| Revision as of 11:50, 12 September 2006 editIantresman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users21,376 edits →''Signpost'' updated for September 11th.← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:32, 12 September 2006 edit undoජපස (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,448 editsm →Personal attacks: better linksNext edit → | ||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
| ==Personal attacks== | ==Personal attacks== | ||
| Thank you for taking the time to look at the . I think blocking is both preventative and punative (like being banned from driving). But I appreciate your intervention, and rebuke, and feel that is a good step in the right direction. --] 11:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) | Thank you for taking the time to look at the . I think blocking is both preventative and punative (like being banned from driving). But I appreciate your intervention, and rebuke, and feel that is a good step in the right direction. --] 11:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :While I appreciate your comments and warning, I think you should know that you have thrust yourself into an extremely long-running conflict (that has lasted more than a year) that has nothing to do with actual personal attacks and everything to do with content disputes. I would point out that Ian did not offer any direct evidence that shows I was "personally attacking" Eric Lerner, he just assumes that my edits to the page somehow defame him. I can assure you this is not the case. I at no time personally attacked Eric Lerner, but I have myself been the recipient of numerous attacks by ]. If you'd like, I'll show you the evidence, but I'm not interested in getting into a long-winded battle of evidence. Basically, I like to give editors infinite second-chances and always hope for the best. This said, I will not refrain from editting this particular page because what I am including on the page is better text and prose from an editorial, neutrality, and verifiable standpoint. Despite offering over and over again, the substantive issues I edit about are actively ignored by certain users who ] with ] who has a hand in writing a version of an article that marginalized criticism while heaping praise upon his work. What's more, ] refuses to engage me in discussion of the substantive claims he continues to remove. This is a problem with ], as others have pointed out, and I in no way am "attacking" this person by trying to get the article to conform more closely to the reality of the marginalization of this particular character in the astronomical community. We already have an ] about this and related issues. | |||
| :I also encourage you to look at the talk-histories and the histories of other pages between myself and ]. For example, you'll note in his request to the NPA board, Ian asked for me to be "banned" from all science-related articles. This is pure vexatious litigation. He doesn't want me to edit articles regarding subjects he holds dear because subjects he holds dear tend to be marginalized by the scientific community and I usually write about such marginalization in relevant articles. Ian has attempted for the last few years to get me railroaded off of Misplaced Pages. He has thus far been unsuccessful. --] 12:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:32, 12 September 2006
|
Thank youThank you for catching the actions done on my talkpage by another user. I've posted a request for help on Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Harassment, and then he followed me there, made a reply, and committed the actions (vandalism?) you reverted. thank you for the assistance. ThuranX 15:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello Shell, please keep in contact regarding this situation with this user. He has threatened legal actions against me, and from what you've said ont eh admin baords, possibly you too. Thank you. ThuranX 01:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Typically talk page messages are archived and its usually considered bad form to archive recent warning messages or on-going discussions. In this case, we have to use our common sense; there were no warnings and since the user has left, there's no chance the conversation will resume. Since he's left, the conversation won't be needed for anything and if anything ever came up, an administrator could undelete it. I can see why you might feel that you're giving in to his demands, but really, is the page doing you any good? Is it worth continued harassment? If you'd rather put up with him, you're welcome to keep it. Personally, I'd probably find it better to have it over with. Shell 05:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Austin downtown imageYou removed the image Image:Austin_downtown.jpg from the Austin, Texas article here due to image licensing concern. However, that image appears to be reasonably licensed as {{GFDL-self}}. Can you clarify your intention or reason? thanks -- Bovineone 18:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Wikiproject SharkHi, You closed this as an A7. Huh? I don't get it -- it isn't just that this CSD applies to articles only: I don't know what you mean to say here. Sharks aren't notable? Sure they are... I'm confused. I haven't reverted the closure; I just want a sensible explanation for it. Best wishes, Xoloz 16:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
El GringoHi - what was the result for El Gringo re his alleged personal attacks? Gsd2000 20:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Removal of photo of Max KenworthyHi, You removed the photo of Max Kenworthy. I created the page, am a friend and associate of Max and he provided me with the photo. I stated as much in the description and picked whatever license seemed most appropriate - what more can I do to prevent the photo from being removed? Please reply via email: matt@deity.co.nz Thanks, Matt NullPainter 09:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Ah, I see. You uploaded it as permission for Misplaced Pages to use it. Unfortunately, while this seems to make sense, since Misplaced Pages has to be free to allow others to disribute its content at will, release to only Misplaced Pages doesn't actually work out and those images get deleted. Check out WP:TAG which lists all of the acceptable image tags and see if you can find the one that fits closest. I'll go ahead and undelete the image for you in the meantime. Just make sure you tag it and list its source in 7 days, or it'll show up for deletion again. Shell 12:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Helper tools - dropdownBTW, I noticed that in your monobook.js file, you have the SRC for these. I think I accidently posted that for a while as a copy-past mistake in the explaination subpage. I'd remove the lines below "Helper tools - dropdown" where it tries to include (src) a css file, which does not make any sense.Voice-of-All 17:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 11th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC) Personal attacksThank you for taking the time to look at the Eric Lerner / ScienceApologist incident. I think blocking is both preventative and punative (like being banned from driving). But I appreciate your intervention, and rebuke, and feel that is a good step in the right direction. --Iantresman 11:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gmail.com
