User talk:Marine 69-71

Tony the Marine is "watching" you

Hi. Are the first and second references in this article the same? I don't have access to the offline one, but they are boot written by the same author and published on the same newspaper at the same date. Or have you made some confusion? Thanks, --damiens.rf 01:21, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed, The NYT article changed the name of the article from "Chronicle" to "Style". It was of no wonder that the "Chronicle" link could not be found. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:09, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Tony. Given the problems with the OTRS ticket, I've listed this file at PuF. You'll find it here: Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2011 July 3#File:SS Euripides Rubio jpg.jpg. I'm afraid that regardless of the outcome of the template up for TfD, the image has issues that need to be addressed if it is to be retained. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:24, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Tony. Thanks for your note. I know it was approved based on the letter. You went out of your way to get that permission, and it was done and accepted in all good faith, but I'm afraid that once our attorney reviewed the letter, he said we could not accept it because he did not believe that the letter would be legally sufficient for the Wikimedia Foundation. This all came up around the time of your surgery. I tried to inform you without bugging you, but I can see now that I didn't explain well enough at the time. We won't be able to use that letter from McClintock to retain any images, but have to look at each image to see where it originated. I am sorry; you did everything right. The problem is in the letter itself, not in your approach. (That said, it can be very helpful if you ask for permission in the future to just point people to Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries and ask them to copy & paste it, with the necessary changes. If they'll do that, it'll save a lot of trouble in the long run because it covers every point we need.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• • Thank you for the advice. It is well taken. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:08, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re [1] [2][3][4][5][6][7] and [8], you appear to be canvassing. Please revert. ScottyBerg (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I will not revert and I am not canvassing. I am not asking anyone to be in favor or against. I am not asking for votes, but for opinions be it in favor to my opinion or not. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ScottyBerg (talk) 02:33, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your contributions are mentioned in a thread at the ANI - Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Marine_69-71 - thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 17:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, please explain this edit before you do anything else. If it's what I think it is, you really need to apologize, promise not to do that again, and think about taking a break from here for a while. If it's not, you need to explain it, because it certainly seems obvious to me. Please be aware that "S was just a random letter I put in" isn't really going to be tenable. If the truth is "it represents a real person, but I did it that way so I'd know who it was, and they'd know who it was, but I could have plausible deniabiltity if called on it", then it's definitely better to just man up and say so. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are a man of many talents. Beneath the incredible contributions you have made here and continue to make, you are human. That means you are imperfect. Even ArbCom recognizes that people make mistakes from time to time. Bruhahas have a way of exploding over the silliest of things sometimes, like the above mentioned "S". Wikipedia at times seems especially prone to the sort of behavior that makes the tiniest of disputes into Waterloo. You can't be everything to all people. No matter what you do, some people will find fault.

Relax, take a deep breath, and remember there are a hell of a lot of people here who think the world of you and your contributions. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, your advice means the world to me. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tony. I don't know if we have ever crossed paths before, but I observed the thread about you on ANI. ScottyBerg wishes to file a WP:RFC/U or WP:RFC/ADMIN, but is having some difficulty finding a second valid certifier. I'm sure you can understand why that may be. I was hoping that you would be willing to waive that requirement, so that proper dispute resolution (aka, not dramacentral) can commence. NW (Talk) 02:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• NW, thank you for your message. NW, you may not be aware, but my health is not in the beat condition. I suffered a double bypass last April. When I recovered I created 11 articles for Wikipedia. Everything was fine until I mistakenly protected "Irish immigration to Puerto Rico". Since then Scotty has been givimg me hell. As you have noticed in the noticeboard they have created an unfounded hysteria because I in bad taste jokenly created a "Wall of Dishonor" and right away Scotty is making a false claim that I had him in mind. They are using this as a base to attack me. I have apologized countless times for my actions and that does not seem as enough. I'm sorry, but let Scotty and Hans take whatever action they want, I'm too tried physically to put up with all this. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:44, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are under no obligation to participate in an RfC if you don't want to. What NW asked is if you'd waive the certification requirement (assuming you have the power to do so). You haven't responded to that. Will you? ScottyBerg (talk) 03:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I sorry, but I believe that you can find someone else to help you in your quest. I have been acussed of being a liar, a time bomb, a killer and so on. I'm just a little tired of it all. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:13, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, if your health is a serious problem, why not just take some time off from Wikipedia, let's say a week or two? I don't want to see ScottyBerg or anyone else contribute to your elevated stress level. Stay healthy, and if that means taking a Wikibreak, then make it so. Think about how many good books you can finish within that time frame! :) Viriditas (talk) 06:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, I think you've done a lot of good work for Wikipedia, but I think you've taken it a little too personally sometimes when someone disagreed with you on content, like in the Irish immmigration to Puerto Rico article. Please accept the feedback you have received recently at that article, on the noticeboard, and at ANI and get back to good, strong, content contributions. Cla68 (talk) 07:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, how do you think this would go today? What's changed? Why would your answers to the few questions be so different? What the hell happened? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:20, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...and this from the boss is pretty much going to be the end of things, I'm afraid. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:34, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my friend - I just wanted to let you know I was thinking about you. --David Shankbone 03:56, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the ANI thread concerning you has reopened to discuss a possible block. ScottyBerg (talk) 14:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tony, please take this as a sincere suggestion. Would you voluntary give up your admin bit. If you think carefully, you don't really need it. You're a great content contributor, but that does not mean the community should punish you by giving you unneeded responsibility, that seems to bring you more problems than solutions. Writing about subjects you love is fun. Fighting vandalism, resolving disputes, enforcing image polices is not.

Why be the worst admin if you can simply be the best editor?

Think about it.

Yours truly, Robert-François - aka --damiens.rf 15:24, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Damiens, believe or not I consider you an excellent person and I am not ashamed to say that I have learned a lot form you. I will think about it. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am talking with you to see if it is at all possible to reach a resolution to this ANI without going to ArbCom or an RfC. I would like to say that I do believe that some of the comments about you in that discussion were completely inappropriate. But that doesn't mean things can just be left as they are. You've acknowledged that at least some of the actions discussed were wrong, but the manner and time it took for you to do so have caused many of us to feel that it is no longer proper for you to have the tools. So I am writing to ask that you take Jimbo's suggestion and voluntarily hand in your tools and, if you wish to do so, stand for RfA again. If you have any kind of alternate proposal for resolution, I would be happy to hear it. Best, ‡ MAHEWA ‡ • talk 18:24, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank yoyu for your message. I will think about it. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Tony ... think quickly; once it goes to court-martial, it's all downhill and ugly from there. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello Tony, I'd like to second what Mahewa suggested. And I'd like to add that I've felt some disgust toward those who attacked you personally, and especially for badgering you on your military service and status as a war veteran. I've also refused to block you for your actions, I don't think anyone should be "punished" in that way. Giving up the tools is a difficult thing to do, it would break my heart if I felt the need to do so myself, but in light of all that has happened and the numerous comments from a multitude of editors, I think it would be the best thing. If nothing else, I think it will be difficult for you to act as an administrator given the lack of confidence that many people have expressed. I just think it's the right thing for you to do, and I'd have a great deal of respect for anyone who was able to make that difficult decision. -- Atama頭 19:34, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to say that I agree with Atama's additional points completely (except for the block issue, which I haven't considered because it's not within my power). I don't want or expect you to make a snap decision. We'll need a decision some time in the near future, but that doesn't mean it needs to be made immediately or without due consideration. You have put in a lot of time and energy into the project and rightfully received the tools as a result. I cannot imagine this is an easy time for you. It's a decision you have to make for yourself as to what the best way to proceed is. ‡ MAHEWA ‡ • talk 19:47, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Even though the thread is closed, I feel that I should hold myself accountable for my mistakes, therefore I am auto imposing upon myself a probation of one year where I will not use my admin. tools and in which my behavior will be monitored by User: Atama. Any concerns which require admin. intervention, feel free to use the services of another admin. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking proactive steps and looking for a compromise. I genuinely appreciate it. I was wondering if you would be willing to go one step farther to help people feel as though this issue is closed with no need for monitoring. Would you be willing to actually have your tools removed for the one-year period? I realize that, generally, an administrator can only come back from a voluntary absence if he began the absence without controversy, so we might not be able to do this. But I'm not really concerned with the procedure or ability for it to happen at this point. All I'm asking is, if your tools could be removed for the one-year period, would you consent to that happening? Thank you again. ‡ MAHEWA ‡ • talk 23:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you voluntarily request tool removal, WP:RESYSOP gives you an option to request them again at a later date. -- Atama頭 23:45, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest RESYSOP doesn't apply here because of criterion 2. StrPby (talk) 23:54, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]