User talk:Sukčių vaikytojas

Sveiki atvykę į Metaviki!

Sveikiname, Sukčių vaikytojas, atvykus į Vikimedijos projektą Metaviki! Šis puslapis skirtas visų Vikimedijos Fondo projektų aptarimui bei koordinavimui. Pradžioje susipažinkite su šio projekto taisyklėmis. Jeigu galite prisidėti prie tekstų vertimo, apsilankykite Babylon.

Babilone arba Vikimedijos forume galite pateikti įvairius klausimus, komentarus arba šiaip parašyti žinutę (prieš tai perskaitykite instrukcijas, esančias puslapio viršuje). Jei reikalinga pagalba, drąsiai kreipkitės į mane, rašykite į mano aptarimų puslapį.

Sėkmės!

Requests for comment/Lithuanian Wikipedia and Wikibooks

Please, stop it. Your tone is not acceptable; a deletion of the page was proposed but the page has just been moved and closed. Your complaints will be heard, if you're not so aggressive. Please follow this suggestion I gave you instead of attacking people: «Please assume good faith, be more neutral, don't come to conclusions and open a new request for comments about specific lacks of policies or bad application of existing policies (e.g. with regard to relevance of corporations and respect of the law), without unnecessary emphasis or personal attacks». Thank you, Nemo 07:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

A thief cries foul.

As I suggested in history of that page: you do not follow your own suggestions.

• What personal attacks? Before making an administrative claim, you must prove it. Do so not by talking to yourself, but by public discussion.
  You abused me by this personal persecution. About more abuse see below.
  My article is not a personal attack. It is a mere record of your personal abuse. Am I lying? All what I write is a truth. Is truth, or personal responsibility an attack? Then you attacked yourself by your own bad deeds.
• What discussion? I propose it. You only talk about it, but never started any.
• What RFC? I do not ask for RFC. If you have an issue with me, start your own RFC. Do not steal my article, and stow it away in the dungeons of RFC.

I am going to propose to close Lithuanian Wikipedia. I did not yet submit that page to voting. So no action can be taken on it legitimately. You cannot close anything, which is not started.

I have called for discussion. If you have comments, you should post them there, just like you have done so here. But you are afraid to to come out into the public, or to draw attention to this matter.

As for the personal attacks, see here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Requests_for_deletion/Archives/2010#Proposals_for_closing_projects.2FLithuanian_Wikipedia_and_Wikibooks_are_corrupt
The first sentence calls me names (a troll). It is a rule of wikipedia, that administrators implement only consensus. They can't act arbitrarily.

Why the "discussion" of my article took place far away from it, in secret, behind "closed doors". They are closed, because they are too hard to find. Perhaps you are surprised, and disappointed that I found it at all.

One user did write to you clearly, that your RFC has no basis:
Daft - not a candidate for speedy at all. --Herby
But do you care?

You are lying that my concerns will be heard. You stuff the ears of wikimedia. You will make sure that I am sterile, and harmless to abusers. You avoid discussion by all means.

You have seen my report. You have seen the abuse the entire team of Lithuanian administrators do. So what? Did you act as resolute as you persecute me?
No. You did not act in any way against them.

My grievances must be heard regardless of my tone. The tone of arrogant administrators is even worse. If you can't tolerate my tone, then you are not patient enough to be an administrator. Go away then.

You have removed a pending request for closing. You did so before the public had a chance to discuss it.
This is a very grave offence.

Your personal, private, secret discussion do not count.

Am I personally attacking you? Who else did so? It was you personally. You attacked yourself by your own action. - Not me.

You committed abuse yourself.
I will report it.

If you agree with my arguments, you may unlock the page. Then I will consider this particular incident resolved, and will not escalate it.

What will you do now? Move this my reply to RFC too? Hide it?

Responding in order:

• Calling editors "corrupt" is an example of a personal attack. Why are you attempting to close Lithuanian wikis? You don't close a Wikipedia on the basis that its editors have done something wrong. When you first disagree with the members of a wiki, you go to the Lithuanian Wikipedia and talk to the administrators about your problem, not open an inappropriate request on the Meta-Wiki. An administrator interprets consensus, yes, but that does not mean that they have to listen to you. Your arguments alone do not constitute consensus. And if you disagree with the consensus, then you do not go against it, you abide by it, and accept it however much you disagree.

:| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Blocked

block log ipblocklist crossblock luxo's unblock remove gblock contribs: +/- You have been blocked from editing Meta temporarily due to vandalism. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, and privacy violations are considered vandalism, and will not be tolerated. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. If you believe the block was placed in error, you may place an unblock request on your talk page using {{unblock|reason}}.

-- Wutsje 20:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Another edit like this and you'll be banned from meta. Is that difficult to use a collegial and civil tone? --dferg ^{☎ talk} 20:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

And now you are indefed. -Barras 20:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)