Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:17, 6 March 2007

Welcome!

Hello, Newyorkbrad, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Karmafist 15:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Sarah Ewart

I read that message on her talk page about her leaving, but I didn't really understand it. What happened to her? I find it a big shame that she seems to have left Misplaced Pages. I found Sarah Ewart to be a kind user, and she did give me both advice and constructive criticism. Acalamari 21:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

If you read the dialog on her talkpage (maybe archived now), she says that she's on a break and she will be back—I hope soon! Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I did read it. I too, hope she comes back soon. We actually first met each other on Ryulong's recent request for adminship when a user had tons of sockpuppets givng Ryulong support votes. In fact, I believe I encountered you there too. Acalamari 22:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

FWIW she's been active at Unblock-en-l. Dino 21:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Further thoughts

The first time I posted to your talk page was over a week ago; it's now in the WP BLP and 3RR section in your talk Archive 4. I'm back because user MoeLarryAndJesus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has recently deleted content from another user's talk page:  first deletion • second deletion • third deletion.

I'm reluctant to restore the content myself, as any act of mine may invite further deletions, so I'm turning again to you as per your reply last week, "Let's see how this user's editing evolves from here, and let me know if you have any further thoughts."   I'll watch your page for a reply—thanks! — Athænara ✉ 05:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I've left him a note not to do this again. Removal of personal attacks is sometimes appropriate, but except in extreme circumstances this is better done by an uninvolved person. Newyorkbrad 19:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your help, thank you. — Æ. ✉ 07:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Request

Hi NewYorkBrad:

A very kind editor, Athaenara helped me when a guy named MoeLarryJesus (who had written me personal, quite nasty emails) started vandalizing my personal page. a few people who have contributed to my entry, emailed me telling me what this guy was doing. Anyway, I guess you stepped in at some point and suspended him for 24 hours. Now, he's back and I think he's using an alias to try and delete the entire entry of me as a "Political Writer". I see that two wikipedians have already commented (in my favor) but I wanted to bring it to Athaenera's attention as she has been sympathetic to MoeLarryJesus's vandalism and everyday disruption. She said I should send you my note to her and her comments. Thanks NYB for taking your time on this --sorry it's so long:

Hi Athaenara, remember me? Seth Swirsky -- Again, I don't know if this is the place to request you look at something --y ou were completely sympathetic to the vandalism being done to my page by MoeLarryJesus last week --well, he's at it again. This guy will not go away .Read his hateful comments on my discussion page. He now has deleted my "Political Writingz" section of my entry entirely. He's using a different name to do this. Do you know how many people write political articles for big-time blogs, as I do? Michaelle Malkin, Bill Maher, David Sirota, Cenk Uygur --and they have their writing archived and spoken about in their Misplaced Pages article. But, MoeLarryJesus is on a mission to get mine taken off. You got him suspended for a day -- but he seriously needs to be blocked from my page forever. A, can you re-visit this? This is insanity (and I'm sure he's loving every minute of it.) It was true what I told you: he did write a scary email to me personally. He claims he didn't but what a coincidence that the email address was from MoeLarryJesus@____.com! Help! Seth Swirsky---- 00:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC) Hi Seth—I remember when you posted on Misplaced Pages:Wikiquette alerts#19 February 2007 (22:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC) diff): "For the record, the date of last harrassing email from MoeLarryandJesus was February 9, 2007 12:49:30 AM PST." A few days ago, I asked Newyorkbrad (the admin who handled the 24 hour 3RR block) about the deletion of content from your userpage, on User talk:Newyorkbrad#Further thoughts. Please bring this to his attention there (you can quote this post if you want) and if you type five tildes 02:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC) after your name he will know what time you posted. OK? Good luck! — Athænara ✉ 01:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC) 02:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Seth Swirsky

I'm sorry, but I can't follow that at all. Could you please try to present your problem more clearly. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 02:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

→ Seth was trying to quote my post from a brief discussion which can be seen with the links and such in full at User talk:Athaenara#Request. — Athænara ✉ 11:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I've deciphered it. Sethswirsky has been receiving coaching from Athaenara in dealing with User page vandalism and unpleasant e-mail by a third user, MoeLarryAndJesus. Athænara has referred Seth to you for comment regarding User page vandalism and unpleasant e-mails. Seth wants Moe permanently blocked from his User page. Dino 11:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Update: It appears that Proto has already permablocked Moe for trolling. It's a moot point, but Seth might be able to use some coaching in the event that Moe comes wandering back. Dino 11:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Arbitration

I removed a part, please be more descriptive about this I do not know what to do, or when you guys are going to reply or you're opinions, most of us are good contributors and this is killing us, what if I miss a spot are you going to block me? you can remove my comments, because I might miss a few, Adil is bringing on false statements on how I use Ips I replied he changed the subject there making false statements, thats very frustrating. Artaxiad 18:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I am not going to block anyone.

Thank you for your help on the evidence page. I will take a look tomorrow and clean up anything else that shouldn't be there. Remember that the purpose of the evidence page is simply to help the arbitrators decide what is the fairest way to resolve this case. The best thing for you to do is to present your evidence, respond to any questions the arbitrators have, and stay away from anything that could be taken as edit-warring in any form. I hope this helps. Newyorkbrad 18:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good, but again editors are seeking to add more information is it only a 1000 limit? for the whole time or per one section. Artaxiad 01:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The usual rule is approximately 1000 words per person. But I see that it's been said some users have asked another user to put in evidence for them because they can't have time right now. I think that is a good-faith request but one can also see how conceivably it could be used, so for the time being I am monitoring the situation. The most important thing is that each party's evidence be concise, clear, and as easy as possible for the arbitrators to understand. Newyorkbrad 01:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi

About the case, two users have no time to provide their evidences, two who are implicated in this case, so some of the materials I have presented. I have asked them if they want I present evidences in their name. They will provide all they had the time to present and I will be working on them expend them and present them. Also, since the evidences I will be providing are extensive, I will be way over the 100 diff. I am already well over. Could there be anything on this? I haven't placed much text in my evidence about article content, or interpretation but sticked to things which could not much be interpreted, but as compressed as it could, presenting also two others provided evidence plus those I have gathered, it is very difficult for me to respect the limit. See my evidence by yourself, it is compacted as much as possible and unlike others I haven't presented content dispute stuff, it is impossible to respect the limits. Fad (ix) 18:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Post what you have from them, make it as reasonable as possible, and the arbitrators and clerks can take a look at it. Newyorkbrad 18:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I have asked the two members to reconfirm their permission in public. One has answered. Fad (ix) 00:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting vandalism to my userpage. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 21:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Signature

I have no objections to changing it, if you require me to do so. However I will not change it at the behest of Astrotrain. Astrotrain is currently engaging in POV pushing against Irish Republican articles and his attempts to get them deleted are not based on Misplaced Pages guidelines or policies. He is also trolling numerous talk pages ignoring guidelines and policies to push his bias. Thanks. One Night In Hackney_IRA 21:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I have no intention of "requiring" you to do anything, although a consensus in the noticeboard discussion may. Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

RE: Baseball

Okay, well first everyone has their own opinions but the reason why is cause they are REALLY good, so if Toronto faces them, they'll probably get slobbered and same goes for hockey too, because I want my favourite teams to go far in the standings and to be better than everyone else in a way, if you know what I mean. I don't really mean it just cause they're in new york, so no offense there. Hasek is the best 22:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Responded on your talk. Newyorkbrad 22:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I never followed the Blue Jays since last year, but I thought they were bad though. To me, the Yankees but not the mets always seemed like the top team in the leaguse with guys like Jeter, Rodriguez, and some others I can't think of on the top of my head. Hasek is the best 22:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Decision Proposals

Can I propose a decision at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/India-Pakistan/Proposed decision? What is the legal status of these Proposed Decisions? Szhaider 01:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Only the arbitrators themselves may post on the /Proposed decision page. The proposed decision is drafted by one of the arbitrators for the others to consider and vote upon. However, any editor, including the parties, may make proposals on the /Workshop page, or comment on the /Proposed decision on its talkpage. Let me know if you have any further questions. Newyorkbrad 01:24, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

What is the legal status of these Proposed Decisions? As I think one year ban is too extreme considering my honest efforts to improve Misplaced Pages. Just when I decide to stay away from any disputes after months of block, an admin opens ArbCom case in his efforts to ban editors who he doesn't like. I consider this abuse of power. Szhaider 03:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The Proposed Decision, as long as it's just a proposal, does not have any binding effect. However, if it's adopted by a majority of the Arbitration Committee, it becomes an official ruling which all editors are required to obey and all administrators are authorized to enforced. (Theoretically, Arbitration Committee decisions can be appealed to Jimbo Wales, but he's never reversed one.) Therefore, if you disagree with the Proposed Decision, you need to present evidence and arguments as to why your conduct was not improper, or how your behavior has changed since the earlier conduct that's being criticized, or why the proposed ban is too harsh. Newyorkbrad 03:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Since the end my blocks, I haven't been even once in an edit war or in any dispute with ‎‎any editor whatsoever. It is not justified to seek a permanent ban right after the end of ‎months of ‎block without giving a second chance. Rama's Arrow has presented the ‎accusations ‎against me for which I already have received months of block. Now I was ‎trying to turn ‎other Pakistani editors too away from edit warring to collaborate on ‎WikiProject Pakistan. ‎Such collaboration could make them so busy they might find little ‎to none time for ‎disputes. But I feel like my good faith is being ignored in ArbCom case. ‎Within days ‎after my block ended, ArbCom case was started again. In fact, I never ‎wanted to be a part ‎of it. Most of disputes were with User:Anupam about which neither ‎of us has formally ‎complained until this case's opening. I have always tried to avoid ‎topics where I found ‎myself insufficiently knowledgeable. A user tried to do experiment ‎with WikiProject ‎Pakistan which triggered me to work on this project with his help. Now ‎I am being ‎banned, makes me disappointed of my new efforts of peace and mutual ‎benevolence.‎ Please note that my block ended on February 05, 2007 and the case was ‎opened on February 14, 2007; only 9 days after. Were 09 days enough to judge my ‎editorial behavior? Was it enough of a chance? I don't think so. Please see my recent ‎history of contributions and see for yourself my efforts to improve quality of articles in ‎certain categories. I do not think this work should be stopped. I have quite a lot ‎experience in Wiki-Syntax and I can easily created and modify complex templates which ‎I want to use improve WikiProject Pakistan and its related articles. I was planning to call ‎it quits after the completion of refinement of WikiProject Pakistan because of editorial ‎and personal life reasons, and with such near future intentions what could be more ‎disappointing and frustrating than getting banned. I believe I deserve a chance. Szhaider 06:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)‎

ultimately there is nothing Brad or the other clerks can do. You can raise this on the proposed decision talk page, or on the arbitrators' talk pages. Thatcher131 06:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Delete

Even though you didn't speedy delete this page, can I still contest it to AfD? I believe that the source isn't notable, because it is a personal website. I didn't know if I could contest the deletion if an admin declined the AfD. Thanks. Real96 04:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You tagged it as non-notable and I decided that a murder case might (barely) meet the requirement for notability. You can definitely put it up for AfD here. In fact in cases where the article isn't a clear speedy, unless there are libel or privacy issues, it's better for the article to go on AfD because that way the whole community decides rather than just one administrator deciding on a speedy. Regards, Newyorkbrad 04:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

If it isn't updated in the next month or so, AfD it goes. Thanks for your help! Real96 04:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure. You should just drop a note to the creator or on the article talk page to make that clear. By the way, just so you know, I'm a relatively new administrator and I am probably more conservative about deleting things than some of my colleagues. My bias is toward more content rather than less, although of course there are limits. Your speedy nomination was completely reasonable even though I didn't wind up deleting. Newyorkbrad 04:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Tigranes article

it looks like I've inadvertedly reverted the page for the second time in 24h here . I did complain though about the disruptive behavior and edit warring some users engaged and admin Husond agreed . I'm involved in this against my wish, but cannot let some of those ideologically moivated editors suppress important, authoritative and verifiable facts from the articles. --AdilBaguirov 06:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggested ban

I saw your question here when JoshuaZ suggested a ban on Sfarti. I dug up some links to the incidents for you and added them to the discussion if you'd like to read up on the past events. -- Gregory9 10:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Just FYI

I asked for oversight of here. I think the jist of the post may be relevant but the amount of information posted is excessive. It's also external and unverifiable. --Tbeatty 17:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't ask for oversight on-wiki, which just calls greater attention to the material you are objecting to. See WP:OVERSIGHT and send an e-mail as described there. Newyorkbrad 17:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Just sent it off. Thx. --Tbeatty 17:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

It was just done. thanks for the help. Keep an eye out for a repost. In case you haven't noticed, it's a little vitriolic over there ;) --Tbeatty 04:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Apj-us-nyc

Brad- What do you think of posting something on user talk:Apj-us-nyc about posting inappropriate and irrelevant information to the arbitration evidence and workshop pages? Thanks --rogerd 21:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been looking at those pages, in between dealing with real-world work. At this point, the best thing for anyone with relevant information would be to e-mail it directly to an arbitrator for forwarding to their mailing list, rather than posting more of that sort of thing on-wiki. Newyorkbrad 21:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

There's been some sort of mistake...

I am plainly not a WP:SPA with respect to Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Derek Smart. Please review my edit history if you don't believe me. Also please note these testimonies where involved editors attest to this fact.

To further prove my innocence in this matter, I asked Guy, an admin here, to give me advice in how to "clear my name". His response was to edit articles unrelated to Smart. I have done this.

I am being punished for being wrongly accused. Where is the presumption of innocence as laid out in WP:AGF? Where is the consideration of evidence and actions I have cited above? This finding is unfair, and I urge you to take proper steps to correct this mistake.

Thank you.

Mael-Num 23:55, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The fact that you received this notice does not mean that you have been determined to be a single-purpose account. The notice is given to all the parties to the case. Administrators who take responsibility for enforcing the decision will determine which editors are single-purpose accounts by analyzing their overall contributions. Newyorkbrad 23:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response. The problem is that I have been named as a "surrogate" of SupremeCmdr, et al., a fact that can be disproved by checkuser, or by an objective look at my words (our writing styles are dissimilar) and actions (I've taken contrary views to SupremeCmdr, and have spent the last few months pursuing topics of interest other than Derek Smart). I am currently barred from editing the article, but this is a trivial point. I am being wrongly accused of something, and if you've never been in a similar situation yourself, please allow me to tell you that from this recent personal experience, it sucks. ArbCom's made a mistake here, so how do I get them to fix it? Mael-Num 00:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

If you truly believe it to be necessary, you can write to one or more of the arbitrators (I see you have already posted on User:UninvitedCompany's talkpage), or request a clarification of the decision at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration. The decision was posted for comments for several weeks, so you had the opportunity to point out if you believed it wasn't clear as to your status. I am serving as the Clerk of the Arbitration Committee just giving notice of the decision, so I am not in a position to interpret it for you, but from a review of your contributions for the past several weeks, it does not appear to me that you are functioning as a single-purpose account. Newyorkbrad 00:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice, Brad. Also, thank you for notifying me of the ArbCom decision in the first place. And I'm sorry if I "shot the messenger" by protesting the decision to you. I'm sure you get tired of that sort of thing. Cheers. Mael-Num 00:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I feel like I should chime in here. At one point, Mael-Num's contributions were almost solely to Derek Smart and its talk page, and he was labelled as a disruptive single-purpose account as a result. However, his contribs show that during the past ~2 months, he has branched out into other areas of the wiki. The RFAr had, unfortunately, stagnated by that point and the relevant finding of fact was never updated to reflect this. Despite this, Mael-Num doesn't actually appear to have been named as a Derek Smart surrogate - just an SPA. The question as I see it is whether we simply move on, since Mael-Num isn't under any ArbCom sanction, or whether we ask the Arbs to update the (now closed) case to reflect Mael-Num's new status as a non-SPA. I'm not sure whether that's possible now though. – Steel 00:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

The decision makes no findings as to which users were or are SPAs on the Derek Smart article, but leaves that up to administrators enforcing the decision. Since you and I agree that a scan of Mael-Num's contributions suggest a non-SPA account, I don't think an issue should arise. In any event, though, the limitation affects only the Derek Smart article, and I am going to make a note of it on the talkpage of that article, so you can post there if you think it would be helpful. By the way, with the ArbCom decision having come down, do you think it's time to unprotect the article? Newyorkbrad 00:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

After looking back at the case, Finding of fact #1 names Mael-Num as an SPA, who are forbidden to revert an edit to Derek Smart. Would the fact that Mael-Num is not an SPA would allow him to revert, despite ArbCom naming him as one? And yes, it's time for unprotection (the closure of the case is what we were all waiting for). I'll do it myself now. – Steel 00:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You are right, I missed that (and I apologize to both of you for that). I think it's a fair reading, though, that the decision governs editors currently acting as SPA's. But if he's concerned that an admin might deem him an SPA because of the earlier mention, he can seek clarification as noted above ... or he can refrain from reverting edits to the article for awhile. I think ArbCom is hoping that the unusual stress on the need to get the article into better shape, which is closer to a content ruling than they usually make, will bring some new editors to it. Newyorkbrad 00:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I would have no problem with refraining from editing the article, but I'd prefer that my restraint be a matter of my recusing myself, rather than being forced to as result of a possibly misinformed finding of complicity. A reading of finding 1, where I am named with SupremeCmdr and Warhawk, combined with remedy 7 ("Supreme Cmdr and other surrogates of Derek Smart are banned from editing Derek Smart.") could mean that I am seen as a surrogate, and am similarly banned. I'm not Cmdr, not Derek Smart, not a SPA, and I'm actually a pretty nice guy, so I would prefer not to be pinned with this. Mael-Num 01:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I see you've posted to User:UninvitedCompany, the arbitrator who drafted the decision. Let's see if he makes any comment. I don't really have any say in the matter. Sorry. Newyorkbrad 03:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand, and you certainly have nothing to apologize for. I really shouldn't have placed this problem at your door (Or UninvitedCompany's either). I prattled on for a bit here because it seemed like a conversation of the subject just spontaneously started; I apologize as this isn't the proper forum.

I filed a request for clarification, as you suggested, over at ArbCom. My problem was that I am really unfamiliar with ArbCom's procedures, but I was fortunate in being able to ask you for guidance. I think this is the right thing to do, making my request official and allowing the general ArbCom body to review it. Again, my thanks for your patience and your efforts to steer me in the right direction. Cheers. Mael-Num 04:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Counting to 1

Heh. I saw it just as I hit save, but you beat me to it. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 01:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You have more important things to worry about. I'm here to count for you. :) Newyorkbrad 01:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

E-mail

You've got e-mail. :) --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 03:17, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Received and answered. Regards, Newyorkbrad 03:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

And you have a reply to your reply. --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 03:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Brandt case

We agree at this point, so it doesn't matter except for 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 on Geni, but wouldn't there be 12 active arbs? There are 10 who voted in the case, plus Charles Matthews and Blnguyen, neither of whom are recused or inactive. Ral315 » 20:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Correct. I was thinking of a couple of other cases in which I had just finished adjusting the numbers, but Mackensen and Essjay weren't participating in those cases. Newyorkbrad 20:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: User talk:SunStar Net

Yeah. =\ I've put in a fair number of reverts over this. Couldn't recall if there was a reason we hadn't protected the user talk, just yet. Hoping 15 minutes is at least long enough to bore this latest wave into inaction, but we might as well go longer (no objection if you want to make it so, have a hunch it'll end up that way, either way). – Luna Santin (talk) 23:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't know if you saw the thread SSN started on AN. I've asked him there if he wants the semi on his talk, although if this goes on much longer it may not be optional. Regards, Newyorkbrad 23:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, heh. Figures I'd miss that sort of thing. Cleaned out the history a bit, extended the semi (deleted edits are visible, of course, but now at another page). – Luna Santin (talk) 00:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I need to figure out how to delete individual edits sometime. Six weeks an admin and I'm still unpacking the buttons. Newyorkbrad 00:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Essjay

Thanks for contribution on this - like Giano, you've had wise and compassionate words to say. Metamagician3000 01:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Might I suggest you go ahead and move the Essjay debate somewhere else? If we're going to wikilawyer this thing, it can't be properly certified but it's not even a "dispute" with Essjay. It properly belongs where it began, at the community noticeboard. You seem likely to have the moral authority to simply move it over there as a subpage. Doc is plainly just going to delete the thing when 48 hours rolls by, and all hell is going to break loose. Derex 03:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to ask on the talkpage for a calm, civil discussion of what to do with it. Newyorkbrad 03:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, events seem to be moving rapidly. If you, brad, close the RfC, does that mean it will be archived? I'd like to keep copies of my own comments, so if so, can you give me time to try to grab them?

I hope you appreciate that I have been sincere in calling repeatedly for discussion of the underlying causes of this affair, rather than tallying further statements by users appalled by his deception. Thanks ---CH 03:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Another user (not me) has closed the RfC. I don't know exactly what happens now, this is hardly a typical situation. I'm sure there will be a record of the discussion somewhere, and if it's deleted, I will be glad to give you a copy of your own comments. Newyorkbrad 03:49, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

My preference, as per Derex, would be moving the discussion of these underlying issues to some suitable place, to emphasize that the discussion is not about adding more critical comments of a particular user, but about how the community should address said underlying issues. ---CH 03:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I assume there will be discussion on some policy page or at the village pump, although I think the discussion will be more clear-headed if things wait a few days first. Personally at this point I don't believe any major changes are necessary, but I'll be glad to consider and participate in discussing any sensible proposals that might be made. Newyorkbrad 03:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If there are issues about future policy and practice, as opposed to rehashing the particular incident, the village pump or some related forum would seem to be the place to do it. I also think it would be wise for anyone who wants to do this to hold off for at least a couple of days and let things cool down. Metamagician3000 04:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Tofangsazan AfD

Brad, just a suggestion for the next AfD: I think it would have have a better chance of succeeding under WP:NOTNEWS than under BLP/IAR. So we might want to wait until WP:NOTNEWS is accepted. Take care, Kla'quot 08:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a fair point, but by then we'll be hearing "come on, it's been AfD's three times already." I think there are deeper issues here than policy fine points, and I think I may take this to DRV so that they can be discussed outside the notorious contexts like Brian Peppers, et al. where they have been discussed to this point. Newyorkbrad 08:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. Good luck. :) Kla'quot 09:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

RE:Essjay

Very true, gossip does spread like wildfire to those who are interested in the subject of it.  ~Steptrip 18:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

WorldTraveler

Mr. Brad, from our dealings before, I hope you've seen that I am a reasonable person. I did apologize to this user, which only caused him to lash out at me. At that point, I decided to keep my distance, as it became clear to me that he wanted blood, the one thing I was unwilling to give him. As I mentioned briefly on my first post about him to AN:I, I have been displeased with his recent activities, revolving mainly around writing and promoting his essay about the failure of the very site he writes it on. I really, honestly, do want to see this resolved in a way that anyone could call 'final', but a plea to return to the site from me would be disingenuous, and, in the likely event he lashed out at me again for any comment I make, I would have no response in this instance. Should he return under a different username and pick up editing where he left off, I most likely would have no idea, and if informed, I would be more than happy to let him continue with his work, as I would have asked him to allow of me. That really seems to me to be all I can do in this situation. --InShaneee 23:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand your position. Thanks for the quick response. Newyorkbrad 23:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Indo-Pak case

Hi - I appreciate your comment. I personally don't think user:Unre4L will do anything more. I would normally be saddened myself, but guys like these just don't understand the Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. I'm here only for the knowledge, giving and receiving. The kind of fantasy battles they were waging, with accusations of conspiracy, racism, etc., it was just best for them for ArbCom to ask them to leave the project for a long while. I had asked myself the same question last year - do I want to help build an encyclopedia and learn something? If not, I should prolly stop harassing those who do and leave them to their business. Cheers - if I can be of assistance in anything, lemme know. Rama's arrow 23:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day!

Sleep

Zomg... you should be asleep Mister (3 INITIALS REMOVED)! Cbrown1023 talk 04:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi, Brad. Just scooting around at the moment and thanking everyone for their support at my RfA. It was a great turnout and a supremely humbling result. Thanks for your confidence, no doubt I will be seeing you around! Cheers. Bubba hotep 21:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Evidence

Man this is getting really annoying can you just let us go, I see no progress what so ever, people are writing things for no reason when will something be done? Artaxiad 01:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

If you mean there is a problem with the evidence presentations, please be more specific. If you mean it takes some time before the arbitrators are reaching your case, this is to allow time for the involved users to post their evidence, plus there are a couple of cases ahead of yours. It will be reached soon enough. If you have a more specific question, please let me know. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

No the whole process bothers me, its really annoying and its getting on my nerves, we can only get one revert barely with discussing while I revert alot of vandalism now I'm scared I might revert twice on a article. If you guys haven't started doing anything we will go nowhere meaning reading the evidence presented 60% of the users involved are not going to reply so theres no point to wait for them, sadly I have decided not to present evidence I don't think accusing my fellow contributors is civil so I am not, im only going to protect my self when necessary. Its been over a week, im dying here plus if your not going to block anyone I see no point since theres no other solutions, very confusing case. Artaxiad 01:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I understand your questions now, but I'm the wrong person to ask them. I don't want to sound like I'm ducking responsibility, but I'm one of the clerks for the committee, and I just am responsible for keeping the pages tidy and giving notices of things. Of course I'm also an editor and I'm now an administrator, but I don't use my admin powers on pages I'm clerking. So I think you might want to pose this question on the talkpage to one of the arbitration pages and see if you can get any of the arbitrators to respond. Good luck with the case. Newyorkbrad 01:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Artaxiad 01:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Persistent personal attacks by User:Tajik

I am writing to report persistent personal attacks by User:Tajik at Talk:Safavid Dynasty. Here are the instances with diff links:

• "What the hell are you talking about?!", "What's wrong with you?!", "Your stubborn attitude is the main reason...", etc. at . I warned the user and said that I will ignore his attack for now .
• After the first warning, User:Tajik again: "this is the information that Misplaced Pages needs, not your POV and stubborn tries to defend POV" and for the second time, I warned the user kindly
• Another attack: "do not think that YOU are in ANY respectable position to judge that a world-class scholar like Minorsky was "wrong""
• In my response to my reference to precise quote from Friedrich Nietzshe unrelated to the user , the response and blackmail warnings from User:Tajik were at :

• "I ask you for the last time to stop lying",
• "You also continue your lie",
• "So please stop to continue your lies and I once again remind you to watch WP:CIVIL",
• "So please stop your agenda, and please stop lying",
• "The problem with you is that you are not ballanced at all"
• "you - based on your own anti-Persian ethnocentrism - purposely cut the text"

Please, help to address the issue. I have exhausted all available means to convince him to stop attacking me. Atabek 02:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad, I read your comment at User talk:Dmcdevit. I can hear your concern. However, first of all, User:Tajik is not a party to the ArbCom case. The content I present above is clearly a personal attack and clearly a persistent one. As indicated above, I have requested the user numerous times to stop attacking me. I am sorry, but it seems that when I was accused of even something very remote like this before, I was immediately blocked with or without an explanation. Yet, for some reason, when it's an attack against me, I am supposed to be tolerant and try to resolve the issue. Well that's fine, I tried to be tolerant, as shown above, 3-4 times, calling User:Tajik to stop attacking me. But when the attacks persist and there is nothing done about it, clearly the attacker feels free to continue doing so. Atabek 02:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Post to ANI, mention that Dmcdevit was policing these pages but in his absence you need another admin to look in. Or I can do so but probably not until tomorrow. Newyorkbrad 02:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

MFD

NP, would have speedied it myself too, enjoy working the backlogs with me! — xaosflux 02:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Question

Without going into much details... What exactly happened to Essjay? I'm -really- confused. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 03:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

If you've really missed this entire episode, you probably should just look at the article in Monday's New York Times, available on their website, which although I hate to say it is probably more NPOV than anything here. There are also a mainspace article and an RfC on the subject, but they've been deleted and undeleted and I don't know what their status is at this particular minute. I'm sure there'll also be coverage in the "Signpost" coming out in the next day or so. If you have a more specific question feel free to let me know. Regards, Newyorkbrad 03:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

What the Times article fails to disclose is that the "person" who contacted the New Yorker and eventually browbeat them into posting a correction is privacy activist and general pest Daniel Brandt, who decided in October to "out" Essjay's real life identity. While something more than an apology was needed, the online lynching that occured was totally uncalled for, and has resulted in a number of other editors leaving, or at least rethinking their positions. Thatcher131 03:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Here was my comment on the RfC, which was posted, as it happens, a few minutes before Essjay's departure announcement:

This situation rapidly escalated from a very controlled tempest on Essjay's talkpage into a raging firestorm across the project within a space of about two days. At this point, several hundred editors, and various outsiders, have reviewed and criticized many aspects of Essjay's statements and actions. No matter how strongly any editor may feel about any one or more of Essjay's actions or statements over the past two years, there is little more that remains to be said. Meanwhile, behind the persona of Essjay, is a real human being, with flaws but who clearly loved Misplaced Pages and Wikipedians, who has fallen from the top of the world to what he must find a very much lower place in a very short span of time—and as I observed last week in a very different context, an individual's mistakes and embarrassments that are captured in an online forum now follow the person for the rest of his or her life. No useful purpose can be served by piling on further criticism and ... I urge that everyone immediately cease from doing so. Newyorkbrad 00:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope not posted in detail my reflections on this entire situation, because the best reflecting does not come in the midst of a frenzy. I expect in due course to say more. Newyorkbrad 03:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

What am I looking for in NYTimes? Please advise. (So I can look it up in library at my univ tomorrow.) - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 05:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The more I think of it, the more I realize that if you have managed to keep on editing for the past few days without having endured this saga, you are one of the lucky ones. Regards, Newyorkbrad 05:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think I'm ignorant, but somehow I managed to miss out on the saga altogether. Blessing in disguise, perhaps? Although I can't help but wonder what happened. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 05:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Scratch all that. I got some links from Jimbo's talk page when I was RC patroling using VP earlier today. /shrug is all I'm going to say regarding this. Personally, I know that I will never know everything, so it wouldn't be right for me to pass judgements. But I think I know how you feel. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 12:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess I am still just a bit stunned by the level of what is barely distinguishable from hatred that I have seen expressed on- and off-wiki in the past few days toward Essjay, or the person who was Essjay. Misplaced Pages is a source of pride and education and enjoyment to me, and I care about it immensely as witness the time I've spent on it for eight months; but it is a web project, and as I've said in the past few weeks in several different contexts, the human beings come first. The sight of a man being pursued by a crowd is always terrible to behold, even and sometimes especially when some of the crowd's grievance is just. Newyorkbrad 12:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Username Disucssion notice

Hi! The template is {{subst:UsernameDiscussion}} or {{subst:und}} for short. I have notified The Ticket Master using that template on his/her talk page per your request. Cheers! :) --Nick—/_Contribs 04:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, and I'll make a note of it. Regards, Newyorkbrad 04:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Artaxiad

Hi. I would like attract your attention to the actions of User:Artaxiad again. What he does is clearly an attempt to stir up a conflict. He deletes info and reverts the articles under the guise of minor edits. This edit: which he marked as minor removed referenced info from a featured article and deleted a number of pictures. Here he did the same, but was reverted by the admin: Can you please tell him to stop it? Thanks in advance. Grandmaster 12:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thats a lie, I did not add that, Grandmaster is lying please see what I added not what Golbez removed! Artaxiad 20:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Also regarding the other one it was a pure mistake, I usually change the sprotects to sprotect2 to make it smaller I might have clicked on a reversion one and added it, he could have asked me but he always goes and reports people. Artaxiad 20:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)