Jump to content

User talk:UndergroundRailroad: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 42: Line 42:


As noted above: [[WP:NPA]] refers to ''other editors''. It does ''not'' mean that one cannot express a negative personal opinion about an ''article subject'' on a ''talk'' page (even if the words are a bit ill-advised, they're not off limits). And secondly, even if there are personal attacks being made which violate the NPA policy, the correct procedure is to advise an ''administrator''. ''We'' will review the situation. ''We'' will determine whether a warning (or two, or three) is necessary. ''We'' will determine whether the situation warrants a stronger response. It is ''not'' your right as a novice editor to impose warnings or punishments for what ''you'' deem to be a policy violation — you notify an administrator of what you believe to be a violation, and then ''stay out of it'' while the ''administrator'' deals with it. [[User:Bearcat|Bearcat]] 10:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
As noted above: [[WP:NPA]] refers to ''other editors''. It does ''not'' mean that one cannot express a negative personal opinion about an ''article subject'' on a ''talk'' page (even if the words are a bit ill-advised, they're not off limits). And secondly, even if there are personal attacks being made which violate the NPA policy, the correct procedure is to advise an ''administrator''. ''We'' will review the situation. ''We'' will determine whether a warning (or two, or three) is necessary. ''We'' will determine whether the situation warrants a stronger response. It is ''not'' your right as a novice editor to impose warnings or punishments for what ''you'' deem to be a policy violation — you notify an administrator of what you believe to be a violation, and then ''stay out of it'' while the ''administrator'' deals with it. [[User:Bearcat|Bearcat]] 10:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


*Bearcat: Your comments above are incorrect. According to WP:PAIN:
"For editors who want to get an administrator to have a look at a personal attack situation and consider action .... 2. Make sure the editor has been warned with the {{npa}}, {{npa2}}, and {{npa3}} templates as appropriate. "

**I am an editor.

**You are somebody who uses draconian administrative powers to enforce the rule-breaking of people who agree with your viewpoints.

::And that's against wiki policy.

[[User:UndergroundRailroad|UndergroundRailroad]] 10:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:59, 13 March 2006

The AFD consensus pertained to whether the article would be deleted or not; the AFD consensus does not permit you to remove discussion from the talk page. The only Wikipedia process which would permit the removal of past talk page discussion would be to have an administrator review it for personal attacks. And even then, only the administrator would have the power to decide what discussion can be removed. You are not under ANY circumstances to remove ANYTHING from the talk page again; you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia if you do. Bearcat 01:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pm shef

Could you please move the comments you just left to User talk:Pm shef, which is the correct place. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the comments over to his talk page. Could you please provide me with the user that Pm shef made the personal attack on and where. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I din't notice that he had done the same to your user page. I have left him the same remark that I left here. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you think that the page should be deleted, please read Wikipedia:How to delete a page. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. pm_shef 17:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Attacks?

  • I'm not acting ignorant, I would honestly like you to explain to me what your warning refers to. If you don't have any examples, and can't show that I have made personal attacks (which I honestly can not think of) then I will have to report it to an administrator and have the warning taken off my page. pm_shef 22:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've checeked around and I can't find where Pm shef has made an attack on another user. I did see somewhere that he had referred to a person named in an article as non-notable but that is permitted. For an example of this see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 March 10 wher several people and groups are called non-notable (nn). The speedy delete tag CSD A7 reads "non-notable biography / vanity." If he has attacked another editor then please provide me with the deatails. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you show me where he called user Elliot Frankl and user Mario Racco these names? Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm going to echo Cambridge's request — I'd like to see the evidence. And in fact, I'm going to be more blunt about it. You have two, and only two, choices in the matter: either produce the evidence (and not just repeating what he said in a hearsay kind of way — show us actual links to the specific edits you're disputing), or stop alleging that he made personal attacks. At this point, you're coming far closer to breaching WP:NPA than anything I've seen pm_shef do or say — what you're doing is itself treading dangerously close to the personal attack line. So if you make the allegation so much as one more time without providing proof of it, you may be temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for violating policy. Bearcat 06:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These attacks were posted by Pm_shef here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eyeonvaughan&oldid=41257881

Quotations:

  • "Meanwhile this "reputable candidate" you keep referring to, Elliot Frankl, is a nutcase"
  • "Sure maybe she's not as intelligent as someone like Elinor or other MP's, but she's a hell of a lot better than Racco, a sleazeball to the nth degree"

Pm_shef has already received his second warning. He should remove his many personal attacks soon, or otherwise some of these attacks will be removed and he will receive his third and final warning. UndergroundRailroad 01:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK I think you may have a slight misunderstanding of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. It refers to attacks on other contributors which is not the case here. The possible attack there is on User:MSJapan who is indirectly called a "trouble maker". I have left a message on User talk:MSJapan asking for their opinion. AS far as I can see there should only be one warning for personal attacks. As such I have removed the NPA2 tag from the top of Pm shef's page and warned him of it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the final time, WP:NPA does not apply to the subject of an article. It applies to users and editors, which neither of those qualify as. While the comments may have been innappropriate, they do not infringe on WP:NPA. I respectfully request that both warnings be removed from my page, as they are both groundless - if they are not removed, I will be applying for arbitration. -- pm_shef 02:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See the reply from MSJApan on User talk:CambridgeBayWeather. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 03:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's been explained to you that the remarks Pm shef made are not covered by WP:NPA to put that on his talk page is begining to look like harassment. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above: WP:NPA refers to other editors. It does not mean that one cannot express a negative personal opinion about an article subject on a talk page (even if the words are a bit ill-advised, they're not off limits). And secondly, even if there are personal attacks being made which violate the NPA policy, the correct procedure is to advise an administrator. We will review the situation. We will determine whether a warning (or two, or three) is necessary. We will determine whether the situation warrants a stronger response. It is not your right as a novice editor to impose warnings or punishments for what you deem to be a policy violation — you notify an administrator of what you believe to be a violation, and then stay out of it while the administrator deals with it. Bearcat 10:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Bearcat: Your comments above are incorrect. According to WP:PAIN:

"For editors who want to get an administrator to have a look at a personal attack situation and consider action .... 2. Make sure the editor has been warned with the Information icon Hello, I'm [[User:{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}]]. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User_talk:{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|my talk page]]. Thank you. , Information icon Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you., and Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. templates as appropriate. "

    • I am an editor.
    • You are somebody who uses draconian administrative powers to enforce the rule-breaking of people who agree with your viewpoints.
And that's against wiki policy.

UndergroundRailroad 10:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]