Verskil tüsken versys van "Overleg gebruker:Jafeluv"

meta:User talk:Jafeluv
Dit is n niet-rechtstreekse deurverwiezing.

• Gebruker:Jafeluv/monobook.js war gin vandalismus. t War ok neet belangriek, moar ie har mal:vort/mal:delete gebruken können. --Erik Warmelink 16:49, 13 juli 2010 (CEST)
• Gebruker:Jafeluv/monobook.js wasn't vandalism. It wasn't important either, but you could have used mal:vort/mal:delete. --Erik Warmelink 16:49, 13 juli 2010 (CEST)

Hi Erik! Sorry for writing in English, but I don't speak Nedersaksisch. If I understand you correctly, it's not okay to delete one's own javascript pages that are no longer needed? I thought removing such pages would be completely uncontroversial (after all, who would benefit from keeping them?). If it's against your policies, I'll of course use {{delete}} next time. I can't see why it should be, though. Best regards, Jafeluv 00:54, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

It is not OK to use global sysop privileges just to show off. It's definitely not OK to use them to strengthen an email harassment campaign. --Erik Warmelink 09:32, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

I agree. I didn't do either of those, though, did I? Jafeluv 11:44, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

I'm not so sure about the second, you did (probably unintentionally) strengthen the harassment campaign (from de.wiki: What words should I censor?). What made you decide to delete that file at 3:17 in the morning? --Erik Warmelink 13:07, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

Would you mind explaining what harassment campaign you're talking about, and how on earth my deletion of a useless redirect in my own userspace could possibly make any difference to that? I don't know Dutch so the most past of the discussion you linked doesn't really tell me anything. Jafeluv 13:21, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

About the harassment campaign:

• Whether you speak Dutch or not, you can see the name of File:Map - NL - Hellendoorn - Wijk 02 Nijverdal Noord - Buurt 03 Galgeman-industrieterrein-Noord.svg, you can see the interwiki's at nl:galg and nl:gagel/nl:wilde gagel.
• nl:Overleg:Wijken en buurten in Hellendoorn is in English.
• commons:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Abigor.
• Gebruker:Erik Warmelink/wachtwoord is in Platt, but the emails (these times from the wiki[mp]edia servers) are English/German.

Once again, what happened between 1:11 (if you didn't send the email: 1:49) and 3:17? --Erik Warmelink 20:46, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

On 25 january John Vandenberg linked to http://fo.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Serstakt:Seinastu_broytingar&days=90&limit=500. At that time it showed that global sysops are unnecessary. Today the same link shows that global sysops mostly clutter the logs. And, yes, you and your friends can start vandalizing that wiki now, but it won't disprove the point that there was no vandalism (compare the edits outside Brúkari:). --Erik Warmelink 20:46, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

Erik, what does any of this have to do with my monobook.js? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I've never interacted with you before, and absolutely certain that I have never sent you a single email. Are you sure you have the right person? Jafeluv 23:24, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

User without a first name, that email was sent. Why did you delete that file in the middle of the night? If you didn't send the email, can you explain http://nds-nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Motte_(dier)&diff=154207&oldid=143715 (1st edit, a revert of an edit I made more than 3 months ago). --Erik Warmelink 23:30, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

You can call me Jafe. So let me get this straight: You're accusing me of sending you harassing emails that have something to do with a file I've never seen before, a checkuser case for a user who I've never interacted with, and a revert of your edit by a user I've also never interacted with – based on the evidence that I deleted my own monobook.js subpage instead of using a {{delete}} template. Is there something I'm missing? Jafeluv 23:50, 14 juli 2010 (CEST)

I can call you pseudonym (and other words). I was not accusing you of sending that email, I was asking you why you chose to delete that file in the middle of the night shortly after that harassing email was sent. You chose not to answer. So, since you insist, I accuse you of being immature (otherwise your friends/puppets would have made you steward instead of global sysop). --Erik Warmelink 00:02, 15 juli 2010 (CEST)

Heh. Well, I'm glad that's settled, then. Jafeluv 00:24, 15 juli 2010 (CEST)

You didn't answer the question, IRC-puppet. What happened between 1:11 (if you didn't send the email: 1:49) and 3:17?

If you're only going to insult me and make baseless accusations, I'd like you to please stop posting on my talk page. Jafeluv 01:05, 15 juli 2010 (CEST)

You didn't answer the question. What happened between 1:11 (if you didn't send the email: 1:49) and 3:17? --Erik Warmelink 05:07, 15 juli 2010 (CEST)

As I told you before, I haven't sent you any kind of email. I don't know you. This was very likely our first interaction anywhere ever. What happened between 1:49 and 3:17? I deleted the monobook.js at 1:17 UTC, which is what I assume you mean by "3:17". As far as I can tell, I didn't do anything at 23:49 UTC on the 12th (which would correspond to your "1:49") – at least I can't find an edit with that timestamp in my contributions. So I don't know what is supposed to have happened at that time. What happened in-between? I guess I could dig through my contributions and find out where exactly I was editing, but I don't think I will. I still don't know what you're accusing me of, or why you think you have the right to come and post personal attacks on my talk page. I have nothing more to discuss with you. Jafeluv 01:35, 16 juli 2010 (CEST)

outdent 1

I can dig through your contributions around that time (and I did). I didn't (intentionally) accuse you of anything, I just asked you what happened between 1:11 CEST and 3:17 CEST which made you decide to delete Gebruker:Jafeluv/monobook.js. It had been a fairly useless redirect since April 9 when you renamed it to Gebruker:Jafeluv/vector.js. What made you decide to delete it more than 90 days later but less than 90 minutes after I received an email which told me that my entries in Kattegerie:vort will not be deleted, but that unelected users can delete the files they want to delete and block the users they want to block? --Erik Warmelink 07:06, 16 juli 2010 (CEST)

All I can say is that I assure you it must have been a coincidence. I had been meaning to tag the redirects for deletion, but decided to wait until I can delete at least some of them myself, so that I don't need to bother local admins with it. (After all, we're supposed to decrease the workload of the local admins so that they can concentrate on the important stuff.) Anyway, I was only made a GS just over 24 hours earlier, so that's why it took over 90 days to get it done. I didn't mean to "show off", nor was I trying to make a point that people can "delete what they want or block who they want". (If I did, I surely wouldn't have picked a page that was of no importance whatsoever to anyone except me.) In any case I believe a GS who overstepped their boundaries and started deleting what they wanted would have the tools quickly removed. But that's not the point, really. The point is I didn't have anything to do with the email sent to you, simply because I was unaware of your existence at the time. I haven't had any disputes with you anywhere, so I would have no reason to suddenly start harassing you, would I? Nobody told me to delete the files when I did. I simply happened to be editing and didn't have anything meaningful to do at the time. Jafeluv 11:19, 16 juli 2010 (CEST)

Erik, t is nait de bedoulen dat goudwillende luu dij allend mor biedroagen willen aan wikipedia blokkeerd worden zunder gouie rezen. Op dij menaaier krieerst allendeg mor irritoatsie en dat is nait wat wie willen, dus wees even wat minder protektief en lot verdachte gebrukers gewoon even geworden. Zo laank zai niks verkeerds doun is der gain reden veur blokkades of zoks wat en n politsieagìnt het wikipedia nait neudeg. Grönneger 1 18:10, 16 juli 2010 (CEST)

Grönneger 1, I did not ask you or anyone else to block Jafeluv. Could you please give me some time to investigate? Could you please look at kattegerie:vort which has entries like kattegerie:wereldarfgoed in China which were proposed for deletion more than half a year ago? If you were just trolling for that "good reason" to block me, you've got it now. --Erik Warmelink 00:04, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

Dat is nait t probleem en doe moutst dit ook nait zain as n aanval. Ik zeg allendeg datst n beetje overdriefst mit verdenken van vandalisme en zo laank as der nog gain vandalisme pleegd is, huift der van mien paart ook gainaine onderzöcht worden. Bist messchain wat té beschaarmend en kinst dingen ook op n wat vrundelekere wieze ôfhaandeln. Neem dit nait te persoonlek op, t is goud bedould. Grönneger 1 01:49, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

That is not the problem and I am not attacking you at all. All I am saying is that you may be a bit exessive when suspecting people from vandalisation and as long as no vandalisation has been committed, any investigation is unnecessary. You may be too protective and can solve things in a kind way. Do not take it too personally, I say this with good intentions. Grönneger 1 01:51, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

For the record, I didn't suspect Jafeluv of vandalism (deleting an unimportant file in one's own user namespace isn't vandalism). It is about harassment in email and I tried to only ask Jafeluv why (s)he deleted Gebruker:Jafeluv/monobook.js at that particular moment. I failed and did accuse Jafeluv and now I try to find out whether an humble apology will do or whether I need to grovel. --Erik Warmelink 09:08, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

Oke, mor kiek es, t is zo wat luttegs en dat gruit oet tot n haile boudel. Zugst toch wel dat dizze wieze van luu benoadern allend mor gedönder oplevert... Grönneger 1 19:43, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

t Is nait luttek as luu zewat iedere dag oewn va bedreigd.

It isn't of little importance if people almost daily threaten one's father. --Erik Warmelink 21:06, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

@Jafeluv, it's time to grovel. I only have an excuse for why the groveling took so long. We have interacted before, I have gesichtet some of your edits about de:St.-Louis-Blues. I can't explain why I remembered your name, but somehow I did. --Erik Warmelink 21:06, 17 juli 2010 (CEST)

Hi Jafeluv,

could you explain me how Gebruker:Tiyoringo would be vandalism? You are not an elected admin here. Erik Warmelink 21:23, 5 aug 2010 (CEST)[reageren]

Hi again! Of course I understand that I'm not an elected admin here, and didn't mean to step on anyone's toes. I'm fully aware that I'm only supposed to use the tools for antivandalism and routine maintenance. The user requested the deletion of their userpages in all wikis, and I thought that it would be an uncontroversial maintenance job to go ahead and remove them. However, if you guys feel that it should have been left to local admins I'll refrain from doing such actions in the future. Regards, Jafeluv 22:11, 5 aug 2010 (CEST)[reageren]

I suppose you would know now that "routine maintenance" isn't the problem. The problem is harassing emails, announcing admin actions by IRC-friends of the harasser(s), and followed within short time by admin actions by a user hiding behind a pseudonym (and by sheer coincidence, it was "Jafeluv" again). Threatening to hang my father is not "routine maintenance". And, of course, you didn't send that email, because you are a pseudonym, which also means that your father can't be threatened; the threat was sent by "another" pseudonym. Once again, with whom did you speak outside public places just before you decided to delete that file? Erik Warmelink 01:03, 6 aug 2010 (CEST)[reageren]

Hol nou toch ais op joe baaident mit dizze onzin. Woarom mout dit op wikipedia?

Both of you, stop this fucking bull shit. Wikipedia is not made for personal conflicts. Grönneger 1 10:25, 6 aug 2010 (CEST)[reageren]

Jafeluv hoeft mi-j neet te mailen as-e iets vortgooit. Mie ducht dat-e niks vort hoef te gooien.

Jafeluv doesn't need to mail me if (s)he intends to delete something (and the allusion to a swinging body was rather farfetched). As far as I know, Jafeluv has never deleted anything which needed to be deleted fast. --Erik Warmelink 21:47, 7 aug 2010 (CEST)[reageren]

As I told you before, I have never sent you a single email, nor have I had anything to you with you before you started posting on my talk page. Why you believe otherwise is completely beyond me. I'm trying to help. You don't want my help, that's fine, but I don't think I deserve you thinking that I'm your enemy.

It seems that your issue might not be with me but with crosswiki contributors in general.[1][2][3] However, that's not really any of my business. How about a solution to the immediate issue: If you guys think it would be better that I leave this project alone, I can. Furthermore, I'll try to avoid you, Erik, if I see you on other projects, since it seems that every time I see you you associate me with the person/people that are harassing you. (Once more I assure you that I have nothing to do with any of that.) Would such a solution be acceptable to you?

By the way, if it's global sysops in general you have objections to, I have a suggestion: you can try to get community consensus to opt out from global sysops, and announce it on Meta with a link to the community discussion. I don't think if you guys have considered it already, but that's one option. Jafeluv 00:51, 8 aug 2010 (CEST)[reageren]