Forum:What happened to Do NOT click any links/click19?
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > What happened to Do NOT click any links/click19?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 6400 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.
Do NOT click any links!/click19 was an ordinary page in the Do NOT click subpages, but someone deleted it and it got replaced with some crap. Can someone restore the original version? --User:Nintendorulez 11:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- I suggest you take this up directly with Isra since he deleted it:
- 21:27, 20 April 2006 Isra1337 deleted "Do NOT click any links!/click19" (for continually being a pain in my ass because nintendorulez won't listen). -- Sir Codeine KUN VFP Bur. MDA NS UotM CM +S (Harangue) 11:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, yea, isra screwed with a lot of the Do NOT click subpages, mainly inserting templates and whatnot that didn't belong there, etc. Adding links to the one that specifically said "This time I wont put any links here", it goes on and on... --User:Nintendorulez 13:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nin, it amazes me continually that you would revert an admin four times in a row, even after he threatens to ban you and YET you still have not even bothered to ask me about the reason, which, though I did give, you clearly do not understand. ---
Rev. Isra (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- I did ask, right in the edit summary, and I actually didn't get a response. --User:Nintendorulez 22:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nin, it amazes me continually that you would revert an admin four times in a row, even after he threatens to ban you and YET you still have not even bothered to ask me about the reason, which, though I did give, you clearly do not understand. ---
- Ah, yea, isra screwed with a lot of the Do NOT click subpages, mainly inserting templates and whatnot that didn't belong there, etc. Adding links to the one that specifically said "This time I wont put any links here", it goes on and on... --User:Nintendorulez 13:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Isra, if the page appearing on special:deadendpages is such an issue, why didn't you just add an invisible link to the page yourself instead of escalating this? It would seem to be a cleaner resolution of the issue. JMHO... --Carlb 01:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Check the history. That's what I did. Again and again. Apparently the invisible link was such an affront to Nin's sensibilities that he reverted it each time. After the fourth revert I said "fuck it, maybe he'll pay attention this time if I delete it." He did and has now promised to move the page out of the main namespace rather than submit to the invisible link. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 02:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- I suggested the idea, I didn't say I would do it. I'm a lazy ass. And it wasn't invisible, since there's text to make it show up on highlight. If it appearing in Deadendpages is such a big deal, then I've come up with a temporary solution by putting a truly invisible link there. It can only be accessed with the tab key. (It works, and I checked Deadendpages) Although I have one thing to say: click7 is supposed to be a dead end. What about that one? --User:Nintendorulez 11:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Check the history. That's what I did. Again and again. Apparently the invisible link was such an affront to Nin's sensibilities that he reverted it each time. After the fourth revert I said "fuck it, maybe he'll pay attention this time if I delete it." He did and has now promised to move the page out of the main namespace rather than submit to the invisible link. ---
- 13:13, 24 April 2006 Carlb restored "Do NOT click any links!/click19"
- 20:27, 20 April 2006 Isra1337 deleted "Do NOT click any links!/click19" (for continually being a pain in my ass because nintendorulez won't listen)
- 08:40, 2 April 2006 Splaka deleted "Do NOT click any links!/click19" (no link to 20)
I suggest CVP.--Jtaylor1
02:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I know it's been a month since I banned you Nin, so you may have forgotten the "don't revert admin changes without discussion" rule. After doing so on Do NOT click any links!/click19 and Encyclopædia_Dramatica, is there any reason that I shouldn't ban you for a while to refresh your memory? 
Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 21:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
If the "click19" question is resolved (and it appears to be at the moment), could you please just leave it resolved instead of attempting to create more problems just for the sake of a "hey, look at me, I'm an admin!" peeing match? --Carlb 23:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Nin and I have been having a pissing match about being revert-happy and discussionless for at least six months. It'd be a shame to let it go this late in the game. ;)
Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 00:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- To be more specific, my irritation lies in that Nintendorulez continues to do something which pissed me off enough to ban him more than once, which frustrated the hell out of Flammable enough that he banned him, and which pissed off Isra1337 enough that he debated banning him. It's not like it's really hard to ask an admin why they did something - we're usually pretty good at answering. It's that I'm tired of seeing Nintendorulez pissing off admins by doing the same thing over and over and over.... Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- For god's sake, I did ask. It's called an edit summary, which is used to explain changes made rather than simply making threats and leaving no explanation as to why the article was fucked up. --User:Nintendorulez 11:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Traditionally questions end with a question mark. They also tend to include an interogative pronoun. Last but not least, they should request some information or acknowledge that the questioner lacks some understanding. Unless you count "What the hell?" you did not ask a meaningful question either in your edit summary or elsewhere. It is also apparent by your most recent (and intentionally disrespectful) edit summary to the page that you still don't get it. The fact that several admins complained at me when I decided to give you one more chance instead of banning you on the spot tells me that your problem here is not an isolated one. A good rule of thumb is this: don't assume that the admin is an idiot who just needs the obvious to be stated and that you know all even without checking up on easily disconfirmed assumptions. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 23:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- Traditionally questions end with a question mark. They also tend to include an interogative pronoun. Last but not least, they should request some information or acknowledge that the questioner lacks some understanding. Unless you count "What the hell?" you did not ask a meaningful question either in your edit summary or elsewhere. It is also apparent by your most recent (and intentionally disrespectful) edit summary to the page that you still don't get it. The fact that several admins complained at me when I decided to give you one more chance instead of banning you on the spot tells me that your problem here is not an isolated one. A good rule of thumb is this: don't assume that the admin is an idiot who just needs the obvious to be stated and that you know all even without checking up on easily disconfirmed assumptions. ---
- Nin - read this, especially the part about "Only Use "Talk:" pages to Communicate with Admins and Other Members". If you can take that whole page to heart, I will probably get off your case. And that would be a very good thing. Not to continue to bash, but your edit comments have really started to become sermons, to the point of inappropriateness. Clean up your act and all will be well. Ish. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 02:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- For god's sake, I did ask. It's called an edit summary, which is used to explain changes made rather than simply making threats and leaving no explanation as to why the article was fucked up. --User:Nintendorulez 11:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
- To be more specific, my irritation lies in that Nintendorulez continues to do something which pissed me off enough to ban him more than once, which frustrated the hell out of Flammable enough that he banned him, and which pissed off Isra1337 enough that he debated banning him. It's not like it's really hard to ask an admin why they did something - we're usually pretty good at answering. It's that I'm tired of seeing Nintendorulez pissing off admins by doing the same thing over and over and over....