| Revision as of 13:11, 15 May 2006 editIkip (talk | contribs)59,234 edits →{{User|Travb}}← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:59, 13 August 2024 edit undoNewyorkbrad (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,478 edits update to remove reference to RfCs, as user-conduct RfCs were discontinued several years ago | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{historical}} | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| :'''This process has been discontinued per ].''' | |||
| <!-- List editors who are making personal attacks below this line. Head with "=={{User|PROBLEM USER}}==", replacing PROBLEM USER with the user name concerned. --> | |||
| =={{user|86.134.83.214}}== | |||
| stream of personal abuse on ] . I added a note on the user's talk page - responded with a stream of abuse at me. (I have absolutely nothing to do with the issue!) <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!-- --> | |||
| *:A quick look didn't turn up any personal attacks.. can you provide diffs? --] ] 07:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *::Several sections have already been removed by ] - e.g. | |||
| *::There's a new crop on there now from ] , a possible sockpuppet - including legal threats this time. -- ] 15:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::: definately shows 86.134.83.214 to be making personal attacks. ] 05:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The personal attack intervention noticeboard (PAIN), created on ] ], was intended as a counterpart to ]. A person with complaints over ] could, after giving warnings, report a personal attacker on this page. | |||
| =={{User|Trollwatcher}} and {{User|64.105.124.26}}== | |||
| (a banned user) is posting personal attacks about an admin on his user talk page. He is currently not logged in and is using the IP given. I have warned him (not using the templates as I didn't know where to find them until I found this page) but he is annoyed by my reverts so could an admin leave a post to confirm this is ok. Thanks ] ]] 19:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::User has restored the material AGAIN! Help! ] ]] 23:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Unfortunately, the noticeboard generated a considerable amount of controversy. While ] is usually a clear cut case, and administrator intervention (i.e. blocking) is usually uncontroversial, determining whether a comment is a personal attack, incivil, or just simply blunt and frank, can be quite ]. That led to a lot of arguments, flame wars, tit-for-tat disputes and ] on this page. Even after several warnings as well as changes to the header designed to instruct users on how to use this page, this noticeboard continued to deteriorate. Due to this deterioration as well as some particularly poor exchanges in December 2006, the entire page was ], with the result that the noticeboard was closed on {{#formatdate:10 January 2007}}. | |||
| =={{user|C-c-c-c}}== this user has been harrassing me, and offending me personally in my talk page. Among many offenses are " P.S. I heard heroin is dirt cheap over there, can you get me some, from one Balkan brother to another?:P ] 21:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)" , "(Albanian Fascist Power)", reminding me that he can do this all the time by saying "I have all day....] 19:55, 13 May 2006 (UTC)", calls me "(Funny Ilir) .] 18:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)". ~I kindly wrote back to not send me personal attacks, and flood me with accusations, but he did not stop. Instead he said he did not give a sh** I would appreciate if someone bans this user, as he/she is disturbing me a lot. Thank you. ] 21:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| The closure of this noticeboard does not mean that personal attacks are tolerated; they should never be. It simply means that complaints over personal attacks are moved to different, and more appropriate venues such as the ], ] or, as a last resort, ]. | |||
| =={{User|Gnetwerker}}== | |||
| Although not a severe personal attack, Wikitionary a personal attack as any comment about the commenter inorder to discredit them. Although Gnetwerker has only made two personal attacks, he has been persistant in reverting any removal of them. This situation is complex as the personal attacks arose from another dispute about two articles. I have repeatedly asked and warned the user to no avail. Although I do not expect a ban on the user, I am hoping an official notice from an admin might deter them from continuing. I also ask an admin remove the personal attacks as it would appear that I would simply be continuing an edit war. The concerning statements are as follows: "" which blatantly implies that I am a Microsoft zealot out to protect Microsoft related pages and make them pro-Microsoft. "" which is the exact definition of a personal attack as he is saying that our comments are not as valid because he feels that we are Microsoft zealots. As I said, these are not severe personal attacks but fit the definition perfectly. Although they do not blatantly offend, they create disruption and violate Misplaced Pages policies. I ask that the comments be removed and the user warned. ] 03:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''EDIT:''' It appears this is not the first time Gnetwerker has been accused of a personal attack: and ] 20:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I did not intend any comment to be a personal attack, and do not believe that any comment was a personal attack. One admin, ], appears to agree that the comments related above were not attacks. I do believe that ] is responding emotionally in the course of a heated discussion, and is inclined to read attacks where none were intended. In my opinion, there is a decided lack of good faith operating here, a misuse of Misplaced Pages process bordering on harrassment, and not a little bit of wikilawyering. Notwithstanding all of this, if any independent editor, upon review of the facts, believes that I have made an attack, I will without hesitation remove the attack and apologize. I would ask that ] agree to the same. -- ] 06:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''UPDATE:''' Gnetwerker has once again made a personal attack . I have elevated the warning on his talk page to <nowiki>{{npa3}}</nowiki>. ] 02:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I am sorry, but the things you are complaining about (like ), are not even remotely personal attacks. Please reconsider your hair-trigger on ], and get some third-party advice before making any more accusations. -- ] 06:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::That's interesting that you say it's not even remotely a personal attack, yet it is almost identical to the example ] makes: "Jane is a bad editor". You don't see any similarity to "Jane is a bad editor" and "these editors are opposed to credible third party sources" (paraphrased)? ] 18:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===Procedure=== | |||
| *'''Plea to Administrators''': OK, ban me, pillory me, do whatever you want, but I am tired of dealing with this user and his accusations. If I have erred, please say so, and if not, please say that. My time spent on Misplaced Pages is too short to deal with high-school students who think they have been wronged by what I think is a standard give-and-take. If even a single admin says I have violated ] in this matter, I will go away, no questions asked. but please resolve! -- ] 06:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| :"high-school students", not a personal attack, but why the prejudice remark? Not the most effective way to support an arguement is it? ] 18:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| *'''Comment''' I do not see evidence of ]. I suggest the accuser read up on the policy and try to find the difference between a personal attack and a ]. Specifically, {{user|Paul Cyr}} should read up on what ] and what ]. -- ] (] • ]) 14:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :*'''Comment'''. I find it suspicious that you have come out of no where, not provided any detailed explaination of how those were not personal attacks <strike>and the fact that you have been yourself. Not that accusations are convicting evidence, but</strike> I would ask that you better justify your claims and I recommend admins taking this user's comments with a grain of salt. ] 18:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::*What personal attack?--] <sup>]</sup> 15:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::*Scroll up. ] 22:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| =={{User|Pansophia}}== | |||
| http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kaiser_Permanente&curid=477362&diff=53254033&oldid=53253341 etcetera. 3 warnings. Set a bad example I think. ] 03:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::The problem is actually Midgley. See this . Also see my talk page - someone already looked into this. --] 03:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| =={{User|Travb}}== | |||
| , , . I've made good faith attempts at a truce but he can't move beyond personal attacks. — ] (]) (]) 12:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :In all my edits, I called Philwelch a "rude person". That was the extent of my personal attacks: | |||
| :*This all started when ] ignored the <nowiki>{{inuse}}</nowiki> tag, when I put a message on his board, calling him a "rude person" | |||
| :*] blamed me for his incivility in editing a section which clearly had an <nowiki>{{inuse}}</nowiki> tag, | |||
| :*] called me a tempermental child. | |||
| :*] reverted my edits four times, http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=NSA_call_database&oldid=53304639] | |||
| :*He ded four reverts despite the <nowiki>{{inuse}}</nowiki> tag and after I asked him to stop after the first one, and | |||
| :*] clearly misrepresented the facts by stating in his first revert that there had been no edits in an hour, when the last edit was one minute before. | |||
| Ever been editing with the <nowiki>{{inuse}}</nowiki> tag and then have someone come along and edit something despite the <nowiki>{{inuse}}</nowiki> tag? How does that make you feel? | |||
| Signed: ] 12:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
| =={{User|Philwelch}}== | |||
| *] called me a tempermental child. | |||
| Signed: ] 13:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:59, 13 August 2024
 | 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. |
- This process has been discontinued per this discussion.
The personal attack intervention noticeboard (PAIN), created on 7 October 2005, was intended as a counterpart to the request for intervention against vandalism page. A person with complaints over personal attacks could, after giving warnings, report a personal attacker on this page.
Unfortunately, the noticeboard generated a considerable amount of controversy. While vandalism is usually a clear cut case, and administrator intervention (i.e. blocking) is usually uncontroversial, determining whether a comment is a personal attack, incivil, or just simply blunt and frank, can be quite subjective. That led to a lot of arguments, flame wars, tit-for-tat disputes and wikilawyering on this page. Even after several warnings as well as changes to the header designed to instruct users on how to use this page, this noticeboard continued to deteriorate. Due to this deterioration as well as some particularly poor exchanges in December 2006, the entire page was nominated for deletion, with the result that the noticeboard was closed on 10 January 2007.
The closure of this noticeboard does not mean that personal attacks are tolerated; they should never be. It simply means that complaints over personal attacks are moved to different, and more appropriate venues such as the administrators' noticeboard, dispute resolution or, as a last resort, arbitration.
Procedure
Misplaced Pages:Personal attack intervention noticeboard/Header
Categories: