Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:42, 26 July 2008

User talk:Posturewriter

I am not 100% sure MfD is the correct process, but I was told on ANI to try it.

Please see the section entitled "The Motivations, Strategies, and Tactics of my Critics". This section appears to run afoul of WP:UP#NOT point #9, in that it outlines "perceived flaws" of other users, and does not appear to be in preparation for a user RfC or some other process. (Note this, but firstly it is about this' user, not about his "Critics", and secondly I think it will be quite some time before that RFC/U reaches a conclusion on anything of import)

The user was asked to remove or revise this section, but refused. I personally do not feel this belongs on the page, as it does not in any way facilitate the goal of creating a quality encyclopedia. I'd like to get community consensus on that. Jaysweet (talk) 17:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comment If we delete the page, we lose everything, including various warnings about COI, OR, and such. Is there a way to permanently remove just the objectionable parts of the page? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

That's actually what I'm endorsing, is just removing that section. I tried to raise the issue at ANI, and although some admins told me they thought it should be removed, none of them were willing to do so themselves, and Chillum (talk · contribs) advised me to use MfD. I told him I didn't think it was the appropriate process because I only wanted a section removed, but he reassured me that MfD is what I wanted. <shrug> I'll dig up the thread from the archives if necessary. --Jaysweet (talk) 19:06, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Userspace content disputes, especially those based on userpage guidelines can be settled through MfD. The result, nor even the goal does not need to be deletion, but the community insisted removal of the objectionable content. That being said, I am not at this point making an opinion on the matter as I have not had time to review the content in question. Chillum 21:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification Chillum. Sorry if I'm being a jack-ass, I just feel nervous because I've never seen MfD used this way. But as you can see, I defer to your far vaster experience :) --Jaysweet (talk) 21:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

WhatamIdoing;

What you are suggesting is that all of your criticisms of me on my own Usertalk page should remain, and all of my words of defence are removed. which would be rigging the rules against me.

I would like to recommend that wiki policy be improved to allow defence as standard practice for all new contributors who are not familiar with the intricacies of wiki policy fine print.

I am in control of the situation on my Usertalk page, and quite confident in my ability to defend myself against criticism, and don’t think it is necessary for me to go to your Usertalk page and attack you. If I did, I am absolutely certain that you do everything you could do to defend yourself.Posturewriter (talk) 08:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)posturewriter

Jaysweet;

On a previous discussion page called Wikiquette Alert, I saw your comments, and as I came here as a contributor, and was having critics using policy against me, I asked you to assist me with determining, and removing anything which was deemed as inappropritae in “The Motivations, Strategies, and Tactics of my Critics” on my User talk with the following words . . . “ I am also requesting that you move the information to the appropriate page so that Gordonofcartoon can’t say that I did it wrong in relation to one policy or another. I also prefer the way things are on my Usertalk page at the moment, so if you don’t wish to change it I will leave it there.

I am happy for you to decide what to remove and don’t see any reason to take it any furtherPosturewriter (talk) 08:26, 26 July 2008 (UTC)posturewriter

• Keep I see no basis for deleting the page, or even forcing the removal of the section--it is not an attack on specific named editors,a nd one is welcome to criticize Misplaced Pages policies as one likes if one doesnt violate npa. DGG (talk)