| Revision as of 21:54, 19 September 2006 editBrendan Moody (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,906 edits →New reports: Mystar← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:59, 13 August 2024 edit undoNewyorkbrad (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,489 edits update to remove reference to RfCs, as user-conduct RfCs were discontinued several years ago | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{historical}} | |||
| {{editabuselinks}}<br /> | |||
| <!-- Please remove/add HTML comments around {{adminbacklog}}. --> | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| :'''This process has been discontinued per ].''' | |||
| == New reports == | |||
| === SqueakBox and Hagiographer === | |||
| {{user|SqueakBox}} was blocked for a week per his personal attack parole (resulting from arbitration) for writing on his user page that one of his achievements was | |||
| : ''restoring ] from the ] of another user who claims to write about saints but who is determined to slur him. '' | |||
| This is a veiled reference to {{user|Hagiographer}}, who acts exactly like {{user|Zapatancas}}, the other party in arbitration. Squeakbox modified the reference so it now says, | |||
| :''restoring José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero from the POV of another user who claims to write about saints. '' | |||
| Hgiographer claims this is still a personal attack and changed the user page on his own several times before it was protected. I would like some idea on whether the revised statement is acceptable or whether it sill constitutes a personal attack. No action is required at this time as Squeakbox is currently blocked for other reasons. ] 12:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The personal attack intervention noticeboard (PAIN), created on ] ], was intended as a counterpart to ]. A person with complaints over ] could, after giving warnings, report a personal attacker on this page. | |||
| ==={{user|Mystar}}=== | |||
| {{user|Mystar}} has been engaging in a pattern of personal attacks in his contributions and edit summaries. Notable recent examples include , which was an echoing of comments , , and . When this problem first emerged a few weeks ago, Mystar was , and for a while he moderated his tone. On his resumption of attacks, I reminding him of ] and pointing out specific examples. He replied by denying that he had made attacks and accusing me of using sock puppets and acting in bad faith. I don't dispute that on occasion other editors may have occasionally been over the line in their comments, but I don't believe anyone's contributions have been as persistently virulent and unproductive as Mystar's, and as long as he doesn't believe he has made attacks, I believe he will continue to behave in this manner. Most immediately I'm looking for an admin or other neutral user to weigh in on whether his conduct has been acceptable. ] 21:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Unfortunately, the noticeboard generated a considerable amount of controversy. While ] is usually a clear cut case, and administrator intervention (i.e. blocking) is usually uncontroversial, determining whether a comment is a personal attack, incivil, or just simply blunt and frank, can be quite ]. That led to a lot of arguments, flame wars, tit-for-tat disputes and ] on this page. Even after several warnings as well as changes to the header designed to instruct users on how to use this page, this noticeboard continued to deteriorate. Due to this deterioration as well as some particularly poor exchanges in December 2006, the entire page was ], with the result that the noticeboard was closed on {{#formatdate:10 January 2007}}. | |||
| ==Open reports== | |||
| <!-- Place reports below this line only after there has been reply to the report --> | |||
| The closure of this noticeboard does not mean that personal attacks are tolerated; they should never be. It simply means that complaints over personal attacks are moved to different, and more appropriate venues such as the ], ] or, as a last resort, ]. | |||
| ==={{User|Axam}}=== | |||
| After disambiguating a term ] at ], ] undid the disambiguation and placed on my talk page stating that basically ''I'm not in charge''. After explaining to him the disambiguation policy and to assume good faith in , he started his personal attacks. | |||
| *"Don't mess with it again, and try to get a life nerd" , after which I told him that he shouldn't use personal attacks (no warning yet) | |||
| *Taking the note as a threat, he wrote "Are you threatening me nerd? You don’t have enough courage to keep up a conversation with rational arguments? I strongly suggest you get a life and keep away from Iran, Iranian culture and Iranian subjects." . At this point I sent a {{tl|npa2}} | |||
| *He then wrote "I strongly suggest you get a life" and "Remember you are nobody and nobody put you in charge." | |||
| -- ] 18:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :Another personal attack on my page, after another user reverted him (an no edits on my part on the page or on his talk page) stating "The abuse of your self-declared provocation will not be tolerated." -- | |||
| :: A small update- The user was warned by Admin Sam Blanning to stop using anon IP addresses to bypass his block, wherein he proceeded to tell him "Feeling tough behind your screen boy?". I asked him to remain civil and that he should calm down, to which he responded by calling Sam (and apparently anyone else involved in the discussion) "geeks", "nerds", and that wikipedia was populated by "ignorant fools". Then he told me to "get a life". ] 06:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===Procedure=== | |||
| :::User has been blocked for 24 hours. --]<sup>]</sup> 09:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ] | |||
| :::I have blocked this user for a week for making threats after his return. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| ==={{User|Thankyoubaby}}=== | |||
| {{user|Thankyoubaby}} has been repeatedly making personal attacks on his userpage; see , , , . The first round were directed toward three users, including myself, but for whatever reason he's now decided to focus on me. I've warned him twice already about this ; his response was to remove my messages from his talk page (note the edit summary in the first one). ] 17:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I warned him. --]<sup>]</sup> 09:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{user|75.3.23.157}}=== | |||
| Repeated personal attack on : calling me "ignorant" and "your hateful nature shines through in every message." ] already has NP3 warning on their Talk page. ] 17:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| after I reverted their vandalism | |||
| (vaguely insulting - calling me ignorant} http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Lordkazan&diff=prev&oldid=75725858 | |||
| {direct attack against my person} http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Lordkazan&diff=prev&oldid=75726763 | |||
| (edit) fixed ip! doh ] 17:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *:'''Comment''' Please also see my talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:CaveatLector#Chris_Kattan where this user has insinuated that I am a member of the Ku Klux Klan (also connecting LGBT activisits with the Klan (?????) and thereby indirectly insulting a good portion of the WP community). Also please note the user's talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:75.3.23.157 where several other users have also experssed to the user displeasure with personal attacks launched against them after reversion of his/her vandalism, even after the Wiki policy was quoted to him/her. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *: User is also harassing ] ] 23:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I should point out that Lordkazan was vandalizing wikipedia by reverting many of my edits which were valid. ] 01:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : Just because you assert an edit to be valid, doesn't make it so ] 13:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::Actually, Lordkazan, you really shouldn't be talking, you think that something is true and sourced is not a valid edit? You have equally done as much vandalism as me. You also need to be warned that you should not revert all edits by one person, even if they are valid, just because you are upset that that user is more knowledgable than you in one area. ] 16:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I didn't connect gay activist with the klan. I connect people such as CaveatLector that although they are gay, they would be liked by the klan because of negative views towards African-Americans, Jews, Catholics, Hispanics, and immigrants. I didn't say that CaveatLector was a member of the klan, just that they'd like him. I could be wrong and CaveatLector could hold similiar views to the KKK because perhaps his father was a member and they probably wouldn't like him then for straying from the flock. ] 01:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| : ] claimed in Edit summaries and on my Talk page that I must be anti-Catholic because I was reverting the vandalism of ] page. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 05:14, September 15, 2006 (UTC{{{3|}}})</small> | |||
| === Messhermit === | |||
| {{User|Messhermit}} has been baned from editing the Wiki entry on ]. Nevertheless, {{User|Messhermit}} continues his baseless personal attacks on my talk page, as well as on the talk page of ] who was his advocate in the editing dispute leading to the editing ban of {{User|Messhermit}}-- | |||
| ], 20 September | |||
| :He's been warned. --]<sup>]</sup> 09:21, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==={{User|Éponyme}}=== | |||
| This users has blantantly tried to attack me. He used prohanity and made comments against me based on my national origin, describing me as "goddamned asshole from Europe trying to apply imperialist arrogance." After issuing the <nowiki>{{npa2}}</nowiki>, he promptly deleted it, adn issued the same warning to me, despite myself staying civil. He also promtly removed the warning. Here are the difs: , , , after being issued <nowiki>{{npa3}}</nowiki> he made his post a bit nastier: , , . He also continues to abstain from a civil discussion: , , | |||
| Please take action if you could, thank you. Best Regards, <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 00:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I suppose that the "incorrigible" nature of this editor in applying separate standards for style (because Americans are ''so different''), as well as general ignorance of my ethnic roots, making disparaging comments about the nature of it and saying he knows more than I, a native American unlike he. His inflammatory comments were the first such in my life that I ever took a stand against with respect to my American ethnicity and United States citizenship. I also voted for George W. Bush and I'm sure that will weigh against me here. Then again, Jimbo is a Randian and would understand where I'm coming from in contrast to hyphenated Americans--as he is an ethnic American like me. You know, don't bother defending America's colonial ethnics from pre-1776 or at least before the first census in 1790. Just support all these immigrants and downgrade the folks who gave them a country to move to. Goddamn, I am really hurt. Stop it--I am the victim here. ] 01:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| There is currently an RfC on this article, which I filed; All 4 Users have agreed with me that the article's title is misleading, yet he keeps pushing that the title be kept in an uncivil manner. This is how he (the user above) responded to 3rd party comments from the RfC I filed: , After a fifth user spoke out in favor of changing the title, this is how the user responded: Best Regards, <b><font face="Arial" color="1F860E">]</font><font color="20038A"><sup>]</sup></font></b> 02:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :The nature of those responses to the situation, truly delineates their apathy to my position. I stand in defense of what unsympathetic people don't care if they tarnish or not. They want to call the American people illegitimate. This type of discussion would not be tolerated in the 1950s. All the opposing positions to my one position would have been rightfully ostracized for making callous, ignorant and anti-American statements. ] 02:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I just warned Éponyme with <nowiki>{{npa4}}</nowiki> after Éponyme insinuated that I was anti-American at ]. Éponyme's response was to place the same template, without any factual basis, at my talk page. Éponyme has been asked by multiple users at ] to calm down and discuss things civilly. Éponyme has not done so. · <font color="#013220">]</font>'' <font color="#465945" size="1">]</font>'' · 03:08, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :How can you disassociate yourself from my situation, so apathetically and continue to bash at me like I'm some lab rat and the fate of my people is an intellectual phenomena? You should be blocked for such intolerant assertations. You bring it upon yourself for joining the lynchmob on a true blue American, who only wants to ensure the story of his people gets fair treatment and no more! ] 03:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| I would also note that Éponyme has been warned multiple times at his or her talk page, but Éponyme has removed each npa notice placed there. · <font color="#013220">]</font>'' <font color="#465945" size="1">]</font>'' · 03:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :OOH YEAH, take that! When you jump on the bandwagon and run into the same walls, maybe it is time to try less hypocritical and apathetic strategies. ] 03:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I have blocked ] for twenty-four hours. ] <sup>]</sup> 15:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:59, 13 August 2024
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
- This process has been discontinued per this discussion.
The personal attack intervention noticeboard (PAIN), created on 7 October 2005, was intended as a counterpart to the request for intervention against vandalism page. A person with complaints over personal attacks could, after giving warnings, report a personal attacker on this page.
Unfortunately, the noticeboard generated a considerable amount of controversy. While vandalism is usually a clear cut case, and administrator intervention (i.e. blocking) is usually uncontroversial, determining whether a comment is a personal attack, incivil, or just simply blunt and frank, can be quite subjective. That led to a lot of arguments, flame wars, tit-for-tat disputes and wikilawyering on this page. Even after several warnings as well as changes to the header designed to instruct users on how to use this page, this noticeboard continued to deteriorate. Due to this deterioration as well as some particularly poor exchanges in December 2006, the entire page was nominated for deletion, with the result that the noticeboard was closed on 10 January 2007.
The closure of this noticeboard does not mean that personal attacks are tolerated; they should never be. It simply means that complaints over personal attacks are moved to different, and more appropriate venues such as the administrators' noticeboard, dispute resolution or, as a last resort, arbitration.
Procedure
Misplaced Pages:Personal attack intervention noticeboard/Header
Categories: