Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:52, 19 September 2012

So yeah

I'm tired of trying your polite approach since no-one fucking pays attention anyways. "See also" is back and everyone just keeps warring it in. You go ahead and try your reasoning. I don't give a shit anymore. Sorry. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

There are other ways to deal with the issue. One, just wait 24 hours or more. The article will be there. Also keep adding your input or you give the article away to the bigots using it to create more violence and allow the Rightwing Christian extremist an ability to take over the encylopedia. We all have a right to edit...but not advocate our beliefs. Don't dispair...they is alwasy tomorrow...and the next day, and the next day, and the next day....and on. Commitmnet to Misplaced Pages is not something that one can really give up on to quickly. Having patience is more than a virtue here. Try joining WP:WER and discussing your concerns as I really don't want you to give up so easily. It can effect your desire to edit here and that would be Misplaced Pages's loss!--Amadscientist (talk) 06:53, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I've been here for years, so this isn't giving up on wikipedia in general. I just have the feeling that the pasts months have been extreme. It might be because there's an election in the U.S. and now this Arab stuff and whatnot, or maybe it's just my impression. I do have the feeling that the number of nutcases is growing, to the extent that it takes a Yoga-Zeng-master to stay focused. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 08:11, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I take Wiki breaks often. One seems just around the corner i think. LOL! ;)--Amadscientist (talk) 08:13, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

see Christian right and Talk:Christian right

What happens when a person not only refuses to participate in dispute resolution, complains at AN/I about DRN volunteers, and then edit wars against the clear conclusion of the DRN - including using a source for a claim which is absolutely nowhere in the source? Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

On a more positive note, I decided to check in to see how it was going and I see it is resolved. Good work.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Sphilbrick. I poured over all the information and read everything with few exceptions.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Collect, DR/N, while considered binding...it is the first step towards binding DR on Misplaced Pages. Editors ARE expected to follow...not the DR/N decision...but the consensus. There indeed does exist a rough consensus by dicounting the two editor opinions (one on the DR/N) who's arguments contradict policy, are based on opinion rather than fact, or are logically fallacious. There are a number of steps that can happen from DR/N, including formal mediation which I feel this situation is destined for.--Amadscientist (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I was involved in one formal mediation -- and I assure you that some editors seem quite unwilling to reach any sort of middle ground when they are sure they don't have to <g>. It dragged on for months - and with a lot of acrimony (let me tell you about it sometime) With the demise of WQA, DRN is, indeed, now a "formal dispute resolution" as far as ArbCom is concerned. Collect (talk) 21:01, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Don't fret too much. The more problematic editor in question has stated they don't plan on editing after the US elections are over, so the end is nigh.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer  21:26, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, I don't think there was an An or AN/I complaint over this. I don't see anything. One editor asked several questions and I answered them with some explanation.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:35, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Tylman

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Tylman. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Time for you to leave

...my talk page alone. I'm really not interested in hearing anything about your latest hallucinations. Keep it to yourself, please. Viriditas (talk) 21:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

You are working against the goals of Misplaced Pages. You have major competency issues and I believe are attempting to disrupt the very heart of the encyclopdia and its core principles. You are not here to collaborate. You are here specificly to undermine the site and destroy the work of others. You are not a good faith editor. You ignore and dismiss almost everything that challenges your conflict with others and seem to be working against the ablility of editors to resolve issues in a civil manner. You are a detriment to Misplaced Pages and should walk away on you own accord study how things are done here and return when you are able to work with others. Barring that I would support an indef block of your account as trolling for conflict, competency issues, undermining editor's ability to work in collaboration with others as well as a clear agenda of disruption, Wikistalking and harasment.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2012 (UTC)