| Revision as of 18:15, 13 October 2013 edit74.192.84.101 (talk) →details of the case-study conflict: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:18, 13 October 2013 edit undoSilkTork (talk | contribs)Administrators104,130 edits →Are you dead certain you did not just ban the only editor doing any work on that article?: commentingNext edit → | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| ::: Well, you are more intellectually flexible than me. I like to think of things in terms of right, and wrong. Ahnoneemoos is wrong that wikipedia should include everything there is. ] I'm not sure whether you were wrong to ban them, or not, but I intend to find out. This is of interest to me in a more general sense -- I think that part of the trouble wikipedia experiences with getting new editors involved, and new admins involved, is that current admins are too free with the ban hammer. I'm not saying that is the case here, but I would like to use this one as a case-study, to probe your thinking on where exactly that line is. I mean, if I tell you that you are wrong, and that every word we add to wikipedia does *not* matter, that's not being abrasive. I could sugar it up, and say, well, you are entitled to your point of view, and I like you as a person, but I think I would have to suggest that maybe your assertion is too strong? Gag. "Some people say weasel words are great!" To quote your userpage. :-) ] (]) 18:11, 13 October 2013 (UTC) | ::: Well, you are more intellectually flexible than me. I like to think of things in terms of right, and wrong. Ahnoneemoos is wrong that wikipedia should include everything there is. ] I'm not sure whether you were wrong to ban them, or not, but I intend to find out. This is of interest to me in a more general sense -- I think that part of the trouble wikipedia experiences with getting new editors involved, and new admins involved, is that current admins are too free with the ban hammer. I'm not saying that is the case here, but I would like to use this one as a case-study, to probe your thinking on where exactly that line is. I mean, if I tell you that you are wrong, and that every word we add to wikipedia does *not* matter, that's not being abrasive. I could sugar it up, and say, well, you are entitled to your point of view, and I like you as a person, but I think I would have to suggest that maybe your assertion is too strong? Gag. "Some people say weasel words are great!" To quote your userpage. :-) ] (]) 18:11, 13 October 2013 (UTC) | ||
| I think if you don't find that user abrasive and uncooperative, then I think we have to agree to differ, and I don't think I will be engaging further in this conversation. ''']''' ''']''' 18:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC) | |||
| == details of the case-study conflict == | == details of the case-study conflict == | ||
Revision as of 18:18, 13 October 2013
SilkTork
I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. Barack Obama
Your actions related to Mayoralty in Puerto Rico
Hi, The actions you performed regarding Mayoralty in Puerto Rico and List of current mayors of Puerto Rico have been reverted. Please see the rationale at Talk:Mayors of Puerto Rico and join the discussion there. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 14:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- User has been blocked for disruptive and abrasive behaviour. SilkTork 18:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thankyou Silk Tork. Not only did you have a quick look as I asked, but totaly sorted out the problem. Please accept this barn star to add to your collection. Op47 (talk) 18:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
|
The Special Barnstar | |
| For completely solving an otherwise insoluble problem Op47 (talk) 18:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC) |
Thank you - I always appreciate a barn star. SilkTork 18:14, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Op47, if SilkTork does not mind, I would also like your input on my questions below; I saw you were one of the editors warring with Ahnoneemoos. Did you call in an admin back during the Nov'12 portion as well? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Are you dead certain you did not just ban the only editor doing any work on that article?
Hope that got your attention. :-) I was reading one of Ahnoneemoos's ... err... okay, this is a talkpage, please don't give me trouble about the posessive. Now where was I... rare essays published in the passive voice by Ahnoneemoos on the reasons that the number of wikipedia editors was declining, and had just finished writing up an mini-essay on how Bad Cops were misusing their ban hammers, when I visited Ahnone.... the talkpage owned by Ahnoneemoos and saw that Right This Instant they were involved in a dispute with yourself, and that you had given them a timeout, to sit in the corner and think about what they had done. Well, *that* seemed like an ironic twist. So, I did a little reading and tried to figure out the situation. If you don't mind, I'd like to talk it over here with you, and get your motivations, and your take on the idea that reverts and ban-hammers are actually *not* the best way to grow the number of contributors to wikipedia articles. As opposed to, say, meta-discussions *about* wikipedia articles, or meta-meta-discussions about theoretically *editing* wikipedia articles by hypothetical editors that may or may not exist, in the reasonably near future, if driven away. WP:BITE is the key here. I have plenty more to say, but in case you are available on wikipedia this weekend, I will go ahead and submit this, to give you a heads-up that somebody is chatting your direction. Thanks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- If a user is being abrasive, uncooperative, and disruptive, and rather than responding to consensus and reason they continue to behave as though everyone who disagrees with them is wrong, then yes they get blocked in order to allow collaborative work to continue. I don't think this particular user quite understands what they are doing wrong, and that concerns me. SilkTork 17:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Sure! Umm.. wait. Citation needed. Abrasive? Uncooperative? Disruptive? Is two against one consensus? Is it possible that everyone who disagrees with them, on some talkpage about some article about the mayors of a small island, way off in the boonies (figuratively speaking -- no offense to puerto rico -- I'm just talking about the lack of attention the article receives) of wikipedia, is in fact ... pause... The Consensus ... of all right-thinking beings in the universe? I agree they don't understand what they did wrong. Neither do I. Please explain to me as if I was not involved. I wasn't, but that's beside the point. Misplaced Pages is not a kindergarten. You cannot put somebody in timeout just because they were failing to act like a well-behaved kindergartener, standing in line, doing as they are told. From my cursory look at the dispute, I'm leaning towards Ahnoneemoos having policy on their side. How were they wrong, exactly? Honest question. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:03, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
First off, I will start off by pointing out that you and Ahnoneemoos have conflicting philosophies about our mutual purpose, here.
- #1A. "We are not the internet, we are an encyclopaedia." --SilkTork
- #1B. "Misplaced Pages should be the sum of all human knowledge." --Ahnoneemoos (more or less exact cite)
- #2A. "Every word we add to Misplaced Pages matters." --SilkTork
- #2B. "Every word we DO NOT add to Misplaced Pages matters." --Ahnoneemoos, kinda sorta, taking some creative liberty with their true thoughts
- #3A. "Deletionist: someone who is willing to revert and ban over a single not-quite-right word." --SilkTork, *very* rough caricature, taking significant creative liberty with their true thoughts
- #3B. "Inclusionist: every bit of knowledge is worth saving, even if we edit it out later." --Ahnoneemoos, *somewhat* rough caricature, taking some creative liberty with their true thoughts
I definitely lean more inclusionist (albeit with a strong dose of law&order to fight vandals and spammers and other unsavory characters). I am 100% with Ahnoneemoos about #2B (otherwise I would be against an *open* encyclopedia and prefer Nupedia/Citizendium/etc). As for #1A, I'm 100% with SilkTork there; Ahnoneemoos is flat wrong... but it is a somewhat subtle distinction. Arguably, wikipedia ought to cover every major branch of knowledge, deeply and substantively. WP:NOTPAPER Actually, when the web was young, *I* thought that is what it would become... now that I'm older, I see my mistake, and use wikipedia as a substitute for what I hoped the internet would turn out to be. :-) 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- I totally embrace different, including conflicting, viewpoints. What I cannot embrace is abrasive and uncooperative behaviour. SilkTork 18:06, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Well, you are more intellectually flexible than me. I like to think of things in terms of right, and wrong. Ahnoneemoos is wrong that wikipedia should include everything there is. WP:EVERYTHING I'm not sure whether you were wrong to ban them, or not, but I intend to find out. This is of interest to me in a more general sense -- I think that part of the trouble wikipedia experiences with getting new editors involved, and new admins involved, is that current admins are too free with the ban hammer. I'm not saying that is the case here, but I would like to use this one as a case-study, to probe your thinking on where exactly that line is. I mean, if I tell you that you are wrong, and that every word we add to wikipedia does *not* matter, that's not being abrasive. I could sugar it up, and say, well, you are entitled to your point of view, and I like you as a person, but I think I would have to suggest that maybe your assertion is too strong? Gag. "Some people say weasel words are great!" To quote your userpage. :-) 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:11, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
I think if you don't find that user abrasive and uncooperative, then I think we have to agree to differ, and I don't think I will be engaging further in this conversation. SilkTork 18:18, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
details of the case-study conflict
You can delete this from your talkpage (or archive it or collapsible-hat-tag it or whatever) if you feel it gets in the way, after our discussion. These are copied straight from the relevant pages, but I edited them to remove excess parens and such.
Summary of the contents of the 1500-word article:
122-word summary
279-word bkgd
143-word powers & reqs
231-word removal & election
519-word list now
212-word refs
Summary of work accomplished since January 2012:
Ahnoneemoos has performed several re-reverts on various adversaries, and sometimes tagged. Additions to the article difficult to judge, but definitely kilobytes. Comments: verbose. 10900 + 11400 talkpage bytes.
SilkTork has performed one massive revert on Ahnon, plus cleaned up the see-also. Moved content from a list-page to this page, no net size gain. Comments: closed talkpage, banned Ahnon for 60 hours. zero + 1800 talkpage bytes.
Op47 has performed one massive revert on Ahnon, plus deleted a move-tag. No additions at all. Comments: no concensus(sic). zero + 4600 talkpage bytes.
Timtrent has performed one massive revert on Ahnon, plus modified a navtag. Filled in 32 references adding 2000 bytes of content. Comments: duplicating is inappropriate. 4700 + zero talkpage bytes.
Mercy11 has performed three massive reverts on Ahnon, plus inserted one cn-tag. No additions at all. Comments: use sandbox, diminished quality, uncited material. 3000 + zero talkpage bytes.
24.54.246.74 has performed no massive reverts on anybody, and modified no tags. Rearranged list of current mayors slightly, no net size gain. Comments: n/a. zero + zero talkpage bytes.
Good Olfactory has performed no massive reverts on anybody, and modified category tags. No additions at all. Comments: n/a. zero + zero talkpage bytes.
Detailed history of the slow edit-war on the article, and the chatter on the talkpage, grouped by timespan:
15:17 12oct'13 SilkTork m 26163 +9907 Reverted edits by Ahnoneemoos (talk) to last version by SilkTork
14:20 12oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 16256 -9907 rv: per WP:RFC in order to allow the discussion to extend up to 30 days since so few people have participated
18:07 11oct'13 SilkTork m 26163 0 SilkTork moved page Mayoralty in Puerto Rico to Mayors in Puerto Rico: In line with other such articles
18:06 11oct'13 SilkTork 26163 -58 →See also: cleanup
16:58 11oct'13 SilkTork 26221 +9965 →Current mayors: merge from List of current mayors of Puerto Rico per talkpage consensus
14:24 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos m 16256 0 →References
04:43 4oct'13 24.54.246.74 16256 -1 →Current mayors
04:02 3oct'13 24.54.246.74 16257 +13 →Current mayors
03:58 3oct'13 24.54.246.74 16244 -27 →Current mayors
03:43 3oct'13 24.54.246.74 16271 +14 →Current mayors
22:42 29sep'13 Ahnoneemoos 16257 +142
19:30 29sep'13 Ahnoneemoos 16115 +5641 Undid revision 575036512 by Op47 (talk) rv: see talk page and WP:EMBED
19:08 29sep'13 Op47 10474 -5641 Undid revision 574997702 by Ahnoneemoos (talk) Please see talk page
13:00 29sep'13 Ahnoneemoos 16115 +5641 →Current mayors
t 13:07 13oct'13 SilkTork 38365 +1 →Threaded discussion: typo
t 05:57 13oct'13 Kingdylan m 38364 +147
t 15:23 12oct'13 SilkTork 38217 +1715 commenting
t 14:29 12oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 36502 +58 →Threaded discussion
t 14:28 12oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 36444 +788 →Threaded discussion
t 14:22 12oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 35656 -1359 rv: per WP:RFC in order to allow the discussion to extend up to 30 days since so few people have participated
t 18:07 11oct'13 SilkTork m 37015 0 SilkTork moved page Talk:Mayoralty in Puerto Rico to Talk:Mayors in Puerto Rico: In line with other such articles
t 16:58 11oct'13 SilkTork 37015 +1359 →RFc for list of mayors: closed discussion
t 12:06 11oct'13 SilkTork 35656 +29 tags
t 17:53 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 35627 +834 →Threaded discussion
t 17:47 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 34793 +1965 →Threaded discussion
t 17:39 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 32828 +1941 →Survey
t 17:38 6oct'13 Op47 30887 +910 Threaded discussion
t 17:20 6oct'13 Op47 29977 +849 Answer
t 14:22 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 29128 +352 →Survey
t 14:17 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 28776 +12 →The list of current mayors...
t 14:11 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 28764 +894 →RFc for list of mayors
t 14:03 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 27870 +1280 →Threaded discussion
t 13:54 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 26590 +216 →Survey
t 13:52 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 26374 +791 →Survey
t 13:05 6oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 25583 +241 →RFc for list of mayors
t 11:48 6oct'13 Op47 25342 +1881 RfC
t 04:41 5oct'13 Ahnoneemoos m 23461 0 →Threaded discussion
t 04:40 5oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 23461 +923 →RFc for list of mayors
t 02:14 5oct'13 Kingdylan 22538 +148 →Survey
t 22:28 4oct'13 Ahnoneemoos 22390 +905 →Threaded discussion
t 18:52 4oct'13 Dailycare 21485 +296 →Survey
t 14:00 4oct'13 Legobot 21189 +14 Adding RFC ID.
t 13:20 4oct'13 Op47 21175 +573 →RFc for list of mayors: new section
t 19:29 29sep'13 Ahnoneemoos 20602 +230 →The list of current mayors...
t 19:12 29sep'13 Op47 20372 +381 The list of current mayors...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
18:48 12may'13 Op47 10474 -90 Remove move tag, no concensus to do this at this time.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
01:23 25dec'12 Ahnoneemoos 10564 -133
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
08:55 30nov'12 Timtrent 10697 +164 Filling in 11 references using Reflinks
08:51 30nov'12 Timtrent 10533 +1826 Filling in 21 references using Reflinks
05:52 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 8707 +355 →Background
04:18 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 8352 +768 →Background
03:54 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 7584 +109
03:53 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 7475 +2 →Background
03:53 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 7473 +136 →Background
03:48 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 7337 +186 →Background
03:30 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 7151 +199
03:28 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6952 +79 →Background
03:25 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6873 +116 →Background
03:14 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6757 +106 →Background
03:11 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6651 +88 +1 reference
03:06 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6563 +49
03:05 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6514 +63 +1 reference
02:58 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6451 +75 +1 reference
02:45 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6376 +2740 Undid revision 525635611 by Mercy11 (talk) rv per WP:IAR and WP:CONSENSUS. WP:BURDEN also states: consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step which you clearly have not done
02:04 30nov'12 Mercy11 3636 -2740 Per talk page. Uncited material
18:15 29nov'12 AnomieBOT m 6376 +19 Dating maintenance tags: {{Move portions from}}
17:54 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 6357 +138 →Election
17:34 29nov'12 Timtrent m 6219 +23 →References: |state=autocollapse for both navigation templates, which distract the reader from the article
17:29 29nov'12 Timtrent 6196 -5936 →Current mayors: duplicating a list held elsewhere is inappropriate
16:48 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12132 -86
16:44 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12218 -242
16:41 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12460 +5
16:41 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12455 +435
16:37 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12020 +9
16:35 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12011 +35
16:32 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11976 -51
16:31 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12027 +429
16:13 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11598 +15 →References
16:11 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11583 -1 →Background
15:50 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11584 +80
15:34 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11504 -4041 Undid revision 525547164 by Mercy11 (talk) rv: they do not diminish the quality of the article
15:27 29nov'12 Mercy11 m 15545 +4041 Reverted good-faith edits by Ahnoneemoos to last version by Mercy11: the edits diminished the quality of the article. User notified to discuss his edits at the article's Talk Page.
04:22 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11504 +64
04:18 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11440 -180
04:11 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11620 -3925 Undid revision 525482121 by Mercy11 (talk)
03:29 29nov'12 Mercy11 m 15545 +3925 Reverted good faith edits to last version by Thief12: Don't experient here; use the WP:sandbox instead
22:54 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11620 +2 →Background
22:53 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11618 +7 →Background
22:52 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11611 +10 →Background
21:41 28nov'12 Good Olfact 11601 +10 removed Category:Mayors of Puerto Rico; added Category:Mayors of places in Puerto Rico using HotCat
20:26 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11591 +51 →Current mayors
20:25 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11540 +1747 →Current mayors
19:34 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 9793 +81
19:33 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 9712 -2
19:26 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 9714 +4
19:24 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 9710 -5835
t 13:23 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 19991 +1674 →The list of current mayors...
t 10:52 30nov'12 Timtrent 18317 +597 →The list of current mayors...: thank you
t 10:45 30nov'12 SMcCandlish 17720 +1371 →The list of current mayors...: Maybe worth merging.
t 05:53 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 16349 -3 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 04:40 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 16352 -2 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 04:40 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 16354 -2 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 04:40 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 16356 +559 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 02:53 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 15797 +1 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 02:48 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 15796 +811 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 02:40 30nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 14985 +816 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 02:04 30nov'12 Mercy11 14169 +1648 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos: comments
t 23:06 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 12521 +293 →The list of current mayors...
t 23:00 29nov'12 Timtrent 12228 +260 →The list of current mayors...: yes, but no :)
t 22:56 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11968 +291 →The list of current mayors...
t 21:00 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11677 +1 →The list of current mayors...
t 21:00 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 11676 +235 →The list of current mayors...
t 19:51 29nov'12 Timtrent 11441 +684 →The list of current mayors...: it's good to disagree in a civilised manner
t 19:33 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 10757 +2464 →The list of current mayors...
t 18:57 29nov'12 Timtrent 8293 +1246 →The list of current mayors...: thoughts
t 18:34 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 7047 +856 →The list of current mayors...
t 18:11 29nov'12 Timtrent 6191 +524 →The list of current mayors...: registering my opposition to the proposed migration of material
t 18:02 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 5667 +528 →The list of current mayors...
t 17:57 29nov'12 Timtrent m 5139 +1 →The list of current mayors...: typo
t 17:56 29nov'12 Timtrent 5138 +719 →The list of current mayors...: we disagree
t 17:49 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 4419 +818 →The list of current mayors...
t 17:30 29nov'12 Timtrent 3601 +315 →The list of current mayors...: new section
t 17:11 29nov'12 Timtrent 3286 +357 →Please form a consensus. War is not needed.: new section
t 17:06 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 2929 +1180 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 16:31 29nov'12 Mercy11 1749 +910 comment
t 15:37 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 839 +2 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 15:36 29nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 837 +347 →Recent edits by Ahnoneemoos
t 15:27 29nov'12 Mercy11 490 +440 bad edits
t 22:44 28nov'12 Ahnoneemoos 50 +23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
01:58 26aug'12 Thief12 15545 +97 →Removal from office: removing cn, amendment was on the External Links section, added it here.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
02:39 27apr'12 Good Olfact 15448 -25 removed Category:Puerto Rico using HotCat
19:43 12apr'12 AnomieBOT m 15473 +16 Dating maintenance tags: {{Cn}}
19:22 12apr'12 Mercy11 15457 +6 →Removal from office: cn
00:36 3mar'12 Thief12 15451 -28 →Current mayors in Puerto Rico
23:24 15feb'12 Thief12 15479 +17 →External links: added PR template