Misplaced Pages

:Miscellany for deletion/User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:27, 6 August 2006 editBhaiSaab (talk | contribs)6,082 edits stringing comments← Previous edit Revision as of 16:27, 6 August 2006 edit undoBhaiSaab (talk | contribs)6,082 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 11: Line 11:
:*'''Comment:''' It is, in essence, an enemies list.] 06:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC) :*'''Comment:''' It is, in essence, an enemies list.] 06:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
::*'''Comment''' -- ] is in cahoots with one of the watchees ().]%% 15:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC) ::*'''Comment''' -- ] is in cahoots with one of the watchees ().]%% 15:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
:::**See ]. Thank you. --] 16:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC) :::*See ]. Thank you. --] 16:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
::*'''Comment''' - Comment made by a supporter of Witzel. Witzel's views on Hinduism (lets just say they're negative) are documented. Timothy Usher's friend :] has threatened Netaji many times, and has made personal attacks. Usher still supports the wild admin. ]%% 15:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC) ::*'''Comment''' - Comment made by a supporter of Witzel. Witzel's views on Hinduism (lets just say they're negative) are documented. Timothy Usher's friend :] has threatened Netaji many times, and has made personal attacks. Usher still supports the wild admin. ]%% 15:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Misplaced Pages not being a battleground. ] 08:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC) *'''Delete''' per Misplaced Pages not being a battleground. ] 08:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:27, 6 August 2006

User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch

This "semi-project" on a user's subpage is being used to ensure that certain users are watched and to attack any religions that are not Hinduism. The Watch Page includes a long list of personal attacks against people who members of this guild deem "fundamentalist editors." This watch list is an extreme display of bad faith, referring to many established users as "vandals" or "dangerous anti-Hindus." On the main talk page Muslims have been referred to as "jihadi users" while Christians have been referred to as "Bible thumpers." I wouldn't be surprised if I ended up on their watch list because of this. BhaiSaab 05:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Strong delete: Watchlisting, blacklisting other editors is always a very very bad idea. If you have problems, there is always WP:RFArb,WP:RFM, WP:ANB, WP:ANB/I to resolve them. But watchlisting a group of editors just because you don't like their edits (seemingly based on religious biases) should not be encouraged. --Ragib 06:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - Comment made by a supporter of Witzel. Witzel's views on Hinduism (lets just say they're negative) are documented. Timothy Usher's friend :User:Dbachmann has threatened Netaji many times, and has made personal attacks. Usher still supports the wild admin. Bakaman%% 15:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Misplaced Pages not being a battleground. FCYTravis 08:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Extremly strong delete Misplaced Pages is not here to harbour or protect your views or ideals. Organising a project to systematically push your view of your religion or critcise other is against everything that Misplaced Pages stands for and keeping a list of users to watch because you don't like their views/edits is a sign of very bad faith. Similarly sentences like "not really islamist but bible thumpers" personal attacks and are a major violation of wikipedia policy. The same goes for watching user because of their religious orientation (Rushdie Islamist POV). The goal stated "to make sensitive history-related articles in tune with the historian's POV and get them "protected status" is an indication of a massive missuse of policy. To what end do you want them protected? So your views stand and other editors do not get a say in it? This is ridiculous. Viridae 08:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch/Watch List should be included in this nomination. Viridae 08:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC) As should this and the pages included on this: User:AMbroodEY/Fundy Watch/Distortion Assesment. Viridae 08:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete. I've already seen this abused, when an editor who never displayed religious sentiments one way or another and just mirrored a mainstream scholarly opinion was labelled a dangerous fundamentalist. CRCulver 08:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Move to Wiki namespace The idea of the project was to have a list of controversial articles and strong POV pushers. Currently it appears to be anti-Islam yet that shouldn't be the case. It is meant to be a peacekeeping ground for all controversial areas such as Serbian-Crotian, Israeli-Lebanon, India-Pakistan etc. These areas can get very emotional for some editors here. It is a fundy (aka Fundamentalist) watch project and has potential to help Misplaced Pages. I encourage non-Indians to join the project. Gizza 10:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Fair enough, though I find it hard to see a way that any wikiproject along those lines will avoid edit wars over articles due to it highlighting articles that are frequently subject to controversy (basically anything religion based) and exposing them to a higher traffic of editors who will be prepared to argue the case. Perhaps you could make WP:1RR a rule for membership to that wikiproject. It would certainly avoid those problems and perhaps foster communication in those high traffic articles rather than waring? Good luck, I will be interested to see how it goes. Viridae 14:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete This is a repugnant project, which by its very existence, with a pejorative in its title, assumes bad faith. For the record I am an atheist and am no friend to POV warriors of a religious stripe but this is indefensible. Even a generic list of POV warriors would be problematic. This far more specific targetting is divisive to a fault.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Several votes have been solicited by D-Boy: , , , , . BhaiSaab 16:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Of course he "just told you to look at it." If you think I'm on anti D-Boy crusade you're welcome to post the evidence at the Administrators' noticeboard. BhaiSaab 16:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)