User talk:Roux/Archives/2010/September

Unblock and related administrivia

collapsing for navigation, still here if anyone wants to read it

{{unblock|I wish to be unblocked. I am aware that many will oppose this. I suspect it will be discussed at AN/I. I believe--as my history has proven--that I have much to contribute to this project, and despite its innumerable problems, this project could succeed. I will not, as is often demanded of users requesting an unblock, grovel or otherwise abase myself to appease the admin corps. I will, however, undertake that when I am being abused, as I have been many times by other users--some of them admins, my reactions to same resulting in this indef--I will simply take it to someone who will actually pay attention and look at the entire issue rather than getting increasingly pissed off myself. →ROUX ₪ 08:14, 19 August 2010 (UTC)}} ...and as anticipated, off to ANI it has gone (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC) It's being discussed at ANI, so you're aware :-) Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 09:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC) Welcome back; the talk should run a fair bit of the day, but you've said the right stuff. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC) do offer Ryan an apology; *not* saying grovel. When Ryan apologizes (and amends my block log) for blocking me over a comment that the recipient understood was a joke, I will apologize to him for using robust language to make my feelings known. Until then it's really not likely. I'm happy to pretend he doesn't exist, and will expect the same courtesy from him. Beyond that? No, sorry, I'm really not going to pretend that people who would rather block than actually comprehend what is going on deserve an apology for my reaction to their behaviour. →ROUX ₪ 08:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC) As you can see in the ANI discussion, consensus is apparently an unblock. /HeyMid (contributions) 09:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC) I've unblocked you per the discussion linked above. Welcome back, buddy. — east718 | talk | 10:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC) Ta. Could you undelete my userspace pls? →ROUX ₪ 18:34, 20 August 2010 (UTC) Done. No doubt I've missed something, because let's face it, there were a lot of separate pages to restore. Ping me if I have. --Deskana (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC) Back again, huh. Please don't get blocked in less than a month again, like last time. I don't think many more will support you after another block, and it's such a shame to lose good editors like you because of lost tempers all around. This place has changed in six months, and I can't say it's all for the better. I've undeleted your css/js pages, btw. Have fun. —fetch·comms 03:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC) thanks.. there's still a fair bit of stuff that's still deleted :S →ROUX ₪ 04:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Have you got it all now? Can help undeleting. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:58, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Amalthea is handling it. Thank you. →ROUX ₪ 21:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC) All pages that were deleted last February are now restored. Those that you U1ed back in 2008 (sandboxes, PagesCreatedS, …) are still deleted, I assume you won't want them back. @Deskana: Special:Undelete does a prefix search for titles with deleted revisions, very handy for cases like this. Amalthea 21:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please Don't

Stuff like this isn't necessary and could get you back on block fast. I had to walk on egg shells when I came off a 6 month indef block. I couldn't so much as go "boo" without having six people looking in my direction. Please be very careful on what you say and do for awhile. Your experience and skills are needed here, but after a block, people won't hesitate to block you again and walk away without considering an unblock again. If you need help, let me know, I am always available. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh please, if some trigger-happy admin is going to block me for something entirely innocuous, this place is even more fucked up than even I had thought. I said in my unblock that I'm not going to grovel or abase myself, and that includes not walking on eggshells just in case someone has an itchy block finger. Cheers. →ROUX ₪ 00:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Okie Dokie, just letting you know. Take Care. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello Roux

bye bye little troll (no not you bugs, the other one)

Morning in the afternoon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) AtlanticDeep (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Trying not to get blocked this time, huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morning in the afternoon (talk • contribs) 20:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Pay that character no never-mind. I've turned him in so he can get the appropriate "processing". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC) I don't, no worries there. Actually I find it unbearably tragic that there's at least two different people out there with nothing better to do with their time than create socks to harass me. How empty and meaningless their lives must be that they derive some sort of pleasure from such actions. →ROUX ₪ 20:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC) By even talking about them this way, we feed their pin-headed little egos. The admin wouldn't block him. I guess he enjoys doing the same work twice. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC) He probably won't be back (at least not under that ID) and it's kind of a shame, as once it got blocked I was going to say, "And so we bid good night to morning in the afternoon." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC) Now that his sockmaster has been identified, I can say he was sent to Davy Jones' locker. You may delete this entire waste-of-time section at your leisure. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC) And now that I've seen his list of socks, I understand why I already had his SPI page on my watch list. OK, nuf sed. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Nom nom

Resident Mario has given you a fresh piece of fried chicken! Pieces of fried chicken promote WikiLove and hopefully this piece has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot piece, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of fried chicken by adding {{subst:GiveChicken}} to their talk page with a friendly message, or gobble up this chicken the giver's talk page with {{subst:MunchChicken}}!!

Uh, thanks. I prefer mine marinated 24 hours in buttermilk, then coated with flour, egg, and pulverized cornflakes. Shallow fried in lard, or deep fried in a pressure fryer. :) → ROUX ₪ 05:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

As more and more Americans complain about the poor health standards of fast food joints, more and more Americans continue to patronize them. Yes, we're getting fatter, but with recession still just around the corner, we're building up layers for future use, kind of like camels do. So McD and KFC and the others continue to defy PC'ness. For example, when complaints mounted about the nutritional quality of their regular hamburgers, McD's response was to create the Angusburger, which is prominent in the "Not" side of the "Eat This, Not That" books. Is America great or what? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:40, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I was expecting "Mhmmm mhmm Fried chicken", but I guess that's ok too =) ResMar 23:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Heh

Whoops... Sorry bout that. The Thing // Talk // Contribs 05:43, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Shit happens. → ROUX ₪ 05:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Image sizes

I don't want to have a debate with you about image sizes but the page was overwhelmed with images and so I forced the size smaller which seems a pretty good justification from the perspective of Wikipedia:Image size. I tend to force image sizes in contexts like this where you have issues of image stacking, text congestion, etc. I think the least of the problems on that page is the fact I forced the image size. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 18:52, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: No Srsly

That's what Michael Cera told me last night OHHH. Jealous much? Ironholds (talk) 08:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

We hates it, precious. We hates it. →ROUX ₪ 08:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) English grammar... /HeyMid (contributions) 18:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Uhh... → ROUX ₪ 18:33, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh Goodness.  f o x  07:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

My GUinness! → ROUX ₪ 07:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Redirection of List of So You Think You Can Dance Canada episodes

Good call! PKT(alk) 01:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Ta. → ROUX ₪ 02:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Please knock it off with Pedro

The two of you are close to mutually breaching NPA. Please just disengage.

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Bit late there, aren't you? Do check timestamps next time, ta. → ROUX ₪ 01:12, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi thanks for your advice. I think you were correct about Wikiquette Alerts being a waste of time though I pretty much had to open a section there to refute some of the false allegations people were making.--Shakehandsman (talk) 01:34, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Roux. You have new messages at Crcarlin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

note

Good deletion. I had a hunch "bell end" was some kind of euphemism of the subjects LC fixates on, but I don't speak British. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It's interesting to note that two of the three registered user socks that first edited today were created months ago, so it might be Electrolux time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2

Because you participated in several secret page MfDs in the past, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2. Cunard (talk) 08:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Good call

On this. I don't understand the rationale for this kind of thing at all. Kudos for a bold removal. Matt Deres (talk)

Shame!

You missed the most obvious one, oh wonder of my soup! ;) ResMar 01:08, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Didn't, or didn't in the previous version of my userpage, which included in the page title a description from the wiki dictionary what a roux is. → ROUX ₪ 07:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Roux! I didn't see you were back. *Does the dance of joy*. Anyway, don't say you're not a hyperintelligent slurry of fat and flour; that's how I always picture you. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I find it dreadfully amusing that our tpage messages crossed in this way. And a roux is not a slurry; a slurry carries water (or similar liquid) as its liquid phase. A roux is almost an emulsion. → ROUX ₪ 08:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I was stalking Ron Ritzman's RfA expressly waiting for you to show up. As for the phases of matter, I was just testing you to make sure you weren't an evil robot clone. In reality of course a roux is a "hodgepodge" of fat and flour. And that's science. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Well no see, I'm the evil one. The clone spends his days feeding children and helping old birds cross the street. → ROUX ₪ 08:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Shame!

You missed the most obvious one, oh wonder of my soup! ;) ResMar 01:08, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Didn't, or didn't in the previous version of my userpage, which included in the page title a description from the wiki dictionary what a roux is. → ROUX ₪ 07:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Roux! I didn't see you were back. *Does the dance of joy*. Anyway, don't say you're not a hyperintelligent slurry of fat and flour; that's how I always picture you. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I find it dreadfully amusing that our tpage messages crossed in this way. And a roux is not a slurry; a slurry carries water (or similar liquid) as its liquid phase. A roux is almost an emulsion. → ROUX ₪ 08:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I was stalking Ron Ritzman's RfA expressly waiting for you to show up. As for the phases of matter, I was just testing you to make sure you weren't an evil robot clone. In reality of course a roux is a "hodgepodge" of fat and flour. And that's science. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Well no see, I'm the evil one. The clone spends his days feeding children and helping old birds cross the street. → ROUX ₪ 08:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Appropriate warning; inappropriate accusation

Please do not close unresolved ANI reports as being resolved. I accepted that my behavior was inappropriate before I opened the incident, and said so in the summary statement.

In a situation in which a warning/explanation of some kind is appropriate, it is not appropriate to accuse the person of something they did not do, and warn them that they will be blocked if they "continue" to do that something they did not do in the first place, and then refuse to explain what they meant or retract what they said. That's the point, and it's not resolved. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

User:SarekOfVulcan agreed with me. And clearly you do not agree that your behaviour was inappropriate; if you did you wouldn't be screaming about admin abuse. I strongly suggest that you walk away. You were indeed harassing and being abusive--the fact that you failed to include any diffs of your own behaviour is strongly indicative that you know exactly what you were doing wrong.

In short: get over it. You were behaving like a dick, you got warned perfectly appropriately for doing it, and now you've got your nose out of joint because you got a warning? Naah. It's resolved, it's over, move on. → ROUX ₪ 18:28, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

If you want Roux, you can always ask for your rollback right to be given back to you, so that reversions made by you are made easier in the future. -- 92.19.22.193 (talk) 16:28, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Who are you? → ROUX ₪ 19:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada/Assessment

Thanks for catching that. I didn't realize I messed up the numbering. Lawyer in training (talk) 05:30, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi there

Just thought I'd let you know, Porchcrop and I are discussing his list on my talk page. Feel free to jump in if you want. Netalarm^talk 01:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Sock?

How and who am I the sock of? I think you need to assume good faith. You don't call someone a sock when you haven't gone through WP:RFCU. -Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 02:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

No need to take offense to that. It's just that your blacklist contains users that are frequently targeted by long-term abusive users, so it'll raise some concerns when someone targets them. I think we've resolved the blacklist issue, and I hope you learn from this incident. Thanks. Netalarm^talk 02:27, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks Netalarm. -Porchcrop ^{(talk|contributions)} 04:07, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback|WikiDao|sig}}

Talkback

{{talkback|WikiDao|sig}}

Your comments on my talk page

Enough. If you remain concerned, you may take it up on the RD talk page. If the consensus there is for me to remove the two image links in question, then I will. Thank you for your concern. WikiDao ☯ (talk) 19:13, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually the consensus at WP:SIG is quite clearly for those to be removed. And so I have. → ROUX ₪ 19:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Is my AGF warranted?

Yes. Sorry, my fault on indents. Apologies. Pedro :  Chat  19:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

De nada. → ROUX ₪ 20:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Whatever. Pedro :  Chat  20:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Huh? This is exactly the problem with you. 'De nada' means 'it's nothing,' colloquially meaning 'hey, don't worry about it, shit happens.' → ROUX ₪ 21:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

{{talkback|Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Nonce introductions}}

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Stevertigo 2

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Stevertigo 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Stevertigo 2/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, NW (Talk) 17:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Warning

Hi Roux, I honestly didn't mean any offense to 74.89, just wondering who it really is. Also, how do you know that he/she has "undertaken to stay away from me"? If that's true, then I will gladly forget this whole incident. - PM800 (talk) 01:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. I just looked through their edits, and it seems like they really did admit that they were wrong and are sorry about it. So case closed, I guess. - PM800 (talk) 02:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

email

I've sent you an email. Netalarm^talk 02:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)