User talk:Judge Dredd/Archive5

__NOINDEX__

Drafts
Do I make a draft in my own userspace (how?) or just add "Draft:" when creating article.Tobias (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's a draft I wish to create Noah Carl Controversy: FAQ (rebuttal)Tobias (talk) 18:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * You simply append  to create a title like Draft:Noah Carl Controversy: FAQ (rebuttal).  18:40, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I just want to say is...
Thank you for blocking UglyRat. That guy was atrocious to everyone on both FANDOM Wikia and RationalWiki. Mar9122 (talk) 23:38, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Greenrd
I suggest a topic ban on Greenrd from editing Claire Lehmann & Quillette. He's back to making problematic edits on Lehmann, see talk of that article. Tobias (talk) 20:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Well at least we got him to stop removing parts of articles, now he is just being weird. 21:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It's a typical modern conservative viewpoint - there's only two sexes. However it's wrong and isn't supported by science. Funnily enough, despite being conservative, it's not even a good traditional view because ancient Greeks and Roman writers knew of inter-sex individuals and viewed sex as a spectrum.Tobias (talk) 22:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Well yes, but a tiny detail like that never bothers the conservative traditionalists. It's a common misconception, I am not too angry. 22:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The fact I removed Greens dubious edit was harassment of Claire Lehmann. I'm so sorry. Tobias (talk) 22:35, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Ah, why I am not surprised, I guess these people never change.

I have added the less than complimentary VDare article about you and RationalWiki to the edit filter to stop nitwits spamming it everywhere, but now Abd is calling hypocrisy because we haven't added it to our pissed at us page. Ultimately it's up to you if you want it there, and I will completely understand if you don't. But I thought I would at least give you the option to add a brief lampoon in your own style. Especially as you went to the trouble of writing an entire article about the shite who wrote it.

Also I note that you have been busy writing about some Reddit thing (more drama lol) on the Emil Kirkegaard talk page. But there is a mod noticeboard discussion currently on the subject of whether users should talk about off-wiki drama such as Reddit etc, on the Wiki itself. You should bear that in mind, and probably keep an eye on it.

And relevant to what you mentioned above, I wonder if Emil Kirkegaard himself now counts as pissed at us. Could be worth adding if there is the material for it. 22:42, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Someone recently contacted me asking about Welton because they want to sue him for defamation. However I said just ignore what he writes because VDARE gets few clicks and no one take it serious. Aside from Mike and Kirkegaard spamming the link to that VDARE article, it probably has less than 500 clicks. So I don't actually mind if it is mentioned on RationalWiki. I was interested in finding who Welton is, hence the article I wrote (largely though just a copy & paste of his deranged beliefs) but he protects his identity, using a pseudonym. This is another reason why I told the person who contacted me why a lawsuit wouldn't get anywhere.Tobias (talk) 23:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Re: kirkegaard. You won't get any sense out of him on Twitter. He's totally irrational. He never explains how I've "harassed" anyone, lies all the time and likely has some sort of victim complex. Also his claim I "stalk" him is psychological projection since as that tweet proves he sits viewing my online edits on RationalWiki, to the extent he will count and screenshot them.Tobias (talk) 23:31, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * People can view my edits, I've not "attacked" or "harassed" anyone rather I've documented and criticised their pseudoscientific beliefs; I also have written a rebuttal to Noah Carl's FAQ that contains many falsehoods and misleading statements. None of this is "harassment".Tobias (talk) 23:49, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Emil was 100% not interested in saying anything to me when I asked why he tweeted that, and blocked me on Twitter without responding, so I can't say I disagree. 09:24, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * You've seen for yourself how he outright lies e.g. my only edit on Claire's article (not even the mainspace) was on the talk and wasn't "harassment", I merely complained about a problematic edit by Green. And there's nothing "harassing" on the Jonathan Anomaly article, that criticises his eugenics views (200 academic signed an open letter also criticising the same thing.) Everything else he's written about me is lies as well. He's the main person responsible for spreading the libel I'm somehow a "schizophrenic stalker who harasses people".Tobias (talk) 12:17, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Not to mention his defense of Noal Carl and others liek him. This guy puts fringe views in academic context, associates with people who do the same, literally organizes infrastructure to allow them do this, and then wonders why nobody will touch him with a barge-pole. Epic. 12:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Your block of "what a wonderful world"
Was it a joke block or did I miss something important that warranted an indef block? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I wish :) 15:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Note
To the banned people so insistent on leaving me messages, like Mike, Max, and Morris (three Ms huh) you would find it better to email me perhaps. ta. 15:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what Mike is doing, just wasting his own time. He claims his article contains "defamation" yet all it does quote is his own postings of Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism, neo-Nazi/white nationalist politics, sexism etc. The article mirrors what is on his remaining social media profiles such as Gab (Twitter banned him). If he's claiming he's being defamed if he's being called a Nazi or white nationalist, why is this all over his social media? His most recent comments are virulently anti-Semitic. I see no defamation on the article. Tobias (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps unlock his talk page for one day to give him a chance to list the alleged "defamation". I would like to see what he claims, since he's never provided any evidence.Tobias (talk) 16:02, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Na, he is welcome to follow the RationalWiki:Legal FAQ anytime. 16:07, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * (redacted)
 * You know what you've been up to you sly fox. :p 19:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, no I don't. Enlighten me. I don't drink, so I can't blame it on that... What a Wonderful World (talk) 19:26, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Huh. 19:44, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Restore my mod powers *now*
What the fuck?! — Dr. Ox   quack specialist  00:37, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Mod powers are under the control of Princess Emblyn right now as they are part of the admin role, I will leave a note. :D 00:41, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No you fucked up the perms for the "mod" role. Not adminship, I can't pin messages, kick people, none of that. What the hell? — Dr. Ox   quack specialist  00:52, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The mod role isn't supposed to have any perms because a ton of people have the mod role, I don't think it was ever supposed to have any perms afaik. The issue is I can give you the admin role because it's equally ranked to me, hence, I will get Em to do it. 00:56, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If that doesn't work you know what to do. — Dr. Ox   quack specialist  00:58, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you just restore mod perms? Em set them up like that in the first place. And who cares if a ton of people have the mod role, nothing bad's gonna happen. Remember that most people on the wiki are sysops, we can revert vandals here, we can kick trolls there, capisce? — Dr. Ox   quack specialist  01:31, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * done EK (talk) 10:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Awesome award
For consistent quality work (and for knowledge of Creative Commons). Bongolian (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Dysk gets a free goat. Congratulations! — Dr. Ox   quack specialist  07:04, 11 May 2019 (UTC)