfC without that. Btw, if he wants to leave his vandal identity behind, I suggest the simplest way would be to create an account and start making only good edits from it. Bishonen | talk 11:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't doubt that it is common courtesy, but I think it is a bit much to try to enforce matters that are simply matters of courtesy. It seems to me that it is also common courtesy not revert a users own edits to his own talk page which is why I asked. I also fail to see what his having filled an RFC has to do with this matter. And I hope you are wrong about other editors reverting him again. Hopefully editors can find more productive ways to spend their time than tampering with another users own page.--Heathcliff 22:49, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Situation of administrator abuse

Hi, I'm in a potentially awkward position with an Administrator. I have read the Wiki pages on dispute resolution but I'm still not sure how to proceed.

The Admin ContiE has a personal grudge against me for reasons I do not fully understand. He has been this way since I began frequenting wikipedia.

I have done work improving the furvert article. He has basically gone on a crusade against any edit I make. He controls every furry category article and several others ruthlessly. He is an iron fist and bans anyone he edit wars with. I had uploaded pictures and he deleted them with no talking. He seems to believe I am every person he has had an edit war against. He is always using personal attacks, calling me troll without reason. I uploaded them again and he voted them for deleted, but to his surprise the person who runs the images, thank you Nv8200p, found they were acceptable once I tagged them properly. Just recently he removed both the images without himself discussing it in the talk page (unless he was the same person who discussed only one) with the edit here [1] Then ContiE assumed bad faith, added his constant insult of troll in the talk page. It appears on a completed different wiki, a comedy one in all things, somebody else stole my username and I believe this was Conti himself and uploaded them. ContiE showed it as his reason. While vandalism like his, I would revert and mention it, he would ban me permanently if I undid his edit. That is why I am asking admins for help. He holds a couple of accounts on wikipedia and I think they are administrators so I have to be careful who I tell about this. Arights 06:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)