Great ways to waste time online

Online games become more frightening every day.

It's on most people's screens in the office RIGHT NOW. Nobody else here seems to like Alchemy http://www.popcap.com/gamepopup.php?theGame=alchemy tho it is ace

allow me to be immodest for a minute: my rating is currently 1977. I got up into the top 300 during the ladder tourneys.

I've wasted many evenings on Bookworm, Dynomite, Alchemy, Candy Train, and Insaniquarium

santa climber

the baby and the beast

http://seawitchery.tumblr.com/post/4070384205/i-started-out-clicking-strategically-and-by-the

had no idea how fun reading grown adults tattling on each other in Wikipedia Administrator's Noticeboards can be, but I'm engrossed.

I went for a walk around the block, considered my actions carefully, then decided that the best course of action to protect Wikipedia from further disruption was to block C. A. Russell (talk · contribs) indefinitely. This was for a combination of the heinous personal attack mentioned above, their failure to show any level of contrition for it (let alone an unreserved apology), their ongoing wikilaywering, their assumptions of bad faith against others, as well as disruptive edit warring. All of this combined means I believe they meet the standard required for blocking indefinitely to protect ongoing disruption and our sense of community.

I've been watching JackkBrown for a bit now after an interaction on his talk page, and have been debating whether or not to bring him to ANI. There are a number of issues here, not all of which are language-barrier issues.

In addition to italics and capitalization, he is fixated on fixing redirects (including template capitalization) and whitespace in templates, despite being told by multiple editors numerous times about things like WP:NOTBROKEN. When asking another user for advice on how to avoid making purely cosmetic edits, he came up with the idea: if I think I'm about to save a cosmetic edit, I can check for missing commas in the text, so that there are no problems if I save the edit [5] suggesting that these edits are still his primary focus, and the other things are an excuse.

He also has an obsession with adding the "Use dmy dates" template to every article / updating the date on the template. As I understand it, you can update the date on this template if you have made sure all of the dates in the article conform to the standard. However, the fact that he changed the mdy template to dmy on the United States page (without changing any of the dates, which were obviously mdy), makes me wonder if he knows what he's doing in that regard.
He does not appear to use the preview feature, resulting in multiple minor edits in a short span of time, or even undoing his previous edits. This is especially noticeable on non-mainspace pages (see, for example, his edits to this page or to his own talk page), which can result in multiple notifications to users. He continues to do this even after being asked multiple times to slow down, use preview, and read over his edits before submitting them. He also not infrequently edits his comments even after others have responded to them.

When his errors are pointed out to him, he protests that he doesn't make very many mistakes, and when this claim is shown to be false, plays the victim. Yet he lashes out at others for minor mistakes, such as with Eric above or with User:IgnatiusofLondon in these two edits (he has since apologized to both of these users). He also has the strange claim about precision above, and the following quote on his own talk page: the problem is that I edit quickly, and very very very carefully, so unfortunately I don't pay much attention to this ban on cosmetic changes (emphasis in original). Of course, if he did edit as carefully as he claims, he wouldn't be making as many mistakes as he does.

He's been criticised for his lack of edit summaries before. Though he now claims to have enabled reminders when leaving a blank edit summary, the edit summaries he leaves are often not helpful.

Then, of course, there's his overuse of the Help Desk and other such forums. At one point I saw that he had 5 topics live on the Help Desk, and in two of them he had asked completely unrelated followup questions because he happened to have someone's ear.

N.B. this user somehow has two separate talk page archiving systems: [6] [7], which are both full of these sorts of things.

Although he does a lot of good work, he also makes many not-so-great edits, and his apparent inability to take advice from others and amend his ways ends up wasting a lot of time. Smdjcl (talk) 02:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Mechanized battalion (talk · contribs · logs) needs help with civility. At Task Force 1-41 Infantry:

Edit summary: "I wrote 90% of this article and I am the one who created it. Quit screwing it up."
I appealed to this editor, and they responded by calling me a Nazi (which they removed when asked).

Today, I started a discussion on the article they "wrote 90% of", and User:Mechanized battalion responded "Grow up and get a life". Any attempt to discuss changes to Task Force 1-41 Infantry are met with insults. Any help would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Because you make mountains out of mole hills. Quit harrassing me. I financially support Wikipedia unlike most. Mechanized battalion (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I removed that comment. I can't decide if a final warning or a block is the way to go right now. Mechanized battalion, you are not being harassed. Drmies (talk) 22:11, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

That photo he is complaining about has been there for years. It was a real time photo of a burning Iraqi vehicle destroyed during a night operation. Of course it is not going to be crystal clear. I have contributed a lot here. Mechanized battalion (talk) 22:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't mean you get to yell at people. Drmies (talk) 22:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
And Magnolia is right: it's a terrible photo, it does not really illustrate anything in the article beyond the basic "stuff was blown up", and I also don't understand why you're placing all those images on the left. Drmies (talk) 22:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

User:Mechanized battalion claimed here they "created" the article Task Force 1-41 Infantry. The edit history shows User:Don Brunett created it, and was blocked indefinitely in August 2016. I ran both though Editor Interaction Analyser and they edit the exact same obscure articles. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:21, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I have blocked Mechanized battalion for one week. Calling another editor a "Nazi" without evidence, even if withdrawn, is an unacceptable personal attack. Cullen328 (talk) 22:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

The block is now indefinite, due to the evidence of block evasion presented by Magnolia677. Cullen328 (talk) 22:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I should have looked better: that account is old. I ran CU, but found User:OldSoldier2012. Magnolia677, what do you think--same editor? Drmies (talk) 22:48, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

And TPA revoked for doubling down with the incivility and battleground mentality. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

This aggression will not stand.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with this. --Onorem (talk) 22:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

It has everything to do with this. I will contact the owner of Wiki. Mechanized battalion (talk) 22:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

"hi, Abe, Abe Wiki? Hey glad I could reach you..."