User talk:Mr Ernie/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

That Hunter Biden laptop page is something else huh

I appreciate that you're basically the lone voice of reason among what is very clearly a Blue-Anon echo chamber. Keep up the good work. They just reverted one of my edits in that talk page after implying I was a Fox viewer and denigrating "MAGA" people.

It's amazing people like this are able to have influence over what is considered accurate information when all they do is post baseless conspiracy theories. I mean the entire first paragraph of that page is now basically a lie, and do you think they'll honestly change it?

Wikipedia has become an insane echo chamber, I swear. I really do appreciate people like you who try to hold entries to the standards the people running things claim they hold them to. Much respect. 24rhhtr7 (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for saying what you did in the Admin action page or whatever it's called. I appreciate you pointing out exactly what I was trying to point out about the nature of the entry and the Talk page, even if you disagree with my behavior.

Keep up the great work as an objective voice of reason. I've definitely had my fill of these political entries. Happy editing! 24rhhtr7 (talk) 07:39, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

It's certainly a doozy. Maybe one of these days it will be better. Mr Ernie (talk) 19:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

DS alert us politics

@NewsAndEventsGuy You are required to check for prior alertness before leaving this. As you obviously have not, I can only interpret this alert as harassment. Please remove it. Mr Ernie (talk) 23:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Mr Ernie, may I recommend a banner similar to what I have at the top of my UTP? If someone attempts to leave a DS alert message, it triggers a filter that advises the editor of a long list of topics that I'm aware of, and quickly cures the problem. It's quite handy. You are welcome to copy it. Atsme 💬 📧 00:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

That’s a good idea. I had expected that editors attempt a minimum checking before issuing these nasty templates. Sorry that the news guy was too busy for that. I’m clearly aware as a 10 second search would discover. Easier just to drop the menacing template I suppose. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Actually, I participated in creating this system and religously check the system log. Here's yours. These DSAlert expire after 12 months, and as you can see, you have not had the US Politics DS alert in the prior 12 months. Since we're expected to WP:Assume good faith, you can assume I know its a no-fault/no-cause FYI and nothing more... besides reading the relevant P&G pages, I was there when we made them. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

PS By the way, casting unfounded accusations of harrassment is often considered to be an WP:NPA violation. I'm willing to chalk this up to honest misunderstanding, but ask that you to use strike out or otherwise retract your "harrassment" claim above, to show it was an honest mistake. Thanks. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Please retract your harassing overtemplating of me on my own talk page. Next time spend 10 seconds to check the other awareness criteria before you come here to attack me. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Can you please remove your DS alert like I asked? You can very easily check my participation at AE as one of the standard means of being “alert.” I had not expected you to double down with your harassment but I’m asking you to please stop. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions#Alerts eds are not required to sift through AE archives. If you want, sure I'll delete it, or you can. But its still in your talk page history, which I can't change, and its still in the system log, which I can't change. Do you still want me to redact it? No problem but given the limitations of what I can do I wanted to verify that's what you want. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

What sifting are you taking about? I have 3 “alert” satisfying edits in my last 50 edits tab. This takes less than 10 seconds to check. I don’t know how to ask more directly - please stop. Refresh yourself with the details of alertness and remove this harassment from my talk page. It’s so easy to check. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Those are defined as adequate evidence to show someone is AWARE when starting an AE complaint. The rules about alerts do not require looking for them. But sure, I'll be happy to redact the template. If you want to delete the thread, have at it. it's your talk page. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Just spend a minute longer and check. It’s really not hard. Thanks for removing. Cheers. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

You within your rights to formally propose a rule change, and if that produces an amendment to the DS Alert system, I'll be glad to do the modified process. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Offtopic sidebar from RSN

In reply to your request for diffs[1] related to my "multiple salvos" remark, you've made four comments in the RSN thread about Rep Thompson and talk about the word "coup". In those you named several people and said they said something and maybe they did or maybe that's your characterization after the passage of years. Unless you provide sources, how can one know, unless they possess extensive prior knowledge about it all? That's all I meant,and I think I've answered your request for diffs. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

What you are saying is laughably false. As said above please take your harassment elsewhere. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Specifico

I am no fan of the editors Specifico and Zaathras. I have had issues with them and I don't consider their demeanor specially great. Some editors simply don't recognize when they are wrong and don't back away from mistakes or uncivil behavior, even if relevant policies or guidelines are pointed at them. Thinker78 (talk) 16:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC) 00:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you self-revert this. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

The frustrating part for me is that SPECIFICO has been warned at least 14 times for such behavior, but it continues. Maybe you could send some advice their way? Mr Ernie (talk) 00:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Good to see you again, by the way. Hope everything is well. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Tackling Herculean challenges deserves

	The Herculean Award
	Keeping POV warriors at bay is like decapitating the lernaean Hydra, thinking it will go away.
	Heracles cried out, and the Hydra pushed back. Where there was once one head, two more appeared. And then a giant crab came to assist the Hydra.
	The 12 Labors of Heracles Atsme 💬 📧 01:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Sorry @Atsme, just getting around to responding to this. It does seem like an unwinnable task, at times! Mr Ernie (talk) 15:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:10, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Wow has it already been 5 years!? Mr Ernie (talk) 20:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Curious

Do you have email activated? Atsme 💬 📧 10:58, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@Atsme yes I do. Mr Ernie (talk) 13:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@Atsme I didn’t receive an email, but I did get an email alert that I had a new talk page notice. Mr Ernie (talk) 00:27, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mr Ernie. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

You may need to check your email address in your preferences. If you will, please send me an email and let's see if the issue is my email first. Atsme 💬 📧 00:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I have received it! Mr Ernie (talk) 00:35, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

H. Biden, the saga continues

It looks like we're heading towards another RFC. Either that or sanctions will likely soon come into play. GoodDay (talk) 20:38, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I’m not holding my breath. There was a DS violation yesterday. Mr Ernie (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

And today. GoodDay (talk) 21:53, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Mainly per your observation. I removed the 1RR sub-discussion. But, I'm still concerned with what appears to be a 1RR breach. Thus my asking advice from 'three' administrators, at my sandbox. GoodDay (talk) 02:25, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Admins don’t seem interested to help with the issues at that page. I don’t know why, but there’s not much else to do about it. Mr Ernie (talk) 02:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I've asked them, if after 24-hrs. Will I be able to revert Feoffer's latest edit. GoodDay (talk) 02:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

So now some want to remove Biden's image. Next will be an RM, to remove his name & then either a complete purge of his name from the page or a re-writing to make him look 100% like a victim. GoodDay (talk) 14:05, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

First attempt: Maintain ...alleged... in the lead (failed). Second attempt: Delete "..belonging to.." from the lead (failed). Now, the third attempt: Try to push "..belonging to..." further down the lead. GoodDay (talk) 22:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Here we go again I guess. Mr Ernie (talk) 22:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I've looked, but I can't find the "14" editors (mentioned multiple times by Feoffer & repeated by Roy) who've been complaining since the last RFC was closed. Maybe you & some others can find them. GoodDay (talk) 16:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

It's being conflated with the editors that Feoffer selectively approached and pinged in this section. Mr Ernie (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The rumours are true…

I’m back.... thanks for your recent comments at AN - it is much appreciated. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome back! It is really good to hear from you. Mr Ernie (talk) 13:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Seeking ANI advice on your 1RR immunity claim

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Feoffer (talk) 01:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Feoffer why are you doing this? I think you have a good chance of getting sanctioned as we are long past the point of good faith. You broke the 24hr BRD when it was in effect, twice, and I think everyone’s patience has been exhausted about this issue. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Please note I'm not trying calling for any particular sanctions against you, and I know boomerangs are always a possibility, but I legitimately need advice and assistance from the Admin community to know how to proceed. A dispute does exist, we need eyeballs on it, and me restoring the tag myself would only compound the problem. Feoffer (talk) 01:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Why do you think we had an RFC in the first place? It was to settle this very dispute. Mr Ernie (talk) 01:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Feoffer: you seem to have forgotten, that you edit-warred on Dec 4, Dec 6 & possibly Dec 15. GoodDay (talk) 02:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

What a silly filing. Chin up Mr. Ernie and Feoffer there were numerous paths including asking at BLPN or RSN or HelpDeak for guidance rather than going to ANI where guards are now up and defenses will be mounted as you are putting people's editing privileges at risk. Slywriter (talk) 02:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

putting people's editing privileges at risk I've asked for advice and assistance, I haven't called for anyone to be blocked, much less banned. I think it's a problem to repeatedly remove tags meant to foster an on-going discussion, Ernie seems to think it's a 1RR exempt behavior. That's a dispute worthy of admin involvement. Feoffer (talk) 02:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

You seemed to think on 15 December, that it was 1RR exempt behaviour to repeatedly add the dispute tag. GoodDay (talk) 03:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Feoffer - what does RFC consensus mean to you? Especially ones that individual editors disagree with? Mr Ernie (talk) 03:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

ANI is not a place for advice. If it was, the message at top of ANI would say something very different. Messaging either of the admins involved in placing restrictions for clarification would have been a much better path. Slywriter (talk) 03:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe gentleman my eyesight is tricking me. But Feoffer seems to be asking for support from two editors at the RFC, for a 'compromise' edit. GoodDay (talk) 03:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Let ANI sort it out or AE when ANI decides to ignore the third thread in a week on this particular page. It's there on the article talk for those who want to bother looking. If the community wants to declare that RfCs are no longer the solution to disputes, that's their choice to make. Just be smart and don't take the bait lying around on the talk page. Slywriter (talk) 04:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

A very happy Christmas and New Year to you!
Have a great Christmas, and may 2023 bring you joy, happiness – and no trolls, vandals or visits from Krampus! Cheers SchroCat (talk) 11:15, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

EEML and arbs

There's quite a few there in the case. Look at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list#List_membership

Four of the people there ( Biophys, jacurek,Piotrus, Radeksz) are listed as parties. Poeticbent is also relevant to the case, as is the blocked Molobo whose retirement is discussed by Volunteer Marek and GizzyCatBella (jacurek) across the case.

In addition you have the old friend and list member Biruitorul commenting there.

And these are just the EEML members whose identity is obvious, it's quite possible there is one or two more there. 109.126.136.177 (talk) 13:00, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Glad it worked out

Glad the situation you were concerned about worked out. Barkeep49 (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)