User talk:Coffee

This user is more awesome than you.

Removal of sourced material

There's a lot of removal of sourced material on the Marlon Brando article by IP's going on, and I would very much like it to stop. Maybe a semi-protection would be helpful? Mythic Writerlord (talk) 09:49, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 14:44, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Demolished buildings and structures in the United States by state

The Category:Demolished buildings and structures in the United States by state currently has only 9 of the 50 states with their own categories. I was going to start creating some of the others, until I saw that they had already been created and deleted. Apparently it was part of a mass deletion of content added by a banned user. If so, would it be okay for me to go ahead and create those categories again? Thanks! Dafoeberezin3494 (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Dafoeberezin3494: Yes, as long as you feel those categories are necessary, do as you please. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 14:44, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Chhavi Leekha

“Dear Chet B. Long,

This message is with reference to deletion of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chhavi_leekha wiki page. On checking the deletion summary we found that this page has been deleted by you immediately and without discussion. We also noticed that this page has been considered under Orphaned articles category.

However, we tried to figure out the exact reason of It but couldn’t crack the complexity of the process. It would be really great if you can help us restore the page and guide us to make it more authenticated to avoid any further damage.

Looking forward to you support.”

Regards

Pankaj — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoomnzap (talk • contribs) 06:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Zoomnzap - Two things: 1. Who is "us"? 2. The reason for the deletion (which can be found at the proper spelling Chhavi Leekha) is as follows: "Expired WP:PROD, concern was: Non-notable - no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Only notability claim is a one-off internal award issued by her own employer and reported in press release format in a trade magazine.". — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 19:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

I have reason to believe the user here is the same person as User:MalleusMaleficarum1486 who has already been banned from wikipedia by you. I am almost 100% percent certain of this based on location, edits, and an off-wiki source I sadly cannot disclose. Would you mind looking into this before he causes more disruption and edit warring, like he is doing right now? Thanks a lot in advance, and sorry to bother you again but I thought it would be best to bring this to your attention swiftly. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Celibacy and Incel

Coffee, per

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Involuntary celibacy (2nd nomination), and
• this talk page discussion,

Mythic Writerlord has continued to remove the merged content without consensus. Mythic Writerlord's failure to respect consensus brings up another, rather unfortunate matter in all of this-- your block of MalleusMaleficarum1486. In trying to deal with these two editors (Malleus and Mythic), my experience with Malleus was that as soon as he understood the relevant Wikipedia policy, he refrained from the problematic matters. I was surprised that, as an admin involved in the AFD close, you blocked him several days after his last offense, and then that, as the blocking admin, you also refused his block review.[1] It is my understanding (I could be wrong) that you should have enlisted a) another admin for the original block (which I disagreed with, as that editor was sincerely trying to learn and respect Wiki policies), and b) allowed an independent editor to review your block. At any rate, the current issue is that Mythic Writerlord-- who was curiously not blocked while engaging in worse behaviors-- continues to disrespect your close of the AFD and the merged content. So, there's a jolly mess there that I'm hoping you'll sort out. From the post above, it's apparent that Mythic has some sort of pony in this race ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:15, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Frankly, today I removed it only once and after that another user removed it another two times. This he did based on a discussion on the celibacy page. I will however promise not to get involved in the editing of that page anymore from now on. And if I caused any disruption I am truly sorry for doing so. I never intended any harm or offense and if I did cause any disruption I am deeply sorry for doing so. It will not happen again. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

PS: I have already made it abundantly clear on several occassions today that I will no longer participate in this discussion, and that I respect the decision made in the AfD back in January. There really is nothing more to say. I made a single edit on the celibacy page and was then accussed of "edit warring" by SandyGeorgia, which is absolutely ridiculous and incorrect. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

• Sigh. The person I meant edit warring on the Sandy Georgia page is Andrey Rublyov, who now made his third revert in 24 hour, not Mythic . I wanted to find some solution and I wished I could have stopped this edit war by coming to some kind of solution, before it went too long. Maybe I should have warned him instead. Please take a look at our discussion at Celibacy talk page, and if it is possible to merge this into Sexual frustration, for example. Hafspajen (talk) 21:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

+1: User ‎Andrey Rublyov which reverted several times and left a very harsh comment was iMHO never seen on the talk page of celibacy.--Turris Davidica (talk) 10:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

An additional curiosity just popped on my watchlist ... both Mythic Writerlord and Turris Davidica attempting to speedy delete Involuntary celibacy over the redirect. [2] Perhaps that page needs protection? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this has been a proposal on my talk page, it's not a secret. It had been proposed since the redirect would point to an non-matching article. What would you suggest?--Turris Davidica (talk) 10:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

• | - At this time I see no need for administrative action here, as the situation has de-escalated. Additionally, if there are continuous issues with editors attempting to subvert the consensus of the AFD, the only possible route at this point would be to open an RFC. As to your concern with MalleusMaleficarum1486, I stand by my decision to block his account per WP:NOTHERE. If you need anything further from me, or if the situation gets out of hand again, let me know. - I do appreciate the heads up. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 14:08, 12 March 2014 (UTC)