Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:49, 15 February 2014

AN

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Guy (Help!) 13:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Mentioned you there; no hard feelings. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me) 13:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Welcome!

Hello, QuackGuru, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Getting Started
• Introduction to Misplaced Pages
• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

FYI: Revert at Acupuncture

FYI, I partially undid a recent change of yours at Acupuncture just based on your wording choice. It's a minor issue, so probably not worth bringing up on the talk page, and I botched the undo initially, but if you have other ideas for how to word that bit without altering the weight, feel free to take another crack at it. If you think it's worth discussing in more depth, feel free to let me know, too. Thanks.   — Jess· Δ♥ 05:23, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Mann jess, after reviewing your edit I fixed the text on another article. See here. QuackGuru (talk) 05:27, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

COI/N thread

You already know about this -- WP:COIN#Acupuncture -- just posting here to advise you as a technicality, for the record. --Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me) 08:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Reconcile?

QG, let's de-escalate some, and please don't think of me as an opponent. As it turns out, my supporting an indef ban was premature. I'd like to offer some perspective on my comments re your RfC. Please AGF, try not to be excessively angry, and consider what I'm saying. I'm certainly not "trying my hardest to get you banned", nor was I the first to think of it, nor am I even still arguing for it. You can see this by reading my most recent comments at WP:AN#Chiropractic and the RfC talk page.

The desired outcome in the RfC, as certified by Mallexikon and myself, was simplythis: that you take feedback to heart, and make some voluntary course changes. And it sounds like you were (are?) going down that path anyway.

The first suggestion of an indef ban was Outside view by Jojalozzo, on Feb. 6th. Then Guy (JzG) mentioned a topic ban at AN on Feb 12. After reading that, and considering these other factors, I decided at the time that I supported one for several reasons:

• Reviewing Rate of serious adverse events -- this was a very difficult thread.
• Ironically, your statement on my talk page that you were considering a topic break "for a very long time": This suggested to me that editing those articles had become not all that important to you. (Kind of dense of me; being sleep-deprived may have affected my judgement.)
• At the same time, the timing of your comments -- right around the time the RfC was attracting attention, and the issues Guy/JzG discussed re chiro on AN -- and your placing them in the RfC-certification thread on my page -- felt strange. I leaned toward AGF, and expressed sympathy and support to you on my talk page, but also wondered whether you might be gaming the system (trying to curry favor and/or undermine the RfC).
• Another factor that initially tilted me toward an indef ban was the history: you've taken (or been forced to take) long breaks, but usually come back with the same issues that got you sanctioned in the first place -- like Rate of serious adverse events.

Then I notified you on Feb 13. I could have been much more diplomatic, and I apologize.

More importantly, I think my decision was premature: I realized that Outside view by IRWolfie- was right that most of your user conduct discussions before the community happened at least four years ago; I then checked your block log, which has been clean for about as long. That made me feel that an indef ban may be excessive.

I am very sorry I endorsed an indef ban before considering all the factors. I hope you accept my apology. As you can probably tell from this post, this is important. No matter what happens at the RfC -- and believe me, the original desired outcome would be great, if it worked -- I don't want you to consider me an enemy or an unfair person.

It's obvious from your block log that you've gradually improved. I'd have changed my mind already, but now I don't know what to think. What really bothers me now is your swing from conciliatory to combative. It makes me wonder how sincere the former is. Your recent posts in multiple places are clearly retaliatory. And I think we both know very well that I wouldn't want to repeat an edit like this, which was a cut-and-paste error, let alone push you aside so I could post more mistakes. I get that you were/are angry, but do you really believe this?

Of course, you feel like I attacked you -- but that's the point; it's a battleground mentality. Like I said: I made the most honest decision I could; it turned out to be premature; but now I'm not sure what to think.

Are you still considering a break? I don't understand why you posted this when and where you did; can you comment on that? What do you think of Rate of serious adverse events: looking back, is there anything you would have done differently in that thread?

Sorry so long; probably "tl;dr". But I hope you get the spirit of it, lower the level of hostility, and let me know what you are thinking.

Best regards, Middle 8 (leave me alone • talk to me) 08:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)