| Revision as of 19:19, 30 July 2013 editCarolmooredc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,944 edits →Official notice on ANI on disruptive/insulting behavior: thanks for diff← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:44, 31 July 2013 edit undoStalwart111 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers16,939 edits →Re: Kitten: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| ::Best ANI yet on the topic of biased editing and brought a lot of people to bios needing attention. | ::Best ANI yet on the topic of biased editing and brought a lot of people to bios needing attention. | ||
| ::No response please, you are still banned from my talk page except for official notices, per the relevant ANI last month or two ago. '''] ''' 19:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC) | ::No response please, you are still banned from my talk page except for official notices, per the relevant ANI last month or two ago. '''] ''' 19:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| == Re: Kitten == | |||
| To begin with, I'm not sure who your talk page ban extends to, so if I'm posting here contrary to a specific instruction then I should say I'm unaware of it and my note here is amoral in that regard. Beyond that, thank you very much for the kitten. I'm not really a "cat person" I suppose, but I can appreciate cute things designed to lighten the mood. | |||
| I also wanted to apologise, in a manner of speaking, for the ANI stuff in general. I thought (and I said so at the time) that your "original" complaints against SPECIFICO and Steeletrap related to things that hadn't really reached the level that required administrator intervention. Likewise, in this instance, Steeletrap probably "went off half cocked", though he had a point about some of the comments. To be perfectly frank, I've been a bit perplexed by everyone's eagerness to run off to ANI as soon as a content dispute gets a bit bogged down and ad-hom stuff starts to creep in (which is the way I described it there). I'm not an economist (ha ha, yes, definitely ''my'' line) but I understand the POV and passion that people bring to the subject. But after God knows how many noticeboard threads, I can't see why everyone seems to think "it will be different this time". | |||
| On a personal note (if I might give some completely unsolicited advice) - please be careful to read diffs and discussions and perhaps read them 2 or 3 times, especially if things are getting heated. The issue that finally prompted me to join the ANI discussion could have ''easily'' been prevented had you carefully read the diff in question and realised that the quote you were attributing to someone else was actually mine (though I would also note that the qualifications I ''do'' have are completely irrelevant here, as are yours and Steeletrap's). Case in point is where it seems you misread something I wrote and wound up professing support for something that both on the North talk page and the Geller talk page had been rejected by most of those involved, and something you previous railed against. I'm inclined to think it's more a matter of trying to rapid-fire replies to multiple threads in multiple places and not having time to read into the context of previous discussion. So its probably just a matter of being a bit more careful. | |||
| I've made no secret of the fact that despite coming to this subject area with ''zero'' prior knowledge, I've since come to the opinion that much of the Austrian/LvMI stuff here on WP amounts to a very insular (though large) ] (an essay I'm pleased you discovered). I will continue to push for that wall to be broken down. I also believe that many of the related articles (written several years ago) are/were incredibly complimentary, sickeningly so in some cases. That doesn't mean we need to go in the ''opposite'' direction but in many cases, balance is sorely needed. That's not a matter of "attacking" BLPs but I'll admit it can often seem that way to see an article transition from gushingly positive to ]. Anyway, I wanted to leave you a note with a couple of thoughts and left you an essay instead, but I hope you can see it comes from a good place. And thanks again for the cat. Cheers, ]] 05:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:44, 31 July 2013
Please post comments about the content of a specific article on the Talk Page of that Article if it is relevant to all editors.'
 Green Line for Barnstars, Archives, Other Stuff
| ||
|---|---|---|
|
Gender bias task force
Hi Carol, something here you might be interested in. Best, SlimVirgin 00:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
SPECIFICO
Many thanks for the notice. After the multiple bogus edit war warnings and wikihounding, yeah, I am very interested. --Abel (talk) 14:06, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
- Bad week to do an on SPECIFICO with people vacationing etc. and the issue being complicated. But already had one issue go stale, so thought I better do it anyway. Misplaced Pages doesn't seem to be able to deal with complicated issues any more and a lot of things that used to get responses don't. Editor drop off really taking its toll. Or maybe they all hate one faction of Austrian libertarian types :-( Among other theories. Frustrating. CarolMooreDC - talk to me🗽 15:52, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- Given that trashing of BLPs is not a big issue anymore, I do believe that Misplaced Pages eventually could face a class action lawsuit charging Misplaced Pages Foundation malfeasance if some creepy-assed lawyers ever decided to put one together with 30 or 40 aggrieved subjects of bios. All they have to do is search throughout the BLP policy, BLPN and its header, ANI and other relevant pages and they could do a real big case based on copious written evidence.
- At least I've figured out what my favorite Wikimedia essay is. User:Carolmooredc 12:10, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
reverted BLP edits?
If you can't remember what edits have been reverted, go to my edit history and figure it out. (In other words, don't make vague, unsubstantiated accusations!) Besides being off-topic as to the RfC issue, your comment insinuates that I don't know what is proper procedure or policy. That is hardly the case. In fact, in this particular RfC, I am trying to resolve the BLP problems in the North article. Read the discussion above and you will see that I am trying to get rid of the OR posted by editors who have an axe to grind. Please remove your post on the RfC threaded discussion. – S. Rich (talk) 17:17, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
CORRECTION -- It looks like I misread your comment about BLP reverts. You were referring to Steele. In any event, such comments about Steele's editing history are off-topic. In this regard they are PA because they do not advance the discussion at hand. Please remove the entire post, including what you addressed to me. – S. Rich (talk) 17:25, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- I guess I forgot to save this 1/2 hour ago, so I'll try again. Please do not post anything but official notices on my talk page. (And I assume they will not be frivolous ones.) I experience your constant chiding me to behave as you think I should as to be harassment, even if you are right 1/3 of the time. If you have a complaint or others do they can make official ones, or do it on the article talk page. Thank you. User:Carolmooredc 18:42, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Official notice on ANI on disruptive/insulting behavior
see: here. Steeletrap (talk) 19:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, if only.... User:Carolmooredc 06:21, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for diff. As I clarified to the closing editor here: My saying "Best to stay away from BLPs until whatever doesn't tick me off so much. Also I was not the one objecting to keepng it open, though it was getting rather tiresome.
- Best ANI yet on the topic of biased editing and brought a lot of people to bios needing attention.
- No response please, you are still banned from my talk page except for official notices, per the relevant ANI last month or two ago. User:Carolmooredc 19:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Re: Kitten
To begin with, I'm not sure who your talk page ban extends to, so if I'm posting here contrary to a specific instruction then I should say I'm unaware of it and my note here is amoral in that regard. Beyond that, thank you very much for the kitten. I'm not really a "cat person" I suppose, but I can appreciate cute things designed to lighten the mood.
I also wanted to apologise, in a manner of speaking, for the ANI stuff in general. I thought (and I said so at the time) that your "original" complaints against SPECIFICO and Steeletrap related to things that hadn't really reached the level that required administrator intervention. Likewise, in this instance, Steeletrap probably "went off half cocked", though he had a point about some of the comments. To be perfectly frank, I've been a bit perplexed by everyone's eagerness to run off to ANI as soon as a content dispute gets a bit bogged down and ad-hom stuff starts to creep in (which is the way I described it there). I'm not an economist (ha ha, yes, definitely my line) but I understand the POV and passion that people bring to the subject. But after God knows how many noticeboard threads, I can't see why everyone seems to think "it will be different this time".
On a personal note (if I might give some completely unsolicited advice) - please be careful to read diffs and discussions and perhaps read them 2 or 3 times, especially if things are getting heated. The issue that finally prompted me to join the ANI discussion could have easily been prevented had you carefully read the diff in question and realised that the quote you were attributing to someone else was actually mine (though I would also note that the qualifications I do have are completely irrelevant here, as are yours and Steeletrap's). Case in point is this edit where it seems you misread something I wrote and wound up professing support for something that both on the North talk page and the Geller talk page had been rejected by most of those involved, and something you previous railed against. I'm inclined to think it's more a matter of trying to rapid-fire replies to multiple threads in multiple places and not having time to read into the context of previous discussion. So its probably just a matter of being a bit more careful.
I've made no secret of the fact that despite coming to this subject area with zero prior knowledge, I've since come to the opinion that much of the Austrian/LvMI stuff here on WP amounts to a very insular (though large) walled garden (an essay I'm pleased you discovered). I will continue to push for that wall to be broken down. I also believe that many of the related articles (written several years ago) are/were incredibly complimentary, sickeningly so in some cases. That doesn't mean we need to go in the opposite direction but in many cases, balance is sorely needed. That's not a matter of "attacking" BLPs but I'll admit it can often seem that way to see an article transition from gushingly positive to neutral. Anyway, I wanted to leave you a note with a couple of thoughts and left you an essay instead, but I hope you can see it comes from a good place. And thanks again for the cat. Cheers, Stalwart111 05:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)