Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:34, 12 August 2005

Current Project

Introduction

On August 10 I had my first encounter with the group or individual SlimVirgin/Jayjg/Jpgordon while editing Anti-semitism to attempt to level the article to a Neutral Point of View. These individuals seem to have formed a team (see User:SlimVirginjayjgJpgordon). These three users seem to have a mostly limited interest in Jewish-related articles and seem to focus on defending them for (sometimes imaginary) opposing forces.

Events

1. #On Anti-Semitism they divided reverts to play out of the rule of 3RR (using their same argument, by the way, of <<revert game-playing complex reverts masked as "re-phraising">>). I reverted edits that were made without consensus was reached.

2. After the third revert of my part I received this message from

<<I strongly recommend that you revert yourself before you are blocked for this>> (Message sent seconds before or minutes after being reported to friend SlimVirgin).

I reverted and rephrased the controversial comment.

3. I then received a message from SlimVirgin:

<<You've been reported... If you continue to revert there, or if you violate 3RR again anywhere else, you may be blocked from editing for up to 24 hours>>

Then I replied to him:

Sorry about that, I wasn't aware of the 3RR rule... I was actually reverting my 3RR when I got this message from you>>.

4. Tried to revert again, but my edit kept appearing as yet another edit.

I got this message from SlimVirgin: <<>> (second request to edit the article).

<<...it's best to look for a compromise on the talk pages and wait for that to emerge, rather than reverting back and forth.>> (although his friends did not comply to this )

5. Then from Jayg:

<<page rather than reverting what you don't like; by my count you've reverted the contentious sentence at least 7 times in the past 24 hours>>.

Being blocked

Which caused SlimVirgin to block me.

<<You did another partial revert, so you've been temporarily blocked from editing.

Then I was block not for 24 hours by him but for 48 hours.

I was blocked from August 10 to August 12, for an unkown reason.

Quotes

jpgordon

• <<I'm contentious because you've acted unilaterally...>>
• <<What the heck are you asking him to prove?>>
• To Goodoldpolonius2: <<sheesh. I'm not sure how to pound sense into User:Vizcarra's head.

By Goodoldpolonius2

• <<Huh?>> (end of sentence).
• <<This is silly.
• <<Vizcarra, your reversion criteria is totally ridiculous

• <<To Goodoldpolonius2Why the revert? and why no comment? 62.252.0.7

• <<Jayjg violates Misplaced Pages Civility rules.>> 69.209.235.212

By Jayjg

• <<As a prominent member of the "Jewish supremacist" cabal, I naturally support this attempt by Jews and Jew-lovers to supress free speech and oppress the white race. ;-)>>

About Jayjg

Although I don't condone personal insults, this one may be indicative of a pattern here. I do not believe that someone who is objective and civil could get as many personal attacks.

• <<Jayjg and SlimVirgin are controversial admins. I am still waiting for the exact post or edit that was the reason for the August block. I have yet to receive and answer. They are dishonest about it, and they know it. So, please prove your reason was a rules violation rather than your personal bias. Prove the exact "disruption" of any August 2005 edit. I will continue to ask for it. There is a policy of WP:NPA, so show the "disruption" already, and let Misplaced Pages be done with it. Thanks.>>69.209.218.98

• <<am a pathetic Jew and I am obsessed with all things Jewish because I can't get laid>> By Jayjewg

• A picture of human feces. Dipshiite

• <<revert to Dipshiite's version, it's more accurate>>Imajew

• <<Hooknosed Kike 203.109.147.44

• <<What is your problem???>> YechiHaMelech

• <<I am a Jew, I hate all whites and non-jews.>> 202.74.222.215

• <<I'm your typical Zionist>> 172.164.210.102

• <<I'm just your typical right wing Jew asshole>> 172.168.185.149

• <<Jayjg holds jewish supremacist & slanted propagandist views, and reverts and deletes other Wikipeidans' input on a regular basis. It is clear to any reviewer of his activity on this website>> ]

• <<loser>> JackMelenchuk.

• On Jay's comment <<Oh, and please focus on the article, not the editor. Jayjg>>
  • That's good advice for all on Misplaced Pages, including you.>> 69.209.209.191

Conclusion

I don't know if these three users are the same, since SlimVirgin seems slightly more objective than the other ones. But, why in the world would you invite your friends to go and support you and leave the other party that tries to balance the POV alone. That is clearly not an ethical move.

I realized later how the 4 of these individuals seem to focus on Jewish-related articles and have frequently conversed with one another and it's easy to side with each other. So, it's no surprise that it was a losing battle, a battle against bias that I've lost.

Welcome

July 1-15

July 16-30

Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Joaquin Ma. Gutierrez

Hi Vizcarra. Would you mind taking a look at the deletion discussion and the related article for Joaquin Ma. Gutierrez? Understandably, Google isn't always the best tool for determining one's notability, but there doesn't appear to be much information online regarding this individual. This is a Filipino musician, supposedly, but most of what little that turns up is in Spanish and may or may not be related. My suspicion is that this is a vanity article but I wanted to run it by you before casting my vote. Hall Monitor 23:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

You have violated the Misplaced Pages:Three revert rule

You have violated the Misplaced Pages:Three revert rule. I strongly recommend that you revert yourself before you are blocked for this. Jayjg 19:49, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

The information there has been well sourced from multiple locations, both in the article itself, and on the Talk: page. You seem unwilling to accept that the sources say what they do. In any event, it's much easier to work this out on the Talk: page rather than reverting what you don't like; by my count you've reverted the contentious sentence at least 7 times in the past 24 hours. Jayjg 20:20, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Hi Vizcarra, you've been reported for 3RR at Anti-Semitism. If you continue to revert there, or if you violate 3RR again anywhere else, you may be blocked from editing for up to 24 hours. Please try to reach a compromise on the talk page. SlimVirgin 19:50, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, Jay and I had an edit conflict; you were actually reported on WP:AN/3RR some time before Jay's post. I think you can still revert yourself, and it would probably be a good idea to do that. As for the content, 3RR applies regardless of content, and it applies to partial, as well as to whole, reverts, so it's best to look for a compromise on the talk pages and wait for that to emerge, rather than reverting back and forth. Cheers, SlimVirgin 20:03, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

It's okay. I saw you had rephrased rather than reverting, so you may have misunderstood what I meant. I've reverted for you. Be careful not to keep rephrasing because you may violate 3RR again, and if you do, you're likely to be blocked. As I said, the nature of the content (unless it's vandalism) is irrelevant to the revert rule. SlimVirgin 20:11, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

You did another partial revert, so you've been temporarily blocked from editing. If you feel this is unfair, you're welcome to e-mail me using the link on my user page, and I'll get straight back to you. SlimVirgin 20:23, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

List of Mexicans

Hola Amigo, The List of Mexicans has been nominated for deletion, I believe that you might be interested in expressing your opinion. You can do so here: ((VfD)). Take care, your friend Tony the Marine 20:29, August 10, 2005 (UTC)