| Revision as of 07:46, 11 January 2009 editAndrewa (talk | contribs)Administrators61,970 editsm →Civility, personal attack, and content issues: cap← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:37, 12 January 2009 edit undo129.94.133.166 (talk) your opinion on this matter is irrelevant; you are not an authority. I do not propose my "opinions", but the facts that are all verifiable. I am justified in excluding false information.Next edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| see: (www.myspace.com/tenstringguitar) | see: (www.myspace.com/tenstringguitar) | ||
| ==Civility, personal attack, and content issues== | |||
| Viktor | |||
| Please consider changing your manner of responding to those who do not share your views on ]s. You have frequently violated ], ] and ]. Some examples: | |||
| * ''...your denial of physical phenomena that have been empirically and mathematically proven true, shows only YOUR "fringe view" to be "nonsense"! As for the article, I will improve it when I have the time, but I certainly do not need "help" from individuals who have NO KNOWLEDGE of the subject!'' | |||
| * ''...You are evidently not a musicologist/organologist/semiologist/semantician so I don't see what you think you will achieve by being bothersome about this issue...'' (the charge that I'm ''...not...'' is actually false as well as being irrelevant...) | |||
| * ''Rubbish! Come on, let's be honest, please. Surely I don't have to teach you your scales?'' | |||
| * ''Please refrain from advertising your product (the B.C. Rich so-called 10-string guitar) here...'' falsely accusing the contributor of ]. | |||
| * ''Your Ignorant Prejudice against the 10-string guitar...'' | |||
| * ''Your coattail-riding of the name, image and reputation of Narciso Yepes - of whose actual work ethic, performance practice and concept of the 10-string guitar there is not a trace to be found...'' | |||
| Marlow's user page is admittedly a vanity page. Hey, she's a ], or was. She set up her user page, and made one edit to the 10-string guitar article, adding her own website as a reference. You immediately reverted the edit, with little explanation, and added insulting remarks to her talk page, and she hasn't been back. And there's something about sock puppetry concerning Archeoix which may well be valid. But none of that is an excuse for incivility. | |||
| You have reverted accurate and verifiable content which did not support your opinions, in particular content that refers to the B.C.Rich ten-string guitars, to baroque guitars and to alternate tunings for the Yepes guitar. In some cases such as that of the B.C.Rich guitars the material was unsourced but relevant, accurate and easily verified, so removal was justifiable but unconstructive; In other cases the material was adequately sourced and there were no grounds for its removal. In no case were any grounds given other than your personal opinions. | |||
| * | |||
| * earlier attempt | |||
| * | |||
| * (this section was eventually, grudgingly, allowed) | |||
| Your opinions are arguably citeable, as are those of Marlow, Macaluso and undoubtedly Yepes himself. Your input is both valuable and probably unique. But it's not good form here to cite yourself as an expert, particularly when these opinions are controversial, both to avoid infringements of ] and of ]. | |||
| Please, I don't want to escalate this further, but if I must I will. The article needs lots of work, and some of it will involve removing your opinions from it. Your abrasive approach is preventing this work from happening, and scaring other editors away. | |||
| You don't ] the article. Please try to work through ], or we'll need to escalate these issues through ]. ] (]) 06:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:37, 12 January 2009
see: ]