Don't have a Bat-Cow, man

sashi · Post by **sashi** » Mon Oct 28, 2019 7:44 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bat-Cow&redirect=no

courtesy of the admin who unblocked me. 8-)

and now restored by Carrite who wants the batcow sent to the slaughter-house.

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:19 pm

Holy cow batman! :shock:

Did Timmy really just show he is more interested in money than improving Wikipedia? Did he really just reverse an edit he said in this very thread is the one he wants to happen, just so it can happen the way that makes him money? Or at the very least, allows him to win an argument on an internet forum?

What have I been telling you people all along, Timmy, is a very bad man.

You couldn't pay me a million dollars to work alongside him.

Maybe someone should report him for this obviously disgraceful and deceitful conduct. If this isn't disruption of Wikipedia, I don't know what is....... :ugeek:

As for calling the redirection an "improper deletion", well, isn't that a remarkably dumb thing for an established Wikipedian to say? All those years with his nose in the trough, snuffling around for paydirt, and he still doesn't know to use the right words. How disrespectful to his fellow 'pediots. A very bad man indeed. I bet he doesn't even care! I bet he won't even apologize. For shame.

Nothing improper about unilaterally redirecting an established article at all, Drmies does it all the time, and if Timmy has a problem with it, he hasn't squeaked a word about it that I've seen. Not a "deletion" according to the book at all, and if you said it was in Drmies' earshot and he knew you knew better, well, he'd be mighty angry.

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:35 pm

Bat-Cow
Hi. A heads-up that I've rolled back your conversion of content to a redirect; this piece was substantial enough that it needs to run through a standardized community deletion process (PROD or AfD) rather than being unilaterally put to the sword. I share your belief it is not gonna pass GNG, mind you; I only differ with the process used here, because I can make money or win a forum argument if it gets deleted it redirected that way. best, —tim //// Carrite (talk) 19:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

FTFY.

Also, what policy says you have to run "substantial" articles through PROD/AFD before you can unilaterally redirect them? You wouldn't be bullshitting your fellow editors, would you Timmy? Because that's baaaad.

Not as bad as being (an incorrect) process wonk. Which, if you don't tell your colleague the real reason why you reverted them, is basically what you look like here with this attempted explanation.

And the less said about inferring this a "substantial" piece in Wikipedia terms, the better. Probably sufficient to simply say it is four short paragraphs, whereas the article currently on the front page is around forty substantial paragraphs.

I wonder, if someone counted, how many times does a unilateral redirection of an article of this size and quality happen every single day without objection? Now that's something I'll take an over/under bet on, Timmy. Only if you tell all your wiki buddies about it, so they can get in on the action too.

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:40 pm

On wow. Now a report is definitely in order......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... on/Bat-Cow

We can't have Wikipedians wasting their valuable time like this just because Timmy wants to make some money/win an argument on a forum.

* Speedy close and block Timmy for deception and disruption. ~~~~

Is what I would say, if I were a Wikipedian. Which I'm not, contrary to some very stupid people with some very stupid opinions.

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Mon Oct 28, 2019 9:14 pm

@Carrite: AFD created, although this seems like discussion for the sake of discussion if you don't actually disagree with the idea of redirecting. A redirect with no deletion and no protection is something any interested editor could have reverted, if there is any active editor who does disagree, so the sword in this case was made of foam. --RL0919 (talk) 20:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

This is what a guy who doesn't know he's being played sounds like.

How do you sleep at night, Timmy?

You're actually making me feel sympathy for a Wikipedian. Even though none of them should really be unaware that being messed around like this is just a Tuesday in their fucked up "community".

And to think, you want people to give you free shit too. Like you're doing something for humanity.

:oops:

The End · Post by **The End** » Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:32 pm

As an aside, I have no problem renaming this thread title to "Don't have a Bat-Cow, man" if a mod wishes to change it. I should've thought of it earlier.

But I am pleased that this minor fancruft article I pointed out is now involved in intrigue. Off-wiki discussion? Money (albeit for charity, right?)? In the olden days, SlimVirgin would've had Carrite's head on a platter for such transgressions against The Wiki. Metaphorically, of course, as she is a vegetarian, I think. If it does spin off into WP drama across administrator and arbitrator boards with threats of blocks and bans, I will be very happy. I rarely strike such gold.

Carrite · Post by **Carrite** » Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:48 am

CrowsNest wrote::lol:
Bat-Cow
Hi. A heads-up that I've rolled back your conversion of content to a redirect; this piece was substantial enough that it needs to run through a standardized community deletion process (PROD or AfD) rather than being unilaterally put to the sword. I share your belief it is not gonna pass GNG, mind you; I only differ with the process used here, because I can make money or win a forum argument if it gets deleted it redirected that way. best, —tim //// Carrite (talk) 19:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
FTFY.

What bet, Chickenshit???

You've pretty clearly given up on pretending serious criticism by this point...

Just another troll...

Cluck cluck cluck.

RfB

JuiceBeetle · Post by **JuiceBeetle** » Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:25 am

The End wrote:I have no problem renaming this thread title to "Don't have a Bat-Cow, man" if a mod wishes to change it.

Done. Lucky I noticed the request. You can also PM Moderators.

Post by **Graaf Statler** » Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:06 am

Carrite wrote:What bet, Chickenshit???

You've pretty clearly given up on pretending serious criticism by this point...

Just another troll...

Cluck cluck cluck.

He Timmy, would it be a idea to go for a walk with the dog? Because your postings are getting now complete infantile.
What a level!

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:15 am

Carrite wrote:
CrowsNest wrote::lol:
Bat-Cow
Hi. A heads-up that I've rolled back your conversion of content to a redirect; this piece was substantial enough that it needs to run through a standardized community deletion process (PROD or AfD) rather than being unilaterally put to the sword. I share your belief it is not gonna pass GNG, mind you; I only differ with the process used here, because I can make money or win a forum argument if it gets deleted it redirected that way. best, —tim //// Carrite (talk) 19:51, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
FTFY.

What bet, Chickenshit???

You've pretty clearly given up on pretending serious criticism by this point...

Just another troll...

Cluck cluck cluck.

The bet you have offered. and would presumably still accept, if I indicated my willingness to wager. :ugeek:

But if, in all this talk of chickens, now that I've upped the stakes, you're withdrawing the offer of a wager......well...... :roll:

Cluck indeed. :lol:

Wikipedia Sucks!

Wikipedia Sucks!

Don't have a Bat-Cow, man

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Bat-Cow

Re: Don't have a Bat-Cow, man

Re: Don't have a Bat-Cow, man

Re: Bat-Cow