|About me||Talk to me||To do list||Tools and other|
This user page has been mirrored on sites that are not en.Wikipedia.org. I do not use this user name anywhere other than en.Wikipedia, with some edits to the Spanish Wikipedia. If you are reading this page anywhere else, that would be a project I'm not involved in, where the User SandyGeorgia was not created by me.
- Who is Sandy Georgia? - "Sandy is a complicated person in real life. She passes her time in simple surroundings, trying to deflect the worship of those who know her and use her gifts to help others. She has been hunted as a fugitive, cursed as a tomb-robber, and is renowned as a lover and duelist. She is a worshiped as a God in Honduras, but is an outlaw in Peru. No living man knows her real name, as she only whispers it into the ears of those she is about to kill. All love her and hate her, she is SandyGeorgia." -- Tim Vickers 17:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)  
|The BLP Barnstar|
|If you'd told me 6 months ago that it was possible to have a substantial rewrite of the JK Rowling article, including the controversial areas, largely done and dusted without any major acrimony or multiple RFCs, I wouldn't have believed you - but that's exactly what you've achieved. Well done! BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:56, 8 April 2022 (UTC)|
|The Writer's Barnstar|
|Sandy, you've more than earned this barnstar your amazing work on J.K. Rowling: reading the biographies and rewriting that section; working throughout to keep the article compliant with MoS; organizing the talk pages; bringing focus and best-practice processes throughout. I've learned a lot just from watching your work. You and the entire crew should be proud of the work there. It's a great achievement. Congrats! Victoria (tk) 23:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC)|
|Most reputable volunteer organisations screen their volunteers before accepting them. That makes it a lot easier to insure or indemnify them. Obvious personality disorders, histories of unsavory behavior, habits of propositioning other volunteers, or an unwillingness to comply with an organisation's basic behavioral expectations are all grounds for refusing or releasing a volunteer. Wikipedia doesn't roll like that; we take people with any (or all) of the above. ... This site persistently hosts a small number of people with frank personality disorders. A much larger fraction of the community is not frankly pathological, but lacks all reasonable sense of perspective. Unless that changes - and I don't see it changing - I'm not willing to compromise whatever pseudonymity I still enjoy. I admire the courage of people who edit under their real names, in the same way I admire the courage of people who do trick motorcycle jumps over flaming trucks, but that's not me. MastCell Talk||30 Oct 2010|
|Just pointing out that "Colin and the Videos" would be a good name for a band. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris||30 Mar 2018|
|I find the thought that people who speak a certain language are getting their medical information primarily from Wikipedia deeply frightening. We are not competent for that task. We are competent to write a tertiary source that summarizes secondary sources. We shouldn't even be trying to be some kind of WebMD. Levivich||27 Dec 2019|
|Ignorance is infinite, while patience is not. Ultimately, you will lose patience with the unchecked flow of ignorance, at which point you'll be blocked for incivility. The goal is to accomplish as much as possible before that inevitability comes to pass. MastCell Talk||15 Feb 2011|
|There is no such consensus, of course. Eric called this the most ridiculous block he'd ever seen. Brad stated that, in general, either warning or requesting evidence would be more appropriate than a block. Kww opined that there was no personal attack in Sandy's comment. And James suggested that Sandy did provide evidence for her accusation. Brad is the only one who mentioned a warning, and then in general terms and as one of several options. There is a consensus, but it's a consensus that this block was mistakenly applied. In that light, Mark's statement in the block log is unfortunate.
I don't mean to pile on as the block has already been lifted, but since the black mark will remain in Sandy's block log I'll add my view that this was an inappropriate block and should have been lifted without prejudice. I'd ask Mark to be a bit more circumspect in the future about what he writes in block/unblock statements, since they are effectively indelible. As block logs are generally not amended even to correct mis-statements, a link to this discussion will have to suffice when Sandy's block log is cited in the future. MastCell Talk
|25 Jun 2013|
|Venality, stupidity and greed are always with us. But our individual acts always leave behind a touch of beauty and sufficient artifacts to allow others to find something deeper for themselves. A Wikifriend||27 Aug 2022|