Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:37, 17 June 2006

This is a failed proposal. Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use the talk page or initiate a thread at the village pump.

This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

GreedyCapitalist (talk · contribs)

This user is, once again, making personal attacks against me. He is calling me a troll on Talk:Objectivism (Ayn Rand), which is specifically stated as being a personal attack in WP:NPA. This is the second time I have reported him for this.
Also, There is a section in that talk page that was made specifically for the purpose of making personal attacks against me, called LGagnon a troll?. User:RJII, who has previously been warned for making personal attacks against me, has taken advantage of this section to do so again. -- LGagnon 02:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Not true. I merely responded to a request for someone on comments on whether you were a "troll." I did not make a personal attack. I worded my comment very carefully to avoid any personal attacks. I merely assented that you appear to be there for no reason but to get people upset, but also noted that I could be wrong and noted that I am continuing to assume good faith as long as possible. In other words, I stood up for you. RJII 02:33, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The section itself is a personal attack. By feuling the fire, you were making a personal attack yourself. And no, your wording was not careful enough. Claiming I'm there for no reason but to upset people is a personal attack. And no, saying you could be wrong does not absolve you, nor does it mean you stood up for me. You're trying to make loopholes that can't be made. -- LGagnon 02:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that calling someone is a troll is a personal attack. But that's not what I did. I was merely letting MrVoluntarist know what may seem to be true is not necessarily so. A lot of people are upset with you, but you may well be operating in good faith. I certainly did not claim that you're there to upset people. Read again. RJII 02:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Just an outsiders opinion, but I looked over the whole section, and in my opinion, RJII wasn't engaging in personal attacks. Merely responding that LGagnon appeared to be acting like a troll, doesn't necessarily mean that he thinks LGagnon is a troll. Just that LGagnon displays characteristics of a troll. I personally don't believe it was a personal attack, but I can see how LGagnon would be offended both my the topic in general and those who contributed to it. Batman2005 02:50, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

It's worth noting that by Misplaced Pages's rules that section shouldn't even exist. An article's talk page is meant for discussing the article & its subject matter alone. It is not there for personal attacks against a user. The entire section was made by someone who has already been warned for making personal attacks against me for creating that section. Thus, an admin has already declared that section to be a personal attack. If others are contributing to it after they were warned about that (as RJII was), then they are also making a personal attack and abusing the talk page. -- LGagnon 15:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

You're making a liberal interpretation of the rules. Simply commenting that you appeared to be a troll is not itself a personal attack. Yes, the section was a personal attack, but the creator is the one you should be reporting, not someone who gave his opinion and never said definitively "yes, LGagnon is a troll." It seems to me that you're, justifiably so, upset about the section and want those people who participated at all to be punished. Batman2005 15:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Those who participated (with the exception of Al, who did not attack me) have been making several personal attacks on me before the section was created. This time, they worked together on it instead of separately. RJII was just trying to find a loophole to doing so to avoid being reported for it again. He had no need or reason to jump in with his opinion, because the section was obviously in violation of Misplaced Pages's rules. It doesn't matter if he tried to create a loophole or not; he was participating in an obvious breach of policy, which he should have noticed on his own. -- LGagnon 17:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

He has made another personal attack against me here: This is the third time I've had to mention this here. -- LGagnon 21:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

He has made another personal attack against me, with a whole section for it, at Talk:Objectivism (Ayn Rand)#LGagnon's constant accusations of Fascism. I would hope that by now, at the fourth time that he has done this, that some admin would take some action to stop him. -- LGagnon 00:24, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm having a really hard time understanding what you see as personal attacks here. Reading over the few diffs you've given and a quick glance at the talk pages shows quite a bit of uncivil behavior on your part. The particular diff you cited as the third instance appears incredibly civil to me. I suggest you take a step back and not let the article dispute get to you personally. Shell 07:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

TShilo12 (talk · contribs)

TShilo12 personally attacked me twice by accusing me to be a sockpuppet of another user. When I removed this he reverted me with the summary rvv and a second time, marked as a minor edit. When I told him to stop it, he went on, calling me a troll and my complaint a diatribe and told me to stop scribbling crap and that I continue to suffer from an abject failure to understand the policy and again summarized rvv when he restored a personal attack. Socafan 23:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

note from TShilo12

If anyone has, after doing a wee bit of research (including User:Socafan's removal of other users' comments from this page) decided to take these allegations seriously, I'll be sure to file a complete report once I return from Shabath. Until then, Tomer 00:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I have told both of these users to stay away from each other. For now, I'm not sure if more is needed. FloNight talk 00:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

A series of personal attacks and incivilities continued after several warnings. I request him to get blocked. Socafan 00:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

JToH (talk · contribs)

This user repeatedly calls people trolls on Talk:Objectivism (Ayn Rand). He is also likely a sock puppet for another user on that page. -- LGagnon 01:42, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

He believes the warnings on his page were made in bad-faith, so as a neutral 3rd party I've given him the final warning. If he continues post back. Paul Cyr 07:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Nandesuka (talk · contribs)

As shown on http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Nandesuka#You_know_better. , Nandesuka left an insulting edit comment, and when I left a warning, he reacted by repeatedly accusing me of "trolling". At the end, he tried to muddy the waters by violating WP:AGF. Al 02:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Alienus has a long history of trolling and incivility and continues it here. His latest antics seem to be connected with the recently-filed RFArb against User:Dabljuh, an egregious disruptor and troll whose activities Alienus encourages. Just looking at his edits in the past 24 hours is instructive. In them, he refers to Arbcom as a "kangaroo court", and "lynching", insults the process and those involved by claiming "the fix is in", and refers to fellow editors as "snippies". I encourage anyone to examine our resprective contributions, and welcome any input from disinterested parties. I've been tolerant of his shenanigans for quite some time, but I don't think it's a personal attack to describe his edits on my talk page, accurately, as trolling. Since I try to make a habit of not removing comments on my talk page, even trolling ones, it's important for me to provide context to the reader, who may be unaware of the histories of the parties involved. Nandesuka 03:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Nota bene: I have moved the interactions that Alienus is complaining about to User_talk:Nandesuka/Trolling_from_Alienus. Nandesuka 05:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Nandesuka is trying to make me look bad to make himself look better. There is a history of bad blood between us. However, bad blood does not equate to trolldom. Nandesuka was genuinely uncivil in his edit comment, as you can see for yourself. And by repeatedly calling me a troll, he launched personal attacks. These things are demonstrably true. Everything else is noise meant to distract you from these simple facts that do not weigh in Nandesuka's favor. Bottom line is that he broke the rules, and he should be treated just like any other editor, even though he's an admin. In fact, as I pointed out, he ought to know better, precisely because he's an admin. That's all I have to say for now. Al 04:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• Both of you should go to bed without any dessert; you both have a history of being not quite civil and you seem to aggravate that in each other. Try to play nice or avoid each other please. Shell 07:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Oops too late... I already looked at both user's contribs and issued coresponding warnings. I didn't find any personal attacks by Nandesuka although some comments were borderline so I remindinded Nandesuka to be careful about what (s)he writes. Alienus on the other hand did make some comments that, although not blatant, were personal attacks. I've given Alienus the {{Npa}} warning. I would strongly suggest both users to remain civil and avoid each other if they can't get along. Paul Cyr 08:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you could help me understand, because i would be hard to follow a policy that I don't.

In WP:NPA, it says:

Accusatory comments such as "Bob is a troll", or "Jane is a bad editor" can be considered personal attacks if said repeatedly, in bad faith, or with sufficient venom.

Now, Nandesuka called me a troll over and over again, with quite a bit of venom. Despite this, you say you can't find a personal attack. I wonder if perhaps you looked there.

On the other hand, there's some sort of comment about my making comments that were personal attacks but not blatant. Well, they must be so "not blatant" that I have no idea what you're talking about.

In the end, it looks like you've missed obvious personal attacks while falsely accusing me of personal attacks so subtle that I didn't even know I made them. By coincidence, Nandesuka is an admin and I'm not. Isn't that special? Al 14:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Doright (talk · contribs)

After {{npa}}, {{npa2)), {{npa3)) being posted on his talk page and warnings from two other users, Doright continues with his pattern of personal attacks. I have tried to work with him, warn him and ignore him with little success. I request an admin take a look at this, and, if appropriate, formally warn him to cease this behavior.--CTSWyneken 12:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages failed proposals
• Inactive project pages