| Revision as of 12:14, 24 August 2007 editCailil (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,119 edits archiving← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:27, 24 August 2007 edit undoCailil (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,119 edits moving archoved convos to /archive2Next edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| | This is an ''']''' of past discussions. '''Do not edit the contents of this page.''' If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the <span class="plainlinks">]</span>. | | This is an ''']''' of past discussions. '''Do not edit the contents of this page.''' If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the <span class="plainlinks">]</span>. | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| ==Note from Cybergroover== | |||
| Hi Cailil, thanks for the links to instructions to write wikipedia articles. I couldn't find them before I added the "criticisms" section. I had another look at the ] article and noticed that much of the rest of the content does not have sources either (for example the "hobby" sections is marked thrice with "citation needed" . This leads me to believe that there must be different rules for citations for different content. Infact I notice to my surprise that this article only includes two references in total. With sentences such as: "Most long term players feel that sixth was a more balanced edition of the game than previous incarnations[citation needed" (6th and 7th edition)going uncited. | |||
| Any information you could give me about this would be appreciated. | |||
| Also I notice you are interested in gender studies. Living in Japan now has brought issues of gender to my attention more than ever before (a Asahi Shimbun poll done around 2000 showed that still 50% of Japanese men feel that woman's rightful place is primarily in the home!). As far as I have noticed here all the "tea ladies", "office ladies", and face to face service staff at banks and post offices are women. And all the managerial staff are men. Certainly makes me feel better (but still perfect) about New Zealand's (my home country) gender relations! Japanese exceptionalism generally keeps foreigners shying away from researching topics such as this and still rampant (and still legal)racism. I widening gap between woman's expectations and cultural and work realities is one of the main drivers behind Japan's low low birth rate (woman are no longer so happy to give up their career completely to raise their family; which is generally a requirement for mothers who find significant barriers to re-entering the private workforce once they have had children). I imagine this would be a very fertile area of research. | |||
| cheers | |||
| Paul<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:03:08, 3 July 2007| 03:08, 3 July 2007|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
| == Feminism & religion == | |||
| Thank you for your support. This is going to be a long argument, I fear. --] 21:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I think you made the right call about the mega-churches ref. I do think Bremskraft is trying to improve the article and her willingness to source what she's added is positive. I'm sure we can all build a consensus on how to improve that section, but yeah it may take a while =) --] <sup>]</sup> 00:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == My situation == | |||
| I appreciate your comments on the CN board. We have an open dispute between two users. The user asked me to help create a template. Through the course of the template creation, he became increasingly agitated because I would not institute a number of features without discussing them first. Many subtopics were started within a very short time and it became very hard to address each one. ] and ], amongst a handful of other things, were violated several days ago by said user. He was informed politely that ] is not a good thing, and that it would be nice if he would not attack others. The attacks continued, and at one point, he even appologized before picking back up again. These issues were bought to the attention of the community through various steps in ]. What happened? The attacks continued. The statements of ] continued. And the only discussion with regards to the issues at hand could be summarized in one statement: "I'm right because it's obvious, so there is no dispute." (I'm creating that quotation as if i were said user). The user started to follow me around and harass me. Finally, after approximately a week of this stuff - I attacked the guy. He has shown no respect for those that don't agree with him. Nobody else wanted to address the issue, so I did what I felt was appropriate. | |||
| Do many people consider that to be a absolute no-no: definitely. Am I one of those people? Absolutely not. I believe it is okay to attack people who show no regards for others in this world. I will only resort to this when absolutely necessary, and had someone stepped in - then this would have never happened. I even opened a wiki alert and nothing came of that (). The failure of the wiki system is that the onus remains on me to have this situation dealt with. I have suggested that we both agree not to edit the template. I have suggested that we both agree not to edit the template on article pages. I have suggested any number of compromises, and nothing is acceptable to the user. I don't see why I should have to start ANOTHER process where everything has to be formatted in a particular way, and everyone has to be noted on the various pages when people involved react with is treated as ]. I am not making any content related edits to wikipedia until this situation is resolved. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 22:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :* As a quick note: I'm watching this page, if you want to discuss this on my talk page as opposed to this talk page, please feel free to refractor the conversation. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 22:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::Re-read ] there is no clause allowing for incivility and/or attacks. WP:CIVIL is non-negotiable, whether or not you have (or feel you have) been provoked. You should know that you may be warned for what you said to User:Chrisjnelson; IMO you were goaded into this attack but that doesn't excuse it. | |||
| :::You should also be aware that you may have violated ] by posting your grievienaces in a number of places in order to get attention. | |||
| :::Have you tried ] with Chrisjnelson? By that I mean have you sought ] or opened a ] on the template? This would attract the attention of impartial editors and help build consensus. | |||
| :::That you have problems with Chrisjnelson is very unfortunate. Are they displaying signs of WP:OWN - yes. Are they being obstructive with comments like "there's what you believe and then there's the truth" - yes. Have they breached ] - yes . Is that enough for WP:CSN - no. I notice that there are other editors who have problems with Chrisjnelson's behaviour. I'll be having a look into the situation. | |||
| :::If you want other editors to look into this issue you need to be specific about what and where the problem is. Give diffs as evidence. Word everything coolly and neutrally. Be concise. Even now ] as best you can. | |||
| :::If you can give a short, specific account of the problems you're having at the temlate page I suggest you ask an admin for advice. They may point you to ] or to ]. There is no short cut to resolving this and asking that admins / the community hurry-up and "ban him" is not helping. | |||
| :::You're fairly new to Misplaced Pages so you could check-out the ] for a while, it might help you with situations like this. But for the time being I really strongly recommend you take a short break (I know how hard that is when you're being attacked - but it is nearly always the first step in resolving disputes)--] <sup>]</sup> 02:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::: I'm not canvasing and I am shocked to see that suggestion. I'm asking for action to be taken because my numerous other avenues are being cut off. The RFM was shot down because he, and another user, wouldn't agree to it. Chris nelson has been going around, asking uninvolved editors to make edits to the template. They, unkowingly make the edits, without realizing there were disagreements. Most of the time, you will see that users (like {{user|RyguyMN}} are quick to agree and promptly step out of the situation, per his comments on Chris' tp. Look through Chris Nelson's talk page history and you will see he has selectively removed content that speaks to this. Per ] it is okay to blank your own user tp, but it is not okay to selectively remove content. I have filed RFCs, RFM, 30, and WAs. Nothing has happened. I am aware of ] and the implications of my actions. If you think that I need to be prevented from editing, then I cannot argue with that. I have always been concise and am willing to talk about things. You might want to talk a look at the recent edits to my talk page by Xanderer, who has had the same problems with him.. That user's talk page has some interesting things on it as well. I can provide you with concrete support that something needs to be done. I'm not even saying that it doesn't involve a reprimand for my actions. But I'm not apologizing for them because I'm the one putting out all the effort to get things moving forward. Especially when Chris calls me ignorant and mentally unstable () - had he been reprimanded immediately for his first round of personal attacks, then I would have never gotten to the point where i made those comments. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 03:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::* Per your concerns, I have struck my request for him to be banned from the CSN page. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 03:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Thanks for that diff. I will be looking into matters. What ever I find I'll bring to the attention of some admins experienced in dealing with ]. You should also be aware that you can warn anyone for violating policy - its not just an admin responsibility / tool (but be careful because using warnings incorrectly is frowned upon). | |||
| :::::I don't think you should be prevented from editing Misplaced Pages but it may be a good idea to look at ] - its not a punishment or a patronizing programme, it gives you privelaged access to the wisdom and knowledge of one of wikipedia's more experienced editors. | |||
| :::::As I've said I will look into this but it may take a little time and it may end-up with a ] about Chrisjnelson. My best advice is to take a short break and to worry about this as little as possible. That you made 1 personal attack is not a banning or blocking offence and if you can learn from it and become an even better wikipedian all the better =)--] <sup>]</sup> 14:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::* I can go on and on about this, so at this time I'll just let you do your thing. It gets fairly hairy because of the various number of editors turned onto the situation, so you might have a hard time following the "sequence of events". You might want to check with {{user|Seraphimblade}} as it looks like he's also willing to look into things. Per the note at the top of my talk page and post, I have decided to stop editing content altogether until this matter is resolved. All i'm doing is discussing on talk pages and making fixing some non-controversial disambig issues. | |||
| :::::*Speaking to the aspect of my behavior: I will tell you that as this thing stretched out from hours to days and eventually week(s), I lost my patience with him in a few places. So whether or not you guys want to consider that one or more attacks is up to you. Again, I'm not apologizing for it, and because that, you won't hear a peep out of me if a ban/block is instituted. | |||
| :::::* I appreciate the suggestion of ], however, I'm just not inclined for that type of thing. I'm well versed in the various policies and guidelines. I understand what I'm doing around here and as you will see by the barn star on my talk page, I was actually able to help other's in this situation. The difference between that situation and this one is that I got involved and politely and diplomatically informed people of ways to improve their behavior. That's in stark contrast to what happened here. People who did become loosely involved for the most part were afraid to speak their mind. In fact, the other editor in that situation just so happens to be involved with this situation with Chris. Apparently the two of them are "buds". I do my best to adhere to policy and guidelines but I temper those policies with ] and ] in the spirit of protecting the content. Content is king on here, that's the only reason an encyclopedia exists. I'm here to be a positive presence in the community and I will give it the "old college try" when dealing with uncivil editors. But I do have to draw the line at a certain point. Any who, I'm all ears if you have some more thoughts on my behavior. As for the dispute, I'll just let you guys take the next step and we'll see what happens. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 14:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| (out dent) thank you for your response. I have looked into this a bit (there's still more to do) and I will be talking to Seraphimblade, as well as other admins. I want to ask you if my impression of events is accurate. In fact I have a few questions | |||
| #Am I correct in saying that this dispute began at the template around July 25th. And that up until the discussion about the "debut date" of players things were fine? | |||
| #Is it the case that Chrisjnelson made a number of MOVES reverting your MOVES without discussionn? | |||
| #Would I be correct in saying that the RFC at the template failed because Pastordavid's and Jddphd's advice was not followed? | |||
| #Finally if you are accusing Chrisjnelson of following around do you have any evidence of this - ie diffs? | |||
| Sorry for all the questions but this dispute is so messy that I'd like to see if I'm anywhere near right in my understanding of it--] <sup>]</sup> 22:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :I fully understand the messiness of this situation. I just want some peaceful resolution. Thank you for engaging me in discussion, even after my admittedly hostile post to ]. | |||
| :#The disputes started to creep in on July 22nd on the discussion {{tl|Infobox NFLactive#Listing out highlights/awards}}. There were also some comments made to my talk page. was really the first edit made to my talk page where trouble started to leak through there (previous edits were pretty benign), and it was on a topic that the person had not been an active participant in. | |||
| :#Yes | |||
| :#That wouldn't be incorrect. as there are a few other "points of interest", but that'll suffice. | |||
| :#Yes I do, would you like me to provide them. This is not a major concern of mine. | |||
| :No problem. Your efforts are MUCH appreciated. I realize that it's silly for me to discuss anything on that talk page as any changes can be reverted later. I'll just leave it alone. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 09:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you for the response. If you have diffs showing that chrisjnelson followed you around please post them here. I've spoken to Seraphimblade and I want to second his call for all parties to enter ]. If this goes to Arbcom it will be a lengthly process and it may not be good, in the long term, for any of the parties involved--] <sup>]</sup> 12:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::* Can't say i disagree with any of your points. I'm hoping this is accepted. I'll post some stuff if need be. But I don't want to drag this out any further. If the guy accepts the proposal, it won't be necessary anyway. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 12:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::* He refused, and did so quite rudely on ]'s page. Is this not grounds for administrative intervention? I'm not sure what the point of going through arbitration is if the guy makes statements that reassert ] and also fail ] repeatedly. Someone else has chimmed in and also agreed that an "impartial" system needs to be used. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">]|]</span></small> 22:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Bremskraft's Contention: we are masking POV by invoking Misplaced Pages rules inconsistently == | |||
| ::Cailil, frankly I do not have the time to continue to reiterate the arguments I have posted on the Feminism page. But here are the relevant issues to what you just posted: 1) Misplaced Pages rules are applied inconsistently; as a result, citing Misplaced Pages rules has become in many instances a way to mask arguments for a certain point of view (whether consciously or not), or conversely for an "NPOV" goal that that no one has defined in the context of what it means to have a masculinism page. 2)It's wonderful that you are taking the time to carefully reorganize many of the pages. Unfortunately, not all of us have the same amount of time, and yet it is still necessary to challenge how certain things are characterized if they are not correct.--] 16:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == thanks == | |||
| Thanks for the help with ] - its going to be a long process getting that to ] but I'm in here for the long haul. Best regards--] <sup>]</sup> 21:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :You're welcome :-) —] <sup>(])</sup> 23:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Your question== | |||
| I don't see any blatant vandalism there, but it certainly seems that the editor is making some very contentious edits, and does very much need to discuss them. You do at least need to make an effort to engage that editor in discussion (which you may have, I don't know). If (s)he refuses or ignores your offers to discuss, and continues to insert the disputed material despite consensus against it, there are certainly steps that can be taken from there. But you'd be surprised at how often an offer to discuss works. ] <small><sup>]</sup></small> 06:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Loneranger4justice == | |||
| He's making some highly POV edits to ] and reverting other editors. Since you've warned him recently, thought I'd let you know. --] 13:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Re: Misandry IPs == | |||
| Hi edgarde, just to let you know I submitted those two IPs (189.155.54.100 & 89.210.111.19) to ] to confirm that they are open proxies - if the User behind these IPs is ] it would start to really worry me - he never used open proxies before--] <sup>]</sup> 23:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Good to know. If you're on this, I'll not bother labeling these so as not to complicate the matter. If there are further IP posts, I'll ]. / ]<small> ] ]</small> 23:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Cailil, I think it's fine to remove those comments--as well as being uncivil personal attacks, they're not part of a good-faith effort to improve the articles in question. Also, if this is ] any edits by a banned editor can be reverted or removed. I've removed the comments at ] and semi-protected that page for a week; let me know if you notice any further problems. ] (]) 15:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:27, 24 August 2007
 Talk page |
 Admin |
 Logs |
 Awards |
 Books |
|
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |