User talk:Parsley Man/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Parsley Man. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I'm not comfortable with the terrorism category you've added to this article. None of the sources in the article refer to this as terrorism.--v/r - TP 23:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I just noticed it was on a list in Terrorism in the United States and I ran with it. When I looked at the article itself, I noticed it and decided to add the category. Parsley Man (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Oh my god that article is awful. Someone needs to take a blender to it. We need sources to label any and all of these as terrorism. We can't just go adding every time someone kills people to a terrorism list. Of the items with a source, even a lot of them don't call it terrorism. I'm going to remove the category from the Harlem article, but the terrorism in the US article needs major work.--v/r - TP 23:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Well, you're going to have to do it, or get someone else to do it yourself. I'm already in a lot of heat with people who would contest with your post and I'd rather avoid anymore conflict. Parsley Man (talk) 23:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Oh my god that article is awful. Someone needs to take a blender to it. We need sources to label any and all of these as terrorism. We can't just go adding every time someone kills people to a terrorism list. Of the items with a source, even a lot of them don't call it terrorism. I'm going to remove the category from the Harlem article, but the terrorism in the US article needs major work.--v/r - TP 23:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Oakland Fire citations
Please don't revert my addition of good refs to the Oakland fire article. I can see from your page that you have a history of edit warring and getting into disputes. Let's avoid that here. Please leave my good ref additions alone.104.163.154.161 (talk) 05:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Ohio State University attack
Are you out of your mind? Religiously motivated attacks need no reference. A few Quranic verse from chapter 2:191-193 are a good example to prove that Ohio state university attack was motivated by religion itself. Do you allow me to add Quranic verses as a citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allansnackbar (talk • contribs) 14:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Videos
Hi, I thought you should probably weigh in on this conversation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Protests_against_Donald_Trump#Videos Victor Grigas (talk) 02:31, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- No can do. Parsley Man (talk) 03:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Victor Grigas (talk) Someone will take care of it.-Kevinmuniz115 (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
AN discussion
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Katietalk 21:18, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Despite being told at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive930 to stay away from E.M. Gregory, it's clear from his words at WP:AN, and even clearer from [1], that you've been following him all over the place. Stalking other users is harassment that will not be tolerated, and if you resume after this block has concluded, you may find yourself the recipient of an indefinite block. Nyttend (talk) 02:20, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Parsley Man (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have not been actively stalking E.M.Gregory in the past few months. We now usually have the occasional run-in because we tend to edit articles in the same general area of expertise (mass murder and terrorism). I was also confused by what the ANI ruling meant, whether I was supposed to literally avoid editing every article E.M.Gregory has edited or will edit, or just stop using E.M.Gregory's edit history to find articles and edit them no matter what the subject material is, which is actually what happened last time. I asked NeilN, the admin who made that ruling, about clarification here after a certain incident, but I apparently have yet to receive an answer. So, while I have stopped using E.M.Gregory's edit history and editing every article listed on there, I still edit certain articles that E.M.Gregory would be likely to come to, like the 2016 Ohio State University attack, for instance. I am confident this is what happened here, unlike last time. Parsley Man (talk) 02:37, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Decline reason:
The consensus at WP:AN was for a one-month ban. It would be inappropriate for any of us to override that consensus. Yamla (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- Given the histories of pages such as Talk:Shooting of Benjamin Marconi, Talk:James Oakley (politician), Keith Ellison (relevant diff), and Columbus State Community College (relevant diff), all of which you edited for the first time very soon after his edit(s), I see no reason to believe the statement in your unblock request. Nyttend (talk) 03:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- I have been editing the shooting of Benjamin Marconi long before E.M.Gregory came in, James Oakley (politician) was created by another user because of the Marconi article and therefore I had to check it out, and I didn't look at the Keith Ellison editing history before I actually started editing, so it was my bad there. Either way, I still would like clarification on what the ANI ruling meant: it was just "leave him alone" with no specifics entailed. Parsley Man (talk) 04:31, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- To Parsley Man's credit, they did edit on shooting of Benjamin Marconi and James Oakley (politician) before EM Gregory did. EvergreenFir (talk) 12:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- There is very strong evidence the overlap of article edits is not down to coincidence. If I was a statistician I might be able to calculate the odds of it happening, but I'm sure it is very low verging on zero. That said, there are also a significant number of articles first edited by Parsley Man which were later edited by E.M.Gregory; so it seems the "following" has worked both ways in the past. It is clear that they share a common interest in the same types of articles. A formal interaction ban may be one way forward, but that would necessarily hinder both of their edits. At this point in time I can't see evidence of bad-faith from Parsley Man; however he could have avoided all this trouble simply by never visiting the page Special:Contributions/E.M.Gregory. These are my thoughts at the moment — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:28, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- It is true that we both "do" shootings. This means that I scan the AFDs listed at "crime" and , therefore, as Parsley says, we will sometimes randomly end up on the same page. In re: Benjamin Marconi (and the related Oakley article) Note that I spotted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 shooting of San Antonio police officer at the Crime related AFD list, and made my first edit at the AFD [2], following it, as I frequently do with stuff I find at AFD, with edits bringing sources to the disputed page. This is not stalking, whichever of us does it.
- However, Please look at the list [3]. You will see , as the editor who imposed the ban did, that Parsley has long stalked me by following me to some pretty random places where he has no interest, and, in many specific cases, neither do I until I notice them at other AFD lists I check, like Christianity related AFD, where I found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Traynor (Royal Marine) and spent some WP:HEYMANN time editing such as John Traynor (Lourdes pilgrim), where Parsley improbably popped up. After the stalking hiatus following the explicit warning NOT to stalk me that he was given he was given at the conclusion of a long ANI discussion that Parsley started accusing me of... I honestly do not remember exactly what. What I do remember, clearly, is how daunting, intimidating, even frightening it felt to be accused and brought to what felt like a trial (OK, I've led a sheltered life, I've never really had to defend myself from an accusation before,) back to the topic at hand. Parsley has recently been back at it, following me again to random pages, including very old articles not recently in the news like Assassination of George Tiller, new articles including 2016 Great Smoky Mountains wildfires, and other articles.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:07, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- I noticed you didn't leave a space between words with this edit, so I simply sought to fix it along with some other minor stylistic edits. There's really nothing wrong or stalk-y with that, right? Then, I proceeded to make a few other edits on the Tiller assassination article that had nothing to do with affecting E.M.'s own edits. As for the wildfires article, I seriously didn't know you made some edits on there. I only noticed that article because I occasionally edited at the 2016 Southeastern United States wildfires article. I saw that the Tennessee wildfires had been split off into another article, so I visited that one too. Then, without checking the edit history, I edited that article too. Look, am I really supposed to check each and every edit history of every article I come across to see if E.M. has edited on it? Parsley Man (talk) 18:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- However, Please look at the list [3]. You will see , as the editor who imposed the ban did, that Parsley has long stalked me by following me to some pretty random places where he has no interest, and, in many specific cases, neither do I until I notice them at other AFD lists I check, like Christianity related AFD, where I found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Traynor (Royal Marine) and spent some WP:HEYMANN time editing such as John Traynor (Lourdes pilgrim), where Parsley improbably popped up. After the stalking hiatus following the explicit warning NOT to stalk me that he was given he was given at the conclusion of a long ANI discussion that Parsley started accusing me of... I honestly do not remember exactly what. What I do remember, clearly, is how daunting, intimidating, even frightening it felt to be accused and brought to what felt like a trial (OK, I've led a sheltered life, I've never really had to defend myself from an accusation before,) back to the topic at hand. Parsley has recently been back at it, following me again to random pages, including very old articles not recently in the news like Assassination of George Tiller, new articles including 2016 Great Smoky Mountains wildfires, and other articles.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:07, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- Let it be known that all of this stems from a deep-rooted disagreement the two of us have over the context of Islamic terrorism and its application for articles. Parsley Man (talk) 20:05, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oh for heavens' sake. Of course we disagree, but "all of this", as you put it, stems from the fact that you persist in Stalking me to pages like Assassination of George Tiller that have nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. sigh.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- @E.M.Gregory: I'd back off from interacting with this user at all. You complained you were being stalked, and such a claim was found to have merit, and Parsley Man was temporarily blocked. Now, you come here and start grave dancing over the issue. Leave him alone yourself unless you'd like someone to return the favor to you. When you complain you don't want someone to bother you, then when they get blocked you start bothering them, it is unlikely to work out well for you. Just leave him be. --Jayron32 20:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- I went over there to fix a spacing error you made. Does that really equate to defecation of edits? Parsley Man (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oh for heavens' sake. Of course we disagree, but "all of this", as you put it, stems from the fact that you persist in Stalking me to pages like Assassination of George Tiller that have nothing to do with Islamic terrorism. sigh.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- I have been editing the shooting of Benjamin Marconi long before E.M.Gregory came in, James Oakley (politician) was created by another user because of the Marconi article and therefore I had to check it out, and I didn't look at the Keith Ellison editing history before I actually started editing, so it was my bad there. Either way, I still would like clarification on what the ANI ruling meant: it was just "leave him alone" with no specifics entailed. Parsley Man (talk) 04:31, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
- The John Traynor (Lourdes pilgrim) incident and others, as E.M.Gregory puts it, happened several months ago when I decided to use Special:Contributions/E.M.Gregory to find articles to edit. But that has not happened since. The only reason I would have edited on articles he edited before right now was because they either came up during one of my Alt+Shift+X searches (like Keith Ellison) or were connected to another article I was already editing (like 2016 Great Smoky Mountains wildfires, which was connected to 2016 Southeastern United States wildfires, where I was active and E.M. was not), and in both cases, I did not look at the edit history for E.M.'s name because I really didn't think he would be on there, at least not recently. The only exception, I will admit, was the Assassination of George Tiller, but I merely noticed there was a spacing error he made and decided to fix it, no harm, no foul. Then my other edits had nothing to do with affecting his own, unless he helped construct the whole article, which I would not know because I did not bother to look far back into the edit history. To be blunt, most of this is because I did not look at the edit history for E.M.'s name. Parsley Man (talk) 05:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Nyttend, you may be interested in having a look at User talk:A1b2C3d4. Ponyo, since you blocked this account in August, perhaps you have an opinion too. Parsley Man, what can I say but this: fool. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- Well that's disappointing... Might want to add it to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Parsley Man. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Since you had me figured out...
I'll come clean. I'm also DisuseKid.
But no matter what, I've done good for this encyclopedia. Don't you dare deny that. You guys need me! Parsley Man (talk) 07:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
- Blocked accordingly, then. Also, Wikipedia:Wikipedia does not need you. If you are regularly being blocked, that's an indication that you are more harm to the site than good and as such we do not need you. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Shooting of Benjamin Marconi
On 7 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Shooting of Benjamin Marconi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the suspect in the shooting of Detective Benjamin Marconi got married the following morning and was arrested later that day? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shooting of Benjamin Marconi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Shooting of Benjamin Marconi), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Schwede66 00:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
RfC notice
There is a Request for Comment posted at Talk:New York Daily News#Request for Comment. You are being notified as one of every registered editor who has edited that article in that past year. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:10, 18 January 2017 (UTC)