| Revision as of 05:43, 5 September 2014 editDexDor (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users64,011 edits Notification: listing at miscellany for deletion of Talk:Wiki/User Talk:Synergisticalism. (TW)← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:09, 5 September 2014 edit undoDr. Blofeld (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors636,310 edits →Eric and Carol ban each other - for future referenceNext edit → | ||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
| ::::::::::Eric, only post official messages here from now on. Thanks. <small>'''] (])'''</small> 23:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | ::::::::::Eric, only post official messages here from now on. Thanks. <small>'''] (])'''</small> 23:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::::::You do make me laugh, so I thank you for that. But naturally you're no longer allowed to post anything on my talk page either. ] ] 23:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | :::::::::::You do make me laugh, so I thank you for that. But naturally you're no longer allowed to post anything on my talk page either. ] ] 23:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| Carol, I know you think that Eric is attacking all women and all that, but the honest truth is that most of his work and interactions over the years have seemed to have been with female editors and he generally gets on very well with them. I'm sure {{ping|Gerda Arendt}} would vouch for that. He just simply doesn't buy the gender inequality argument and that gender identify matters. I'm all for a higher number of female editors, and I fully support what Rosiestep is doing with ] as some of the coverage of female writers in the Latin world or encyclopedists etc is pathetic. But I do also find it a bit offensive that gender identity matters in quality of writing for instance. Eric used the example of ] which we co-authored, it wouldn't have made any difference if it had been written by women. Where gender identity might matter more, aside from projects like Rosie's which try teven up coverage, there's quite a few topics which most male editors wouldn't edit and might be more likely to be edited by females, so that would be a good thing in addressing systematic bias, but by no means does that mean that simply because an editor is female they'll want to edit a "female" topic like nursing or fashion or whatever. Eric just seems to find it highly offensive that they think it's a major issue in terms of quality writing I think. I think you've taken a lot of what he's said as an attack on all women in general, which given my experience of his interactions with female editors, I really don't think is true. And no, I'm not defending him because I'm male, but I am saying that I don't think he's quite what you think. It also concerns me Carol that you keep talking about "guy editors" a lot, as if it really matters. I welcome anybody who does anything constructive on the website, I couldn't give a toss who the editor is and what they're like in real life.♦ ] 10:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
| ==MfD nomination of ]== | ==MfD nomination of ]== | ||
| ], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 05:43, 5 September 2014 (UTC) | ], a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for ]. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at ] and please be sure to ] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). You are free to edit the content of ] during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.<!-- Template:MFDWarning --> ] (]) 05:43, 5 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 10:09, 5 September 2014
Green Box Links to Barnstars, Archives, Other Stuff   See here for my Arbitration-related topic ban info. |
|---|
 |
 | This user wants to see everything in its place. |
ARBCOM clarification request regarding use of "TERF"
I have initiated a request for clarification from the ARBCOM regarding the use of "TERF" per discussions on Talk:Radical feminism. I am messaging you because you have been involved in past discussions regarding this issue and may wish to participate in the new discussion at the ARBCOM. The discussion can be found here. Thank you and best wishes. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of User:Two kinds of pork
User:Two kinds of pork, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Two kinds of pork and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Two kinds of pork during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Two kinds of pork (talk) 04:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
IMO
The recent thread you posted is a non-starter. By including 3 editors, you set up a situation where the discussion will be diverse x3 and feckless x3. If there are specific WP:TPNO issues with particular editors which need addressing, they should be brought up one-by-one as they occur. If there is an overall pattern with any particular editor, you could start a RFC/U as to the editor. (Above all, bringing up editor behavior problems on the Gender Project talk page would be most unworthwhile.) I urge you to withdraw the thread/close the discussion as soon as possible. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 05:14, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, is Jimbo a participant on the project? Since he is not, what is the point of posting a notice on his talkpage? It looks like an effort to drag someone onto the drama board. Again, I urge you to closeout the discussion. Say so to me and I will do so on your behalf. I will simply say "Upon further consideration, OP has determined that pursuance of this particular thread would no be helpful to WP as a whole nor to the Gender project. – S. Rich (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
As I thought would happen, the discussion deteriorated. Among other things, various editors were saying "so-and-so should be banned for having these-and-those opinions", and "you are making a personal attack on me". I have "closed" the discussion with a {{NOTHERE}} template. – S. Rich (talk) 17:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You aren't an admin and others are expressing concerns so I think you should take you opinion off the top of the posting and put your own opinions in there just like any other editor. Another nail in your administrators coffin?? Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Please note in the ANI instructions the ANI calls for the attention/intervention of administrators and experienced editors. If I was an admin, I would have archived it. In any event, you will see that nothing will come of your thread. There is some risk of a boomerang. First, the thread reflects badly on you. Second, a thread about a Project talk page diverts attention from the actual goals of the Project. The real work on the problem is listed at WP:CSBOT. – S. Rich (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You can't get any work done if every constructive comment is badgered. Do you think that should be allowed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Palestine or WP:Wikiproject Israel? Think about it. Hard. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Regrettably, the ANI you opened is not constructive. You can see so by the results thus far. (I have not looked at Palestine or Israel, but suspect that similar long, drawn-out, endless discussions about the opinions of others would not be constructive either.) I and another editor have tried to close the ANI without success. And I am sad to see that Admins are contributing to the drama rather than dropping the curtain. – S. Rich (talk) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- I think it's going well, getting a good discussion going, etc. So we'll have to agree to disagree.
- I wonder if it will end up in the new government funded study of sexism on Misplaced Pages. (See Resources list.) I assume they'll be reading all the relevant threads. Also assume they won't use real names, knock wood.
- By the way, I've read that more males get raped by other males in the military than females. Perhaps you have some insights on this or know about some abstruse military sources that might be open to the public. Or that we could do FOIs on? Something I just have a couple articles on right now from a year ago; haven't thoroughly research. And, as always, so many articles, so little time. Sexual assault in the United States military is the relevant article. I guess I can start by at least throwing in the couple refs I have saying it's more guys, though of course they rarely report it. (It seems it was a higly reliable source.) Thanks. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 20:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- BTW, the Barnstar below, for your editing efforts, is certainly deserved. Congrats. But I wish you'd withdraw the WP:ASPERSIONS you made about me being biased. Such is hardly the case. (And I dont know anything about the male/female rape issue. I presume you mean FOIA, but crafting one would be difficult.) – S. Rich (talk) 20:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)20:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- There are all kinds of bias, including based on past experience in different situations. I could replace it with "pain in the butt".
Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 20:45, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You said "way too biased" and "obvious biases". These remarks, especially when brought up on Gender Project discussions, imply gender-bias and other bias. It easily construed as a personal attack. If you would be so kind as to replace "biased" and "biases" with "nick-picking pain in the butt", I'd be quite happy. – S. Rich (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Your comments helped me clarify in my own mind the nature of the bias so did so there. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 21:17, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You said "way too biased" and "obvious biases". These remarks, especially when brought up on Gender Project discussions, imply gender-bias and other bias. It easily construed as a personal attack. If you would be so kind as to replace "biased" and "biases" with "nick-picking pain in the butt", I'd be quite happy. – S. Rich (talk) 21:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- There are all kinds of bias, including based on past experience in different situations. I could replace it with "pain in the butt".
- BTW, the Barnstar below, for your editing efforts, is certainly deserved. Congrats. But I wish you'd withdraw the WP:ASPERSIONS you made about me being biased. Such is hardly the case. (And I dont know anything about the male/female rape issue. I presume you mean FOIA, but crafting one would be difficult.) – S. Rich (talk) 20:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)20:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Regrettably, the ANI you opened is not constructive. You can see so by the results thus far. (I have not looked at Palestine or Israel, but suspect that similar long, drawn-out, endless discussions about the opinions of others would not be constructive either.) I and another editor have tried to close the ANI without success. And I am sad to see that Admins are contributing to the drama rather than dropping the curtain. – S. Rich (talk) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You can't get any work done if every constructive comment is badgered. Do you think that should be allowed at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Palestine or WP:Wikiproject Israel? Think about it. Hard. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Please note in the ANI instructions the ANI calls for the attention/intervention of administrators and experienced editors. If I was an admin, I would have archived it. In any event, you will see that nothing will come of your thread. There is some risk of a boomerang. First, the thread reflects badly on you. Second, a thread about a Project talk page diverts attention from the actual goals of the Project. The real work on the problem is listed at WP:CSBOT. – S. Rich (talk) 17:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC) 20:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
A Barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar | |
| Well behaved women rarely make history - or change male dominated editing environments.Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:27, 4 September 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks. What was that Cole Porter song? Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 20:39, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Question
I think I've seen you mention recent discussions around the "c-word" but I couldn't recall where/when. Can you point it out to me? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:31, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- It's in different places, and can get pretty confusing, but the main ones I found and put in the ani are ANI vs him (and perhaps the next one down in archives) and in different places on these Wales archives 167, 168, 169. Search the word. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 21:37, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- It goes back further, to my block of Eric for this comment, which I somehow misconstrued as personal attack. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, wow. I had an impression they were always talking about some past event, where he "only" was talking in generalities. But I see he was gotten on a specific... Bad behavior does encourage more. I've said a few obnoxious things the last month I wouldn't have except my internal censor got dislodged by thinkng "if Eric can do it, why not me." Geez...
- His conflict of interest vs. the GGTF is pretty clear now. I mean I was reading terms of use today and see the Foundation can block people if it wants. The fly in the anarchist ointment. (I'm an organized decentralist myself.) Now if only there weren't so many admins defending that sort of nonsense. Well, raising consciousness is a much better option for solving the problem anyway. Though you'll always have that tiny number of individuals with a brown shirt/right sector/black bloc/gang banger mentality to deal with. Ugh... Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 22:59, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- It goes back further, to my block of Eric for this comment, which I somehow misconstrued as personal attack. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- That's simply a lie Hawkeye7. Why don't you explain to Carol why you were desysopped? Eric Corbett 23:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- I'll read it at my leisure but reading the first Statement, I'm sure I'll have a different perspective. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 23:11, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- The Nazi/fascist reference isn't a great idea either. But I suppose you believe that you know best. Eric Corbett 23:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- It's all a spectrum of gang behavior by a tiny minority of individuals. I could have listed hotel room destroying rock bands and hockey and football teams, etc. etc. too. Chill... Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 23:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- The Nazi/fascist reference isn't a great idea either. But I suppose you believe that you know best. Eric Corbett 23:15, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Eric and Carol ban each other - for future reference
- How you have the absolute gall to say "chill" to me after initiating the most ridiculous AN/I report I've ever seen just beggars belief. Here's a warning for you. Don't try that stunt or anything like it again. Eric Corbett 23:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Eric, only post official messages here from now on. Thanks. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 23:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You do make me laugh, so I thank you for that. But naturally you're no longer allowed to post anything on my talk page either. Eric Corbett 23:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Eric, only post official messages here from now on. Thanks. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 23:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- How you have the absolute gall to say "chill" to me after initiating the most ridiculous AN/I report I've ever seen just beggars belief. Here's a warning for you. Don't try that stunt or anything like it again. Eric Corbett 23:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Carol, I know you think that Eric is attacking all women and all that, but the honest truth is that most of his work and interactions over the years have seemed to have been with female editors and he generally gets on very well with them. I'm sure @Gerda Arendt: would vouch for that. He just simply doesn't buy the gender inequality argument and that gender identify matters. I'm all for a higher number of female editors, and I fully support what Rosiestep is doing with WP:Women writers as some of the coverage of female writers in the Latin world or encyclopedists etc is pathetic. But I do also find it a bit offensive that gender identity matters in quality of writing for instance. Eric used the example of Enid Blyton which we co-authored, it wouldn't have made any difference if it had been written by women. Where gender identity might matter more, aside from projects like Rosie's which try teven up coverage, there's quite a few topics which most male editors wouldn't edit and might be more likely to be edited by females, so that would be a good thing in addressing systematic bias, but by no means does that mean that simply because an editor is female they'll want to edit a "female" topic like nursing or fashion or whatever. Eric just seems to find it highly offensive that they think it's a major issue in terms of quality writing I think. I think you've taken a lot of what he's said as an attack on all women in general, which given my experience of his interactions with female editors, I really don't think is true. And no, I'm not defending him because I'm male, but I am saying that I don't think he's quite what you think. It also concerns me Carol that you keep talking about "guy editors" a lot, as if it really matters. I welcome anybody who does anything constructive on the website, I couldn't give a toss who the editor is and what they're like in real life.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
MfD nomination of Talk:Wiki/User Talk:Synergisticalism
Talk:Wiki/User Talk:Synergisticalism, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Wiki/User Talk:Synergisticalism and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Wiki/User Talk:Synergisticalism during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 05:43, 5 September 2014 (UTC)