Jump to content

User talk:Michael

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Morwen (talk | contribs) at 14:52, 31 January 2006 (Reverted edits by Black ninja daniel morgan (talk) to last version by Peruvianllama). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The why is Michael not liked section

  • User:Pizza Puzzle -- Michael appears to be not liked for two reasons:
    • A) He enters a lot of apparently bogus information
    • B) He swears a lot
  • The Anome adds:
    • C) He enters false edit summaries to disguise what he is doing
    • D) He continues to edit, even when told that he is banned by the site admins.
    • E) He uses multiple login names and IP addresses to try to avoid bans
    • F) He appears to enjoy "mind games" at the expense of others, which seem to be his main motivation for editing here.
  • User:Quercusrobur adds:
    • G) He has a fixation on some band called Trapeze and is convinced they are actually Crass
    • H) He makes vulgar insinuations about the sexual preferences of female wiki contributors.
    • I) He has threatened to 'rape' other users (see Vandalism entry)


Plz submit further information in a concise and clear and coherent format

The why is Michael likable section

  • User:Pizza Puzzle says:
    • Michael is a sweet and lovable human being with issues of some sort which are not clear at this time
  • Rotem Dan says:
    • "Fun Fun Fun in the fluffy chair Flame up the herb Woof down the beer ...", this is really nice and funny! :) I think Michael is an imaginative and creative person who likes music a lot, has good writing skills, and needs a medium to express himself. The only problem is that he seems to have some major problem with giving attention to details, as in the accuracy of the articles that he writes. Naturally, that upsets fellow wikipedians. I bet that his responses and behavior weren't so vulgar and defensive if people were more at ease with him, and understood his problems. I have already proposed that he should be allowed to use his own namespace, that starts with his name, say Michael:Crass, for his article about Crass (that would be transferred to the main article after it has been factually approved), or he could also write in the meta-wikipedia (but I think it having his own namespace is preferable).

Please note, Rotem Dan, that the quote is from the song "MTV Get Off the Air" by the Dead Kennedys. --cprompt

      • Also-- if you check the record -- he didnt write that on his page -- I did. I also said "I like beans" to which he replied "me too." Its important to know your audience -- in this case Michael is not entirely accustomed to words with three or more syllables.-戴;&#30505sv 04:25, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)
    • Another problem I think is communication, in textual communication between people, it is definitely harder to express and understand the other person's emotions. Some people have problems with reading and understanding the subtle emotional language used in such limited textual system. I bet that if it was frontal, or at least vocal communication, then he would have understood better how others think about him, and acted more responsibly.
  • Ich says:
    • He added a category [Category:Later punk groups] to a page (that I have almost sole writing credit for) on Wizo that was a useful addition, but it was reverted because people assume that as a troll, all you do is bad stuff. I have no problem with a vandal being banned, but I want to say that his edit on Wizo wasn't vandalism; it added to content.
      • While that may be true, the fact is that Michael's behaviour was so bad that no-one trusts his contributions at all and he has been officially hard-banned (I think the only person to be so banned); this means that everything he contributes is reverted regardless of its virtues -- he is not permitted to have anything on Wikipedia. -- Arwel 09:38, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Plz submit further information in a concise and clear and coherent format

Older talk archived here.
Ban talk to User talk:Michael/ban

Michael, what is your source for the release dates of albums? Usually I can find no information on exact dates. On the only occasion I have, the date I found was different from the one you added to the article (see Talk:Public Affection). -- sannse 21:33 Mar 11, 2003 (UTC)

Michael, your antagonistic behavior is beginning to really annoy people. Please be more friendly. If you'd like, you should join the wikien-l mailing list to discuss these issues before it gets out of hand. It's simply unacceptable to answer legitimate content questions by saying "It's none of your business." Come on, now, why be that way? Jimbo Wales 14:45 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)

The quality and accuracy of all Wikipedia articles is everyone's business. In fact, it's our only business, since our mutual aim is to create high-quality, accurate article here. This is not an "opinion board", but a project to create a free encyclopedia. We are all accountable to each other.

I hope you will feel comfortable working with us, and please tell me what I can do to make your "stay" here more pleasant and rewarding. --Uncle Ed 14:55 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)

Could you perhaps explain your reasons for blanking this talk page? If not here, then somewhere else? We just want to talk with you - it doesn't matter where... Martin
What-fucking-ever Michael

Hey. Please don't add junk to articles. Writing "George Washington had sex with women and touching other peoples penises." on 1751 is not on. -- Tarquin 23:55 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, he did have sex in 1751 (i'm serious). Really, i'm serious girl or boy. Look it up from [http://www.firstgaytime.com the opposite sex]. A guy named peter knows.


What has that porn site got to do with George Washington? -- Tarquin 00:05 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)

I said go to [http://www.firstgaytime.com the opposite sex] you idiot! that's where you'll find his evacuation sex.

Yeah. I clicked that link. The link you've type above is http://www.firstgaytime.com . It appears to be a gay porn site. You might want to quote what it is you're referring to. -- Tarquin 00:14 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)

It was a joke. I was kidding. Of course didn't let girls suck George Washington's penis and let his wife suck on her friend who is a girl's vagina.

Fair enough. But please don't play jokes on article pages. People come to this site all the time, every second of the day, looking for information. We don't want them to find things like that in articles. It also makes extra work because someone (me in this case) has to clean in up. cheers. -- Tarquin 13:28 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)


What source are you using that tells you Crass recorded demos in 1976? It has been pointed out on Talk:Crass that they didn't. Could you please explain why you think they did if you are going to keep adding that information to pages. --Camembert

Also, why are you adding links to non-existent images such as on Slowhand? --Camembert

I am not -- Michael

Dear Michael: Welcome to The Wikipedia and I hope you enjoy your stay here. I saw that in only one day you have about 20 collaborations (pages and edits) done. That must be a record.

Down to business: I saw that you want your page about a music album not to be edited, as you stated it yourself. You will have to get used to having your articles edited. Why? Because as much as we want to be, none of us here are the know-it-all of the world and someone else with valuable information will probably come and add it. Not only that, but wiki-people also want encyclopedic like phrases on the site. For example, when you said The next year, they released feeding the 5000 in 1980, someone will probably change it to In 1980, they released...'

I hated getting edited at first, no secret about that. But I began to think that if it is a good edit with valuable information that I did not have, then why not? I get mad when people put things that make no sense. But I realized that if they add good info I didnt add, then my article looks better.

Other than that, good to have you here. Enjoy and I hope to read more of your articles soon.

God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Pink Head Martin

Fine

Please don't change my userpage. And please check your facts before you add them to the Wikipedia. Thanks, Tuf-Kat

Well, I'm sure you'll delete this and all, but at least it will be in the history. Please don't make duplicate articles under alternate capitalizations (e.g. Toys in the Attic, Toys In The Attic). In case you don't know, you put a the text #redirect XXX and clicking on the link will automatically take you to the article entitled XXX.

Do you make up information to add to articles? You seem to have an amazingly high proportion of simply incorrect additions. Would you mind doing some additional fact-checking?

Thanks for taking the time to delete my suggestions, Tuf-Kat

OK -- Michael

I like beans. -- Stevertigo



Me too -- Michael

Please stop adding utterly incorrect information to pages such as Album of the Year. It's getting to the stage where people are going to revert your changes even without checking them simply because much of your information is demonstrably inaccurate. Camembert


Michael, you're going to have to reply to people when they talk to you here. THis is how Wikipedia works. -- Tarquin 17:52 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)

OK! Fine! - Michael

Michael, I don't think it's appropriate to mention KROQ on the articles about bands. Bands such as Crass or Rainbow have their music played on radio stations all over the world; we're not going to list them all. -- Tarquin 00:49 Mar 17, 2003 (UTC)

I know we're not going to list Crass or Rainbow on our subject called History of KROQ. But, I like it when that page is there.
Wikipedia isn't about what we might 'like', it's about what is true, accurate and relevant, and 'KROQ' have sod all to do with Crass quercus robur 09:11 Mar 17, 2003 (UTC)
Fine!

Please don't move albums, or anything else, to subpages (e.g. Mötley Crüe/Shout at the Devil). The Wikipedia software doesn't support subpages, so it should be put at the most easily-linked to title, Shout at the Devil. Tuf-Kat

Along the same lines, what's your source for saying that Motley Crue formed in 1979? A quick search shows that the year was either 1980 or 1981. What are your intentions here, Michael? You've done an enormous amount of work, but much of it is littered with questionable facts that you don't provide support for. -- Stephen Gilbert

I saw this information from a fan website about Mötley Crüe, sir

Well sir, do you have a link, sir? My quick and dirty Google search shows a pretty even mix of 1980 and 1981 as the year, but no mentions of 1979. -- Stephen Gilbert

Copied from Nevermind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols talk page;

Removed

"Four songs previously appeared on 1976's live EP, The Mini-Album, which was recorded live from July 13 through July 30." from Nevermind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols;

Michael, please do a modicum of research before adding to these entries.

There was no 1976 live ep, the mini album is one of a slew of 'semi official' and bootleg releases of recordings of demos and such like that appeared long AFTER the Pistols ceased to be a creative force (it's called 'cashing in', Micheal). The tracks on the mini album were in fact demo's recorded with producer Dave Goodman from July 76, October 76 and possibly Jan 77, BUT WERE NOT RELEASED UNTIL MUCH LATER AS A SEMI-BOOTLEG!!!

The Pistols did not release ANYTHING before the single "Anarchy in the UK" in November 1976, it was their debut, and much awaited and anticipated at the time, I remember, I was there!!!!! Their next release was "God Save the Queen" in May 1977, in between THEY DID NOT HAVE A RECORD CONTRACT!!!.

There may be a case for adding a page to wiki devoted to Pistols bootlegs, but these should not be confused with the band's 'official' output, which is what counts in terms of chronology and an understanding of the history and context of The Pistols and the wider punk movement in which they existed, and the sociology of what was going on in the UK in 70's.

Sorry for the shouting but Michael is really exasperating me with his attempts at rewriting the history of UK punk. quercus robur 11:29 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)

A few suggestions:

  • As several people have already requested, please do some fact-checking. Simple things like release dates are easy to find. Do not make them up.
    • You seem to use some very different definitions of genres than others. Do you really classify Rush as punk and Fugazi as emo? If so, your POV should be represented; if not, then please refrain from describing them as such.
  • A self-titled album is not called Self-Titled. It is called The Ramones, Fugazi or something similar. Please refer to self-titled albums with their title.
  • Please do not make duplicate articles, like at Fugazi and Fugazi (band).
  • Please do not use subpages, like at Coal Chamber/Dark Days.
  • The word is performed, not preformed.
  • BAND makes contact to RECORD LABEL does not make sense in English. As you've probably deduced by seeing others change it, please use BAND signs to RECORD LABEL or BAND signs a contract with RECORD LABEL.
  • Please do not put the recording of albums in the year in music pages unless the recording was otherwise significant. That will make the lists of events much too long to be useful.
    • Similarly, please do not add when people like Rivers Cuomo go to college to the year in music pages. (1988 in music)
    • Do not randomly place bullets under unrelated bullets (1988 in music).
  • In English, the word blockbuster is not a synonym for popular. It is superlative, and means extremely popular. (1988 in music -- Time Odyssey was not a blockbuster)
  • Please use complete sentences (e.g. see my fix at Nothing's Shocking)
  • The subject of an article should be bolded on its first occurrence only.
  • Please don't erase all or part of talk pages. (e.g. Talk:Crass)

Thanks, Tuf-Kat

Yes sir, I will not erase Talk:Crass.

e.g. means for example, so you need to not erase any talk page at all. Tuf-Kat
And do you agree to follow my other requests? Tuf-Kat

Alex Lifeson's Victor was released in 1996 [1]. Please check your information with a reputable source before posting it. -- goatasaur

Good evening. I see you have deleted a stack of talk page comments again - please do not do this. I see you have kept adding incorrect info to articles again and then readding it even after its incorrectness has been pointed out - please do not do this. I don't know how much patience other people have left with you, but I have none, and if you carry on editing the way you are doing now I shall be sorely tempted to revert all your edits on sight. I hope the remainder of your weekend is pleasant. --Camembert

I agree - I'm getting fed up too. Michael, you are going to have to realize that this is not your personal playground and if you continue to do sloppy work and continue to ignore the wishes of other contributers then we will revert all your changes as soon as you make them. Please understand that we only wish the best for the project and will defend it when it's quality is being reduced by any single member. --mav
Just as a note to future readers, Michael blanked this talk page mere minutes after Mav left this last comment and a few hours after semi-agreeing to my request above. Tuf-Kat

Michael, since English does not appear to be your first language, I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt on the issue of complete sentences, and I will assume you have difficulty writing sentences. First time making movies from 1991-2003. is not a sentence because there is no subject, nor a verb. A sentence needs to have a person or other thing which does an action. For example, Alan Cummings began making movies in 1991 has a subject (Alan Cummings) which does an action (began making movies; note making can not be a verb alone, it requires a helper such as began or is or has been). Giving a timespan (such as 1991-2003) in this case doesn't work because the sentence is about the beginning of his acting career, which occurred in 1991 and not 2003 or any of the years in between. Thank you for trying to write in sentences... Tuf-Kat

Please don't include see alsos that are not obviously related unless there is an explanation for why the link is relevant. In addition, please don't make lists of similar artists and such (like at Alan Cummings). See Talk:Fiona Apple for the reason why. (I know this last request has no consensus, but no one has argued against my reasoning, so I am treating it as such) Tuf-Kat

Well, I've been deleting his similar artists and see alsos whenever I see them, and so has Salsa Shark. -- Zoe
Yeah, yeah, yeah. WHAT FUCKING EVER! - Michael
The double single-quotes will work across spaces. ''WHAT'' ''FUCKING'' ''EVER!'' will display the same as ''WHAT FUCKING EVER''. Tuf-Kat

See Talk:Mercyful Fate Thanks. Tuf-Kat

---

I can see I'm not the first person to have problems with this guy. In my arrogant opinion, this user is either careless or a vandal. He puts blatantly false information into pages, like asserting that Randy Rhoads committed suicide (see old versions of Quiet Riot), and not even spelling Randy Rhoads's name correctly. If even some of the other charges made against him above are true, the guy is a menace and may require administrative action. -- Branden

Michael, could you please explain where you get the information for a 1995 album by The Unseen called 13 Songs or 18 Songs or 19 Songs or anything like that? Their official website at http://unseen.thegeek.net/records.html makes no mention of any such album. -- Zoe

Michael, According to the Jimmy Eat World website, the album ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR was released in 1994, not 1995. Please do some more fact-checking.

Also, please do not include to-be-announced albums. Include them after they are released.

Thanks,

cprompt

OK - Michael

Note

The following is a complete list of articles last edited by User:Michael under that name:


The following is a complete list of articles last edited by User:No-Fx under that name:

None of the other users identified as Michael by JohnOwens's Most Wanted page have been the last to edit any article, disregarding talk pages and pages in their own user areas.

24.130.213.242

The following is a complete list of articles last edited from the IP address 24.130.213.242. Edits from that IP address have been reported as being by Michael.

Tim Allen
  • Michael addition removed. Guanaco 02:10, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Vinnie Moore
  • Has already been fixed. Guanaco 02:10, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Rachel Bolan
  • Reverted. Guanaco 02:10, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
King Diamond
  • Fixed except for the discography section, which will need to be checked. Guanaco 02:36, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I hope that this information will be of use to someone. -- Oliver P. 00:27 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

these edits are all prior to Michael's first edits under user:Michael, so I didn't add an accuracy dispute to any of them. Martin

Hi

(to user:My Green Dice) You don't have to worry about me doing anything to your garbage articles. It is accepted Wikipedia pratice to allow vandals to make whatever nonsense articles they want, and then to attack the people who try to clean up after them. You have my blessing. -- Zoe

After the roaring success that is user:Smarandache fan, I've applied the same approach to (two now) of Michael's pseudonyms. Revert if I'm wrong. Martin

hi, can you remind me of who the people are who are interested in reverting Michael's "contributions"? I just ask because it's much quicker for sysops than for non-sysops. Thanks. Koyaanis Qatsi 03:24 11 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yes, I know. It's an unending task. Oddly, I'm tempted to ask to be sysop again just so I can help revert his work. It's a shame, really. I think he may be mentally ill. Still I wish he'd go somewhere else. Koyaanis Qatsi 18:33 11 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Could well be the case- TUF KAT (I think- or mabe it was tarquin?) put forward a strong case that 'Michael' could well be autistic. However in the 'real world' I work with such people, as well as those who show other manifestations of learning disabilities and in the long run it doesn't help either the person or those that live with them to pander to their delusions or obsessional behaviours. quercus robur 01:35 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Tell me where you are, mike. Seriously. - Hephaestos 03:23, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Could some sort of restraining order be placed on "Michael?" I imagine it would have to be a Federal matter. We have amassed a huge chunk of evidence. If such an order could be procured, then he could face criminal prosecution. Kingturtle 19:02, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I think that is a logical approach. If as I suspect Michael's edit style is a product of mental illness, an external investigation could discover the fact. In that case having the police communicate with his carers about his behaviour might be enough to have those looking after him take actions themselves to stop his access. If he is simply a vandal acting maliciously, a restrained order could be the result. Either way, Wikipedia hasn't been able to stop him and the on its own won't be able to. It has to go outside wikipedia and down the legal route to establish who he is, why he acts the way he acts and then put a stop to it. FearÉIREANN 20:21, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I think a letter to his parents or legal guardian(s), would be quite effective, if he is not living alone. WhisperToMe 03:43, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

On the mailing list, I believe someone said they would contact his ISP, America Online. Does anyone know if that was done, and what the results were?
--cprompt 23:26, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)
AOL is, in my experience, completely indifferent to its users' abuse of the net in other matters; I fear we can expect no difference here. Salsa Shark 01:03, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Does this Michael have a life? Why doesn't he write articles that are correct. Is he actually doing something illegal? Are there laws for this sort of thing? --Sennheiser! 00:44, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Please do not block Michael's accounts. See the village pump. Guanaco 18:12, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I wash my hands of this whole matter

I have BEGGED that Michael be required to apologize for his actions, and have been absolutely and completely ignored. I have been listed on Vandalism in progress for reverting his illegally-placed edits. I have been villified by Guanaco and others for following the rules which they refuse to do. You're letting him back in and he'll be right back to where he started from, and I will not step in to do a damn thing about it. You have all made your beds. RickK 21:47, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

Why do you think that Michael hasn't apologized? Danny 21:49, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

He hasn't apologized on either his Michael or Mike Garcia account, and he hasn't apologized on the mailing list, so where would he have apologized? RickK 21:57, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

First of all, I fail to see how that is your business. Nowhere does it say he needs to make a public apology. Danny 22:01, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Actually, yes it does. See User:Michael/Proposal. RickK 22:06, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

That is not the original proposal. Danny 22:07, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

So what? And why did you delete this comment purportedly made by Michael?:RickK 22:08, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)

Because Michael did not make the comment. I will not have people trying to frame him. Danny 22:11, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Michael&oldid=37520196"