User talk:Paul Norfolk Dumpling

Helpme

Could you tell me how to "nominate" someone for a ban? It seems they have a long history of warnings, and temporary bans.

I posted a warning to them yesterday, regarding another incident of unsourced information, and they have ignored this too.

According to the user talk, they have been warning for using unsourced information, and vandalism in the past. Paul Norfolk Dumpling 15:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, simple vandals can be reported on WP:AIV where they will be summarily blocked by an administrator. For less clear-cut cases, or for cases that aren't vandalism, use WP:ANI. Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 15:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't be ridiculous. Barbara Osgood 22:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes you are. Valid and valuable contributions I make outstrip anything else by, literally, hundreds. And have done for over a year since any "long and extensive" history. Barbara Osgood 22:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't claim it was justified. I am talking about balance and judgement. Each to our own. Barbara Osgood 22:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

I apologise if my edits come across as vandalism and I assure you and the Wikipedia community that there was in no way any malice intended. I recently read an obscure passage in an underground magazine that described one Charley Uchea as a "Bitchicus Whinicus" and I thought that it was applicable, as there was alot of citation.Ryannus 20:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand your concerns about the Big Brother article remaining neutral and how it may have come across as a vicious personal attack, but surely in order to obtain a neutral point of view, we must take into account different points of view? I have yet to discover if the term "Bitchicus Whinicus" is a genuine term for such an "annoying female", but I am sure that there must be a medical term for Charley Uchea and that she could be a possible candidate for a personality test. Big Brother, despite being a gameshow, is in a fact a huge experiment and if we are to better ourselves as human beings, we must come to understand the human condition and I would be willing to put this idea forward to Channel 4. Ryannus 20:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Reverting

Paul, excellent work on the Big Brother 2007 (UK) article, but I just wanted to ask if, where possible, you can use the undo function rather than manually reverting changes. There are various reasons for this, for example it puts a standard revert template into the comment on the change, it avoids any errors when changing the text back (not that I have seen you make any), and finally it also gives it a more authoritative look, it's less likely to be changed back and turn into a edit war. Obviously this isn't always possible as people may have made changes since, so in that case carry on as normal. Thanks. John Hayes 09:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Weasel Words in Buildings in King's Lynn

Paul, you added the Weasel Words header to the Buildings in King's Lynn page, but neglected to elaborate or give examples of the sections that 'make you cringe' in the talk page. Do you think you would be able to highlight the problem so I can go through and improve the article? Alienturnedhuman 20:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)